中山肛门里长血泡中山拉粑粑屁股流血是怎么回事,中山哪个医院脱肛专业,中山华都肛肠医院网站好不好,中山有时大便有血正常吗,中山混合痔的价格怎么样,中山华都肛肠医院PPH治疗痔疮怎么样,中山内痔手术医院哪家最好

A FEMA report obtained by ABC News said that 34 White House staffers and contacts were infected with the coronavirus.According to ABC News, some of those infected were not identified in the report, but a number of those infected have publicly confirmed positive tests in recent days, including President Donald Trump.According to PBS, which identified 33 of the 34 confirmed cases, 11 of the coronavirus cases stemmed from workers of last week’s presidential debate in Cleveland. The White House Correspondents Association confirmed three positive cases among its ranks. 579

A federal judge ruled Monday Pennsylvania’s Governor Tom Wolf’s COVID-19 pandemic restrictions are unconstitutional.Four counties in the state filed a lawsuit claiming the governor’s orders closing non-life-sustaining businesses and limiting outdoor gatherings, and stay-at-home orders were unconstitutional. They stated the orders were "arbitrary, capricious and interfered with the concept of 'ordered liberty' as protected by the Fourteenth Amendment."Plaintiffs included hair salons, a drive-in theater, other businesses, as well as state representatives and congressman Mike Kelly.In his ruling, the judge says the governor’s actions likely had good intentions, “to protect Pennsylvanians from the virus," but that "even in an emergency, the authority of government is not unfettered."U.S. District Judge William Stickman IV ruling reads, “"(1) that the congregate gathering limits imposed by defendants' mitigation orders violate the right of assembly enshrined in the First Amendment; (2) that the stay-at-home and business closure components of defendants' orders violate the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment; and (3) that the business closure components of Defendants' orders violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment."In his written opinion, Judge Stickman continued his explanation of his ruling."There is no question that this country has faced, and will face, emergencies of every sort. But the solution to a national crisis can never be permitted to supersede the commitment to individual liberty that stands as the foundation of the American experiment. The constitution cannot accept the concept of a 'new normal' where the basic liberties of the people can be subordinated to open-ended emergency mitigation measures,” Stickman wrote."Rather, the Constitution sets certain lines that may not be crossed, even in an emergency. Actions taken by defendants crossed those lines. It is the duty of the court to declare those actions unconstitutional." 2007

A candid photo of former Vice President Joe Biden has been shared more than 100,000 times as the former running mate of President Obama considers his own presidential run.The photo was taken by Paul Equale, who posted it on Facebook on Friday afternoon. The photo is tagged at an AMC movie theater in the Georgetown nieghborhood of Washington, D.C."Joe Biden took his granddaughter to the movies in Georgetown last night," Equale wrote. "On his way out he stopped to speak w/ a homeless man. A bystander took this candid shot. Character is about what you do when no one is watching."Reports indicate that Biden appeared to write the man a note.Later, Equale posted that his Facebook post led to receiving media requests from "everywhere" and receiving more than 25,000 friend requests.The post also led to renewed cries for Biden to run for the Democratic nominee for President in 2020. Dozens of comments on the post called for Biden to give the presidency another shot.Biden declined to run for president in 2016, a decision he has said he since regrets.Alex Hider is a writer for the E.W. Scripps National Desk. Follow him on Twitter @alexhider. 1171

A California teacher was arrested Wednesday after a video posted to Reddit shows her cutting students' hair while singing the "Star-Spangled Banner."Margaret Gieszinger, 52, was arrested and changed with abandonment and neglect of children.According to NBC News, Gieszinger is a teacher at University Preparatory High School in Visalia, California. The video shows Gieszinger in a classroom, cutting chunks of hair from a male students' head and throwing it behind her as she sings the national anthem.After cutting the boys' hair, she threatens to cut other students' hair.The College of the Sequoias Chief of Police confirmed to NBC News that the video was the reason for the arrest.Gieszinger is currently being held in the Bob Wiley Detention Center in Tulare County, California on 0,000 bond. She has a court appearance scheduled for Friday.  898

A lawsuit against Harvard brought on behalf of Asian-American students who failed to gain admission goes to trial on Monday in one of the most consequential race cases in decades, with affirmative action policies across the country at stake.The lawsuit was crafted by conservative advocates who have long fought racial admissions practices that traditionally benefited African-American and Latino students. Their ultimate goal is to reverse the 1978 Supreme Court case that upheld admissions policies that consider the race of students for campus diversity.Parties on both sides expect the Supreme Court to eventually resolve the issue. And with President Donald Trump's two appointees, Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, the high court now has five conservative justices who may be inclined to reverse the landmark ruling.The challengers are led by Edward Blum, a conservative activist who has devised a series of claims against racial policies, including an earlier affirmative action lawsuit on behalf of Abigail Fisher against the University of Texas and several challenges to the 1965 Voting Rights Act.Justice Anthony Kennedy, the key vote in 2016 when the court last endorsed race-based admissions in the University of Texas case, was replaced by Kavanaugh earlier this month. Gorsuch succeeded the late Justice Antonin Scalia, who had opposed all affirmative action and criticized the University of Texas program, but died before that case was completed.The Students for Fair Admissions group Blum founded when he filed the Harvard case in November 2014 contends the university engages in unlawful "racial balancing" as it boosts the chances of admissions for blacks and Hispanics and lowers the chances for Asian Americans.Harvard's practices, the group says, are "the same kind of discrimination and stereotyping that it used to justify quotas on Jewish applicants in the 1920s and 1930s."That assertion has deeply resonated with some Asian Americans who fear they are held to a higher standard than other applicants to prestigious universities. Yet Asian-American advocates, representing a wide swath of backgrounds and educational experiences, have come in on both sides of the case.Some who back the lawsuit seek to end all consideration of race in admissions, while others, siding with Harvard, argue that universities should be able to consider race for campus diversity and that some Asian Americans, particularly those with ties to Southeast Asian countries, may have had fewer educational opportunities before applying to college.The NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund filed a brief on behalf of 25 Harvard student and alumni organizations comprising blacks, Latinos, Native Americans, Asian Americans and whites. The Legal Defense Fund calls the lawsuit an effort "to sow racial division" and emphasizes the Supreme Court's repeated endorsement of the 1978 case Regents of the University of California v. Bakke.Those subsequent rulings, however, turned on a single vote, either that of Kennedy or Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who retired in 2006.The Trump administration, which is separately scrutinizing of race-based admissions practices at Harvard through its Education and Justice departments based on a complaint from more than 60 Asian American groups, has backed Students for Fair Admissions.Harvard, the country's oldest institution of higher education, denies that it engages in racial balancing or limits Asian-American admissions. It defends its longstanding effort for racial diversity as part of the education mission and says admissions officers undertake a "whole-person evaluation" that includes academics, extracurricular activities, talents and personal qualities, as well as socioeconomic background and race.Since the case was first filed, both sides have mined similar statistical evidence and testimony but with sharply contrasting conclusions -- all of which will now be presented before US District Court Judge Allison Burroughs."Each party relies on its own expert reports to show the presence or absence of a negative effect of being Asian American on the likelihood of admission ... and claims that there is substantial -- or zero -- documentary and testimonial evidence of discriminatory intent," Burroughs said in an order last month rejecting requests from both sides to rule for each, respectively, before trial.The case was brought under Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, prohibiting racial discrimination at private institutions that receive federal funds.Burroughs, a 2014 appointee of President Barack Obama, has said she expects the trial to last about three weeks. Both sides will offer opening statements on Monday. 4719