成都治精索静脉曲张的专科医院成都脉管炎截肢的治疗方法,成都哪个治疗睾丸精索静脉曲张医院好,成都血管瘤专科工立医院,成都血糖足溃烂症哪家治疗好,成都治静脉曲张的价格,成都治疗鲜红斑痣医院地址,成都治疗小腿静脉曲张用多少钱

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Gov. Gavin Newsom has approved legislation prompted by the helicopter crash that killed Kobe Bryant and eight others.The bill signed Monday makes it a crime for first responders to take unauthorized photos of deceased people at the scene of an accident or crime.Reports surfaced after the January 26 crash that graphic photos of the victims were being shared. Eight deputies were accused of taking or sharing graphic photos of the scene, Los Angeles County Sheriff Alex Villanueva said then, adding that he had ordered the images deleted.Sheriff Villanueva said the department has a policy against taking and sharing crime scene photos, but it does not apply to accident scenes.The measure that will take effect Jan. 1 makes it a misdemeanor with fines up to ,000 per offense to take such photos for anything other than an official law enforcement purpose.Bryant’s widow, Vanessa Bryant, has sued the department over the photos. In her lawsuit, Bryant alleges that eight deputies took "gratuitous images" with their cell phones after responding to the scene.Bryant's suit also alleges that one of those deputies showed images from the scene to someone outside the department. According to Yahoo, that deputy showed photos from the scene to a person at a bar and bragged "about how he had been at the crash site." A bartender who overheard the conversation later notified the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department about the conversation. 1474

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — A peaceful protest in a sleepy suburb that’s home to the head of the California National Guard was among four demonstrations monitored by National Guard spy planes. That's according to a report by the Los Angeles Times. The four planes took to the skies over cities in June to monitor protests following the killing of George Floyd. Three watched demonstrations in Minneapolis, Phoenix and Washington, D.C. But the target of the fourth was the Sacramento, California, suburb of El Dorado Hills. Authorities have not explained how and why that neighborhood was chosen when other cities that had seen property destruction and street clashes were not.The head of the California National Guard, Maj. Gen. David S. Baldwin, lives in El Dorado Hills, according to the Times. Baldwin told the Times that he didn't recall whether he approved the mission and his residence had "nothing to do with" the deployment. 938

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California lawmakers approved a multibillion-dollar plan Thursday to shore up the state's biggest electric utilities in the face of catastrophic wildfires and claims for damage from past blazes caused by their equipment.It requires major utilities to spend at least billion combined on safety improvements and meet new safety standards, and it creates a fund of up to billion that could help pay out claims as climate change makes wildfires across the U.S. West more frequent and more destructive.Lawmakers passed the bill less than a week after its final language went into print, and Gov. Gavin Newsom was expected to sign it Friday. Republicans and Democrats said the state needed to provide financial certainty to the state's investor-owned utilities, the largest of which, Pacific Gas & Electric Corp., is in bankruptcy.But they said their work is far from over and they plan to do more on wildfire prevention and home protection when they return in August from a summer break.A broad coalition rallied around the measure, from renewable energy trade groups and labor unions representing utility workers to survivors of recent fires caused by PG&E equipment. Victims applauded provisions they say will give them more leverage to get compensation from the company as it wades through bankruptcy.But several lawmakers raised concerns that the measure would leave utility customers on the hook for fires caused by PG&E despite questions about the company's safety record."No one has ever said this bill is going to be the silver bullet or fix all but it does take us in dramatic leaps to where we can stabilize California," said Assemblyman Chris Holden, a Democrat from Pasadena and one of the bill's authors.Holden and other supporters said the legislation would not raise electric rates for customers. But it would let utilities pass on the costs from wildfires to customers in certain cases, which would make costs rise.The legislation also extends an existing charge on consumers' electric bills to raise .5 billion for the fund that will cover costs from wildfires caused by the equipment of participating electric utilities.PG&E filed for bankruptcy in January, saying it could not afford billions in damages from recent deadly wildfires caused by downed power lines and other company equipment, including a November fire that killed 85 people and largely destroyed the town of Paradise.Credit ratings agencies also are eyeing the financial worthiness of Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric.PG&E did not take a formal position on the bill. Spokesman Lynsey Paulo said the utility is committed to resolving victims' claims and reducing wildfire risks.To use the fund, companies would have to meet new safety standards to be set by state regulators and take steps such as tying executive compensation to safety. The state's three major utilities could elect to contribute an additional .5 billion to create a larger insurance fund worth at least billion.Questions about PG&E's efforts to combat fires led to some opposition.A day before the legislation passed, a federal judge overseeing PG&E's bankruptcy ordered its lawyers to respond to a report in The Wall Street Journal that showed it knew about the risks of aging equipment but did not replace systems that could cause wildfires."It is hard not to see this bill as something of a reward for monstrous behavior. They haven't done the work. They should not be rewarded," said Assemblyman Marc Levine, a Democrat from San Rafael who voted against the legislation.David Song, a spokesman for Southern California Edison, said the utility supports the bill but wants to see "refinements." He offered no specifics."If the bills are signed into law they take initial steps to return California to a regulatory framework providing the financial stability utilities require to invest in safety and reliability," he said.___Associated Press writer Adam Beam contributed. 4026

Richard Ojeda, the former congressional candidate who lost his 2018 bid as a Democrat in southern West Virginia, is running for president in 2020."I'm Richard Ojeda and I'm running for the President of the United States of America," he announced Monday at the Korean War Veterans Memorial in Washington, DC.Prior to his announcement, Ojeda filed with the Federal Election Commission to run for President and teased the run in an email to supporters on Sunday night.Ojeda's entry to the race is unexpected and highlights just how massive the Democratic field for President will be in 2020. Democratic operatives believe big-name candidates will announce presidential bids in early 2019, but fully expect candidates like Ojeda and others to explore a run starting in late 2018.Ojeda's unique candidacy -- he is a former Army paratrooper who ran on the Democratic ticket as a populist and Trump critic in Republican West Virginia -- markedly over-performed how Hillary Clinton did in the state in 2016. Trump won the state's 3rd Congressional District by 49 percentage points in 2016. Ojeda closed that gap, losing by 12 percentage points earlier this month.But getting through a Democratic primary could be difficult: Ojeda voted for Trump in 2016, something that may be beyond the pale for some Democrats.Ojeda has soured on Trump, though, and Trump called him "a total whacko" at campaign events in 2018.At his announcement on Monday, Ojeda said, "I think I relate to the people far more than what the President can ever relate to these people. The very people he comes down to West Virginia and stands in front of could never afford one single round of golf in some of his fancy country clubs. That's not where I stand."He continued, "I stand with the working-class citizens. I am a Democrat because I believe in what the Democratic Party is supposed to be: taking care of our working-class citizens."Although Ojeda handily lost to Republican Carol Miller, he told his supporters in an email on Sunday that his run taught him people across the country were feeling the same pain that he has seen in Appalachia."Everyday, hundreds of letters poured in from around the country where you shared your stories with me. You wrote about not being able to afford college, losing loved ones to drug addiction and struggling day-to-day to make ends meet," he writes. "This is an American problem and it has to change."Ojeda has long argued that the Democratic Party has lost its roots and become a party controlled by special interests and wealthy donors, and his presidential campaign will likely hinge on that message.He closes the email by inviting supporters to join him for a noon ET announcement.Ojeda got ahead of the announcement, however, by filing a presidential committee with the FEC and sitting down for an interview with The Intercept, where he announced his intention to run."We're going to have quite a few lifetime politicians that are going to throw their hat in the ring, but I guarantee you there's going to be a hell of a lot more of them than there are people like myself that is, a working-class person that basically can relate to the people on the ground, the people that are actually struggling," he told The Intercept. "I'm not trying to throw stones at people that are rich, but once again, we will have a field that will be full of millionaires and I'm sure a few billionaires." 3406

Rudy Giuliani said Wednesday that President Donald Trump's legal team has responded to the special counsel, the latest effort in ongoing negotiations over a possible interview."We have now given him an answer. Obviously, he should take a few days to consider it, but we should get this resolved," Giuliani said during an interview on the radio show of fellow Trump attorney Jay Sekulow."We do not want to run into the November elections. So back up from that, this should be over by September 1," Giuliani said.Sekulow confirmed in a statement that the legal team "responded in writing to the latest proposal" from the special counsel, but declined to comment on the substance of the response.Giuliani had previously told CNN that the team planned to send its counteroffer to special counsel Robert Mueller regarding a potential interview on Wednesday."It is a good faith attempt to reach an agreement," Giuliani, one of Trump's lawyers on the Russia investigation, told CNN.The former New York City mayor similarly would not describe the contents of the counteroffer, except to say that "there is an area where we could agree, if they agree."Giuliani wouldn't say if that area has to do with collusion or obstruction.The President has previously said that he wants to speak with the special counsel and has insisted there was no collusion or obstruction, while deriding the investigation as a "witch hunt."But Trump's public attacks on the Russia probe have sparked questions over whether his actions could constitute obstruction of justice. Those questions intensified earlier this month when the President called on Attorney General Jeff Sessions to shut down the investigation, an escalation that Giuliani attempted to downplay as Trump merely expressing an opinion.The President's team has sought to limit any potential interview to questions about collusion. But Giuliani told CNN they would be willing to consider questions relating to any obstruction of justice inquiry as long as they are not "perjury traps," a phrase favored by the Trump legal team as a way to raise questions about the fairness of the special counsel, though it also speaks to the risks of having the President sit down for an interview."For example: 'What did you say about Flynn?' 'Why did you fire Comey?'" They already know our answer," Giuliani said, referring to former national security adviser Michael Flynn and former FBI director James Comey, whom Trump abruptly fired in May 2017. The former FBI director later testified to Congress that Trump had pressed him to drop an investigation into Flynn, a claim that Trump has denied. "If they can show us something in that area that didn't involve those direct questions, that we don't consider perjury traps, we would consider it," Giuliani said, but conceded he "can't think of what that would be."Mueller has indicated to the team that the special counsel wants to ask the President obstruction questions in an interview.The President's lawyers had previously offered the special counsel written answers to obstruction questions and limiting the interview to matters before his presidential inauguration, which are largely confined to collusion.The back and forth over an interview comes as the special counsel investigation faces its first major test in court as Trump's former campaign chairman Paul Manafort stands trial in the Eastern District of Virginia where he is accused of bank fraud, tax evasion and other financial crimes.Manafort's case isn't about the 2016 presidential campaign, but he is the first defendant Mueller's team has taken to trial. 3603