Wife of Mexican drug lord gives birth in Calif.

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Wife of Mexican drug lord gives birth in Calif.

LOS ANGELES (AP) — The young wife of Mexico's most wanted drug lord has given birth to twin girls at a hospital in northern Los Angeles County, according to a newspaper report.

Emma Coronel, the 22-year-old wife of Joaquin Guzman, crossed the border in mid-July and delivered her daughters at Antelope Valley Hospital in Lancaster on Aug. 15, the Los Angeles Times reported on its website Monday (http://lat.ms/nyfqmn).

Coronel, a former beauty queen who holds U.S. citizenship, returned to Mexico after they were born.

Birth certificates listed Coronel as the mother of the girls, but the spaces for the father's name are blank. U.S. law enforcement officials, who tracked her movements even before she traveled to Lancaster, told the Times that Coronel was not arrested because there are no charges against her.

Coronel is believed to be the third or fourth wife of Guzman, the 54-year-old multibillionaire head of Mexico's most powerful drug-trafficking gang, the Sinaloa cartel. The couple married the day she turned 18 at a lavish wedding in the highlands of central Mexico in 2007.

U.S. authorities have placed a $5-million bounty on Guzman head and allege that he and the Sinaloa cartel control the majority of cocaine and marijuana trafficking into the U.S. from Mexico and Colombia.

http://news.yahoo.com/wife-mexican-drug-lord-gives-birth-calif-044415749.html

should us authorities have allowed this to happen? she is a US citizen, not under indictment, however, she is married to a known drug lord and i highly doubt she is ignorant of his activities.

 

[RockX]

At least she can afford to pay her hospital bill, unlike the other 3 million illegals sucking the life out of California taxpayers.

 

[Bonestorm]

Wife of Mexican drug lord gives birth in Calif.

LOS ANGELES (AP) — The young wife of Mexico's most wanted drug lord has given birth to twin girls at a hospital in northern Los Angeles County, according to a newspaper report.

Emma Coronel, the 22-year-old wife of Joaquin Guzman, crossed the border in mid-July and delivered her daughters at Antelope Valley Hospital in Lancaster on Aug. 15, the Los Angeles Times reported on its website Monday (http://lat.ms/nyfqmn).

Coronel, a former beauty queen who holds U.S. citizenship, returned to Mexico after they were born.

Birth certificates listed Coronel as the mother of the girls, but the spaces for the father's name are blank. U.S. law enforcement officials, who tracked her movements even before she traveled to Lancaster, told the Times that Coronel was not arrested because there are no charges against her.

Coronel is believed to be the third or fourth wife of Guzman, the 54-year-old multibillionaire head of Mexico's most powerful drug-trafficking gang, the Sinaloa cartel. The couple married the day she turned 18 at a lavish wedding in the highlands of central Mexico in 2007.

U.S. authorities have placed a $5-million bounty on Guzman head and allege that he and the Sinaloa cartel control the majority of cocaine and marijuana trafficking into the U.S. from Mexico and Colombia.

http://news.yahoo.com/wife-mexican-drug-lord-gives-birth-calif-044415749.html

should us authorities have allowed this to happen? she is a US citizen, not under indictment, however, she is married to a known drug lord and i highly doubt she is ignorant of his activities.

Should US authorities have allowed what to happen? Allow a US citizen to be present in the United States? Are you serious?

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Should US authorities have allowed what to happen? Allow a US citizen to be present in the United States? Are you serious?

given who she is married to? granted, not under indictment, but do you really think she is completely innocent? i don't see how they could have legally stopped her. i made the thread after reading the comments which were quite interesting. seemed like an interesting topic when you consider the dynamics of the facts.

 

[Bonestorm]

given who she is married to? granted, not under indictment, but do you really think she is completely innocent? i don't see how they could have legally stopped her. i made the thread after reading the comments which were quite interesting. seemed like an interesting topic when you consider the dynamics of the facts.

She's a U.S. citizen. There isn't any reason for her to be barred from entering the country.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Wife of Mexican drug lord gives birth in Calif.

LOS ANGELES (AP) — The young wife of Mexico's most wanted drug lord has given birth to twin girls at a hospital in northern Los Angeles County, according to a newspaper report.

Emma Coronel, the 22-year-old wife of Joaquin Guzman, crossed the border in mid-July and delivered her daughters at Antelope Valley Hospital in Lancaster on Aug. 15, the Los Angeles Times reported on its website Monday (http://lat.ms/nyfqmn).

Coronel, a former beauty queen who holds U.S. citizenship, returned to Mexico after they were born.

Birth certificates listed Coronel as the mother of the girls, but the spaces for the father's name are blank. U.S. law enforcement officials, who tracked her movements even before she traveled to Lancaster, told the Times that Coronel was not arrested because there are no charges against her.

Coronel is believed to be the third or fourth wife of Guzman, the 54-year-old multibillionaire head of Mexico's most powerful drug-trafficking gang, the Sinaloa cartel. The couple married the day she turned 18 at a lavish wedding in the highlands of central Mexico in 2007.

U.S. authorities have placed a $5-million bounty on Guzman head and allege that he and the Sinaloa cartel control the majority of cocaine and marijuana trafficking into the U.S. from Mexico and Colombia.

http://news.yahoo.com/wife-mexican-drug-lord-gives-birth-calif-044415749.html

should us authorities have allowed this to happen? she is a US citizen, not under indictment, however, she is married to a known drug lord and i highly doubt she is ignorant of his activities.

Who cares what you highly doubt?

She is a US citizen with no charges against her. Period.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

fuckin yurt.... you made a comment so ignorant that even Dung and I agree? Never go full retard son.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

given who she is married to? granted, not under indictment, but do you really think she is completely innocent? i don't see how they could have legally stopped her. i made the thread after reading the comments which were quite interesting. seemed like an interesting topic when you consider the dynamics of the facts.

SF needs reading comprehension lessons.

notice again WHY i made the thread. and notice again where i stand.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

She's a U.S. citizen. There isn't any reason for her to be barred from entering the country.

not unless she is on a watch list for something. and the facts do not indicate that.

 

[Damocles]

Um... A US citizen that is not under indictment, or even one under indictment, is most likely to have their kid in the US even if you don't want them to...

How could they have stopped it, what are you saying they should have done?

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

SF needs reading comprehension lessons.

notice again WHY i made the thread. and notice again where i stand.

You truly are a full retard.... I was commenting on the OP you idiot. Your implication in the OP was "however, she is married to a known drug lord and i highly doubt she is ignorant of his activities." what?

THAT is what I responded to. Moron.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

You truly are a full retard.... I was commenting on the OP you idiot. Your implication in the OP was "however, she is married to a known drug lord and i highly doubt she is ignorant of his activities." what?

THAT is what I responded to. Moron.

wtf? so you believe she has no idea what he does? and then you commented on her legal status as if that was something new and as if i thought they could stop her. you're too spastic to realize this thread was about discussion, i didn't give an opinion in the OP except that i doubt she is ignorant of what he does. from your post calling me a retard for stating that, shows me that you believe she is ignorant. now that is truly retarded.

you are a spazz.

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Um... A US citizen that is not under indictment, or even one under indictment, is most likely to have their kid in the US even if you don't want them to...

How could they have stopped it, what are you saying they should have done?

let me state this again:

i don't see how they could have legally stopped her.

if you read the comments after the article, many seem to believe they could have. i thought this would be good discussion for a political board, little did i know SF would come running in and spazz all over the place.

 

[cawacko]

fuckin yurt.... you made a comment so ignorant that even Dung and I agree? Never go full retard son.

 

[Onceler]

Just so you know, I didn't miss this one either.

"Yurtlogic"

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Just so you know, I didn't miss this one either.

"Yurtlogic"

substance. as usual, nothing to offer.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

wtf? so you believe she has no idea what he does? and then you commented on her legal status as if that was something new and as if i thought they could stop her. you're too spastic to realize this thread was about discussion, i didn't give an opinion in the OP except that i doubt she is ignorant of what he does. from your post calling me a retard for stating that, shows me that you believe she is ignorant. now that is truly retarded.

you are a spazz.

Moron... I ASKED you what your implication WAS from that comment.

That said, I could care less if she knows what he does. IT IS IRRELEVANT. SHE is a US Citizen. SHE has no warrants for her arrest. SHE has no charges filed against her.

so the 'point' of your OP was to have a 'discussion' about whether a US Citizen with no charges against her should be allowed in the US?

What exactly is there to discuss??? It is a no brainer. Even an idiot like you should know the answer. There is NOTHING to discuss.... other than your implied 'she knows what he does so should that prohibit her from coming to the US'

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

Moron... I ASKED you what your implication WAS from that comment.

That said, I could care less if she knows what he does. IT IS IRRELEVANT. SHE is a US Citizen. SHE has no warrants for her arrest. SHE has no charges filed against her.

so the 'point' of your OP was to have a 'discussion' about whether a US Citizen with no charges against her should be allowed in the US?

What exactly is there to discuss??? It is a no brainer. Even an idiot like you should know the answer. There is NOTHING to discuss.... other than your implied 'she knows what he does so should that prohibit her from coming to the US'

wow, another spazz post. i already said what i think they could do in stopping her. try not to be so ignorant because you're spazzing over one of my posts in a desperate attempt at a gotcha moment. you never asked me what the implication was until after you got embarrassed for claiming i made an ignore comment that you and dung agreed against me on. which was completely untrue because your reading comprehension sucks. you and dung never agreed to anything i did not. but i know you won't admit you're wrong.

apparently you're too daft to understand what i've said in this thread, so once again:

the comments after the article, where many believed the US had a right to stop her, led me to think it would be an interesting discussion on our diverse political board.

next time, count to 10 slowly before you respond to any of my posts.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

wow, another spazz post. i already said what i think they could do in stopping her. try not to be so ignorant because you're spazzing over one of my posts in a desperate attempt at a gotcha moment. you never asked me what the implication was until after you got embarrassed for claiming i made an ignore comment that you and dung agreed against me on. which was completely untrue because your reading comprehension sucks. you and dung never agreed to anything i did not. but i know you won't admit you're wrong.

apparently you're too daft to understand what i've said in this thread, so once again:

the comments after the article, where many believed the US had a right to stop her, led me to think it would be an interesting discussion on our diverse political board.

next time, count to 10 slowly before you respond to any of my posts.

Poor Yurtle... spazzing yet again?

"it was TOO a good discussion, cause I read some posts that said she should not be allowed"

Ok Yurtle.... easy now.... we get it.... GOOD THREAD yurtsie...

 

[Cancel 2018. 3]

no surprise SF can't admit he screwed up in reading what i actually said. further, i never said the sentence you put in quotes above. thanks for spazzing out and derailing the thread, really good job SF.

yawn