河北儿童羊癫疯病的治疗方法山东治疗癫痫的正规医院有哪家,江苏医院羊癫疯专病在哪里,江苏治疗医院羊羔疯专病哪里好,威海治羊羔疯需要多少钱,菏泽癫痫哪里医院好,山东省石医治疗癫痫病的医院,山东省治疗癫痫疾病需要多少钱

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

SACRAMENTO (AP) — California is seeking to join the Justice Department in its antitrust lawsuit against Google parent Alphabet Inc. The Justice Department sued Google in October, saying it has abused its dominance in online search and advertising. The case, filed in federal court in Washington, D.C., alleges that Google uses billions of dollars collected from advertisers to pay phone manufacturers to ensure Google is the default search engine on browsers. Eleven states, all with Republican attorneys general, joined the federal government in the lawsuit at the time. California is the first Democratic state announcing its intent to join the Justice Department’s case. 681

SACRAMENTO (KGTV) -- California's attorney general disclosed an ongoing probe into Facebook's privacy practices Wednesday, as it sued the company over its repeated refusal to turn over documents and answer questions.California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said his probe has been going on for more than a year. He said he was disclosing it now because his office was making a public court filing to force the company to comply with subpoenas and requests for information."Facebook is not just continuing to drag its feet in response to the Attorney General's investigation, it is failing to comply," the lawsuit said.The lawsuit was filed in state Superior Court in San Francisco.The California probe, one of many legal and regulatory inquiries into Facebook, began as a response to the Cambridge Analytica scandal and grew into an investigation into whether Facebook misrepresented its privacy practices, deceived users and broke California law.Cambridge Analytica, a data mining firm, gathered details on as many as 87 million Facebook users without their permission. The Federal Trade Commission fined Facebook billion this summer for privacy violations in an investigation that also grew out of that scandal. California officials say questions have been raised about what Facebook knew and why it didn't prevent third parties such as Cambridge Analytica from misusing user data.The court filing said Facebook hasn't given answers on 19 of the attorney general's questions and hasn't given any new documents in response to six document requests. The filing also said Facebook has refused to search the emails of top executives Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg, as the state requested.Becerra's office said it requested additional information after Facebook took a year to respond to an initial subpoena.Investigators sought communications among executives on developers' access to user data, the relationship between ad spending and access to data and the introduction of new privacy features and privacy-related news stories. Officials also sought information on the effects of privacy settings on third-party access to data and Facebook's enforcement of policies.Facebook, which has its headquarters in Menlo Park, California, didn't respond to requests for comment.California hadn't joined a separate probe involving attorneys general from New York and other states. The New York probe is looking into Facebook's dominance and any resulting anticompetitive conduct. California is also a holdout in a separate probe into Google's market dominance.The District of Columbia and Massachusetts have also gone after Facebook on privacy. The Massachusetts attorney general's office is set to argue in a state court Thursday why Facebook should be compelled to stop resisting and turn over documents for its investigation.Facebook's various legal troubles have yet to make a significant financial dent on the company. Even the FTC's billion fine, the largest ever for a tech company, came to just under one-tenth of Facebook's revenue last year. The penalty was criticized by consumer advocates and a number of public officials as being too lenient.___AP Technology Writers Mae Anderson and Frank Bajak contributed to this report. 3248

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California would become the first state to require businesses to offer electronic receipts unless customers ask for paper copies under legislation proposed on Tuesday.Many businesses and consumers already are moving toward e-receipts, said Democratic Assemblyman Phil Ting of San Francisco.But he said a law still is needed because many consumers don't realize most paper receipts are coated with chemicals prohibited in baby bottles, can't be recycled and can contaminate other recycled paper because of the chemicals known as Bisphenol-A (BPA) and Bisphenol-S (BPS).His bill, AB161, would require all businesses to provide proof of purchase receipts electronically starting in 2022 unless the customer asks for a printed copy.RELATED: City Council votes to ban Styrofoam across San DiegoIt comes days after another first-in-the-nation California law took effect requiring dine-in restaurants to provide drinking straws only at customers' request.The penalties in Ting's bill are modeled on the straw bill, said Nick Lapis of Californians Against Waste. It calls for written warnings for the first two violations and a fine of a day for subsequent infractions, with a 0 cap."It's intended to be a pretty light touch in terms of enforcement," Lapis said.Advocates said the use of straws is declining after that law was passed.Many larger stores already offer the choice involving receipts but it is unclear if a mandate would cause a hardship for small and medium-size stores, said California Retailers Association spokeswoman Pamela Williams. Her association and the California Chamber of Commerce have not taken positons on the bill.Ting said businesses can save money by moving away from printed receipts.The advocacy group Green America, which is pushing a "skip the slip" campaign, estimated that millions of trees and billions of gallons of water are used annually to produce paper receipts in the United States.Ting cited studies by the Environmental Working Group and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that retail workers have higher concentrations of BPA or BPS than those who do not have regular contact with receipts.Ting said consumers can still request paper receipts if they are worried about giving out their email addresses for privacy reasons or to avoid having their emails used or sold for marketing purposes. 2382

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