洛阳网络安全工程师自学要多久江西100M谷歌100M高速服务器租用,长春C#线上培训哪里好,广州eclipse自学书籍推荐,天津网络安全工程师自学网,山西RAS解密主机购买,重庆C++培训哪家好,贵阳解密型主机服务器抢购

Rudy Giuliani just contradicted the White House and the Justice Department on a very sensitive subject: The AT&T-Time Warner deal."The president denied the merger," Giuliani, a new member of President Trump's legal team, said in an interview with HuffPost on Friday.Giuliani was seemingly trying to defend the president against any suggestion that Michael Cohen improperly influenced the administration after the revelation that Cohen, Trump's longtime personal attorney, was paid large sums of money by AT&T and several other corporate clients."Whatever lobbying was done didn't reach the president," Giuliani said, repeating a claim he made to CNN's Dana Bash on Thursday.But then Giuliani went further, telling HuffPost's S.V. Date that "he did drain the swamp... The president denied the merger. They didn't get the result they wanted."In other words: If AT&T hired Cohen to win government approval of the deal, AT&T wasted its 0,000.But the assertion that "the president denied the merger" flies in the face of everything the government has previously said about the deal."If Giuliani didn't misspeak, this is major news," former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti tweeted Friday night. "It is highly unusual for the president to be involved in DOJ merger decisions."It is possible that Giuliani misspoke, or that he simply does not know what he's talking about. He was not working for Trump at the time the Justice Department was reviewing the deal. Since he began representing Trump, he has had to change the story he has been telling in public about Stormy Daniels and what Trump knew or didn't know and when about the payment Cohen made to her. And he may simply have meant "the president" as a stand-in for "the administration."But this is not the first time that there have been questions about whether politics and Trump influenced the DOJ's decision.On the day AT&T announced its bid to buy Time Warner, the parent company of CNN, then-candidate Trump said he opposed the deal. So when he took office, there were concerns within AT&T and Time Warner that he or his aides would try to block the deal.AT&T said earlier this week that it hired Cohen, in part, to gain "insights" about the Trump administration's thinking about the deal.Throughout 2017, career officials at the Justice Department's antitrust division conducted a standard review of the proposed deal.The DOJ traditionally operates with a lot of independence. But there were persistent questions about possible political interference, especially in light of the president's well-publicized disdain for both CNN and attorney general Jeff Sessions.Still, AT&T and Time Warner executives believed the deal would receive DOJ approval, much like Comcast's acquisition of NBCUniversal did nearly a decade ago. By October, they thought the thumbs-up was right around the corner.They were wrong. In November, the DOJ went to court to block the deal, alleging that the combination of the two companies would give AT&T too much power in the marketplace.That's when questions about Trump's hidden hand really got louder. Democratic lawmakers raised alarms. So did AT&T and Time Warner. Other critics pointed out Trump's complaints about Sessions and the DOJ. Trump had recently been quoted saying "I'm not supposed to be involved in the Justice Department," adding, "I'm not supposed to be doing the kinds of things I would LOVE to be doing, and I'm very frustrated by it."But White House aides like Kellyanne Conway insisted that the White House was not interfering.The DOJ's antitrust chief, Makan Delrahim, said the same thing. He denied being influenced by Trump.In an affidavit, Delrahim said "all of my decisions" about suing to block the deal "have been made on the merits, without regard to political considerations."Ahead of the trial, AT&T and Time Warner sought discovery on any relevant communications between the White House and the Justice Department. But a judge denied the request, and the companies dropped any argument that the case was motivated by politics.The Justice Department and AT&T had no immediate comment Friday night.The-CNN-Wire 4182

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California Gov. Gavin Newsom on Monday asked President Donald Trump to approve more housing vouchers as Trump's administration weighs in on the most populous state's massive homelessness problem.Members of the administration visited Los Angeles last week to view the city's sprawling homeless encampments after Trump told his staff to develop policy options to address the national crisis of people living on the streets.The Democratic governor and officials representing California cities and counties sent the Republican president a letter asserting that "shelter solves sleep, but only housing solves homelessness."Their letter asks Trump to provide 50,000 more housing vouchers through two existing programs and to increase the value of the vouchers to account for high rents. That would help "a significant proportion of our unsheltered population," including thousands of military veterans, they wrote.Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, a Democrat, invited Trump in July to tour the city's streets. Garcetti estimated that 36,000 people in the city are homeless on any given night, while thousands sleep on streets in other California cities.Newsom's office could not immediately say how much more the voucher proposal would cost.U.S. Housing and Urban Development officials did not immediately comment.The California officials also asked Trump to create a program to encourage landlords to work better with voucher holders."Pairing more vouchers with an increase in the fair market rent value of the vouchers, you have the ability to make a meaningful difference in the lives of so many who suffer on our streets," the officials wrote.They defended California's attempts to deal with poverty while contrasting the administration's "significant cuts" to public housing and community grant programs. They asked Trump to also work with Congress to increase funding for 300,000 new housing vouchers nationwide. 1945

Roseanne Barr apologized after a bizarre, racist Twitter rant Tuesday morning, and then announced she's "now leaving Twitter." Following the rant, one of the show's consulting producers, Wanda Sykes, said she's done with the show."I will not be returning to @RoseanneOnABC," Sykes tweeted.Her announcement came just minutes before ABC announced that it is canceling "Roseanne."Earlier on Tuesday, Bar tweeted an apology to Valerie Jarrett and "all Americans.""I am truly sorry for making a bad joke about her politics and her looks,"Barr tweeted. "I should have known better. Forgive me-my joke was in bad taste." Barr then said she's leaving Twitter.The star of ABC's hit reboot of "Roseanne" wrote early Tuesday morning, "Muslim brotherhood & planet of the apes had a baby=vj." Barr was responding to a comment about Jarrett, a top former aide to president Obama. She later deleted the tweet.CNN reporter Andrew Kaczynski responded to Roseanne on Twitter about the Jarrett comment, which she replied was "a joke."Social media immediately lit up with criticism of both Barr and ABC, with some demanding a response from the broadcast network. ABC has not replied to CNNMoney's request for comment.In the past, ABC executives have privately said that they hold their noses when Barr tweets. They know some of her posts have been problematic -- full of pro-Trump conspiracy theories that mislead her fans.The executives want Barr to focus on her show. But they seem to take the position that there's no controlling Barr, and that's what makes her the successful comic she is.ABC employees shared these views on condition of anonymity earlier this year, before the current Twitter controversy.Barr also made comments on Twitter about Chelsea Clinton, tweeting, "Chelsea Soros Clinton." She later replied in the comments that Clinton is "married to Soros nephew." Soros is a billionaire liberal benefactor who has been the subject to many right-wing conspiracy theories over the years.Clinton responded to Barr shortly after."Good morning Roseanne - my given middle name is Victoria. I imagine George Soros's nephews are lovely people. I'm just not married to one," she wrote.Barr responded back to Clinton saying, "Sorry to have tweeted incorrect info about you! Please forgive me!"She then continued, "By the way, George Soros is a nazi who turned in his fellow Jews 2 be murdered in German concentration camps & stole their wealth-were you aware of that? But, we all make mistakes, right Chelsea?"This conspiracy theory about Soros has been debunked many times. The fact-checking site Snopes called it "false" back in 2016.Roseanne's rant is nothing new to those who follow the sitcom star on Twitter. The star bred controversy on the site before.The premiere of Roseanne's reboot was one of the highest-rated new shows of the season, and Barr is one of the network's biggest stars, if not its biggest.However, after the huge debut, which brought in more than 18 million live viewers, the show saw its audience come back down to earth. Its finale, which aired last week, nabbed roughly 10 million viewers.MSNBC's "Morning Joe" host, Joe Scarborough, was critical of ABC on Twitter following the rant."Hey @ABC, Roseanne Barr compared Valerie Jarrett to an ape. There is no apology she can make that justifies @ABC turning a blind eye to this bigotry by airing another second of her show," he tweeted. "Even in the Age of Trump, there are red lines that can never be crossed. This is one."Others like civil rights activist DeRay Mckesson called on the network to cancel the show.".@ABC, how desperate are you to profit from Roseanne's racism? We know racism sells in this country, it always has. But you don't have to participate in it," he tweeted. "This apology is meaningless. Cancel Roseanne."The-CNN-Wire 3823

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California voters could decide in 2020 whether it should be easier for their local governments to raise taxes and issue bonds for affordable housing, road improvements and other public projects.A constitutional amendment proposed Wednesday would lower how much voter support communities need to raise money for infrastructure projects from two-thirds to 55 percent.Assembly Democrats say the current threshold allows a minority of voters to derail needed projects."These two-thirds thresholds are meant to enable a boisterous minority to impede progress," said Assemblyman Todd Gloria of San Diego.But taxpayer advocates said it would make things more expensive for homeowners in particular because it could lead to more parcel taxes, a flat tax levied on property owners."If this passes it's going to be devastating for property owners," said David Wolfe, legislative director for the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association.Constitutional amendments need support from two-thirds of lawmakers to land on the ballot, and the backing of a simple majority of voters to become law.Assemblywoman Cecilia Aguiar-Curry, a Democrat sponsoring the amendment, said she hopes to place it on the November 2020 ballot. That would coincide with the presidential election, which usually draws the highest voter turnout and millions more Democrats than Republicans.It would apply to projects including affordable housing, wastewater treatment, fire and police buildings, parks, public libraries, broadband expansion, hospitals and more.Local governments typically fund those projects through bonds or special taxes, like the parcel tax or a dedicated sales tax.The 55 percent threshold would still be higher than the simple majority communities need to raise general taxes, such as sales taxes not dedicated to special projects.Democrats highlighted projects that have narrowly missed the two-thirds threshold to make their case, such as a recreation center restoration in Millbrae and road repairs in Eureka."I have heard about deteriorating buildings, decrepit community facilities and our extreme lack of affordable housing," said Aguiar-Curry, a former mayor of a small rural California city. "This will empower communities to take action at the local level to improve the economies, neighborhoods and residents' quality of life."But Wolfe, of the taxpayers association, said the list of allowable projects is broad and could lead to a slew of new tax and bond proposals from cities and counties that could saddle taxpayers for years."These are pretty encompassing categories and there's no limit," he said. "You're talking about long-term debt that lasts for decades." 2688

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California's incoming governor said Tuesday his transition started with a "reality check" as the state contended with a mass shooting and two deadly wildfires.Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom appeared alongside fellow Democrat and outgoing Gov. Jerry Brown for the first time since he was elected California's 40th governor last week."That puts everything in perspective," Newsom said of the tragedies, standing behind a large brass bear that former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger installed in front of the governor's office during his tenure.Newsom said he's focused for now on staffing his administration. The governor appoints hundreds of people who serve at top levels of state agencies and departments. He announced last week that he'd picked former Hillary Clinton aide Ann O'Leary to be his chief of staff and Ana Matosantos, a former chief of finance for the state, to be his cabinet secretary.He and Brown did not offer details of their discussions."Pick an issue. We've had a chance to dialogue at least broadly about it," Newsom said.With fires raging on both ends of California, one of them the deadliest and most destructive in the state's history, Newsom sidestepped questions about what action should be taken against utilities if their equipment is found to be responsible. The fires started near the time and place where Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric reported equipment irregularities, but no cause has been determined."I'm going to assess the facts first before I opine," he said.Newsom called legislation enacted last year to improve forest management and protect utilities from financial ruin "a good first step, obviously a work in progress." The measure included money to clear dead trees from fire-prone areas and made it easier for utilities to pass along the costs of wildfire lawsuits to their customers. California is one of two states with a legal standard that holds utilities entirely liable if their equipment causes a wildfire.Brown said California is "pretty well maxed out" from fighting several deadly wildfires and he's grateful for the help from surrounding states and the federal government.He said the state is doing everything possible to prevent fires, but "some things only God can do.""This is unprecedented, or what I call the new abnormal," Brown said. "The winds are faster, the temperatures are hotter. The soil and vegetation is dryer. This is unprecedented. And it's a tragedy, and we as human beings have to be humble in the face of it, but also resolute and determined." 2568