昌吉不要孩子医院哪家好点昌吉哪家医院人流手术较好,昌吉意外怀孕30天,昌吉检测试纸两条红线是什么意思,昌吉56岁勃起不坚,昌吉较好的男科医院是,昌吉哪所医院泌尿科比较好,昌吉男人勃不起

President Donald Trump, facing a drastically revised death toll in Puerto Rico a year after dual hurricanes devastated the island, offered a still-rosy outlook of his administration's handling of the disaster on Wednesday."I think we did a fantastic job in Puerto Rico," Trump told CNN's Jim Acosta during an exchange with reporters at the White House. "We're still helping Puerto Rico."It was an optimistic accounting of his administration's handling of the natural disaster, which left much of the US territory without power for months and resulted in thousands of deaths.The island's governor formally raised the death toll from 64 to 2,975 on Tuesday following a study conducted by researchers at George Washington University.The study accounted for Puerto Ricans who succumbed to the stifling heat and other after-effects of the storm and were not previously counted in official figures.Trump has trumpeted his handling of the storm's aftermath, including saying in the days afterward the storm had resulted in a relatively small number of deaths compared to a "real catastrophe like Katrina." Hurricane Katrina, which devastated parts of Louisiana in 2005, killed roughly 1,200.He also awarded himself a "10 out of 10" on disaster recovery efforts during an Oval Office meeting last year with Puerto Rico's governor."Did we do a great job?" he asked his guest.Through it all, Trump has maintained that Puerto Rico's languishing infrastructure and geography hampered efforts. He said on Wednesday an outdated electric grid and the territory's status as an island continued to the difficulty."Puerto Rico was actually more difficult because of the fact it was an island," he said. "It's much harder to get things on the island."Trump has come under stiff criticism for his handling of the disaster, principally from Carmen Yulín Cruz, the mayor of Puerto Rico's capital city San Juan."The administration killed the Puerto Ricans with neglect. The Trump administration led us to believe they were helping when they weren't up to par, and they didn't allow other countries to help us," Yulín Cruz said on CNN Wednesday, later adding, "Shame on President Trump. Shame on President Trump for not even once, not even yesterday, just saying, 'Look, I grieve with the people of Puerto Rico.'"Trump did not respond directly to his critics Wednesday, instead saying he hoped the island doesn't suffer a similar fate this year."I only hope they don't get hit again because they were hit by two in a row," Trump said.Trump's comments were reminiscent of former President George W. Bush's comments days after Hurricane Katrina made landfall in Louisiana, when Bush praised his FEMA director Michael Brown during his first visit to the region affected by Hurricane Katrina in 2005."Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job," Bush said then.Trump's comments on Wednesday were not the first time he has praised the federal response in Puerto Rico. And while the death toll was not known when he voiced some of his earlier praise, they did come as disaster relief experts and local officials sounded the alarm about the slow pace of the federal response."Every death is a horror -- but if you look at a real catastrophe, like Katrina, and you look at the tremendous hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of people that died, and you look at what happened here with, really, a storm that was just totally overpowering -- nobody has ever seen anything like this," Trump said in Puerto Rico less than two weeks after Maria struck. "Everybody around this table and everybody watching can really be very proud of what's taken place in Puerto Rico."Trump not only repeatedly praised the federal response, but he also struck out at the news media and critics who highlighted the slow pace of some of the recovery efforts and the dire conditions that much of the island continued to face for weeks and months after the hurricane made landfall.Ten days after the hurricane made landfall, Trump lambasted news reports about the troubled situation in Puerto Rico in a series of tweets."Despite the Fake News Media in conjunction with the Dems, an amazing job is being done in Puerto Rico," Trump tweeted. "The Fake News Networks are working overtime in Puerto Rico doing their best to take the spirit away from our soldiers and first R's. Shame!"In another tweet, he lashed out at San Juan's mayor, who had taken to the airwaves to raise alarm about the slow pace of recovery efforts."Such poor leadership ability by the Mayor of San Juan, and others in Puerto Rico, who are not able to get their workers to help," he tweeted. 4625

President Donald Trump’s plans to kick off Independence Day with a showy display at Mount Rushmore are drawing sharp criticism from Native Americans who view the monument as a desecration of land violently stolen from them. Several groups led by Native American activists are planning protests for Trump’s July 3 visit, part of his “comeback” campaign for a nation reeling from sickness, unemployment and social unrest. But it comes amid a national reckoning over racism and a reconsideration of the symbolism of monuments around the globe. Many Native American activists say the Rushmore memorial is as reprehensible as the many Confederate monuments being toppled around the nation.The president's plans are also raising questions about fireworks safety. A fire expert says a fireworks display planned at the Mount Rushmore National Memorial is “ill advised” given the abnormally dry conditions and risk of summer wildfires. The July 3 event could attract 7,500 people. Bill Gabbert is the former fire management officer for Mount Rushmore and six other national parks in the region. Earlier this month, he said shooting fireworks over the extremely flammable ponderosa pine forest should not be done. The fireworks display at Mount Rushmore to celebrate Independence Day has not happened since 2009, when it was ended because of fire danger after a pine beetle infestation. Additionally, a 2016 U.S. Geological Survey report ties high levels of perchlorate contamination in the water at Mount Rushmore national memorial in South Dakota with past years of fireworks displays there. The pyrotechnics are set to resume this Independence Day holiday at the urging of President Donald Trump. 1698

Protests, elections, COVID-19--these are some of the factors experts say are leading to the rise of gun sales this year.“There’s just so much happening right now to make people feel uncertain, and I think that’s the one thing that might explain gun sales,” said Trent Steidley, a sociologist and Assistant Professor at the University of Denver.Steidley focuses on topics like firearms and society.“First, it was COVID to think about. OK, people are probably feeling unsure about a lot of things, and we know uncertainty kind of correlates with gun sales. It can go with things like a recession, it can go with things like unemployment,” he explained. “What we've seen now is about four months of pretty heavy gun sales.”A firearm industry survey conducted by the NSSF showed handguns outpaced shotguns 2 to 1 in sales among first-time gun buyers, following a larger, rising trend Steidley has been watching.“Before 2012, 2013, long guns, shotguns, rifles, consistently outpaced handguns. Slowly over time, that ratio changed though,” he said.FBI firearm background check data appears to coincide with two major events. The top two highest weeks for checks since 1998 were March 16 through March 22 of this year with 1,197,788 checks, and June 1 through June 7 with 1,004,798 checks. For reference, March 13 was the day President Donald Trump announced the national emergency for coronavirus and May 25 was the day of George Floyd’s death in Minneapolis.“It’s human nature. People feel threatened in some way, either they feel their rights might be threatened,” Sheriff Justin Smith in Larimer County, Colorado said. “You can’t go on the internet or watch TV and pick up the news and not see some very concerning stories on spikes in violence around the country.”Smith said his department has seen an increase in those applying for concealed handgun permits.“The numbers are certainly on the increase. We just can’t say because a lot of folks are stuck waiting. We’re clear into September on appointments right now, but I definitely get that sense those numbers are up,” he said.The response from Steven Reams, Weld County Sheriff, echoed the same:“I’ve definitely seen a marked increase in concealed weapon permit applications. It started to increase in mid-March and then there was a dramatic increase in June, and then another in July. It seems that most applicants are not necessarily all new gun owners, more than half are people who just decided it was a good time to start carrying. The balance of the applicants are largely first time gun buyers.”Surveys from the NSSF show firearm retailers believe 40 percent of all guns purchased this year have been by first-time buyers, which has brought training and safety to the forefront.“Representatives of the industry and trainers are all aware there's a need to get these people trained up on how to use a gun safely, how to store a gun, proper safety protocols,” Steidley said.“Training is a must,” Steve Allred said. “I would say probably 50 percent of my students never even held a gun.” Allred leads gun safety and self-defense courses in Wyoming. COVID-19 impacted what he’s able to do, but thanks to technology, he’s figured out a solution.“We ran five, six, seven classes every year in the summer mainly,” he said. “April is usually when we start classes. We just decided everyone's kind of going to the Zoom thing. Anyways, we can provide the class live.”There are limitations of what Allred can teach virtually, but he offers anyone who takes the class to join him on the range, as well.“What it’s allowed us to do is it's allowed us to instead of concentrate locally, we’re having students all over the country,” he said.While feelings of uncertainty fuel firearm sales, Allred said no matter someone’s reason for buying a gun, it’s important they know how to use it.“Why do I want a gun? Why do I push my wife to train with her weapon? And it boils down to just the ability to protect when you least expect it,” he said. 3992

RAINBOW (CNS) - A 51-year-old man was arrested on suspicion of attempting to abduct a 61-year-old woman while she was walking in a senior mobile home community in northern San Diego County, authorities said.At 1:10 p.m. Sunday, a 61-year-old woman called 911 and reported that a man, later identified as Francisco Gutierrez, had attempted to kidnap her in the 4700 block of Oak Crest Road, in a senior mobile home park in Rainbow, Sheriff's Lt. Arnold Aldana.The woman reported that Gutierrez had allegedly crept up behind her, grabbed her and attempted to drag her away, Aldana said. She was able to fight him off and run to a nearby neighbor to call 911.Deputies responded to the area and were flagged down by a witness who directed them to Gutierrez, who was sitting in a vehicle he had allegedly broken into, the lieutenant said.Deputies gave Gutierrez multiple commands to surrender, but he refused and a sheriff's K-9 was deployed, Aldana said. Gutierrez was taken into custody and transported to Tri-City Medical Center in Oceanside for treatment of unknown injuries he suffered during the arrest.Upon release from the hospital, Gutierrez was expected to be booked into the Vista Detention Facility on suspicion of kidnapping, assault with intent to commit rape, resisting arrest and attempted auto theft, Aldana said. 1333

Republican senators' latest attempt to repeal Obamacare could be the most far-reaching of GOP efforts this year.Senators Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Bill Cassidy of Louisiana last week released?a bill that would eliminate or overhaul major sections of the health reform law. The duo had been trying to garner interest in earlier versions of their bill for months, but hadn't gotten much traction.Now, however, Republicans likely have only two weeks left to use their 2017 budget reconciliation bill as a way to dismantle Obamacare with a simple majority in the Senate. The Graham-Cassidy bill is the only repeal effort left on the table, coming even as a bipartisan Senate committee is working on legislation to stabilize the Affordable Care Act.The Congressional Budget Office said Monday it may take several weeks for it to release an analysis of the Graham-Cassidy bill so it remains to be seen how many fewer people could be insured under it or what the impact on premiums may be.Here's what's in the bill:Repeal Obamacare individual and employer mandates: Obamacare levies penalties on most Americans who don't have health insurance and larger employers who don't provide affordable coverage for their workers. The bill would eliminate the penalty, retroactive to 2016.Repeals Obamacare subsidies and ends Medicaid expansion funding: The legislation would eliminate Obamacare subsidies that lower premiums, deductibles and co-pays in 2020. It would also jettison federal funding for Medicaid expansion, which 31 states use to provide coverage for residents with incomes up to about ,000.The legislation would turn the federal funding for Medicaid expansion and the subsidies into a block grant program. States would be given a lump sum of money and would have a lot of leeway over how to spend it.For instance, they could help enrollees pay their premiums and out-of-pocket costs or set up high-risk or reinsurance pools to help protect insurers from costly enrollees and entice them to stay in the individual market. States could use a portion of money to help those enrolled in Medicaid afford care.Graham and Cassidy say that this provision would return power to the states and allow them to create programs that fit their residents' needs. Also, it would equalize Medicaid funding across the states. The bill's authors note that four states get 37% of Obamacare funding.But Democrats and consumer advocates say that many states, particularly those that expanded Medicaid, would lose a lot of federal funding, making it harder for them to provide coverage or assistance to their residents. Also, they note, the block grant is only authorized through 2026, jeopardizing the continuation of funding after that.Loosens Obamacare's regulations regarding pre-existing conditions: The bill would also waive several key Obamacare protections for those with pre-existing conditions. While it would still require insurers to provide coverage to everyone, it would allow carriers to charge enrollees more based on their medical history. So younger, healthier folks could see their premiums go down, but sicker Americans could find themselves priced out of policies.The legislation also would eliminate Obamacare's essential health benefits provision, which mandates insurers cover an array of services, including hospitalization, maternity care, prescription drugs, mental health and substance abuse services. This could lower premiums somewhat and give consumers a wider choice of plans. But it would also make it harder for people to buy comprehensive policies so those with pre-existing conditions may not be able to find coverage that meets their health care needs.Revamps funding for Medicaid overall: The legislation would send the states a fixed amount of money per Medicaid enrollee, known as a per-capita cap, starting in 2020.States could also opt to receive federal Medicaid funding as a block grant for the non-disabled adults and children in their program. Under a block grant, states would get a fixed amount of federal funding each year, regardless of how many participants are in the program.States, however, cannot opt to receive block grant funding for elderly and disabled participants.Graham-Cassidy would also shrink the program even more over time by pegging the annual growth rate of funding for children and non-disabled adults to standard inflation after 2024, rather than the more generous medical inflation.Either per-capita caps or block grants would limit federal responsibility, shifting that burden to the states. However, since states don't have the money to make up the difference, they would likely either reduce eligibility, curtail benefits or cut provider payments. The block grant would be more restrictive since the funding level would not adjust for increases in enrollment, which often happens in bad economic times.Allows states to institute work requirements for Medicaid: States would now be able to require adult Medicaid recipients to work. The disabled, elderly and pregnant women would be exempt, however.Permits everyone in the individual market to buy catastrophic plans: Obamacare only allows those under age 30 to buy catastrophic policies, which usually have higher deductibles and fewer benefits. This legislation would allow anyone to buy these plans starting in 2019.Repeals a handful of taxes: The bill would repeal the tax on over-the-counter medicine, health savings accounts and medical devices, a levy unpopular on both sides of the aisle. But it keeps in place Obamacare's taxes on the wealthy, health insurers and others.Defunds Planned Parenthood: In keeping with longstanding Republican beliefs, the legislation prohibits federal funding for Planned Parenthood. But the restriction is only for a year, beginning when the bill is enacted.Increases maximum contributions to health savings accounts: Today, individuals can save up to ,400 and families can save up to ,750 a year tax-free in a health savings account. The bill would raise that limit to the annual out-of-pocket maximum for high-deductible plans. For 2018, that would be ,650 for individuals and ,300 for families. 6238