成都婴儿血管瘤哪里治疗比较好成都老烂腿哪个医院治比较好,成都医院精索静脉曲张在线咨询,成都肝血管瘤去哪家医院看比较好,成都看静脉曲张得多少钱,成都下肢静脉曲张医院手术,成都治慢性前列腺肥大,成都下肢静脉曲张 手术

VISTA, Calif. (KGTV) - A backyard workshop in Vista caught fire Sunday afternoon, according to Vista Fire officials. Neighbors said they saw thick black smoke towering into the sky and heard almost a dozen explosions.Neighbor John Ploetz said it sounded, "like a bomb, people up the street heard it.""It takes a minute you know, your brain goes oh it's probably fine, or he's welding you know and then I see there's flames, and no firemen here, and the fence is on fire, I better call 9-1-1," Ploetz said he grabbed his garden hose and worked to contain the fire. He wet down nearby foliage and put out small spot fires on the outside of the fence.Fire officials said the fire started around 12:32 p.m. and arrived at the home in the 1000 block of Ora Avo Drive in minutes. Ploetz said what he did was something anyone would do and he was concerned the fire would spread to other homes nearby. He was shocked when a pine tree burned up in seconds, "it just whoosh! Went up like a torch, it was loud, that was before the firemen got here."The workshop contained propane tanks, and tools for metal art that the homeowner creates as a hobby. The family was at church when the fire started and were thankful no one was hurt. Among the valuables they lost were three boats and a motor home.Firefighters are still investigating the cause. 1340

VISTA, Calif. (KGTV) — The jury deciding former NFL star Kellen Winslow Jr.'s fate in a rape trial, sent a note to the judge asking two questions.The questions lending a window into what's happening as the jury continues deliberating.10News spoke with Defense Attorney Gretchen Von Helms, to gain insight.On the surface, the questions seem obvious: "The jurors could benefit from an explanation as to what being under oath means. Additionally, how we should follow the law and not what we think the law should mean."RELATED: Kellen Winslow Jr. rape trial: More accusers set to testify"Every fourth-grader knows what under oath is and so also, should we follow the rules? Yes, you're supposed to follow the law," Von Helms said.She said the note made her think the jury was not agreeing, "the jury's trying to be nice here and say there's one person who just doesn't want to follow the rules, that's what it sounds like."The first question, she said, could indicate questions the jurors have, "sometimes police officers have to take an oath to be a police officer and maybe they feel that the police officer didn't do their job and follow up correctly or maybe they feel that their definition of that oath is different from the jurors oath."In regards to the second question, she said "the gut versus law issue, they must follow the law, even if they don't like the defendant, even though some people may not want to convict him because he's a football legacy, you can't do that. You have to look at the evidence and make a determination, is there enough?"RELATED: Accusers set to testify in Kellen Winslow Jr. rape trialVon Helms said the most important take-away from the note and the time spent during deliberations is that it appears the jury is taking the case very seriously.She said the prosecution's job is to lay out the evidence so clearly that the jurors have no doubt on the verdict.She added, the more time they take to come to a decision, the more reasonable doubt there may be.Winslow faces three counts of felony rape, misdemeanors of sexual misconduct among other charges. 2096

WASHINGTON — The Department of Justice is using aggressive tactics against those it has charged in the civil unrest over racism. Those people have been portrayed by President Donald Trump as violent left-wing radicals.The Republican president has used the protests to try to scare white, suburban voters into reelecting him. But an Associated Press review of thousands of pages of court documents from the more than 300 federal arrests made nationwide shows many are people caught up in the moment. Very few of those charged appear to be affiliated with any highly organized extremist groups.The Associated Press reports that there is only one apparent mention of antifa in a federal arrest. In a Boston case, an FBI Gang Task Force member was investigating “suspected ANTIFA activity associated with the protests” when a suspect shot at police. The arrest record said the FBI is not investigating the shooter as an antifa member.Members of both far-left and far-right groups have been arrested charged for acts of violence amid a summer of protest, as have those who seized upon the chaos as a chance to loot businesses. But the vast majority of those arrested during summer protests are young suburban adults with little criminal history, from the very neighborhoods Trump vows to protect.Despite that sparse criminal history, the AP reports that the federal government is pushing to keep those protesters behind bars, even as the COVID-19 pandemic is spreading quickly among those who have been incarcerated. According to a tracker compiled by the AP and The Marshall Project, more than 16,000 COVID-19 cases have been recorded in the federal prison system.The Associated Press adds that 40% of those facing federal charges are Black, and two-thirds are under the age of 30.The vast majority of protests against police brutality and systemic racism that took place this summer following the death of George Floyd were peaceful. One study showed that 93% of Black Lives Matter protests between late May and late August were peaceful. 2043

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court has agreed to review a court decision that the NCAA has said blurred “the line between student-athletes and professionals.” A lower court ruling removed caps on education-related money that certain football and basketball players can receive. The case will be argued before the Supreme Court in 2021 with a decision expected before the end of June. The NCAA contends that antitrust law allows its member schools to impose certain restrictions, like on athlete compensation, in an effort to promote competitive equity and have a product for dans that is distinct from professional sports, according to USA Today. The NCAA claims a change to this arrangement would have larger implications on professional level sports leagues. An appeals court panel in May upheld a lower court ruling barring the NCAA from capping education-related compensation and benefits for student-athletes in Division I football and basketball programs. Such benefits could include cash payments for academic performance. The lower court's ruling said the NCAA could still set limits on compensation not connected to education. The association has revealed proposed rule changes that would allow athletes to make money from their names, images and likeness. Those proposed changes are set to be voted on in January. Division I conferences can still independently set their own rules. 1395

WASHINGTON (AP) — A more conservative Supreme Court appears unwilling to do what Republicans have long desired — kill off the Affordable Care Act. That includes its key protections for pre-existing health conditions and subsidized insurance premiums that affect tens of millions of Americans. The justices met a week after the election and remotely in the midst of a pandemic that has closed their majestic courtroom to hear the highest-profile case of the term so far. They took on the latest Republican challenge to the law known as “Obamacare,” with three appointees of President Donald Trump, an avowed foe of the health care law, among them.But at least one of those Trump appointees, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, seemed likely to vote to leave the bulk of the law intact, even if he were to find the law’s now-toothless mandate that everyone obtain health insurance to be unconstitutional.“It does seem fairly clear that the proper remedy would be to sever the mandate provision and leave the rest of the act in place,” Kavanaugh said.Chief Justice John Roberts, who wrote two earlier opinions preserving the law, stated similar views, and the court’s three liberal justices are almost certain to vote to uphold the law in its entirety. That presumably would form a majority by joining a decision to cut away only the mandate, which now has no financial penalty attached to it. Congress zeroed out the penalty in 2017, but left the rest of the law untouched.“I think it’s hard for you to argue that Congress intended the entire act to fall if the mandate were struck down when the same Congress that lowered the penalty to zero did not even try to repeal the rest of the act. I think, frankly, that they wanted the court to do that, but that’s not our job,” Roberts said.Tuesday’s arguments, conducted by telephone and lasting two hours, reached back to the earlier cases and also included reminders of the coronavirus pandemic. The justices asked about other mandates, only hypothetical, that might have no penalties attached: To fly a flag, to mow the lawn or even, in a nod to current times, to wear a mask.“I assume that in most places there is no penalty for wearing a face mask or a mask during COVID, but there is some degree of opprobrium if one does not wear it in certain settings,” Justice Clarence Thomas said.The court also spent a fair amount of time debating whether the GOP-led states and several individuals who initially filed lawsuits had the right to go into court. 2495