伊宁专业的阴道紧缩医院(伊宁怀孕20天能检查出来吗) (今日更新中)

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) -- Arnold Schwarzenegger and three other former California governors have joined Gov. Gavin Newsom in a video campaign promoting use of face coverings to prevent spread of COVID-19.The public service announcement released Monday also features Jerry Brown, Gray Davis and Pete Wilson.The message is that nobody wants to wear masks but COVID-19 is still spreading and halting it is important to keeping people safe, reopening businesses and putting people back to work.The video follows Newsom's recent order requiring Californians to wear masks in high-risk settings.Schwarzenegger tells viewers wearing a mask is not about being weak and they should just do it. 693

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Two former Cambodian refugees facing deportation for crimes committed as young adults were among seven people granted clemency Monday by California Gov. Gavin Newsom in his first pardons since taking office in January.Newsom pardoned Kang Hen, of San Jose, who pleaded guilty to being the getaway driver during an attempted armed robbery in 1994. Hen, who was brought to the U.S. when he was 9, surrendered to immigration authorities April 1 after he was notified he was wanted for deportation.The governor, a Democrat, also issued a pardon for Hay Hov, of Oakland, who was convicted of solicitation to commit murder and participation in a street gang in 2001.Hov, a naturalized citizen, was taken into custody by immigration officials in March.Both men immigrated to the U.S. lawfully as children. They petitioned Newsom for pardons, saying they have moved past their troubled youth to become respectable men with jobs and families.Pardons don't automatically halt deportation proceedings, but they eliminate the criminal conviction judges often base their decisions on, according to the governor's office.In Hen's case, a pardon may eventually allow him to stay in the U.S. Hov, whose green card was recently re-instated by a judge, is no longer at risk of deportation."Both men have young children, are the primary income provider for their families, and provide care to relatives living with chronic health conditions," the governor's office said in a statement. "Their deportation would be an unjust collateral consequence that would harm their families and communities."The pardons are a rebuke to President Donald Trump's administration, which has cracked down on immigrants who committed crimes. Since Trump took office, a large number of people have been detained and deported to Cambodia, according to advocates.Newsom's predecessor, Gov. Jerry Brown, pardoned five Cambodian refugees who faced deportation last year.Newsom on Monday also pardoned five other people who had convictions more than 15 years old — including business owners, students and at least one grandparent, the governor's office said. Their crimes ranged from forgery to drug-related offenses.None of those pardoned had multiple felonies and all had completed their sentences, Newsom's office said.Newsom's highest profile use of his clemency powers came in March, when he placed a moratorium on executions for the 737 people on California's death row. His action temporarily halted the death penalty in the state. 2528

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — The California Democratic Party is investigating allegations of sexual misconduct against chairman Eric Bauman.A party vice chairman, Daraka Larimore-Hall, brought the charges against Bauman last week on behalf of anonymous accusers and called for Bauman's resignation. Larimore-Hall alleged that Bauman sexually harassed and assaulted people during party functions.Larimore-Hall spoke to two accusers and a witness, the Sacramento Bee newspaper reported."I take seriously any allegation brought forward by anyone who believes they have been caused pain," Bauman said Saturday in a statement announcing the investigation. "I look forward to putting these allegations behind us and moving forward as unified Democrats."An outside investigator is looking into the claims. Other California Democrats have already called for Bauman to be replaced, including U.S. Rep. Ro Khanna and the Orange County Young Democrats.A series of sexual misconduct allegations against lawmakers, lobbyists and others in politics rocked California's political world late last year, at the height of the #MeToo movement. Three Democratic men resigned as state lawmakers after investigators hired by the Legislature found they likely engaged in inappropriate behavior.In a letter to the party last week calling for Bauman's removal, Larimore-Hall said stories from Bauman's accusers illustrate a "clear and escalating pattern" of inappropriate behavior.Larimore-Hall did not respond to a request for comment Monday from The Associated Press.Bauman narrowly won the party chairmanship last year against Kimberly Ellis after a contentious battle between establishment Democrats and progressive activists.During that fight, Bauman said he was falsely targeted by rumors he engaged in inappropriate behavior with teenage boys. Bauman is the party's first openly gay chairman.Bauman called the rumors "despicable lies," and Ellis denounced them.Party officers can be removed from office by a vote of the executive board. Larimore-Hall's call for Bauman's removal still has several steps to clear before reaching a vote. 2122

Rudy Giuliani's assertion to CNN this week that President Donald Trump can't be indicted by the special counsel, and thus can't face a subpoena, banks on a series of internal Justice Department policies.The question to this day is untested in the court system. Yet the step-by-step process Robert Mueller or any special counsel could follow for a President under investigation has several possible outcomes.According to several legal experts, historical memos and court filings, this is how the Justice Department's decision-making on whether to indict a sitting president could play out:First, there must be suspicion or allegations of a crime. Did the President do something criminally wrong? If the answer is no, there would be no investigation.But if the answer is maybe, that puts federal investigators on the pursuit. If they find nothing, Justice Department guidelines say they'd still need to address their investigation in a report summarizing their findings.If there could be some meat to the allegations, the Justice Department would need to determine one of two things: Did the potentially criminal actions take place unrelated to or before to the presidency? Or was the President's executive branch power was crucial in the crime?That determination will come into play later, because Congress' power to impeach and remove a president from office was intended by the framers of the Constitution to remedy abuse of the office, legal scholars say.Perhaps, though, the special counsel decides there's enough evidence to prove that the President broke the law.That's where the Office of Legal Counsel opinions come in.In 1973 and 2000, the office, which defines Justice Department internal procedure, said an indictment of a sitting president would be too disruptive to the country. This opinion appears to be binding on the Justice Department's decision-making, though it's possible for Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to choose to override the opinion, give Mueller permission to ignore it and take it to court, or ask the office to reexamine the issue by writing a new opinion.This sort of legal briefing has been done before, like in the year after the 1973 opinion, when then-special prosecutor Leon Jaworski wrote a Watergate-era memo describing why the President should not be above the law.Of course, there's another immediate option if a special counsel finds the President did wrong. Prosecutors could use the "unindicted co-conspirator" approach. This would involve the special counsel's office indicting a group of conspirators, making clear the President was part of the conspiracy without bringing charges against him.At any time, in theory, a special counsel could decide to delay an indictment until the President leaves office -- so as not to interfere with the functioning of the executive branch. The other options would be to drop the case or send an impeachment referral to Congress. As evidenced by Mueller's actions previously in the investigations of Trump's personal attorney Michael Cohen and former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, any steps this special counsel takes will likely come with the full support of the acting attorney general on the matter, Rosenstein.The question of whether a President could be subpoenaed is a story for another day. 3303

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

来源：资阳报