中山为什么大便的时候有血(中山大便时肛门疼挂什么科) (今日更新中)

Facing backlash, President Donald Trump informally announced outside of the White House on Thursday that his administration would continue funding its share for Special Olympics, mere hours after his Education Secretary Betsy DeVos defended the cuts for a third day in a row. "I've overridden my people, we're funding the Special Olympics," Trump said on Thursday. Trump's proposed budget still needs congressional approval. On Tuesday, DeVos met with lawmakers, and defended the Trump Administration for proposing nearly million in cuts to Special Olympics.DeVos was questioned on the subject by Rep. Mark Pocan, D-Wis., who took issue with DeVos not knowing the number of participants in Special Olympics.“Let me just say that I think Special Olympics is an awesome organization, one that is well supported by the philanthropic sector as well,” DeVos said.According to 2017 figures from Special Olympics, the organization generated nearly 0 million in annual revenue. The majority of its budget comes from donations from individuals and corporations, which totals million a year.DeVos then defended the move as one to save the government money.“We had to make some difficult decisions," she said.A number of prominent celebrities decried DeVos' testimony later on Tuesday."Terrible. We should support athletes with disabilities, not rip away their opportunities," Chelsea Clinton tweeted.On Thursday, before a Senate committee, DeVos once again defended the budget cuts to Special Olympics. "I love Special Olympics myself, I have given a portion of my salary to Special Olympics. I hope all of this debate encourages lots of private contributions to Special Olympics," DeVos said "Let's not use disabled children in a twisted way for your political narrative. That is just disgusting and it's shameful, and I think we should move on from that."While DeVos was delivering testimony, Trump reached the conclusion that the government should provide funding for Special Olympics. "I just told my people, I want to fund the Special Olympics, and I just authorized a funding of the Special Olympics," he said. "I've been to the Special Olympics, I think it's incredible."According to Special Olympics, its mission is "to provide year-round sports training and athletic competition in a variety of Olympic-type sports for children and adults with intellectual disabilities, giving them continuing opportunities to develop physical fitness, demonstrate courage, experience joy and participate in a sharing of gifts, skills and friendship with their families, other Special Olympics athletes and the community." 2628

Former White House communications director Hope Hicks is not responding to any questions about her time at the White House in a closed-door congressional interview Wednesday, angering Democrats who say they expect to go to court to force her to answer their questions.White House attorneys are objecting to all questions related to the White House, Democrats say, all the way down to where Hicks sat in the West Wing. But Hicks is answering questions about her time on the Trump campaign, which is not covered by executive privilege.The White House is not asserting executive privilege, but arguing that Hicks has absolute immunity from testifying as a senior adviser to President Donald Trump. Democrats called that legal claim "ridiculous" and "absurd" as they signaled they will likely challenge it in court."There is no such thing as absolute immunity that prevents someone from answering questions about any subject related to their work in an administration. It just doesn't exist," said Rep. David Cicilline, a Rhode Island Democrat. "This is an ongoing effort by the president of the United States to obstruct, to prevent Congress from finding the facts and behaving as if he's above the law."House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler told reporters as he exited the interview, which is still ongoing, that she was answering some questions."Ms. Hicks is answering questions put to her and the interview continues," the New York Democrat said. He declined to say what his next steps would be.Although many questions from Democrats were not answered, Hicks did provide some responses, such as when she was asked about her House Intelligence Committee testimony from 2018 in which she said that she sometimes told white lies on behalf of the President.Under Democratic questioning, Hicks told the panel that she never lied about anything "substantial," according to multiple sources. Hicks said that the lies were about small matters such as scheduling, which was similar to her previous testimony.Hicks' appearance is the first time a member of Trump's inner circle is appearing before a Democratic committee investigating the President, which comes as Nadler's committee wrestles with whether to begin an impeachment inquiry.Trump weighed in on Hicks' interview on Twitter Wednesday, accusing Democrats of "extreme presidential harassment.""The Dems are very unhappy with the Mueller Report, so after almost 3 years, they want a Redo, or Do Over. This is extreme Presidential Harassment," Trump tweeted. "They gave Crooked Hillary's people complete Immunity, yet now they bring back Hope Hicks."Republicans criticized Democrats for trying to interview Hicks in the first place. Georgia Rep. Doug Collins, the ranking Republican on the committee, called Hicks' appearance merely an attempt from Democrats to generate a "press release." And Rep. Steve Chabot, an Ohio Republican, called the interview a "total waste of time" as he left the room.The White House's objections to Democrats' questions were expected, as White House Counsel Pat Cipollone sent the House panel a letter Tuesday evening arguing that Hicks was immune from testifying about her time at the White House as one of the President's senior advisers, citing executive privilege protections."Because of this constitutional immunity, and in order to protect the prerogatives of the Office of President, the President has directed Ms. Hicks not to answer questions before the Committee relating to the time of her services as a senior adviser to the President," Cipollone wrote.The White House's stance means that Nadler, a Democrat from New York, could end up in court to try to enforce the subpoena of Hicks, just as the committee says it will do to compel the testimony of former White House Counsel Don McGahn."If she doesn't testify, then Jerry Nadler will, I assume, unleash the full power of the House Judiciary Committee and the United States House of Representatives that could include, but is not limited to, contempt," said Rep. Hakeem Jeffries of New York, the Democratic caucus chairman, who sits on the Judiciary Committee.Asked Tuesday about the White House instructing Hicks not to answer questions, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said: "Obstruction of justice."But Democrats plan to ask Hicks about more than just her time at the White House. Judiciary Committee aides said they also intend to ask one of Trump's longest-serving campaign aides about her knowledge of the payments that were made during the 2016 campaign to silence women alleging affairs with Trump.The decision to focus on the hush-money payments underscores that the committee is broadening the focus of its probe into the President -- which Nadler has said the panel is undertaking before a decision is made on impeachment, to go beyond the episodes outlined in the Mueller report.Still, the committee is eager to speak to Hicks about her time at the White House. Committee aides said there were five episodes Mueller documented that they wanted to press Hicks about, including the firing of then-national security adviser Michael Flynn, the firing of then-FBI Director James Comey, former Attorney General Jeff Sessions' recusal from the Mueller probe and Trump's efforts to dismiss Mueller from overseeing the probe and to curtail the special counsel's investigation.The committee plans to release a transcript of Hicks' interview afterward, potentially within 48 hours. The Judiciary Committee wants to bring in witnesses to talk about the Mueller report publicly, but so far it has held only open hearings with experts."I hope eventually she and all witnesses will be in the public," said Rep. Madeleine Dean, a Pennsylvania Democrat on the committee. "It's our job. I really believe it's our job to get the facts before the American public. ... The best, most effective way to do our oversight is to make sure it's in the public."Also looming: whether the committee will interview Mueller himself publicly -- and if it will need a subpoena to do so. Nadler declined to comment on those negotiations Tuesday.Republicans argued that Hicks' interview is proof that Democrats' claims of White House stonewalling are overblown."Judiciary Democrats have been their own barrier to information by choosing to escalate instead of negotiate at every turn," said Rep. Doug Collins of Georgia, the top Republican on the Judiciary panel. "The White House has offered to negotiate with Democrats for documents that Ms. Hicks can't provide, and the committee could probably have heard from her earlier if Democrats didn't take a scorched-earth approach to pursuing information."Hicks has previously testified behind closed doors before the House and Senate Intelligence committees, and she left her job at the White House the day after appearing before the House panel. At those interviews, Hicks also did not discuss her time at the White House, Cipollone wrote.Democrats have argued that Hicks cannot claim executive privilege when she spoke to the special counsel's office about the same topics, but the Trump administration has countered that being interviewed in an executive branch investigation does not waive privilege for a legislative branch probe. That question is also one that's likely to end up in court for a number of witnesses the panel is seeking to interview.One potential point of contention is the presidential transition before Trump took office. Although Democrats -- and some Republicans, like former Rep. Trey Gowdy of South Carolina -- have argued that executive privilege does not apply to the transition, Cipollone argued in his letter Tuesday that Hicks' transition work would likely be privileged because it involved decisions that would be made after Trump was inaugurated. 7754

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Thursday the House was proceeding with articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump."Today I am asking our chairman to proceed with articles of impeachment," Pelosi said on Capitol Hill. "The President leaves us no choice but to act because he is trying to corrupt once again the election for his own benefit."The speaker's announcement is the clearest signal yet that Democrats are moving 444

Former Penn State football player Isaiah Humphries has filed a federal lawsuit, claiming that other members of Penn State’s football team hazed him and the coaching staff was aware of it, ESPN reported. Humphries’ suit is against Penn State head coach James Franklin and former teammate Damion Barber. Humphries claimed that other teammates, including Barber, Micah Parsons, Yetur Gross-Matos, Jesse Luketa brought on the hazing, ESPN reported. Among the allegations, ESPN reported that Humphries alleged that players “facilitated a campaign to harass and haze underclassmen” on the team. Humphries claimed that a member of the team said "I am going to Sandusky you."Jerry Sandusky was a former Penn State coach convicted of sexually abusing children while on university property. Many university officials, including former head coach Joe Paterno were fired in the wake of the Sandusky scandal.Penn State released a statement to ESPN noting that no charges were filed. "The university has established processes in place for responding to claims of potential misconduct. In accordance with our processes, the Office of Sexual Misconduct Prevention and Response and the Office of Student Conduct carried out investigations of the plaintiff's claims independent from Intercollegiate Athletics," the school said. "In addition, Penn State police investigated related allegations and forwarded the results of that investigation to the Office of the Centre County District Attorney. The DA reviewed the case and decided that no charges would be pursued."To read more of ESPN’s report, click 1597

For Afghanstan war veteran Matthew McDonell of Wisconsin, Dec. 24, 2012 will be a day that changed his life in many ways."Christmas Eve we lost one of our teammates in a fire fight," 36-year-old Army Specialist McDonell said.That teammate was Sergeant Enrique Mondragon. Following his death on Christmas day, his squadron participated in a final roll call. A traditional military salute to a fallen soldier. It's a moment that will live with McDonell forever."It kind of starts going through your head why not me."Since then, things haven't been completely the same for McDonell. Holiday's became tough to celebrate. 628

来源：资阳报