山东强直脊柱炎的诊治山东强直脊柱炎能医好吗,济南怎么样才能治好强直性脊椎炎,山东强直早期影响生育吗,济南强制性脊椎炎的并发症,山东更好的强直脊柱炎医院是哪家,济南中医强直性脊椎炎治疗,山东强直性脊柱炎会低烧吗

The Department of Labor just released its latest report showing jobless claims in the U.S. remain elevated. About 1.43 million people filed new unemployment benefits claims last week. There are about 19.3 million continued claims or people still unemployed.With so many Americans looking for work right now, a lot of people are being targeted by scammers.“I was actually scammed myself,” said Amelia Brockman.In March, shortly after Brockman uploaded her profile to the gig site Upwork, she had her first experience with what’s known as an employment scam.“On Upwork, I was looking for work and a job I found would pay a lot of money for it,” said Brockman. “I was desperate because I didn’t want to go back to actual outside work.”This put her in a vulnerable place, where she ignored some warning signs.“I got the job. It seemed legit,” she said. “Then, he started asking if I am going to pay you, I need you to go buy Google cards. Something about how he needed to put me in the system.”She never got paid, in fact, she lost roughly ,000 in Google card purchases.“People are heartless at this point. Not everyone, just the scammers,” she said. “It is getting ridiculous.”Over the past three months, while looking for other work, Brockman has come across at least 40 other job scam posts, including one where during an online interview, the interviewer started asking her for personal info and to purchase equipment.“I called the company and eventually I texted him back and said ‘dear sir, that is a scam. You don’t work for them,’ and he blocked me,” said Brockman.According to the Better Business Bureau, employment scams are the riskiest scams right now. A newly released report by the BBB, shows 53% of the people targeted by employment scams are unemployed and roughly 75% of the people actually scammed are in a personal financial crisis.To avoid being a victim of an employment scam yourself, the BBB says there are a few things you can do. They include noticing if a job posting has grammatical errors or misspellings. If it does, it is usually a scam.The BBB says you should remember that you should never have to pay to get a job or have to provide you credit card and bank account information. Legitimate employers provide a paper check option.Lastly, try to research the company or employer to see if they have had complaints.If you come across a posting that you suspect is a scam or get scammed, report it.“You should go report it, because I did not report mine until months later to the point where another state called me and you don’t want to be scammed the same way,” said Brockman. 2613

The Cameron Peak Fire is now the largest wildfire in Colorado's history. It grew overnight and is now 164,140 acres, but it remains 56% contained and no injuries have been reported.The fire became the largest in Colorado history Wednesday evening. It took only 48 days for the Cameron Peak Fire to surpass the 139,007-acre Pine Gulch Fire as the largest in recorded state history, and also blew past the 137,760-acre Hayman Fire in 2002.In a Thursday morning update, Operations Section Chief Paul Demerico of Rocky Mountain Team 1 said they are expecting a challenging few days ahead."But we have beefed up and feel like we have adequate resources to do what we can, especially when it comes to structure protection," he said.Several areas near the fire are under mandatory or voluntary evacuations as a result of the blaze. Highway 34 was also temporarily shut down in both directions between Loveland and Estes Park to help with evacuations, but has reopened.In addition, the Canyon Lakes Ranger District of the Roosevelt National Forest closed Thursday morning. This closure includes recreation sites — including all campgrounds — trails and Forest Service Roads.View the mandatory evacuations in the map below, or go here for the full list of evacuations and closures.Demerico said the western side of fire is almost all contained, but the fire was able to run east all the way to County Road 27 thanks to the wind, terrain and dry fuels.The main objective for the next day or so is to keep the fire south of 44H Buckhorn Road and west of County Road 27, he said.Winds will continue to be a problem over the next few days, Demerico said. Structure protection resources are scattered around Storm Mountain, Cedar Park, Glen Haven and Estes Park.The gusts also prevent fire officials from flying aircraft to help fight the blaze from the air.Larimer County residents may see periods of moderate to heavy smoke in their neighborhoods Thursday, according to the Colorado Air Quality Summary. The smoke may impact Fort Collins and Loveland as well.The National Weather Service said smoke from both the Cameron Peak Fire and the new East Troublesome Fire in Grand County will move toward Denver Thursday afternoon.The state's 10 largest wildfires in history, ranked by acreage, are:1. Cameron Peak Fire (2020): 164,140 acres2. Pine Gulch Fire (2020): 139,007 acres3. Hayman Fire (2002): 137,760 acres4. Spring Fire (2018): 108,045 acres5. High Park Fire (2012): 87,284 acres6. Missionary Ridge Fire (2002): 72,962 acres7. 416 Fire (2018): 54,000 acres8. Bridger Fire (2008): 45,800 acres9. Last Chance Fire (2012): 45,000 acres10. Bear Springs/Callie Marie fires (2011): 44,662 acresNote: The Rocky Mountain Area Coordination Center said the West Fork Complex fire, which burned a total of 109,632 acres in 2013, is not included on this list since it involved three separate fires.This story was originally published by Stephanie Butzer at KMGH. 2951

The CEOs for auto giants Kia and Hyundai have refused to attend a congressional hearing to explain why hundreds of their vehicles have spontaneously burst into flames.Both carmakers and a spokesman for Democrats on the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation have confirmed the companies’ refusal to send representatives to the hearing, which has been scheduled for next week.A Kia spokesman said the company is working with the committee to “analyze all relevant information associated with any fire or other safety-related matters and will take any necessary corrective action in a timely manner.”A Hyundai spokesman said, “Hyundai takes this matter very seriously, and fully appreciates the concerns of the Senate Commerce, Science & Transportation Committee including those of the Chairman and Ranking Member.”It was not immediately clear whether the U.S. Senate committee would postpone or cancel its Nov. 14 hearing on Kia and Hyundai fires.The call for the hearing came six months after Consumer Investigator Jackie Callaway, of WFTS television station in Tampa, Florida, first reported on the unexplained car fires.Since April, the WFTS I-team has exposed hundreds of Kia and Hyundai models manufactured since 2011 that caught fire across the country.“The hearing will focus on motor vehicle safety issues involving vehicle fires,” stated the identical letters – dated Oct. 16 – and sent to Kia Motors America President and CEO Seungkyu “Sean” Yoon and Hyundai Motor America's Kyung Soo “Kenny” Lee.The CEOs were asked to “promptly identify and respond to defects that may pose a fire risk” at the Nov. 14 hearing in front of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation.In September, an Ohio mother spoke out and called for a federal investigation after watching her son burn alive in her 2014 Kia Soul parked at her apartment complex just outside of Cincinnati last year. 1926

The first hearing in CNN and Jim Acosta's federal lawsuit against President Trump and several top White House aides lasted for two hours of tough questioning of both sides.At the conclusion of the hearing, Judge Timothy J. Kelly said he would announce his decision Thursday afternoon.CNN and Acosta are alleging that the White House's suspension of his press pass violates the First and Fifth Amendments.The hearing started around 3:40 p.m., Kelly began by probing CNN's arguments for the better part of an hour. Then he turned to questioning a lawyer representing the government.Lawyers for the network and Acosta asked for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction that would restore his press pass right away, arguing that time is of the essence because his rights are violated every day his pass is suspended.Kelly opened the hearing by quizzing CNN attorney Theodore Boutrous on the network's First Amendment claim and asking how the President's history of attacks on CNN should be viewed in the context of the lawsuit.Boutrous rattled off examples of Trump's missives against CNN, including his claim that the network is an "enemy of the people."Kelly expressed skepticism that this proves the Acosta ban is "content-based discrimination," as CNN is alleging.Kelly said there is some evidence that Acosta's conduct -- not his content -- led the White House to suspend his press pass.But Boutrous disputed that and said there "never will there be more evidence of facial discrimination and animus against an individual reporter" than in this case.Kelly said "we've all seen the clip" of the White House press conference where Trump and Acosta had a combative exchange last week. Kelly said that Acosta "continued speaking after his time expired" and "wouldn't give up his microphone" -- points that the Trump administration made in its briefs earlier Wednesday.Under questioning from the judge, Boutrous cited Trump's words to Acosta from the press conference, and said, "'Rudeness' is really a code word for 'I don't like you being an aggressive reporter.'"Kelly peppered CNN's attorney with hypotheticals as he tried to determine what a lawful move by the White House, responding to Acosta's actions, would look like."Could they let him keep the pass but tell him he couldn't come to presidential press conferences?" Kelly asked.Boutrous contended that even a partial response like that would be a violation of Acosta's First Amendment rights.Boutrous called the White House's move to revoke Acosta's hard pass "the definition of arbitrariness and capriciousness.""What are the standards?" Boutrous asked. "Rudeness is not a standard. If it were no one could have gone to the press conference."Boutrous separately brought up evidence that hadn't been available when CNN filed its suit: A fundraising email that the Trump campaign sent Wednesday.The email touted the decision to revoke Acosta's credentials and attacked CNN for what it called its "liberal bias." Boutrous said that by grouping that all together in the same breath, the email made it clear that it was Acosta's coverage and not his conduct at a press conference that triggered the revocation of his press pass.Kelly asked CNN's lawyers to state the company's position regarding the original White House accusation that Acosta placed his hands a White House intern as she tried to grab his microphone away."It's absolutely false," Boutrous said.Boutrous also pointed out that Trump administration never mentioned that accusation against Acosta in the 28-page brief that Justice Department lawyers filed with the court earlier on Wednesday."They've abandoned that" claim, Boutrous said.In his first question in a back and forth with the government, Kelly asked Justice Department attorney James Burnham to clear up the government's shifting rationale for revoking Acosta's pass."Why don't you set me straight," Kelly said. "Let me know what was the reason and address this issue of whether the government's reason has changed over time.""There doesn't need to be a reason because there's no First Amendment protection and the President has broad discretion," Burnham said.Still, Burnham called the White House's stated reasonings "pretty consistent throughout," and walked through a series of statements that the administration has made — from Trump's first comments at the press conference to Sanders' tweets announcing the revocation to the official statement put out Tuesday after CNN filed its suit.Burnham said Sanders' claim that Acosta had inappropriately touched a White House intern was not a part of their legal argument."We're not relying on that here and I don't think the White House is relying on that here," Burnham said.Burnham said that it would be perfectly legal for the White House to revoke a journalist's credentials if it didn't agree with their reporting.He made the assertion under questioning from Kelly, who asked him to state the administration's position in this hypothetical situation.The judge asked if the White House could essentially tell any individual journalist, "we don't like your reporting, so we're pulling your hard pass." Burnham replied, "as a matter of law... yes."Pressed again by the judge on Sanders' claim that Acosta had inappropriately touched the intern, Burnham said "we don't have a position" on that."The one consistent explanation," Burnham said, "is disorder at the press conference."Burnham contended that revoking Acosta's hard pass was not "viewpoint discrimination" — part of a legal threshold for a First Amendment claim."A single journalist's attempt to monopolize a press conference is not a viewpoint and revoking a hard pass in response to that is not viewpoint discrimination," Burnham said.Kelly tried to press for details about how Acosta's pass came to be revoked, asking Burnham who made the actual decision.Burnham said he didn't have any information beyond what had been filed in court documents: that the revocation was first announced by Sanders on November 7 and then "ratified" by Trump the next day."Do you have any information to suggest that it was anyone other than Ms. Sanders that made the decision?" Kelly asked."No, not that I'm offering today. I'm not denying it but I don't know anything beyond what's been filed," Burnham said.Later, Burnham argued that revoking Acosta's press pass does not infringe on his First Amendment rights because he can still call White House staffers for interviews or "catch them on their way out" of the building."I think the harm to the network is very small," Burnham said."Their cameras are still in there," he added.Burnham said CNN had made an "odd First Amendment injury" claim and suggested that Acosta could do his job "just as effectively" watching the President's appearances piped into a studio on CNN."The President never has to speak to Mr. Acosta again," Burnham said. "The President never has to give an interview to Mr. Acosta. And the President never has to call on Mr. Acosta at a press conference.""To be in a room where he has no right to speak... this seems to me like an odd First Amendment injury that we're talking about," Burnham said.Boutrous, the CNN attorney, fired back on rebuttal."That's not how reporters break stories. It's simply a fundamental misconception of journalism," Boutrous said, adding how unscheduled gaggles and source meetings throughout the White House amounted to "invaluable access."In a legal filing by the Justice Department on Wednesday, the White House asserted that it has "broad discretion" to pick and choose which journalists are given a permanent pass to cover it.That position is a sharp break with decades of tradition. Historically both Republican and Democratic administrations have had a permissive approach to press access, providing credentials both to big news organizations like CNN and obscure and fringe outlets.Acosta's suspension -— which took effect one week ago — is an unprecedented step. Journalism advocates say it could have a chilling effect on news coverage.CNN and Acosta's lawsuit was filed on Tuesday morning, nearly one week after Acosta was banned.Before the hearing began, CNN's lawyers said the case hinges on Acosta and CNN's First Amendment rights; the shifting rationales behind the ban; and the administration's failure to follow the federal regulations that pertain to press passes, an alleged violation of Fifth Amendment rights. The lawsuit asserts that this ban is really about Trump's dislike of Acosta.The "reasonable inference from defendants' conduct is that they have revoked Acosta's credentials as a form of content- and viewpoint-based discrimination and in retaliation for plaintiffs' exercise of protected First Amendment activity," CNN's lawsuit alleges.In addition to the temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction that CNN is seeking at the hearing, CNN and Acosta are also seeking what's known as "permanent relief." The lawsuit asks the judge to determine that Trump's action was "unconstitutional, in violation of the First Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment." This could protect other reporters against similar actions in the future."If the press is not free to cover the news because its reporter is unjustly denied access, it is not free," former White House correspondent Sam Donaldson said in a declaration supporting CNN that was filed with the court on Tuesday. "And if denying access to a reporter an organization has chosen to represent it -- in effect asserting the president's right to take that choice away from a news organization and make it himself -- is permitted, then the press is not free."Ted Olson, a Republican heavyweight who successfully argued for George W. Bush in Bush v. Gore, is representing CNN, along with Boutrous — himself another prominent attorney — and the network's chief counsel, David Vigilante.Olson said Tuesday that while it was Acosta whose press pass was suspended this time, "this could happen to any journalist by any politician."He spoke forcefully against Trump's action. "The White House cannot get away with this," Olson said.Most of the country's major news organizations have sided with CNN through statements and plan to file friend-of-the-court briefs. 10291

The damage wrought by Hurricane Irma has sparked a fresh wave of giving from corporate America.The extent of the destruction in Florida and the Caribbean isn't yet known, and Irma is still making its way toward Georgia as a tropical storm. It could be one of the costliest natural disasters in U.S. history.Corporate donations raised in the immediate aftermath of Hurricane Harvey, which struck two weeks ago, totaled about 0 million.A fundraising effort called Hand in Hand, backed by Verizon, Apple and other major companies, is hosting a televised fundraiser on Tuesday at 8 p.m. ET. Beyoncé and Oprah Winfrey are among the celebrities who have signed on.Here is a running list of all the ways companies have promised to help, both for Harvey and Irma relief.Apple: Donated million to the Red Cross in addition to pledging million for the Hand in Hand effort.Ashley Furniture: Promised to contribute products and subsidize furniture purchases up to million for hurricane victims in Texas and Florida.AT&T: Donating .4 million to relief efforts in the Caribbean and U.S. states hurt by Harvey and Irma. The company previously announced it would contribute at least 0,000 to help communities after Harvey.Bank of America: Donating more than .5 million to victims of the two storms, including 4,000 donated by bank employees, which the company matched.Citi: In the wake of Irma, the Citi Foundation committed a million donation to the Red Cross, bringing its total hurricane relief contributions to million.Dick's Sporting Goods: The company and its foundation have pledged a combined .5 million to hurricane relief. That includes .5 million worth of clothing and footwear and million "to rebuild and refurbish youth sports programs and facilities" in affected areas.Discover: Pledging million to American Red Cross. The company is also matching up to million in donations to the American Red Cross by its card members.Disney: Pledging .5 million in humanitarian aid for Florida, the Caribbean and other places hit by Irma. Says it raised almost million for Harvey relief.Goldman Sachs: Committed to giving 0,000 to organizations involved in the "immediate search, clean-up and recovery efforts" after Harvey struck the Gulf Coast. After Irma, the company promised 0,000 more.Home Depot: Pledged million for Harvey and Irma relief.Humana: Says its Humana Foundation will donate million to the Red Cross for Irma relief.IBM: Has pledged million. It says million will go toward Harvey relief and million toward helping Irma victims.JPMorgan Chase: Says it will donate million to support Irma relief in the U.S. and the Caribbean. Funding goes to the Red Cross, International Medical Corps and local nonprofits. Also donated million to Harvey relief.Lowe's: Committed to million for Irma relief in cash and "product donations," after donating another million for Harvey relief.Panda Express: Committed to raising million in stores and donating million.PayPal: A sponsor of Hand in Hand, PayPal is donating 0,000 to Save the Children and 0,000 more to the Red Cross for Irma relief. It's also launching a campaign to raise money from donors. A similar campaign for Harvey relief raised more than million from 81,000 donors.Qualcomm: Says it gave million to the Center for Disaster Philanthropy. Qualcomm gave million more to various disaster relief organizations after Harvey struck Texas.Target: Pledged up to million to Irma relief organizations, including the Red Cross, Habitat for Humanity, the Salvation Army, UNICEF and Save the Children. This is in addition to a .5 million donation for Harvey relief.UnitedHealthcare: Announced a donation of million for Irma relief, and also a 2-to-1 match for employee donations. It previously promised .3 million in "cash and medicines" after Harvey.Verizon: After announcing a million commitment after Harvey, Verizon said it would donate .5 million to Hand in Hand.Walmart: Has committed to donating up to million to hurricane relief.Wells Fargo: Pledged .1 million to Irma relief efforts in Florida and the Caribbean, nearly half to the Red Cross. The company said its customers have donated, via ATMs, nearly .7 million to the Red Cross for Harvey relief. 4337