息县哪有算卦准的(南川有出名的算命的吗) (今日更新中)

A man shot himself in the head in front of the White House at just before noon Saturday, a Secret Service spokesperson has told CNN."Secret Service personnel are responding to reports of a person who allegedly suffered a self-inflicted gun shot wound along the north fence line of @WhiteHouse," the Secret Service tweeted as the incident unfolded.The man approached the fence line, removed a concealed handgun and fired several rounds, none of which appear to have been aimed at the White House, a Secret Service spokesperson said. The man has since died; no one else was injured in the incident, the spokesperson said.  633

A black bear was spotted wandering through backyards in Brecksville, Ohio on Tuesday night, and it seems to be a little hungry.Officers said the bear bent a fence to get into a beehive within the fenced area.Police said the bear was sighted in the 9000 block of Highland Road, east of I-77 and south of State Route 82. This area has deep wooded lots, according to officials.The animal warden was out checking the area with officers and the Ohio Department of Natural Resources will be contacted in the morning, according to police. 564

A growing group of Republicans want Attorney General Jeff Sessions to be the party's choice in the Alabama Senate race, but ethics experts say Sessions either would have to have to leave the Department of Justice or continually disavow campaigns to put him in the seat if he wants to run for the office and avoid legal trouble.This week Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn of Texas both said they would support Sessions as a write-in candidate over Republican candidate Roy Moore, who has been accused of pursuing sexual relationships with teenagers when he was in his 30s.Moore denies the allegations, and says he has no plans leave the race. And Sessions has not indicated that he's planning to run for his old seat.But ethics experts say that even if Sessions does not himself campaign to be a write-in candidate in the race, he could have an "affirmative duty" to disavow campaigns to put him in the Senate while he's still the attorney general. If he remains silent, he could be in violation of the Hatch Act, a 1939 law restricting the ability of most federal employees to engage in political campaign activities.Walter Shaub, a former director of the US Office of Government Ethics who's now at the nonprofit Campaign Legal Center, told CNN that the federal Office of Special Counsel has issued an advisory opinion on write-in candidates, which specifies:"(S)uch a candidacy is permissible only if spontaneous and accomplished without an employee's knowledge. You acknowledge that you have heard rumors of a write-in effort to elect you to the school board. It would be a violation of the Act if you encouraged this effort or remained silent. The Act imposes on you an affirmative duty to disavow this effort through public announcements and other appropriate means." It remains to be seen whether the OSC considers the comments by McConnell and Cornyn as imposing an "affirmative duty.""There's a question as to whether it's a write-in campaign or a stray comment from one guy," Shaub said following McConnell's comments. "If McConnell keeps talking about it, he's going to create an affirmative duty."Larry Noble, a senior director at the Campaign Legal Center who's a CNN contributor, said Republicans such as McConnell are "putting (Sessions) in a very difficult position" by even suggesting he be a write-in candidate."We are close to the line of his having to disavow," Noble added.For Sessions to be eligible as a write-in candidate, Noble said, he would have to "affirmatively disavow" any campaign or resign from office to avoid violating the Hatch Act.Sessions would likely be asked about his support for the write-in candidacy frequently until the December 12 election. Questions could also be raised about whether he was having private conversations about the effort with the state party and the Republican National Committee, which also would violate the Hatch Act.In response to a request for comment, Sarah Isgur Flores, director of public affairs for the Department of Justice, said, "Our ethics officials will need to evaluate precisely what has been said by others and then review what, if any, affirmative obligations we may have."Samuel Bagenstos, a University of Michigan Law School professor who specializes in constitutional litigation, noted that a few previous attorneys general -- including Dick Thornburgh and Robert Kennedy -- have campaigned for Senate seats, but neither were floated as write-in candidates."It's extremely suboptimal for an attorney general, who is supposed to have some insulation from electoral politics, to be actively running for a political office," Bagenstos said, adding, "And of course there would be lots of possible recusal questions."Aside from ethical considerations, running as a write-in candidate would be a long shot even if Sessions resigned.Few candidates have won Senate seats via write-in campaigns. Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, won her seat that way in 2010, but prior to her election the last person to do it was Strom Thurmond in 1954.However unlikely, a Sessions victory would serve two purposes for the GOP: The party would retain the seat, and Sessions would leave the DOJ after months of public criticism by President Donald Trump over his decision to recuse himself from the Russia investigation and not to prosecute Trump's political enemies. 4412

A Georgia woman spent three months in jail after two deputies said a field test of a blue substance found in a car she was in turned up positive for methamphetamine.But it wasn't meth. It was cotton candy.Dasha Fincher claims that while she was in jail she missed several major life events, including the birth of twin grandchildren, and was refused medical care for a broken hand and ovarian cyst.Now she's filed a lawsuit against Monroe County and the three officers involved for wrongful imprisonment and violating her civil rights. The lawsuit also targets Sirchie Acquisition Company, the maker of the field kit the deputies used to produce the mistaken test result. 679

A day after Judge Amy Coney Barrett mostly sidestepped questions on her judicial views of politically-charged topics, Barrett returned to the Capitol on Wednesday for another marathon session of questioning in her Supreme Court confirmation hearing.On Tuesday, Democrats continued their attempt to pry Barrett into sharing her judicial views on topics like abortion, public healthcare, LGBTQ+ rights and gun control — topics which Barrett is considered to take a conservative slant. However, Barrett continued to repeatedly invoke the "Ginsburg rule.""Justice Ginsburg, with her characteristic pithiness, used this to describe how a nominee should comport herself at a hearing. No hints, no previews, no forecasts," Barrett said on Tuesday.Ginsburg — whose seat Barrett seeks to fill following the longtime justice's death in September — coined the phrase during her confirmation hearings 27 years ago. While she did not set that precedent, she's credited with the concise phrasing that has been recited by many prospective justices in the decades since.But The Associated Press notes that Ginsburg was open on her views of at least one hotly-debated topic — abortion."The decision whether or not to bear a child is central to a woman's life, to her well-being and dignity," Ginsburg said in 1993 during her confirmation hearing, according to the AP. "It is a decision she must make for herself. When Government controls that decision for her, she is being treated as less than a fully adult human responsible for her own choices."As Democrats lobbed questions at Barrett regarding her judicial views, the judge offered few insights. Here's how she answered on the following topics:AbortionLike she did on Tuesday, Barrett attempted to avoid answering specific questions regarding her personal views on abortion. However, Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham asked Barrett specifically about legislation he introduced that would prevent a woman from receiving an abortion after 20 weeks. When asked if Barrett would listen to both sides of that case, Barrett said she would.Graham went on to say that if Barrett were to be confirmed, it would punch through a "reinforced concrete barrier" facing conservative women, adding it would be the first time in history that a woman who is "unashamedly pro-life" would be appointed to the Supreme Court.Affordable Care ActBarrett mostly stuck to the "Ginsburg Rule" by attempting not to tip her hand when it came to sharing judicial views. However, questioning from Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont, forced Barrett to admit that while she had written negatively about the Affordable Care Act and some Supreme Court rulings upholding it in the past, she had not ever written favorably about the law.Cameras in the Supreme CourtThe Supreme Court has famously been one of the most secretive branches of government. Cameras and recording devices weren't allowed in high court hearings until this year when arguments were forced to be held via teleconference due to the COVID-19. In fact, it wasn't until 2018 that the court published case filings online.However, Barrett said Wednesday that she would "keep an open mind" about allowing cameras in the courtroom moving forward.Climate changeSen. Richard Blumenthal asked Barrett directly if she believed if humans are causing climate change. She declined to answer the question directly and added that she didn't think it was relevant to her job.Her comments come a day after she said during the first day of questioning that she has "no firm views" on climate change and added that she's "not a scientist."COVID-19 lockdownsFeinstein also asked Barrett about a Supreme Court ruling earlier this year in which the court said Wisconsin could not extend mail-in voting during its primary elections. The primary took place on April 7 — in the throes of pandemic-related lockdowns.Feinstein asked Barrett specifically about her view of the case. Barrett declined to give one, again citing the fact that she did not want to provide a judicial view.PolygamyWhen asked by Graham if a group of Americans had a right to polygamous marriage, Barrett declined to give a direct answer, keeping in line with avoiding direct judicial answers.Presidential powersLeahy asked Barrett specifically if a president had a right to pardon himself for any crimes he may have committed. Barrett responded that such a hypothetical was not settled law and that she did not want to speculate lest a similar case come before the courts.ImmigrationSen. Cory Booker, a New Jersey Democrat who ran for the party's presidential nomination, question Barrett on her views on separating children at the border. "Do you think it is wrong to separate a child from their parent, not for the safety of the child or parent, but to send a message? As a human being, do you believe that that is wrong?"Booker asked. "That's been a matter of policy debate and that's a matter of hot political debate in which I can't express a view or be drawn into as a judge," Barrett responded. What's nextSenators will meet privately to review Barrett's FBI file and background check. On Thursday, witnesses for and against Barrett's confirmation will go before the committee. _____Tuesday's hearings were also beset by technical issues. During Blumenthal's questioning, the committee was forced to take a brief recess when microphones in the room stopped working. Upon the committee's return, microphones again went dead as Blumenthal was wrapping up his time, forcing another brief recess.On Tuesday, Barrett also often invoked the "Ginsburg Rule" when discussing abortion, an upcoming case that could decide the legality of the Affordable Care Act, gun control and voting rights.Barrett was also asked about comments from President Donald Trump, who has hinted in the past that Ginsburg's seat must be filled prior to the election in the event the Supreme Court needs to make a crucial ruling. Barrett did not commit to recusing herself should such a case arise, but said she would consider the case and the recommendations of other justices.Barrett's thorniest stretch on Tuesday came in a denouncement of discrimination of LGBTQ+ people when she used the term "sexual preference." The term, generally deemed to be outdated, is classified as "offensive" by GLAAD because it implies that sexuality is a "choice" that can be "cured." Barrett later apologized for using the term when confronted by Sen. Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii.The 22 Senators on the committee were each given 30 minutes to question Barrett on Tuesday. Senators will each be given 20 minutes for questioning on Wednesday. Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, says he hopes to wrap up the confirmation hearing Thursday, and that Barrett is on track to be confirmed later this month, about a week before the 2020 election.Several swing-vote Republicans have already indicated that they will vote to confirm Barrett, suggesting that she will likely be confirmed. 6963

来源：资阳报