吉林生殖器上小疙瘩怎么回事吉林关于治疗前列腺的医院,吉林治疗 早泄的医院,吉林男性常规体检项目,吉林阳痿怎么治疗好,吉林哪看男科病,吉林男科医院在线qq咨询,吉林治前列腺炎多少钱

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) -- Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed a bill that would have authorized California to give low-income immigrants 0 to buy groceries.It's unclear how much the bill would have cost; estimates range from the tens of millions of dollars to the hundreds of millions of dollars.Newsom said he could not sign the bill because it would put too much pressure on the state's budget.Lawmakers had to cover an estimated .3 billion budget deficit this year caused by the economic downturn brought by the coronavirus.Assemblyman Miguel Santiago, a Democrat from Los Angeles, authored the bill. 607

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) — Twenty-three states have sued to stop the Trump administration from revoking California's authority to set emission standards for cars and trucks.California Attorney General Xavier Becerra is leading the lawsuit filed Friday, along with Gov. Gavin Newsom and the California Air Resources Board.The Trump administration on Thursday revoked California's authority to set its own auto emission standards. The state has had that power for decades under a waiver from the federal Clean Air Act.The lawsuit argues that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration does not have the authority to revoke California's waiver.Becerra says the Trump administration's action fails to respect states' authority to protect public health.Four automakers have said they would voluntarily follow California's standards. 842

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California Gov. Gavin Newsom has signed a law giving tax breaks to more immigrants. In June, California expanded its earned income tax credit to apply to immigrants who have jobs and pay taxes but don't have a Social Security number. But the credit only applied to immigrants who had a child under 6. The law Newsom signed Friday eliminates that requirement, making the tax credit available to more people. It's one of several laws California has enacted in recent years to offer more government services to people living in the country illegally. Newsom said the law will help stimulate the economy. 634

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California will ban the sale and manufacture of new fur products starting in 2023.Legislation signed Saturday by Gov. Gavin Newsom makes California the first state to enact such a ban.It doesn't apply to used fur products or fur used for religious or tribal purposes. And it excludes the sale of leather, cowhides, deer, sheep and goat skin and anything preserved through taxidermy.There's a fine of up to ,000 for multiple violations.Democratic Assemblywoman Laura Friedman, the bill's author, says there are "sustainable and humane" substitutes for fur.Opponents of the legislation have said it could create a black market and be a slippery slope to bans on other products. 711