成都治疗雷诺氏症哪家正规成都治疗血糖足有哪些医院好,成都怎样治无菌性前列腺肥大,成都哪里可以做精索静脉曲张微创手术,成都什么医院看下肢动脉硬化比较好,成都治疗下肢动脉硬化去哪个医院,成都前列腺肥大不开刀治疗,成都治疗肝血管瘤费用要多少

WASHINGTON, D.C.—A Russian military intelligence unit secretly offered bounties to Taliban-linked militants for killing American troops in Afghanistan, officials tell multiple news outlets.The intelligence on bounties was reported initially by The New York Times and was confirmed by The Associated Press.Intelligence officials said Islamist militants, or armed criminal elements closely associated with them, are believed to have collected some bounty money. It’s not clear which of the 20 American killings in Afghanistan from 2019 is under suspicion.The officials tell the Times and AP that Trump was briefed on the matter earlier this year and took no action. However, the president denies being briefed on the matter and says he was told Sunday night the intelligence wasn't considered credible.The Kremlin calls the report “a lie.”House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told ABC’s “This Week” that she hadn’t been informed about the reported bounties. She says, “this is as bad as it gets” and yet Trump won’t confront Russia. Pelosi say she’s asking for a report to Congress regarding the news.A senior administration official says the White House plans to brief select members of Congress on Monday.Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden is sharply criticizing Trump over the reports that he says, if true, contain a “truly shocking revelation” about the commander in chief and his failure to protect U.S. troops and stand up to Russia. 1455

We sincerely regret that this incident fell short of the experience we strive to give our customers every day. We reached out to this customer immediately after being notified of this event. We take the safety of our community and the conduct of Dashers extremely seriously. We have since taken appropriate actions, including deactivating the Dasher from our platform for failing to follow and maintain our standards of food safety.This story was originally published by Kimberly Craig on 497

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Democratic lawmakers in both chambers of Congress are introducing a bill that would ban the federal government from using biometric technology, including facial recognition technology.The bill would also effectively strip federal support for state and local law enforcement entities that use biometric technology. Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass) is joining forces with Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Rep. Pramila Jayapal (WA-07) and Rep. Ayanna Pressley (MA-07) to introduce the Facial Recognition and Biometric Technology Moratorium Act in the House and Senate.This measure comes amid growing calls from civil rights advocates who say facial recognition technology disproportionately misidentifies non-white individuals. It’s the first bicameral piece of legislation introduced that focuses on the tech since police brutality protests began about a month ago.In a press release, Markey cited a growing body a research that points to inaccuracy and bias issues with these technologies, which pose disproportionate risks to people of color.Markey points to a National Institute of Standards and Technology report on facial recognition tools that found Black, Brown and Asian people were up to 100 times more likely to be misidentified than white male faces.The bill’s introduction comes just one day after the ACLU amplified the story of a Black man in the Detroit area who says he was wrongfully arrested after this kind of technology misidentified him as a man seen stealing ,800 worth of watches.Specifically, the proposed legislation would do the following:Place a prohibition on the use of facial recognition technology by federal entities, which can only be lifted with an act of Congress;Place a prohibition on the use of other biometric technologies, including voice recognition, gate recognition, and recognition of other immutable physical characteristics, by federal entities, which can only be lifted with an act of Congress;Condition federal grant funding to state and local entities, including law enforcement, on those entities enacting their own moratoria on the use of facial recognition and biometric technology;Prohibit the use of federal dollars for biometric surveillance systems;Prohibit the use of information collected via biometric technology in violation of the Act in any judicial proceedings;Includes a private right of action for individuals whose biometric data is used in violation of the Act and allows for enforcement by state Attorneys General; andAllow states and localities to enact their own laws regarding the use of facial recognition and biometric technologies.“Facial recognition technology doesn’t just pose a grave threat to our privacy, it physically endangers Black Americans and other minority populations in our country,” said Markey. “As we work to dismantle the systematic racism that permeates every part of our society, we can’t ignore the harms that these technologies present. I’ve spent years pushing back against the proliferation of facial recognition surveillance systems because the implications for our civil liberties are chilling and the disproportionate burden on communities of color is unacceptable. In this moment, the only responsible thing to do is to prohibit government and law enforcement from using these surveillance mechanisms. I thank Representatives Jayapal and Pressley and Senator Merkley for working with me on this critical legislation.” 3433

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Hispanics make up the largest emerging ethnic group in the United States and one that the outcome of this year’s elections may hinge on.“Eight out of every 10 Latinos in our country are United States citizens. The other thing that is important to know is that, during presidential elections, eight out of 10 Latinos, who are registered to vote, vote.”Clarissa Martinez is with UnidosUS, the largest Latino civil rights organization in the country. UnidosUS is now working on voter registration outreach, in the run up to the 2020 election.“We have a lot eligible, but unregistered, voters,” Martinez said.According to the Pew Research Center, a record 32 million Hispanics will be eligible to vote in the 2020 election, many of them in valuable swing states.Hispanics make up about 20% of eligible voters in Arizona and Florida, nearly a third of the potential electorate in California and Texas, and more than 40% of eligible voters in New Mexico.“Basically, in pure numbers, [it] means that, if they were a solid bloc, they would really make a significant difference,” said Dr. Eduardo Gamarra, a political science professor at Florida International University.Yet, he adds – Hispanics are not a solid voting bloc.For example – in past elections – Cuban Americans tended to vote Republican, while Mexican Americans favored Democrats, with Puerto Ricans sometimes split between the two parties.“It is a very diverse community,” Dr. Gamarra said. “It's national origin, but it's also income. It's also race, to a certain extent, right? And Latino women, in some measure, in some places, vote different than Latino men.”That means campaigns may need to tailor their messages, depending on which part of the Hispanic electorate they’re trying to reach.It’s outreach that Clarissa Martinez argues is often missing when it comes to Hispanic voters.“In the last two presidential elections, for example, 60% of Latino voters who were highly likely to vote said that they had not heard from campaigns or candidates – which, frankly, is political malpractice,” she said.However, she says it can be rectified with a simple political playbook.“Candidates matter, their positions matter,” she said, “and meaningful outreach is essential.” 2254

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court is allowing nationwide enforcement of a new Trump administration rule that prevents most Central American immigrants from seeking asylum in the United States.The justices' order late Wednesday temporarily undoes a lower-court ruling that had blocked the new asylum policy in some states along the southern border. The policy is meant to deny asylum to anyone who passes through another country on the way to the U.S. without seeking protection there.Most people crossing the southern border are Central Americans fleeing violence and poverty. They are largely ineligible under the new rule, as are asylum seekers from Africa, Asia and South America who arrive regularly at the southern border.The shift reverses decades of U.S. policy. The administration has said that it wants to close the gap between an initial asylum screening that most people pass and a final decision on asylum that most people do not win."BIG United States Supreme Court WIN for the Border on Asylum!" Trump tweeted.Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor dissented from the high-court's order. "Once again, the Executive Branch has issued a rule that seeks to upend longstanding practices regarding refugees who seek shelter from persecution," Sotomayor wrote.The legal challenge to the new policy has a brief but somewhat convoluted history. U.S. District Judge Jon Tigar in San Francisco blocked the new policy from taking effect in late July. A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals narrowed Tigar's order so that it applied only in Arizona and California, states that are within the 9th Circuit.That left the administration free to enforce the policy on asylum seekers arriving in New Mexico and Texas. Tigar issued a new order on Monday that reimposed a nationwide hold on asylum policy. The 9th Circuit again narrowed his order on Tuesday.The high-court action allows the administration to impose the new policy everywhere while the court case against it continues.Lee Gelernt, the American Civil Liberties Union lawyer who is representing immigrant advocacy groups in the case, said: "This is just a temporary step, and we're hopeful we'll prevail at the end of the day. The lives of thousands of families are at stake." 2276