成都有哪些知名医院治疗精索静脉曲张(成都能做精索静脉曲张手术的医院) (今日更新中)

Russia is threatening action against U.S. media outlets operating there as soon as next week.On Thursday Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said in an interview on Russian television that Russia is working on practical steps in response to U.S. government pressure on Russian-government owned media operating in the U.S."I think that our patience that is nearly run out will take some legal shape. I don't rule out it will be done next week," she said in the interview according to the state-run news wire TASS. "As of today, there is understanding that a practical phase of these response measures (in respect of US media in Russia over demands the RT broadcaster register itself as a foreign agent in the US) will begin next week."Zakharova did not specify which outlets would be targeted or what the actions would be. But last month, Russian officials sent letters to news organizations in Russia that are backed by the U.S. government, warning them of possible "restrictions."The comments are the latest in the increasing saber rattling from the Russian government regarding American media operations in Russia. Russian officials say it is in reaction to a request from the Justice Department that the Russian state-funded outlets RT and Sputnik register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) in the United States.RT's network is available on cable in the United States and Sputnik has an FM radio station in the U.S. Both have websites that are accessible in the U.S. Though the United States funds news organizations in Russia such as Radio Free Europe and Current, those outlets are not available on radio or on cable but are normally accessed via the internet.According to RT, the DOJ initially gave it an October deadline to register. RT has said it purposely missed that deadline as it tried to fight against the forced registration. Individuals or organizations that register under FARA are asked to disclose their funding, operations and other information, but are allowed to continue their work. Other state-sponsored news organizations like Japan's NHK and The China Daily are already registered under FARA.RT reported on Thursday that the DOJ has given it a new deadline of November 13 and that it plans to register, but will challenge the DOJ's request in court. Editor-in-Chief Margarita Simonyan said in an article on the Russian version of RT's website that the "DOJ left us no choice" and that RT's lawyers have said that the head of its American operations could be arrested and company accounts seized if it does not comply."We believe this requirement is not just contrary to the law, and we intend to prove it in court. This requirement is discriminatory, it contradicts both the principles of democracy and freedom of speech," she said, according to a translation by the AP.Convictions of people or organizations which fail to register under FARA are rare. According to the DOJ, there have only been seven FARA-related criminal cases in the past 50 years. FARA experts told CNN in October that though jail and asset seizure is rare, it can happen in certain cases.RT America was singled out in a January intelligence community report for the impact it may have had on the 2016 election. The report said RT "conducts strategic messaging for [the] Russian government" and "seeks to influence politics, [and] fuel discontent in the U.S." The report also mentioned Sputnik as "another government-funded outlet producing pro-Kremlin radio and online content."Federal investigators are also reportedly looking into whether Russian government-funded outlets such as RT and Sputnik were part of Russia's influence campaign aimed at the 2016 presidential election. Yahoo News has separately reported that the FBI interviewed a former Sputnik correspondent about his work at the website.The Russian Embassy in the United States blasted the DOJ's move in a Facebook post."Blatant pressure on the Russian mass media confirms that the United States pursues the course of deliberately hurting our relations. We consider its demand as a wish to eliminate an alternative source of information, which is an unacceptable violation of the international norms of free press," the post said.The DOJ declined to comment. An RT spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment. 4321

Russia has condemned US, UK and French strikes against targets in Syria over the alleged use of chemical weapons, as the Western allies argued they were essential to deter the future use of illegal munitions.The strikes hit three sites -- one in Damascus and two in Homs -- which US President Donald Trump said were "associated with the chemical weapon capabilities of Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad."The action followed a week of threats of retaliation for an alleged chemical weapons attack on civilians in Douma, outside Damascus, where Syrian forces have long been battling rebels. 594

Rudy Giuliani said Wednesday that President Donald Trump's legal team has responded to the special counsel, the latest effort in ongoing negotiations over a possible interview."We have now given him an answer. Obviously, he should take a few days to consider it, but we should get this resolved," Giuliani said during an interview on the radio show of fellow Trump attorney Jay Sekulow."We do not want to run into the November elections. So back up from that, this should be over by September 1," Giuliani said.Sekulow confirmed in a statement that the legal team "responded in writing to the latest proposal" from the special counsel, but declined to comment on the substance of the response.Giuliani had previously told CNN that the team planned to send its counteroffer to special counsel Robert Mueller regarding a potential interview on Wednesday."It is a good faith attempt to reach an agreement," Giuliani, one of Trump's lawyers on the Russia investigation, told CNN.The former New York City mayor similarly would not describe the contents of the counteroffer, except to say that "there is an area where we could agree, if they agree."Giuliani wouldn't say if that area has to do with collusion or obstruction.The President has previously said that he wants to speak with the special counsel and has insisted there was no collusion or obstruction, while deriding the investigation as a "witch hunt."But Trump's public attacks on the Russia probe have sparked questions over whether his actions could constitute obstruction of justice. Those questions intensified earlier this month when the President called on Attorney General Jeff Sessions to shut down the investigation, an escalation that Giuliani attempted to downplay as Trump merely expressing an opinion.The President's team has sought to limit any potential interview to questions about collusion. But Giuliani told CNN they would be willing to consider questions relating to any obstruction of justice inquiry as long as they are not "perjury traps," a phrase favored by the Trump legal team as a way to raise questions about the fairness of the special counsel, though it also speaks to the risks of having the President sit down for an interview."For example: 'What did you say about Flynn?' 'Why did you fire Comey?'" They already know our answer," Giuliani said, referring to former national security adviser Michael Flynn and former FBI director James Comey, whom Trump abruptly fired in May 2017. The former FBI director later testified to Congress that Trump had pressed him to drop an investigation into Flynn, a claim that Trump has denied. "If they can show us something in that area that didn't involve those direct questions, that we don't consider perjury traps, we would consider it," Giuliani said, but conceded he "can't think of what that would be."Mueller has indicated to the team that the special counsel wants to ask the President obstruction questions in an interview.The President's lawyers had previously offered the special counsel written answers to obstruction questions and limiting the interview to matters before his presidential inauguration, which are largely confined to collusion.The back and forth over an interview comes as the special counsel investigation faces its first major test in court as Trump's former campaign chairman Paul Manafort stands trial in the Eastern District of Virginia where he is accused of bank fraud, tax evasion and other financial crimes.Manafort's case isn't about the 2016 presidential campaign, but he is the first defendant Mueller's team has taken to trial. 3603

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — The California Assembly voted Thursday to cap the interest lenders may charge on loans that can carry rates spiraling into the triple digits.Backed by civil rights groups, religious organizations and some trade associations, the proposed law would cap annual rates at around 38% for loans between ,500 and ,000.The bill comes as legislators across the country seek to reign in a storefront lending industry critics accuse of preying on low-income consumers in need of cash and trapping them under mounds of debt for years.But even as the bill advanced, some California lawmakers expressed concern that it will limit choices for consumers with bad credit or little access to banks and other financial products. And the lending industry, which wields significant influence in legislatures as well as in Washington, has launched an advertising campaign in California attacking the bill as it heads to the state Senate, where observers expect a tougher fight.Proponents of capping interest rates point to an explosion in high-interest consumer loans around the state over the last decade.The state already caps interest rates on consumer loans under ,500 but not for amounts over that threshold. In 2009, 8,468 loans for amounts between ,500 and ,000 came with interest rates over 100%, according to data from state regulators. Lenders now issue more than 350,000 loans each year with interest rates in the triple digits. A legislative analysis said at least one out of three borrowers is unable to pay their loans.But proposals to cap interest rates in recent years have faltered at California's Legislature. Several lawmakers still expressed concern about the latest proposal, suggesting it could drive lenders out of the market, pushing consumers with low incomes toward unregulated lenders or cutting off their easy access to capital."Without these alternative financial service providers, those folks would have nowhere else to go," said Democratic Assemblywoman Sydney Kamlager-Dove of Los Angeles.Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon dismissed arguments the bill would ultimately harm low-income residents."Those are merely talking points of an industry that has repeatedly lied to members of this chamber," he said.Casting the bill as a moral issue, the Democrat said the legislation can be considered as important as any other lawmakers will vote on this year in the country's most populous state.The bill ended up passing with bipartisan support as one Republican legislator cited religious prohibitions on usury."I'm a free-market capitalist and I'm unashamed of it but we need to stand up and protect people who are being preyed upon," said Assemblyman Jordan Cunningham of San Luis Obispo.The support of the financial industry this year, too, may also signal that the sector foresees a reckoning in the state or at least further political uncertainty if lawmakers do not approve limits for loans between ,500 and ,000.The California Supreme Court cast a legal question mark last year over the lending industry's practices, deciding in one class action lawsuit that some interest rates can be so high as to be deemed unconscionable under financial laws.Democratic Assemblywoman Monique Limon of Santa Barbara, the bill's author, also suggested that an interest rate cap could end up on the ballot if the Legislature does not act.If passed, California would join 38 states and the District of Columbia in capping interest rates for these types of loans, according to a legislative analysis. The level proposed in California would be on the higher end.Observers expect a bigger political fight when the bill heads to the state Senate, however.Opponents of the bill have launched an advertising campaign aimed at stopping it.The trade group Online Lenders Alliance has bought ads on Sacramento television stations, according to Federal Communication Commission filings.A group calling itself Don't Lock Me Out California has also bought online ads attacking the bill. 4018

RICHMOND, Va. — Richmond Police are investigating after someone spray-painted "White Lives Matter" across a statue of black tennis legend Arthur Ashe statue along Monument Avenue in Richmond.Ashe, a Richmond-born tennis star and humanitarian, was the first black man to win U.S Open and Wimbledon titles.Wednesday's incident at the Ashe statue comes after weeks protests against police brutality both in Richmond and around the country.Statues along Monument Avenue honoring Confederate leaders like Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson, and Jefferson Davis have either been spray-painted or toppled during the protest.Concrete barriers were installed around the Lee statue on Wednesday morning.The Virginia Department of General Services said it was erecting the barriers to protect the safety of demonstrators and the structure.The action came shortly after protesters toppled the Howitzers Monument located near Virginia Commonwealth University's Monroe Park campus on Tuesday.It was the third Confederate statue, and the fourth monument, to be torn down by demonstrators in Virginia following the death of George Floyd, a black man who died after a white Minneapolis police officer pressed a knee into his neck.Earlier this month, Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam said the state would take down the Lee statue.This story was originally published by WTVR in Richmond, Virginia. 1379

来源：资阳报