el procurador de los estados unidos, mary garland, dijo que ambos hombres enfrentan mÚltiples cargosredes letales para producir y traficar. el fentanilo. el mayo guzmÁn se suma tambiÉn a una lista cada vez mayor de narcotraficantes que se encuentran en estos momentos arrestados aquÍ en suelo estadounidense y a quienes se les seÑala como ser los responsables de crear una de las mayores crisis de drogas aquÍ en los estados unidos, especialmente con la producciÓn del fentanilo, que estÁ daÑando seriamente a la juventud de este paÍs. las autoridades en estos momentos no han especificado a dÓnde fueron trasladados estos presuntos narcotraficantes y lÍderes del cÁrtel de sinaloa y por supuesto, nosotros estaremos informÁndoles estamos siguiendo los detalles de a dÓnde fueron transformados para dar mÁs detalles sobre estos arrestos que estÁn causando verdaderamente bastante sorpresa aquÍ en los estados unidos. >> julio sÍ, es una noticia en desarrollo, paco. asÍ que la informaciÓn va surgiendo minuto a minuto. gracias. gracias por el reporte. el mayo zambada y joaquÍn guzmÁn lÓpez estÁn acu

long ago mary garland said once charges have been brought, once a grand jury has indicted the defendante, donald trump, the case is now in the court's jurisdiction and it is in the court's purview to continue moving it forward toward a trial. what was the department of justice supposed to do? dismiss it because donald trump would love to retake the reins of presidential power so he could, you know, flex his absolute presidential immunity muscle? let's be clear. we have an imperial supreme court that just said presidents are also imperial, they are monarch lake and they now have the power of lawlessness with impunity and immunity. if that is in concerning and if that doesn't get people up and out to the polls, together with everything else, i don't know what will. >> ian, quickly, i wanted to ask you about a component of the scotus decision, you are not permitted, jurors or courts, are not permitted to look into the motives, the intent of the president, in the decision in the crime he or she commits. i have a problem reconciling that with the idea of specific intent. you have to have spe

marie antoinette. the role of the pagan god dionysus was played by painted blue paint in garlands homosexual.l shock was caused by the participation of transgender people, homosexuals and other satanists at the last supper. well-known. painting by leonard da vinci, which depicts christ and the apostles. the drac queens eventually sat down at a long table, reenacting this biblical scene. the role of jesus was played by an oversized lesbian who called her performance a new gay council. afterwards, a bearded man in women's clothing started dancing on the table. and it's not even that some people don’t like gays, transgender people and other mentally ill people, the main problem is that it’s just ugliness, it’s kitsch and bad taste. the horseman of the apocalypse with the olympic flag in his hands became the cherry on satan's ball. mog has already made his official apology. macron said that the opening was wonderful. jill biden has already supported macron, saying that she is wildly delighted and doesn’t even know how the united states can now surpass such magnificence. the fact is that the next

garland. other courts have upheld the constitutionality of special counsel. based on your understanding, how out step is the judge here with what you know legal precedent to be? mary quite out of step with the legal precedent. i would say all of the cases, all of the courts who have upheld the appointment of the special counsel in the past have relied on a supreme court case, called u.s. versus nixon, which accepted for purposes of that case that the attorney general had the authority to appoint special prosecutors with special responsibilities. and pointed to the same statutes the attorney general in this case relied on in appointing jack smith. know who she is not out of step with is justice thomas, who his concurring opinion, in the immunity decision, spent several pages, his entire point of his concurring opinion was to call attention to the fact that he thought it needed to be examined with the appointment of jack smith violating the appointment's clause. that is not an issue before the court. it had not been briefed. it had not been argued. nevertheless, he sent out a roadmap for determining that the appointments clause was invalid and if you read his short