The trial for the alleged perpetrator of the deadliest antisemitic attack in US history is set to begin.

British rock icon Ozzy Osbourne announced on Monday he was pulling out of the Power Trip music festival scheduled for October, citing persistent health problems that have plagued his career in recent years.

Donald Trump is now seeking to have his federal criminal trial delayed until after the 2024 election, citing his status as a candidate for president and other legal arguments which experts say lack any grounding in actual law. In a court filing in Miami late on Monday, Mr Trump’s lawyers asked the judge to indefinitely delay his trial on charges over his handling of classified documents, saying that due to the extraordinary nature of the case it would not be possible to try it before the presidential election. In the 12-page filing, they called the government’s case against him “extraordinary” and claim it “presents a serious challenge to both the fact and perception of our American democracy” because Mr Trump is seeking his party’s nomination to run against the incumbent president who defeated him in 2020, Joe Biden. “The Court now presides over a prosecution advanced by the administration of a sitting President against his chief political rival, himself a leading candidate for the Presidency of the United States. Therefore, a measured consideration and timeline that allows for a careful and complete review of the procedures that led to this indictment and the unprecedented legal issues presented herein best serves the interests of the Defendants and the public,” they said. While prosecutors had asked Judge Aileen Cannon to set a trial date of 11 December, the former president has opposed that request on the grounds that to “begin a trial of this magnitude within six months of indictment is unreasonable, telling, and would result in a miscarriage of justice” for him and his co-defendant, longtime aide Walt Nauta. In a brief order issued shortly after Mr Trump’s arraignment last month, Judge Cannon set a trial date for 14 August, but Special Counsel Jack Smith later asked for the four-month delay the ex-president and his co-defendant now oppose. Instead, Mr Trump is seeking an indefinite delay to the proceedings against him. “Based on the extraordinary nature of this action, there is most assuredly no reason for any expedited trial, and the ends of justice are best served by a continuance,” his attorneys wrote in Monday’s filing. “The Court should, respectfully, before establishing any trial date, allow time for development of further clarity as to the full nature and scope of the motions that will be filed, a better understanding of a realistic discovery and pre-trial timeline, and the completion of the security clearance process,” they said, adding later that the trial should also be delayed because Mr Trump’s presidential campaign “requires a tremendous amount of time and energy,” and makes trial preparation too difficult. Mr Trump’s attorneys also say that the case poses “significant” legal questions that could see the case dismissed long before trial, and suggest in their filing that they plan to argue that Mr Trump declassified the documents at issue, challenge the constitutionality of the Classified Information Procedures Act — the law used to allow classified evidence in criminal trials — and they further suggest that it would be impossible to select an impartial jury during the 2024 election. “Proceeding to trial during the pendency of a Presidential election cycle wherein opposing candidates are effectively (if not literally) directly adverse to one another in this action will create extraordinary challenges in the jury selection process and limit the Defendants’ ability to secure a fair and impartial adjudication,” they said, citing a Justice Department policy that “cautions against taking prosecutorial action for the purpose of affecting an election or helping a candidate or party” even though that policy pertains only to investigations and indictments, not the conduct of criminal cases that have already been brought. The ex-president’s lawyers later suggested that they intend to repeat baseless legal claims Mr Trump has advanced on his Truth Social page, namely the argument that under the Presidential Records Act and a 2012 court precedent regarding tapes belonging to former president Bill Clinton, he had the right to keep the documents at issue in this case. “Contrary to the Government’s assertion regarding the nature of the legal issues in this matter ... this case presents novel, complex, and unique legal issues, most of which are matters of first impression. As noted above, this Court will need to evaluate the intersection between the Presidential Records Act ... and the various criminal statutes forming the basis of the indictment. These will be questions of first impression for any court in the United States, and their resolution will impact the necessity, scope, and timing of any trial,” they said. Continuing, they also said they plan to challenge the constitutionality of the Espionage Act under which Mr Trump is being prosecuted, as well as Mr Smith’s ability to indict a former president. Mr Smith’s office has not yet responded to the filing. Last month, Mr Trump was indicted on 37 federal charges over his handling of classified documents, including national defence information, after leaving the White House. The indictment, which was unsealed on Friday (9 June), alleges that Mr Trump deliberately lied to and misled authorities so that he could hold onto documents that he knew were classified. On at least two separate occasions, Mr Trump then showed some of the classified documents to people not authorised to see them, the indictment alleges. Stunning photos revealed that many of the documents were stored around a toilet, shower and ballroom at his Mar-a-Lago estate. The charges include 31 counts of willful retention of national defense information and single counts of false statements and representations, and counts of conspiracy to obstruct justice, withholding a document or record, corruptly concealing a document, concealing a document in a federal investigation and a scheme to conceal. He pleaded not guilty to the charges at his arraignment in a Miami federal courthouse, becoming the first current or former US president ever charged with a federal crime. Mr Trump’s longtime aide Walt Nauta was also charged with six obstruction- and concealment-related charges after he allegedly helped move boxes of documents from Mar-a-Lago to Mr Trump’s residence and then lied to investigators about having any knowledge of the handling of the papers. The two men appeared in court together but Mr Nauta did not enter a plea as he did not have legal counsel in Florida. Mr Nauta appeared for his arraignment last week where he pleaded not guilty. Read More Trump news – live: Trump wants classified documents trial delayed to after 2024 as Georgia grand jury meets Trump’s co-defendant wants to delay routine hearing on classified documents case Ron DeSantis reveals wife Casey’s reaction to being called ‘America’s Karen’ Pence shuts down voter who blamed him for certifying Biden’s 2020 win Trump’s co-defendant wants to delay routine hearing on classified documents case Ex-Congressman suggests Hunter Biden alleged laptop data fabricated

Terry Smith, the UK’s most popular money manager, saw his first pay drop since 2016, as his funds

The Braves could be without veteran reliever Jesse Chavez for a substantial time after a scary exit on June 14. Who could Atlanta trade for to replace him?Jesse Chavez has been one of the most pleasant surprises for the Atlanta Braves this season. The 39-year-old reliever was signed to a minor-l...

NICKMERCS has returned to Warzone, and since he has returned, he has found a new favorite loadout using the H4 Blixen SMG. Here's how to build it yourself.

To defeat all Operation Nightmare bosses in Warzone's The Haunting, players must perform certain tasks throughout Al Mazrah to eliminate the creatures.

Japan face the biggest test of their Women’s World Cup campaign yet as they take on Sweden in the quarter-finals. Japan have been the standout team of the World Cup so far to emerge as one of the favourites for the title. The 2011 champions are the tournament’s top scorers, with striker Hinata Miyazawa leading the golden boot standings with five goals from four games. But Sweden offer a true test of those title ambitions, after the Olympic silver medalists knocked out the United States on penalties in the last-16. After a 0-0 draw against the USA, Sweden progressed in dramatic fashion after Lina Hurtig’s penalty was ruled to have crossed the line by an inch. The winner will play Spain in the last four after La Roja defeated the Netherlands 2-1 to reach their first ever Women’s World Cup semi-final, thanks to Salma Paralluelo’s extra-time winner. Follow live updates from Japan vs Sweden as the World Cup quarter-finals continue, following Spain vs Netherlands Read More Women’s World Cup TV schedule: How to watch every match today Who and when do England play next? Lionesses route to the World Cup final Lauren James handed ban for World Cup red card

Weeks before the US Supreme Court overturned Roe v Wade last year, Oklahoma’s Republican governor vowed to “outlaw” abortion in the state entirely, and pledged to sign any legislation that promised to do just that. Governor Kevin Stitt signed several anti-abortion bills into law, including a measure that outlaws abortion at roughly six weeks of pregnancy, and another banning all abortions with exceptions only to save the patient’s life in a medical emergency or if the pregnancy is the result of rape, sexual assault or incest that has been reported to law enforcement. On 31 May, the highest court in the state struck down both of them. But abortion access remains out of reach for most patients in the state, after that same court upheld a far-reaching abortion ban from more than 100 years ago earlier this year. A state law from 1910 makes it a felony punishable up to five years in prison for anyone to perform or help someone seek an abortion unless to save the patient’s life. “This ruling, while providing clarity in emergency situations, does not change the landscape of care significantly,” Emily Wales, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood Great Plains, said in a statement. Oklahoma was the first state in the US to successfully outlaw abortion despite a constitutional right to abortion care that was affirmed by Roe v Wade. But in March, the state’s Supreme Court ruled that the state’s constitution “creates an inherent right of a pregnant woman to terminate a pregnancy when necessary to preserve her life,” though the court declined to weigh in on whether the constitution protects abortion access in other circumstances. The court also ruled that doctors should be able to use their own medical judgment to determine whether to provide an abortion when a patient’s life is at risk “due to the pregnancy itself or due to a medical condition that the woman is either currently suffering from or likely to suffer from during the pregnancy.” But it also preserved the 1910 law, a 113-year-old ban on abortion care that threatens providers with prison. The court’s decision on 31 May reaffirmed its decision recognising a right to abortion care in life-threatening cases, and struck down two the overlapping bans. In the months after the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which struck down a constitutional right to abortion care, clinics in Oklahoma have been forced to close, and patients have traveled thousands of miles for legal abortion care in a region surrounded by states where abortion is severely restricted or effectively outlawed. Even in cases of emergencies, there appears to be no hospital in Oklahoma that provides “clear, consistent policies for emergency obstetric care to pregnant patients,” according to an April report from Physicians for Human Rights, Oklahoma Call for Reproductive Justice and the Center for Reproductive Rights. Oklahoma hospitals “offered opaque, contradictory, and incorrect information about abortion availability and approval processes in obstetric emergencies, as well as little reassurance that clinicians’ medical judgment and pregnant patients’ needs would be prioritized,” according to the report. Only two out of 24 hospitals described providing legal support for providers in such situations, and representatives for three hospitals claimed their facilities do not provide abortions at all, the report found. Abortion rights advocates welcomed the court’s decision on 31 May, which abortion rights advocates said will at least allow doctors to clearly rely on their own medical judgment to provide care when a patient’s life is in jeopardy. “After months of uncertainty and chaos, Oklahomans should finally be able to access the life-saving care they need in their home state,” according to Dr Alan Braid, an abortion provider and plaintiff in the case challenging the overlapping abortion bans. “Heartbreakingly, we were forced to close our Tulsa clinic due to Oklahoma’s abortion bans, but I will continue to serve patients in the region at clinics in Illinois and New Mexico,” he added. “While we are relieved the court upheld the right to abortion in medical emergencies, this does not diminish the fact that care remains out of reach for the majority of Oklahomans,” according to Ms Wales. Following the state Supreme Court decision on 31 May, Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond clarified that “except for certain circumstances outlined in that statute, abortion is still unlawful in the state of Oklahoma” because of the 1910 law. Governor Stitt accused the court of using “activism to create a right to an abortion in Oklahoma.” “This court has once more over-involved itself in the state’s democratic process, and has interceded to undo legislation created by the will of the people,” he said in a statement. Within the last year, more than a dozen states – including most of the entire US South – have outlawed abortion care for most pregnancies. Read More ACLU sues Nebraska over combined law targeting abortion and gender-affirming care: ‘Egregious overreach’ South Carolina judge halts six-week abortion ban as state Supreme Court set to review new law Doctor who provided abortion care to 10-year-old rape survivor reprimanded in case that drew national scrutiny Anti-abortion laws harm patients facing dangerous and life-threatening complications, report finds

The luxury armored train carrying North Korean leader Kim Jong Un has apparently crossed into Russia ahead of

Andrew and Tristan Tate took to social media to give their own take about 'Barbie'

Andrew Tate is currently under house arrest with his brother Tristan