濮阳东方妇科医院在哪(濮阳东方妇科口碑如何) (今日更新中)

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — A highly decorated U.S. Forest Service police dog suffered nine stab wounds during a marijuana raid in Northern California. But he survived after he was airlifted to a veterinary clinic. What's more, it's the second time the dog, named Ice, recovered after being seriously injured. The agency said Friday that Ice was wounded late last month in the Klamath National Forest south of the Oregon border. He kept hold of the suspect even after he was stabbed. A helicopter flew Ice to a veterinary clinic in Medford, Oregon. The agency says Ice had multiple stab wounds that were more severe during a similar raid in 2016. 652

Rudy Giuliani joined President Donald Trump's legal team last month, and in a whirlwind few days, he has made a series of eye-opening statements about a hush money payment to Stormy Daniels.After an interview with Fox News' Sean Hannity on Wednesday night, Giuliani's comments have prompted legal questions from Trump critics and remarks from the President himself, who said Friday that his new attorney was "still getting his facts straight."Here's some of what Giuliani has had to say: 495

Rudy Giuliani's assertion to CNN this week that President Donald Trump can't be indicted by the special counsel, and thus can't face a subpoena, banks on a series of internal Justice Department policies.The question to this day is untested in the court system. Yet the step-by-step process Robert Mueller or any special counsel could follow for a President under investigation has several possible outcomes.According to several legal experts, historical memos and court filings, this is how the Justice Department's decision-making on whether to indict a sitting president could play out:First, there must be suspicion or allegations of a crime. Did the President do something criminally wrong? If the answer is no, there would be no investigation.But if the answer is maybe, that puts federal investigators on the pursuit. If they find nothing, Justice Department guidelines say they'd still need to address their investigation in a report summarizing their findings.If there could be some meat to the allegations, the Justice Department would need to determine one of two things: Did the potentially criminal actions take place unrelated to or before to the presidency? Or was the President's executive branch power was crucial in the crime?That determination will come into play later, because Congress' power to impeach and remove a president from office was intended by the framers of the Constitution to remedy abuse of the office, legal scholars say.Perhaps, though, the special counsel decides there's enough evidence to prove that the President broke the law.That's where the Office of Legal Counsel opinions come in.In 1973 and 2000, the office, which defines Justice Department internal procedure, said an indictment of a sitting president would be too disruptive to the country. This opinion appears to be binding on the Justice Department's decision-making, though it's possible for Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to choose to override the opinion, give Mueller permission to ignore it and take it to court, or ask the office to reexamine the issue by writing a new opinion.This sort of legal briefing has been done before, like in the year after the 1973 opinion, when then-special prosecutor Leon Jaworski wrote a Watergate-era memo describing why the President should not be above the law.Of course, there's another immediate option if a special counsel finds the President did wrong. Prosecutors could use the "unindicted co-conspirator" approach. This would involve the special counsel's office indicting a group of conspirators, making clear the President was part of the conspiracy without bringing charges against him.At any time, in theory, a special counsel could decide to delay an indictment until the President leaves office -- so as not to interfere with the functioning of the executive branch. The other options would be to drop the case or send an impeachment referral to Congress. As evidenced by Mueller's actions previously in the investigations of Trump's personal attorney Michael Cohen and former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, any steps this special counsel takes will likely come with the full support of the acting attorney general on the matter, Rosenstein.The question of whether a President could be subpoenaed is a story for another day. 3303

RIP Hugh Keays-Byrne ?? It’s amazing you were able to play an evil warlord so well cause you were such a kind, beautiful soul. You will be deeply missed my friend. pic.twitter.com/kXDhNs5jEU— Charlize Theron (@CharlizeAfrica) December 2, 2020 250

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California prosecutors announced Wednesday they will seek the death penalty if they convict the man suspected of being the notorious "Golden State Killer" who eluded capture for decades.The move comes less than a month after Gov. Gavin Newsom announced a moratorium on executing any of the 737 inmates on the nation's largest death row. Newsom's reprieve lasts only so long as he is governor and does not prevent prosecutors from seeking nor judges and juries from imposing death sentences.Prosecutors from four counties briefly announced their decision one after another during a short court hearing for Joseph DeAngelo, jailed as the suspected "Golden State Killer." He was arrested a year ago based on DNA evidence linking him to at least 13 murders and more than 50 rapes across California in the 1970s and '80s.He stood expressionless in an orange jail uniform, staring forward from a courtroom cage, as prosecutors from Sacramento, Santa Barbara, Orange and Ventura spoke. Although prosecutors from six counties were in court for the four-minute hearing, charges in those four counties include the special circumstances that could merit execution under California law.His attorney, public defender Diane Howard, did not comment. DeAngelo, 73, has yet to enter a plea and his trial is likely years away.Prosecutors wouldn't comment after the hearing, but Orange County District Attorney Todd Spitzer said several prosecutors and family members of murder victims planned a Thursday news conference to denounce Newsom's moratorium. An announcement from Spitzer's office said victims' families "will share their stories of losing their loved ones and how the governor's moratorium has devastated their pursuit of justice.""These are horrific crimes," Newsom said in a statement. "Our sympathies are with the victims and families who have suffered at the hands of the Golden State Killer. The district attorneys can pursue this action as is their right under the law."California has not executed anyone since 2006, but Newsom said he acted last month because 25 inmates have exhausted their appeals and court challenges to the state's new lethal injection process are potentially nearing their end. He endorsed a repeal of capital punishment but said he could not in good conscious allow executions to resume in the meantime knowing that some innocent inmates could die.He also said he is exploring ways to commute death sentences, which would permanently end the chance of executions, though he cannot act without permission from the state Supreme Court in many cases.Voters narrowly supported capital punishment in 2012 and 2016, when they voted to speed up executions by shortening appeals.Criminal Justice Legal Foundation legal director Kent Scheidegger said prosecutors' decision made sense despite Newsom's moratorium."It's a perfect example of a killer for whom anything less would not be justice," said Scheidegger, who is fighting in court to resume executions. "I think it's entirely appropriate for DAs to continue seeking the death penalty in appropriate cases, because the actual execution will be well down the road and the governor's reprieve won't be in effect by then. Something else will have happened." 3257

来源：资阳报