重庆输尿管软镜碎石术费用(石桥铺尿结石碎石) (今日更新中)

SAN DIEGO (CNS) - A Baja California resident pleaded guilty today in San Diego to operating an unlicensed money transmitting business in connection with the sale of hundreds of thousands of dollars in Bitcoin to more than 1,000 customers throughout the United States from January 2015 to April 2016.According to his plea agreement, Jacob Burrell-Campos, 21, admitted to operating a Bitcoin exchange without registering with the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network of the U.S. Treasury Department, and without implementing the required anti-money laundering safeguards.Burrell advertised his business on Localbitcoins.com, and communicated with his customers through email and text messages, often using encrypted applications, according to the plea agreement.Burrell negotiated a commission of 5 percent above the prevailing exchange rate, and accepted cash in person, through nationwide ATMs, and through MoneyGram. Burrell admitted that he had no anti-money laundering or "know your customer" program, and performed no due diligence on the source of his customers' money, according to the U.S. Attorney's Office.The defendant initially purchased his supply of Bitcoin through a U.S.-based, regulated exchange, but his account was soon closed because of a large number of suspicious transactions. He then resorted to a cryptocurrency exchange in Hong Kong, where he purchased a total of .29 million in Bitcoin, in hundreds of separate transactions, between March 2015 and April 2017, according to federal prosecutors. Burrell also admitted that he exchanged his U.S. currency, which he kept in Mexico, with Joseph Castillo, a San Diego-based precious metals dealer.Between late 2016 and early 2018, Burrell and others imported more than million in U.S. currency on almost a daily basis. Burrell admitted that they did this in amounts slightly below the ,000 reporting requirement.Castillo pleaded guilty to making a false statement on his federal tax returns and will be sentenced in December.According to his plea agreement, Burrell agreed to forfeit more than 3,000 to the United States. He will be sentenced in February. 2154

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (KGTV) -- With 35 days until the election, it appears California voters are in favor of eight state propositions that impact everything from property taxes to parole to rent control. Still, for most propositions, the support is not enough to feel comfortable. A new ABC-10News-Union-Tribune scientific poll shows eight propositions leading outside the poll's 5.4 percent margin of error. Still, pollster Survey USA says that could change because typically opposition to all ballot measures increase as election day gets closer. Then again, it says 2020 is not a typical election year. Thad Kousser, a political analyst at UC San Diego, said propositions that do not poll over 50 percent have an increased chance in ultimately failing, even if they are up."The more people learn about propositions and their details, the less there is to like about them," he said. "Sometimes a proposition has one part of it that people find attractive and then other details that they don't like, and as a campaign exposes those, as the No campaign makes that case, then support will drop off."The poll also shows Joe Biden defeating President Trump 59 percent to 32 percent in California. Interestingly, however, the poll says voters who plan to vote in person on election day choose Trump over Biden, 55 to 38. Here is the breakdown of the propositions as part of the poll, which surveyed 588 likely voters:Prop 15, which would reassess some commercial properties to raise property taxes for schools and local governments, exempting smaller businesses and farms, is passing 49 to 21, with the remainder undecided.Prop 16, which would eliminate the ban on consideration of race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin in public education, public employment and public contracting to allow for more diversity, is passing 40 to 26, with the remainder undecided.Prop 17, which restores voting rights to former inmates, is passing 55 to 19, with the remainder undecided.Prop 19, which allows severely disabled homeowners, those over 55, and those who have lost their homes in a wildfire to transfer their property tax basis to any property in the state, and allocates new revenue to fire protection services, is passing 56 to 10, with the remainder undecided. Prop 20, which would reclassify certain crimes and change parole on other crimes, is passing 35 to 22, with the remainder undecided. Prop 21, which allows local governments to establish rent control on some properties over 15 years old, is passing 46 to 27, with the remainder undecided.Prop 22, which aims to keep Uber, Lyft and Doordash drivers as independent contractors with benefits, as opposed to full employees, is passing 45 to 31, with the remainder undecided. Prop 23, which adds requirements for kidney dialysis clinics, is passing 49 to 23, with the remainder undecided. 2854

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (KGTV) — California will require people to wear face coverings in most indoor settings and outdoors when physical distancing isn't possible.Gov. Gavin Newsom had previously allowed counties to set their own requirements for facial coverings to slow the spread of the coronavirus. San Diego, Los Angeles, and San Francisco already have face-covering mandates in effect. "Simply put, we are seeing too many people with faces uncovered – putting at risk the real progress we have made in fighting the disease," Newsom said. "California’s strategy to restart the economy and get people back to work will only be successful if people act safely and follow health recommendations. That means wearing a face covering, washing your hands, and practicing physical distancing."RELATED: New UCSD study: Wearing masks significantly curbs spread of COVID-19California's cloth face covering mandate includes situations like:While outdoors in public spaces when maintaining a physical distance of six feet from persons who are not members of the same household or residence is not feasible.Inside of, or in line to enter, any indoor public space;Obtaining services from the healthcare sector in settings including, but not limited to, a hospital, pharmacy, medical clinic, laboratory, physician or dental office, veterinary clinic, or blood bank;Waiting for or riding on public transportation or paratransit or while in a taxi, private car service, or ride-sharing vehicle;Engaged in work, whether at the workplace or performing work off-site, when:Interacting in-person with any member of the public;Working in any space visited by members of the public, regardless of whether anyone from the public is present at the time;Working in any space where food is prepared or packaged for sale or distribution to others;Working in or walking through common areas, such as hallways, stairways, elevators, and parking facilities;In any room or enclosed area where other people (except for members of the person’s own household or residence) are present when unable to physically distance.Driving or operating any public transportation or paratransit vehicle, taxi, or private car service or ride-sharing vehicle when passengers are present. When no passengers are present, face coverings are strongly recommended.RELATED: San Diego County exceeds community outbreak limit, forcing pause on reopeningsThe state's order exempts:Children under 2 years old; Individuals with medical, mental health or developmental disability that prevents wearing a face covering;Persons who are hearing impaired, or communicating with a person who is hearing impaired, where the ability to see the mouth is essential for communication;Persons for whom wearing a face covering would create a risk to the person related to their work, as determined by local, state, or federal regulators or workplace safety guidelines.Persons who are obtaining a service involving the nose or face for which temporary removal of the face covering is necessary to perform the service;Persons who are seated at a restaurant or other establishment that offers food or beverage service, while they are eating or drinking, provided that they are able to maintain a distance of at least six feet away from persons who are not members of the same household or residence;Persons who are engaged in outdoor work or recreation such as swimming, walking, hiking, bicycling, or running, when alone or with household members, and when they are able to maintain a distance of at least six feet from others;Persons who are incarcerated. Prisons and jails, as part of their mitigation plans, will have specific guidance on the wearing of face coverings of masks for both inmates and staff.As of Wednesday, California reported 157,015 coronavirus cases and more than 5,200 deaths from the virus.RELATED: Some San Diegans push for end of San Diego County face mask requirement 3926

SAN DIEGO (AP) - President Donald Trump is strongly defending the U.S. use of tear gas at the Mexico border to repel a crowd of migrants that included angry rock-throwers and barefoot, crying children.Critics denounced the action by border agents as overkill, but Trump kept to a hard line."They were being rushed by some very tough people and they used tear gas," Trump said Monday of the previous day's encounter. "Here's the bottom line: Nobody is coming into our country unless they come in legally."At a roundtable in Mississippi later Monday, Trump seemed to acknowledge that children were affected."Why is a parent running up into an area where they know the tear gas is forming and it's going to be formed and they were running up with a child?" the president asked.He said it was "a very minor form of the tear gas itself" that he was assured was "very safe."Without offering evidence, Trump claimed some of the women in Sunday's confrontation are not parents but are instead "grabbers" who steal children so they have a better chance of being granted asylum in the U.S.On Tuesday, U.S. authorities lowered the number of arrests during the confrontation to 42 from 69. Rodney Scott, chief of the Border Patrol's San Diego sector, said the initial count included some arrests in Mexico by Mexican authorities who reported 39 arrests.Scott also defended the agents' decisions to fire tear gas into Mexico, saying they were being assaulted by "a hail of rocks.""That has happened before and, if we are rocked, that would happen again tomorrow," he told reporters.The showdown at the San Diego-Tijuana border crossing has thrown into sharp relief two competing narratives about the caravan of migrants who hope to apply for asylum but have gotten stuck on the Mexico side of the border.Trump portrays them as a threat to U.S. national security, intent on exploiting America's asylum law. Others insist he is exaggerating to stoke fears and achieve his political goals.The sheer size of the caravan makes it unusual."I think it's so unprecedented that everyone is hanging their own fears and political agendas on the caravan," said Andrew Selee, president of the Migration Policy Institute, a nonpartisan think tank that studies immigration. "You can call it scary, you can call it hopeful, you can call it a sign of human misery. You can hang whatever angle you want to on it."Trump rails against migrant caravans as dangerous groups of mostly single men. That view figured heavily in his speeches during the midterm election campaign, when several were hundreds of miles away, traveling on foot.The city of Tijuana said that as of Monday, 5,851 migrants were at a temporary shelter, 1,074 were women, 1,023 were children and 3,754 were men, including fathers traveling with families, along with single men.The U.S. military said Monday that about 300 troops who had been deployed in south Texas and Arizona as part of a border security mission have been moved to California for similar work.The military's role is limited largely to erecting barriers along the border and providing transportation and logistical support to Customs and Border Protection.Democratic lawmakers and immigrant rights groups blasted the tactics of border agents."These children are barefoot. In diapers. Choking on tear gas," California Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom tweeted. "Women and children who left their lives behind — seeking peace and asylum — were met with violence and fear. That's not my America."U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Kevin McAleenan said the administration's concerns about the caravan "were borne out and on full display" Sunday.McAleenan said hundreds — perhaps more than 1,000 — people attempted to rush vehicle lanes at the San Ysidro crossing. Mexican authorities estimated the crowd at 500. The chaos followed what began as a peaceful march to appeal for the U.S. to speed processing of asylum claims.McAleenan said four agents were struck with rocks but were not injured because they were wearing protective gear.Border Patrol agents launched pepper spray balls in addition to tear gas in what officials said were on-the-spot decisions made by agents. U.S. troops deployed to the border on Trump's orders were not involved in the operation."The agents on scene, in their professional judgment, made the decision to address those assaults using less lethal devices," McAleenan told reporters.The scene was reminiscent of the 1980s and early 1990s, when large groups of migrants rushed vehicle lanes at San Ysidro and overwhelmed Border Patrol agents in nearby streets and fields.The scene on Sunday left many migrants feeling they had lost whatever possibility they might have had for making asylum cases.Isauro Mejia, 46, of Cortes, Honduras, looked for a cup of coffee Monday morning after spending Sunday caught up in the clash."The way things went yesterday ... I think there is no chance," he said.Mexico's Interior Ministry said in a statement it would immediately deport the people arrested on its side of the border and would reinforce security.Border Patrol agents have discretion on how to deploy less-than-lethal force. It must be "objectively reasonable and necessary in order to carry out law enforcement duties" and used when other techniques are insufficient to control disorderly or violent subjects.___Long reported from Washington. Associated Press writers Robert Burns in Washington; Julie Watson in San Diego; Jill Colvin in Biloxi, Miss.; and Christopher Sherman in Tijuana, Mexico, contributed to this report. 5562

SAN DIEGO (CNS) - A 41-year-old documented gang member was convicted Wednesday of murder and attempted murder in the shooting death of a career Navy man and the wounding of his cousin outside a comedy club at Horton Plaza.Jurors deliberated for nearly two days before finding Arrow Morris guilty of the two felony charges, in addition to sentence-enhancing allegations of using a firearm and three counts of being a felon in possession of a firearm, in connection with three guns investigators found during a search of his girlfriend's home.Morris, who is scheduled to be sentenced May 20, faces more than 80 years to life in prison for the killing of 43-year-old James Celani, who was struck in the head, neck and chest. His cousin was grazed in the leg.Deputy District Attorney Amy Maund said that on the night of June 10, 2017, following a violent confrontation with his girlfriend, Morris and his brother walked away from the club and encountered Celani and his cousin, who were walking past them in the opposite direction.Maund told jurors that either Celani or his cousin said "What's up?" to the Morris brothers as they walked past, to which Morris replied "Don't (expletive) talk to me," then began firing.The prosecutor said Morris, still in a rage over the confrontation with his girlfriend, took his anger out on Celani and his cousin, some of the first people he came across after leaving the club.The shooting happened to "a truly innocent, vulnerable victim," Maund said, "and it could have been anyone."Maund said several witnesses pointed to the shooter as a man wearing a red shirt, red hat and white jacket, which Morris can be seen wearing in surveillance footage from Horton Plaza and a 7-Eleven convenience store.Defense attorney Steward Dadmun contended that witnesses mistook his client for his brother, who, according to Dadmun, was the actual shooter. The whereabouts of Morris' brother was unclear."None of these witnesses passes the reasonable doubt test, not a single one of them," Dadmun told the jury.According to Dadmun, Morris had "no idea" his sibling was going to begin shooting, while Maund maintained that the altercation with his girlfriend left Morris enraged and prone to violence."The defendant was angry, the defendant had a gun and he wasn't backing down," the prosecutor said.Morris was arrested two days after the shooting during a traffic stop in Serra Mesa. 2411

来源：资阳报