A Ugandan border town is preparing to bury victims of a brutal attack by suspected extremist rebels on a school that left 42 dead, most of them students

Northern Ireland’s top police officer has apologized for what he described as an “industrial scale” data breach, in which the personal information of more than 10,000 officers and staff was released to the public

Donald Trump has already been indicted three times this year, twice at the federal level. In April, he was arraigned in New York and pleaded not guilty to state charges after receiving an indictment from Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg accusing him of manipulating his business records to conceal hush money payments allegedly made to porn actress Stormy Daniels in 2016 to stop her discussing an extramarital affair they are said to have had in 2006 in time to derail his presidential run. Justice Department special counsel Jack Smith then handed him a federal indictment in May over his alleged mishandling of classified government documents following the conclusion of his one-term presidency and then another in August over his efforts to overturn the 2020 election result, accusing him of conspiracy to defraud the United States, tampering with a witness and conspiracy against the rights of citizens. In both cases, Mr Trump again pleaded not guilty to all charges. But that’s not all. He could be about to face a fourth indictment, this time from Fani Willis, district attorney of Fulton County, Georgia, over his attempts to influence the 2020 vote count in that crucial swing state, which turned blue for Joe Biden and prompted Mr Trump to pressure local secretary of state Brad Raffensperger into helping him “find” the 11,780 ballots he needed to win, a conversation that was recorded and described as “worse than Watergate” by veteran Washington Post journalist Carl Bernstein. While Ms Willis hasn’t confirmed that an indictment will be handed down this week, her earlier statements and security measures surrounding the Fulton County courthouse indicate that movement is imminent in the case. No former or sitting president of the United States has ever been formally charged with a crime before, so for Mr Trump to have received multiple indictments is already history-making, another ignominious claim to fame for the first American commander-in-chief ever to have been impeached twice. The prospect of Mr Trump winning the presidency again in November 2024 and then attempting to use his presidential pardoning powers to excuse himself is a fascinating prospect that could yet become a reality. As president between 2017 and 2021, Mr Trump cheerily used his executive clemency powers to hand out pardons to no fewer than 237 people, from Arizona sheriff Joe Arpaio to right-wing content creator Dinesh D’Souza by way of cronies like Steve Bannon, Roger Stone, Michael Flynn, Paul Manafort and George Papadopoulos. Whether he had the authority to pardon himself was a key question at the time he left office in the aftermath of the deadly Capitol riot of 6 January 2021, which, ultimately, never had to be answered because he did not attempt to do so. The broad consensus among legal experts back then was that there was no stipulation in place to actually prohibit such an act but, given that there was no precedent for it either, it would likely be subjected to a lawsuit calling into question its legal validity. While Mr Trump is now a private citizen and therefore has no such powers, he does find himself in the extraordinary position of being thrice-indicted while simultaneously leading the pack for the Republican Party’s nomination to be its candidate for president in 2024, leaving such rivals as Ron DeSantis, Mike Pence, Nikki Haley, Tim Scott and Chris Christie eating his dust in the polls. There is nothing in the US Constitution to stop someone from running a presidential campaign while under indictment or even having been convicted of a crime, although its 14th Amendment does prevent anyone from running who has taken an oath of office and thereafter engaged in “insurrection or rebellion” against the country, which could ultimately cause problems for Mr Trump should he be convicted over Mr Smith’s charges pertaining to the Capitol riot. Unless that comes to pass, however, he is free to run for the White House once more. But what would happen if he were to actually win and attempt to use his reinstated pardoning powers for his own benefit is where matters get really knotty. Firstly, presidential pardons are only applicable to federal crimes. While that means he could potentially absolve himself in the classified documents and 2020 election cases brought by Mr Smith, he could not do the same in the indictment brought by Mr Bragg, which is a state affair. Second, the Constitution bans presidents from pardoning themselves from impeachments, meaning any conduct Mr Trump is found guilty of committing in connection with impeachment would not be eligible for a pardon. Third, any pardon would almost certainly result in a Supreme Court case and the court might not be inclined to side with Mr Trump, despite the current conservative majority on its benches. A Justice Department memo from 1974 stated: “Under the fundamental rule that no one may be a judge in his own case, the president cannot pardon himself.” While that memo is not law, it could be used to argue for precedent should the situation go to court. Therefore, if a scenario were to arise in which Mr Trump won the 2024 election but was convicted on charges in the state case (a trial is scheduled for March) or in the federal case relating to the Capitol riot, over which he was impeached, he would not be allowed to pardon himself, likely resulting in a massive and costly legal fight to spare him jail time. If he found himself unable to avoid that outcome, the situation would almost certainly lead to a third impeachment or his removal from office via the 25th Amendment, which allows the Cabinet to remove a president who is unable to perform their duties. There are many duties and trappings of the presidency an incarcerated person would simply not be able to carry out from a prison cell, like the viewing of classified materials, to name just one. We are still very much in hypothetical territory at this point, with any potential conviction for Mr Trump still a long way off and little more than a distant possibility. But the conversations he has started with his latest bid for the presidency have already pushed parts of theoretical US constitutional law far further than many experts ever believed they might live to see. Read More Trump judge demands court hearing as Jack Smith and ex-president spar over protective order – latest Trump-appointed Judge Aileen Cannon sides with Trump again in classified documents case Former Republican official in Georgia subpoenaed over Trump efforts to change election result Trump and Biden tied in hypothetical 2024 rematch, poll finds Prosecutors have started presenting Georgia election investigation to grand jury Hunter Biden's lawyers say gun portion of plea deal remains valid after special counsel announcement Trump assails judge in 2020 election case after she warned him not to make inflammatory remarks

Celine Dion has reportedly sold her mammoth Las Vegas residence to private equity investor Chuck Esserman

Asian stocks gained some support Friday from signs of progress in debt-ceiling talks and an advance in US

Hundreds of people have gathered near a state funeral home as China's former premier Li Keqiang is being put to rest

US sales of new houses fell in October after a downward revision to the prior month as decades-high

Eleven people are unaccounted for after a fire broke out at a vacation home in eastern France early Wednesday morning, authorities said.

A former soldier has recounted the terrifying shark attack he suffered during a military exercise which caused him to lose an arm and a leg. Paul de Gelder was a paratrooper who feared for his life during the ordeal, which saw him attacked by a 50-tonne bull shark. The animal tore off two of his limbs during the attack in 2009, and de Gelder spoke about his ordeal during an interview with CBS. The 46-year-old from Melbourne, Australia was taking part in a naval exercise in the Sydney Harbour when it took place. Sign up to our free Indy100 weekly newsletter “I was swimming from point A to point B on the surface on my back and a 10-foot bull shark came up from underneath me,” he said. "It grabbed me by the back of my right leg and my right hand, which was by my side, all in one bite." Describing how he tried to fight back by hitting the shark, de Gelder said: "That's when it started to shake me like a rag doll. As its teeth worked through my flesh and bone like saws, I was overcome by the most intense pain imaginable." He then recalled how he managed to escape the shark’s clutches before having to swim back to his boat surrounded by a pool of blood. "It took me under. The pain and the terror. I thought I was going to die. It removed my hamstring and my hand,” de Gelder added. "I had to swim back to my safety boat with one hand and leg through a pool of my own blood. I didn't think I was going to make it. “I'm very, very lucky and blessed to still be here and breathing today." He returned to work with the armed forces and also became a motivational speaker. However, despite his injuries, he believes that sharks should not be demonised. "I see my role as speaking up for an animal that doesn't have a voice,” he said. "I figure if someone like me who has almost lost their life and two limbs to a shark can understand why they are so important and why they need to be saved, then maybe everyone else should be able to as well." Have your say in our news democracy. Click the upvote icon at the top of the page to help raise this article through the indy100 rankings.

Officials in Pakistan say the death toll from two weeks of monsoon rains rose to at least 55 on Thursday after at least 12 people, including eight children, died in weather-related incidents in Pakistan

A pair of Amtrak train cars has derailed outside of Washington D

'The View' host Whoopi Goldberg received flak as the co-hosts discussed how the younger generation's view of the 'American Dream' differs