昌吉妇科检查那个医院(昌吉怀孕2个月人流价格) (今日更新中)

Top officials at the Justice Department, the FBI and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence agreed Monday to share highly classified information with lawmakers related to the Russia investigation amid an escalating controversy over the bureau's use of a confidential intelligence source during the 2016 presidential campaign.White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said Monday that chief of staff John Kelly planned to "immediately" schedule a meeting with the officials and leaders of Congress to "review highly classified and other information they have requested."But the statement -- vague enough to allow each side to claim victory -- did not fully settle the critical issue: whether the Justice Department would ultimately be forced to turn over the documents subpoenaed by House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes on the FBI source.Sanders had said earlier that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, FBI Director Christopher Wray and Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats were expected to gather at the White House on Monday afternoon for a discussion aimed at addressing congressional requests.Rosenstein, Wray and several other officials were spotted leaving the White House just before 4 p.m. ET after over an hour inside. The Justice Department did not comment on the meeting or details of the agreement.While Sanders and a source familiar with the meeting said it had been scheduled before a weekend of tweets from President Donald Trump, it took on a heightened public focus Monday afternoon.On Sunday, Trump demanded via tweet the Justice Department "look into whether or not the FBI/DOJ infiltrated or surveilled the Trump Campaign for political Purposes."His tweets prompted the Justice Department to ask its inspector general to expand its ongoing probe into the surveillance of former Trump campaign aide Carter Page to include a review of whether the FBI was politically motivated in its investigation of Russian meddling in the 2016 US election, Justice Department spokeswoman Sarah Isgur Flores said in a statement Sunday."If anyone did infiltrate or surveil participants in a presidential campaign for inappropriate purposes, we need to know about it and take appropriate action," Rosenstein said in the statement.Some former Justice Department and FBI officials praised the move as deftly avoiding a ugly showdown, while others lamented that Rosenstein had failed to stand up to the President.But tapping Inspector General Michael Horowitz to examine the issue appeared to de-escalate the controversy, at least for now.Vice President Mike Pence praised the decision during an interview with Fox News set to air later Monday."The President I think is grateful that the Department of Justice is going to have the inspector general look into it, and determine, and insure, that there was no surveillance done for political purposes against our campaign," Pence said.How House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes and other Republicans on Capitol Hill handle the apparent agreement for another classified briefing remains to be seen.Nunes said Sunday that he would refuse to meet with the Justice Department unless he was able to review documents related to the confidential FBI source.Rep. Adam Schiff, of California, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said he's unaware of what the administration briefing on the confidential source is about, whether they'll see documents and whether he'll be invited. He's concerned that the Justice Department may have "capitulated" despite its concerns that revealing the information could put lives at risk.Schiff also expressed concern about Kelly or other White House officials at the upcoming meeting getting access to sensitive materials related to the ongoing investigation.The New York Times and The Washington Post?have reported the source spoke to Page and Trump campaign co-chairman Sam Clovis, as well as campaign adviser George Papadopoulos.Clovis' attorney, Victoria Toensing, told CNN on Monday that the source had reached out to Clovis but her client "didn't know this guy from Adam.""Russia didn't even come up," Toensing added, saying the meeting was about China and took place around the end of August or early September 2016.Page tweeted what he indicated was an email from the source in July 2017, describing their interactions as "cordial," but CNN has not independently confirmed the email's authenticity.Trump has previously suggested the intelligence source was "embedded" in his presidential campaign, but US officials have denied that claim to CNN. 4642

'Tis the season for spicy lattes, fast food turkey sandwiches and pumpkin-flavored everything.If you're a fan, you'd better act fast: They won't be around for long.That's by design. Seasonal items are an important marketing tool for the food industry, according to Alexander Chernev, a professor of marketing at Northwestern University's Kellogg School of Management.Limited releases almost give consumers a Pavlovian response. For example, when the weather turns colder, Starbucks customers habitually get excited about Pumpkin Spice Lattes. In November, customers come in to check out the new holiday cups."When you have these exclusive products, which exist for a short period of time, it gives people a reason to come to the store," Chernev explained.It's not just Starbucks that comes out with seasonal specials: Dunkin' Donuts announced a whole slew of pumpkin-flavored treats in August. McDonald's is getting ready for winter with the McRib. As the holiday season gets into full swing, we'll be sure to see Santa on Coca Cola bottles, turkey sandwiches from Subway and more. In the spring, it'll be Girl Scout cookie time.Related: The McRib is back at McDonald's For fast food chains in particular, which rely on familiarity, holiday items can offer consumers some variety."You need consistency because that's the brand mantra," said Chernev. "But no matter how much you like something, consuming something different ... increases the enjoyment of what you consumed before."Chernev says it's a neat marketing ploy: Although a specialty item may be exciting on its own, it can also remind consumers how much they like the basics.Seasonal offerings can also give brands a chance to test a new product. When Starbucks announced the return of the Pumpkin Spice Latte this year, it also unveiled the Teavana Pumpkin Spice Chai Tea Latte.And Chernev pointed out that seasonal menu items mean brands have something new to talk about every quarter.Starbucks says that's part of the rationale behind its seasonal drinks"We strive to provide our customers with unique, seasonal offerings to celebrate each season, and customer response has been extremely positive to that," a company spokesman said.Related: Hey, latte fans: Maple is having a moment this fallThere are some basic supply-and-demand economics behind limited-time releases too: Scarcity can build hype."It's a way to create excitement for the menu," said R.J. Hottovy, a consumer strategist for Morningstar.Items that might be popular for a few months probably wouldn't generate enough year-round demand.For example, when the McRib debuted in 1981, it was a dud. McDonald's pulled it from its menu four years later. Though it never achieved nationwide success, there were parts of the country where the McRib generated a solid enough fan base to bring it back every now and then."There's a lot of mystery around why the McRib comes and goes, but to be honest it's a local option based on consumer demand," a McDonald's spokesman said.The McRib works very well in the Midwest, but doesn't necessarily work as well in the coastal areas, Hottovy noted. That's why it makes sense to restrict the amount of McRibs that go on sale.Hottovy explained that sales typically rise for a short time when companies unveil seasonal items. But after a few weeks, that demand drops off after the core fans of the limited time product are satisfied.So enjoy your Pumpkin Spice Latte while it lasts. And let's be honest, you probably wouldn't want one in April.The-CNN-Wire 3526

They’ve been fighting in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania over the cutoff date for counting mailed ballots, and in North Carolina over witness requirements. Ohio is grappling with drop boxes for ballots as Texas faces a court challenge over extra days of early voting.Measuring the anxiety over the November election is as simple as tallying the hundreds of voting-related lawsuits filed across the country in recent months. The cases concern the fundamentals of the American voting process, including how ballots are cast and counted, during an election made unique by the coronavirus pandemic and by a president who refuses to commit to accepting the results.The lawsuits are all the more important because President Donald Trump has raised the prospect that the election may wind up before a Supreme Court with a decidedly Republican tilt if his latest nominee is confirmed.“This is a president who has expressed his opposition to access to mail ballots and has also seemed to almost foreshadow the inevitability that this election will be one decided by the courts,” said Kristen Clarke, executive director of the National Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law.That opposition was on display Tuesday during the first presidential debate when Trump launched into an extended argument against mail voting, claiming without evidence that it is ripe for fraud and suggesting mail ballots may be “manipulated.”“This is going to be a fraud like you’ve never seen,” the president said of the massive shift to mail voting prompted by the pandemic.The lawsuits are a likely precursor for what will come afterward. Republicans say they have retained outside law firms, along with thousands of volunteer lawyers at the ready. Democrats have announced a legal war room of heavyweights, including a pair of former solicitors general.The race is already regarded as the most litigated in American history, due in large part to the massive expansion of mail and absentee voting. Loyola Law School professor Justin Levitt, a former Justice Department elections official, has tallied some 260 lawsuits arising from the coronavirus. The Republication National Committee says it’s involved in more than 40 lawsuits, and a website operated by a chief Democrat lawyer lists active cases worth watching in about 15 states.Democrats are focusing their efforts on multiple core areas — securing free postage for mail ballots, reforming signature-match laws, allowing ballot collection by third-parties like community organizations and ensuring that ballots postmarked by Election Day can count. Republicans warn that those same requests open the door to voter fraud and confusion and are countering efforts to relax rules on how voters cast ballots this November.“We’re trying to prevent chaos in the process,” RNC chief counsel Justin Riemer said in an interview. “Nothing creates more chaos than rewriting a bunch of rules at the last minute.”But there have been no broad-based, sweeping examples of voter fraud during past presidential elections, including in 2016, when Trump claimed the contest would be rigged and Russians sought to meddle in the outcome.Some of the disputes are unfolding in states not traditionally thought of as election battlegrounds, such as Montana, where there is a highly competitive U.S. Senate race on the ballot. A judge Wednesday rejected an effort by Trump’s reelection campaign and Republican groups to block counties from holding the general election mostly by mail.But most of the closely watched cases are in states perceived as up-for-grabs in 2020 and probably crucial to the race.That includes Ohio, where a coalition of voting groups and Democrats have sued to force an expansion of ballot drop boxes from more than just one per county. Separately on Monday, a federal judge rejected changes to the state’s signature-matching requirement for ballots and ballot applications, handing a win to the state’s Republican election chief who has been engulfed with litigation this election season.In Arizona, a judge’s ruling that voters who forget to sign their early ballots have up to five days after the election to fix the problem is now on appeal before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.A federal appeals court on Tuesday upheld a six-day extension for counting absentee ballots in Wisconsin as long as they are postmarked by Election Day. The ruling gave Democrats in the state at least a temporary victory in a case that could nonetheless by appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. In neighboring Michigan, the GOP is suing to try to overturn a decision that lets the state count absentee ballots up to 14 days after the election.In battleground North Carolina, where voters are already struggling with rules requiring witness signatures on absentee ballots, the RNC and Trump’s campaign committee have sued over new election guidance that will permit ballots with incomplete witness information to be fixed without the voter having to fill out a new blank ballot.In Iowa, the Trump campaign and Republican groups have won a series of sweeping legal victories in their attempts to limit absentee voting, with judges throwing out tens of thousands of absentee ballot applications in three counties. This week, another judge upheld a new Republican-backed law that will make it harder for counties to process absentee ballot applications.Pennsylvania has been a particular hive of activity.Republican lawmakers asked the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday to put a hold on a ruling by the state’s highest court that extends the deadline for receiving and counting mailed-in ballots. Republicans also object to a portion of the state court’s ruling that orders counties to count ballots that arrive during the three-day extension period even if they lack a postmark or legible postmark.Meanwhile in federal court, Republicans are suing to, among other things, outlaw drop boxes or other sites used to collect mail-in ballots.The Supreme Court itself has already been asked to get involved in several cases, as it did in April, when conservative justices blocked Democratic efforts to extend absentee voting in Wisconsin during the primary.There is, of course, precedent for an election that ends in the courts. In 2000, the Supreme Court settled a recount dispute in Florida, effectively handing the election to Republican George W. Bush.Barry Richard, a Florida lawyer who represented Bush during that litigation, said there’s no guarantee the Supreme Court will want to get involved again, or that any lawsuit over the election will present a compelling issue for the bench to address.One significant difference between then and now, he said, is that neither candidate raised the prospect of not accepting the results.“There was never any question, in 2000, about the essential integrity of the system. Neither candidate challenged it,” Richard said. “Nobody even talked about whether or not the losing candidate would accept the results of the election. That was just assumed.”_____Follow Eric Tucker on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/etuckerAP 7075

The U.S. Department of Agriculture announced on Thursday that it is looking for ways to transition some people off of the department's Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).Specifically, the USDA is looking at beneficiaries who are not disabled and who don't have any dependents.“Long-term dependency has never been part of the American dream,” said U.S. Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue. “USDA’s goal is to move individuals and families from SNAP back to the workforce as the best long-term solution to poverty. Everyone who receives SNAP deserves an opportunity to become self-sufficient and build a productive, independent life.”Related:?Trump administration proposes Blue Apron-style overhaul for food stamps 773

Transportation Security Administration said air travelers abandoned more than 6,000 at security checkpoints in 2019.As it turns out, it's money TSA can claim if someone doesn't come back for it, Dallas Morning News reported.On Friday, the government agency released its annual report for the total of the nation's 75 biggest airports, which they are required to submit to Congress by law.The report covers the period between October 2018 and September 2019.John F. Kennedy International in New York topped the list with passengers leaving ,110 left in those grey bins.San Francisco, Miami, Las Vegas, and Dallas-Ft. Worth rounded out the top 5.In the fiscal year 2018, passengers left 0,105.40 behind. 718

来源：资阳报