中山痔疮会影响排便吗中山治疗痔疮有什么办法,中山肛门有硬物,中山大便表面带鲜血,中山百姓放心医院痔疮手术多少钱,中山pph术治痔疮费用,中山胃口疼 拉血,中山那家医院治疗内痔最好

President Donald Trump, Vice President Mike Pence and other political leaders on Wednesday denounced the suspicious packages sent to 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, President Barack Obama and CNN's New York bureau, among other locations.The White House called the attempted attacks "despicable.""The United States Secret Service and other law enforcement agencies are investigating and will take all appropriate actions to protect anyone threatened by these cowards," White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said in a statement.Responding to a tweet from Pence, who said the administration condemned the "despicable" actions and that "those responsible will be brought to justice," Trump said on Twitter, "I agree wholeheartedly!""This clearly is an act of terror attempting to undermine our free press and leaders of this country through acts of violence," New York Mayor Bill de Blasio said at an afternoon news conference about the package sent to CNN's office at the Time Warner Center in New York City.New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo echoed the mayor, saying, "Terrorism only works if you let it work. We will not allow these terrorist thugs to change the way we live our lives."National Counterterrorism Center spokesperson Maura Beard tells CNN that officials there have not yet concluded that there is a link to foreign terrorism with the suspicious packages.The Secret Service said Wednesday it intercepted two "suspicious packages" addressed to Obama and Clinton it discovered during "routine mail screening procedures" earlier this week.Pence said in his tweet he was "grateful for swift response" of the Secret Service, FBI and local law enforcement, who are investigating whether the packages intended for Obama and Clinton are connected to the package targeting major Democratic donor George Soros earlier this week."Let me be clear, we condemn these attempted acts of violence in the strongest possible terms," Pence said later, speaking at a campaign event in Pennsylvania.The President's family -- first lady Melania Trump, the President's daughter and adviser Ivanka Trump and sons Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump -- condemned the threats."These terrorizing acts are despicable, and anyone responsible will be held accountable to the fullest extent of the law," Sanders said in a statement.House Speaker Paul Ryan echoed Sanders' statement, saying that "those behind such reprehensible acts must be brought to justice.""We cannot tolerate any attempt to terrorize public figures," the Wisconsin Republican tweeted.House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, who was seriously wounded from a gunshot last summer, said the attempted attacks "are beyond criminal, they are acts of pure terror.""Violence and terror have no place in our politics or anywhere else in our society," the Louisiana Republican posted on Twitter. "I have experienced first-hand the effects of political violence, and am committed to using my voice to speak out against it wherever I can."Scalise added that this "cannot become the new normal."Republican Sen. Jeff Flake of Arizona, who was on the baseball field with Scalise during the 2017 shooting attack, warned that we are in "terrible times" and called for Americans to "tone down the rhetoric" on "both sides" of the aisle."We've got to tone it down. We've got to see people as opponents, but not enemies," Flake told CNN's Maria Santana outside the evacuated Time Warner Center on Wednesday morning.Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky too condemned the incidents in a statement from his office saying, "As we continue to learn more, Americans are united in gratitude for the first responders — the Secret Service, the Postal Service, and other law enforcement — who protect our leaders and public figures from such unconscionable acts."Asked whether discourse has contributed to increasing threats like the suspicious packages, Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch told CNN that there are "a lot of things" that have contributed to the rising political rhetoric, saying that "our society has become fairly complex."The Utah Republican suggested that people "ought to moderate their positions, both sides."Asked if that pertained to the President, who has labeled Democrats and media the enemy, Hatch said, "I don't see anything really wrong with the President. I think that he's in a tough position. He's getting attacked on all sides, so he ought to be able to express himself."Republican Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida was forceful in his response, saying that an "attack on an American who happens to be a Democrat, Republican or independent is an attack on America.""Some already giving in to temptation to react to this terror attack by either assigning blame for or rationalizing it," Rubio wrote on Twitter. "No sane or well intentioned person, no matter how partisan, would do this. It's either the work of a demented person or terror aimed at further dividing America."Democrats also called out the attempted violence."Once again, we are reminded of the heroism of America's first responders as they work to counter these attempted attacks," House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of California said.She added, "We will not allow them to diminish our commitment to building a brighter future for communities across America."On Twitter, Democratic Sens. Tim Kaine of Virginia, Clinton's running mate in 2016, and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts said the threats have "no place in our free and lawful society" and "no place in our democracy." 5516

President Donald Trump's immigration agenda was dealt another blow by federal courts Friday, when a federal judge largely blocked the Justice Department's efforts to punish sanctuary cities for a second time this year.US District Court Judge Harry D. Leinenweber agreed with the city of Chicago that the administration's new requirements for receiving a key law enforcement grant that hinged on immigration enforcement could cause "irreparable harm," adding that the city had shown a "likelihood of success" in its case that Attorney General Jeff Sessions exceeded his authority in requiring local jurisdictions to comply with the new standards.Leinenweber blocked the Justice Department from enforcing the new measures, which it introduced earlier this summer, meaning cities applying for the funds this year will not have to comply."The harm to the city's relationship with the immigrant community, if it should accede to the conditions, is irreparable," Leinenweber wrote. "Once such trust is lost, it cannot be repaired through an award of money damages."Friday's decision marked the second time this year a federal judge has blocked the Trump administration's efforts to force sanctuary cities to cooperate on immigration enforcement. A judge in San Francisco restricted a January executive order from Trump that threatened to block all federal funds to sanctuary cities -- a catchall term generally used to describe jurisdictions that have some policy of noncooperation with federal immigration enforcement.The administration has made such jurisdictions a key focus of its immigration agenda -- arguing that such policies are a public safety threat."By protecting criminals from immigration enforcement, cities and states with 'so-called' sanctuary policies make their communities less safe and undermine the rule of law," Justice Department spokesperson Devin O'Malley said. "The Department of Justice will continue to fully enforce existing law and to defend lawful and reasonable grant conditions that seek to protect communities and law enforcement."In a tweet, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel heralded the judge's ruling as a victory."This is not just a victory for Chicago. This is a win for cities across the US that supported our lawsuit vs Trump DOJ defending our values," Emanuel tweeted.At issue in the case was a new salvo the administration opened against sanctuary cities in July, when Sessions announced that going forward, funds under the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program, or Byrne JAG, would be conditioned upon two new requirements: allowing federal immigration authorities access to local detention facilities and providing the Department of Homeland Security at least 48 hours' advance notice before local officials release an undocumented immigrant wanted by federal authorities.Those are some of the most controversial requests by the federal government regarding local law enforcement. A number of cities and police chiefs around the country argue that cooperating with such requests could jeopardize the trust police need to have with local communities, and in some cases could place departments in legal gray areas. The Trump administration, on the other hand, has accused sanctuary cities of putting politics over public safety.Leinenweber temporarily blocked both requirements on a nationwide basis Friday, explaining that the federal government does not have the authority to place new immigration-related conditions on the grants, as Congress did not grant that authority in setting up the program.Emanuel sued Sessions over the new requirements in August, saying they would "federalize local jails and police stations, mandate warrantless detentions in order to investigate for federal civil infractions, sow fear in local immigrant communities, and ultimately make the people of Chicago less safe."The conditions in July came after a federal judge in April restricted a January executive order that sought to block federal funds going to sanctuary cities to the JAG grants exclusively and existing requirements on them. After the administration failed in its attempt to get that injunction lifted, Sessions announced the new measures.The Justice Department did get one win, however. Leinenweber did side with the Trump administration on preserving an existing requirement for the grants -- certifying compliance with a federal law that mandates local jurisdictions communicate immigration status information to the federal government -- which was put in place originally by the Obama administration.Virtually all jurisdictions in the US say they are already in compliance with that measure.The-CNN-Wire 4664

Ray Chavez, the nation's oldest survivor of the attack on Pearl Harbor, has died, the White House says. He was 106.The veteran passed away peacefully in his sleep Wednesday, CNN affiliate KFMB reported, citing a family statement.Chavez was a quartermaster stationed in Pearl Harbor at the time of the Japanese attack on Hawaii that launched America's entry into World War II in 1941.He lived in Poway, California, with his family but gained prominence in recent years as he traveled around the country, attending memorial services and commemorations. Earlier this year, he met with President Donald Trump in the Oval Office ahead of Memorial Day."Ray was honored to have served his country and to fight among heroes and loved meeting his fellow comrades," his family said in a statement. "He cherished his time going to talk to the kids at schools because he doesn't want them to forget Pearl Harbor."As his health declined in recent months, he wished to be buried at the Miramar National Cemetery, the San Diego Union-Tribune reported. 1044

President-elect Joe Biden’s proposal to forgive ,000 of federal student debt as COVID relief could erase loan balances for 15 million borrowers and reduce balances for millions more, according to federal data.Broad student loan forgiveness could affect 45.3 million borrowers with federal student loan debt who owe a total of .54 trillion to the government. Wiping out ,000 each — as Biden calls for — would result in up to 9 billion canceled.Seth Frotman, executive director of the Student Borrower Protection Center, says removing the student loans “albatross around their financial lives” could mean the difference for consumers who aspire to buy a house, save for retirement or start a business.“Student loan borrowers across the spectrum — old, young, urban, rural, high-balance, low-balance, Black, white — are hurting with their student loans, and that was before COVID even hit,” Frotman says.For now, Biden’s proposal is just an amount, with no details to answer questions about which loans might be canceled, whether forgiven amounts would be taxed and if borrowers would have defaulted loans removed from their credit history. It also faces huge hurdles politically.But here’s how ,000 in forgiveness could affect some categories of borrowers.For 15 million borrowers, a slate wiped cleanMore than a third of federal borrowers could see their balances fall to zero with ,000 in debt cancelation. Among those, 7.9 million owe less than ,000 in student loans and 7.4 million owe between ,000 and ,000, according to federal data.These are also the borrowers most likely to default on their loans. Over half of those who default (52%) have less than ,000 of federal undergraduate debt, according to an analysis of federal data by The Institute for College Access and Success, or TICAS.That’s because those with lower debt amounts often have not completed their schooling, so they don’t reap the benefits of a degree that leads to a better paying job. Among those who default, 49% did not complete their program of study, TICAS found.Default has severe consequences: It can sabotage credit scores and trigger collection efforts that can include seizure of tax refunds and Social Security payments.Many of these borrowers are current on their payments. For them, forgiveness could help, but it might not be much of a boon to the overall economy, says Betsy Mayotte, president and founder of The Institute of Student Loan Advisors.“If you owe ,000 and your payment is 0 — and that’s a lot of money to a lot of people — but you all of a sudden don’t have to pay 0 a month, I don’t see that 0 being put toward something that will stimulate the economy,” Mayotte says.For 19 million borrowers, some breathing roomThe typical student leaves school with around ,000 in debt, according to TICAS, an amount that can grow quickly with interest if students pause payments or go on repayment plans that allow them to make lower payments.Nearly 19 million borrowers owe between ,000 and ,000 in federal student loans, according to federal data. Without detailed execution plans from the Biden team, it’s trickier to say how these borrowers would be affected.For example, cancellation might not reduce the amount they pay each month, but it could draw their end date closer and lower the total amount they’d pay overall, due to interest. Or it might wipe out one loan completely but leave payments on others intact.For 11 million borrowers, a drop in the bucketHigher income households, as a whole, are the ones that hold the most debt.The high debt/high earner correlation makes sense because those who make more money tend to have more advanced education, according to findings from Georgetown University Center for Education and the Workforce. To get those advanced degrees, students rack up debt in the process.More than 8 million people owe the government between ,000 and 0,000 in student loans. An additional 3.2 million borrowers owe more than 0,000 on their federal loans, data show.A borrower repaying 0,000 on the standard federal 10-year plan at 5% interest would pay off the loans 15 months early if ,000 were forgiven.Forgiveness is still a big maybeThere’s also the question of how loan forgiveness could move forward: Will it be through Congress or executive action or not at all?“If anything can be done by executive action, [forgiveness] could happen very quickly,” says Robert Kelchen, associate professor of higher education at Seton Hall University. “I’m just not sure whether forgiving debt would withstand legal scrutiny.”Experts say any executive action could face lawsuits or be subject to judicial review, which would leave the fate of an order for forgiveness in the hands of the Supreme Court.“There are a lot of conservative judges, so I can imagine that many of them could be hostile to the policy,” says Wesley Whistle, senior advisor for policy and strategy, higher education at the public policy think tank New America.Mayotte said she is doubtful borrowers will see straight forgiveness since the reach of this type of pandemic relief wouldn’t be as broad as, say, providing supplemental unemployment or propping up small businesses.Forgiveness won’t happen before payments restartBiden proposed his forgiveness measure as part of COVID-related relief, but experts say there’s an even more pressing student loan concern that will come to a head before Biden starts his term — the end of the payment pause for student loan borrowers, which is set to sunset after Dec. 31.Doug Webber, associate professor of economics at Temple University, says he’s worried about the pitfalls of going “zero to 60” in one day with reinstating loan payments for a population that isn’t ready.“Once you give people a benefit, it’s always harder to take it back,” Webber says.The payment pause, known as a forbearance, has been in effect since March as part of the first coronavirus relief bill. President Donald Trump extended the relief through the end of the year, but neither the outgoing or incoming administration has committed to extending it again.While borrowers await the fate of forgiveness, they should contact their servicer to get enrolled in an income-driven repayment plan if they won’t be able to afford their payments. These plans set payments at a portion of their income and can be as low as zero if they’re unemployed.NerdWallet writer Ryan Lane contributed additional reporting to this story.More From NerdWallet10+ Student Loan Forgiveness Programs That Discharge LoansFederal Loans Are Paused Until 2021 — Should You Pay Anyway?Income-Driven Repayment: Is It Right for You?Anna Helhoski is a writer at NerdWallet. Email: anna@nerdwallet.com. Twitter: @AnnaHelhoski. 6765

President Donald Trump weighed in on if MMA commentator Joe Rogan should be a moderator during a debate between him and Democratic nominee Joe Biden.Former MMA fighter Ted Kennedy tweeted out that he and Rogan discussed the presidential debates on Rogan's podcast "The Joe Rogan Experience." 299