中山怎样治大便有血中山肛泰肛肠医院贵不贵,中山医院割痔疮多少钱,中山拉粑粑拉出了血怎么回事,中山肛门流血是怎么回事呢,去中山华都医院做几路车,中山肛裂治疗医院排名,中山华都肛肠医院评论如何

The jury in Bill Cosby's retrial found the TV icon guilty of all three counts of aggravated indecent assault on Thursday for drugging and sexually assaulting Andrea Constand at his home in a Philadelphia suburb in 2004.The 80-year-old comedian faces up to 10 years in prison on each count, but would likely serve them concurrently. A sentencing hearing has not yet been scheduled, and he remains out on bail.Cosby did not have an audible reaction to his conviction, but erupted shortly afterward. Minutes after the verdict, prosecutors asked the judge to revoke Cosby's bail because they say he is a flight risk and has a private plane.Cosby, who did not testify in the trial and has sat quietly throughout the proceedings, then stood up and yelled in a loud, booming voice: "He doesn't have a plane, you asshole."Judge Steven O'Neill ruled that Cosby should not leave his Pennsylvania home, and that he would need to be fitted with a GPS tracking device.What the case was aboutThe case against Cosby centered on testimony from Constand, a former employee with Temple University women's basketball team. She testified that Cosby, a powerful trustee at Temple, drugged her and sexually assaulted her when she visited his home to ask for career advice.Cosby's defense team argued that their interaction was consensual. Constand is a con artist, they argued, who wanted a piece of Cosby's fortune.After the trial concluded, Constand left through a side door in the courtroom, walking into a hallway with her arms around two women and a huge smile on her face.The case is the first celebrity sexual assault trial since the #MeToo movement began last fall, and as such, represents a test of how the cultural movement will translate into a courtroom arena.In closing arguments, defense attorney Kathleen Bliss positioned Cosby's legal team as standing up against "witch hunts, lynchings (and) McCarthyism."Attorney Gloria Allred, who represents many of the women who have accused Cosby of misconduct, said this was the happiest she had been with a verdict in 42 years."We are so happy that finally we can say, women are believed. And not only on #MeToo but in a court of law where they are under oath, where they testified truthfully, where they are attacked," Allred said. "After all is said and done, women were finally believed."Cosby's attorney, Tom Mesereau, said he plans to appeal "very strongly.""We are very disappointed by the verdict. We don't think Mr. Cosby's guilty of anything and the fight is not over," he said.The guilty verdict is a remarkable turn of events for the man once known as "America's Dad." Cosby was a groundbreaking actor and the first African-American performer to win an Emmy for his role on "I Spy." His portrayal of the sweater-loving Cliff Huxtable on "The Cosby Show" was one of the first mainstream TV shows to feature a black upper-middle class family.Previous trial ended in a hung juryAlthough dozens of women have accused Cosby of sexual misconduct, only Constand's allegations resulted in criminal charges."I feel like I'm dreaming," Lili Bernard, who has accused Cosby of assault, said afterward. "I feel like my faith in humanity is restored."The verdict came a year after Cosby's previous trial ended in a mistrial, as a different panel of jurors said they were deadlocked and could not unanimously agree on a verdict. This jury began deliberating Wednesday around 11 a.m., and worked for more than 14 hours over two days to reach the verdict.At the retrial, five other Cosby accusers testified as "prior bad acts" witnesses and said that Cosby had drugged and assaulted them decades ago. Prosecutors said these women's stories showed that Cosby had a pattern in his actions and did not make a one-time mistake in his interactions with Constand.The-CNN-Wire 3806

The polling industry has a lot on the line heading into Tuesday's midterm election.Critics blamed pollsters when voters were caught off guard by Donald Trump's election in 2016. Old cries of "don't believe the polls" became fevered shouts. And the president has encouraged distrust by calling certain polls "fake" and claiming they are used to "suppress" the vote.Although there is no evidence to suggest that is true, there is persistent and widespread suspicion about polling, according to, you guessed it, a McClatchy-Marist poll. And it exists on both sides, albeit in different forms."I think Democrats may have felt let down by the polls but don't think it was an intentional error. I think many Republicans believe the polling errors of 2016 were intentional," GOP pollster and co-founder of Echelon Insights Kristen Soltis Anderson told CNN.So can the industry regain trust?Since 2016 there's been a whole lot of self-reflection in the polling world. Pollsters have tweaked their techniques; pundits have become more cautious when talking about polls; and news outlets have conducted some fascinating experiments.On Tuesday, all the efforts are being put to the test."Some pollsters would disagree with this, but the way that the public generally views whether or not polling is accurate is whether or not it gets the results of the election right," CNN analyst Harry Enten said on "Reliable Sources.""I'm not necessarily sure that's fair," Enten said, "but I do think that there is more pressure on pollsters this year to get it right given the president's rhetoric and given what happened in 2016."Many, though not all, 2016 polls underestimated support for Trump. This effect was particularly pronounced at the state level, where there were embarrassing "misses," showing Hillary Clinton with safe leads in states Trump actually carried.Most national polls accurately showed Clinton winning the popular vote. But reporters and commentators made lots of mistakes in their interpretations of the polls. Readers and viewers did, too. Many people discounted the margin and other factors and made faulty assumptions that Trump would lose to Clinton.There were other problems, too. Predictive features on websites gained lots of traffic before the election but caused lots of consternation afterward. HuffPost's model infamously showed Clinton with a 98 percent chance of winning. "We blew it," the site admitted afterward.But just as importantly, HuffPost's Natalie Jackson tried to explain why.Other news outlets have also tried to be more transparent and remind voters of what polls cannot convey.In special elections since 2016, Democrats have repeatedly outperformed polls of their races.The top example was the Virginia governors' race. "Ralph Northam was favored by three points. He ended up winning by nine," Enten said.But past outcomes are not an indicator of future results."I think many pollsters and forecasters have tried to be much more intentional about explaining uncertainty and being humble about what data can and can't tell us," Anderson said. "Because I think there was a big sense that in 2016, there was more certainty conveyed than may have been justified by the available data."So political pros and reporters are communicating poll results differently this time. Time magazine's Molly Ball, who has a no-predictions rule for herself, said that even people who do make predictions are adding more caveats: There's "less of the, 'Well, the needle shows this' and more of, 'Here's what it doesn't show, here's what we should always remember can happen about probabilities.'"Early voting has been explosive in the midterms, indicating above-average enthusiasm among both Democrats and Republicans. Pollsters have to make assumptions about turnout when contacting "likely voters," and this is a difficult election to forecast.The 2018 electorate is "a universe that doesn't exist yet," Democratic pollster Margie Omero said. "I mean, people don't know whether they're going to vote, some people."They may tell a pollster that they're sure to vote, but never make it to the ballot box. Or they might change who they're voting for.Conversely, certain subsets of voters may have a big impact on the final results without really showing up in the pre-election polling. If pollsters assume relatively low youth turnout, but lots of young people vote for the first time, that could cause big surprises in certain races.The vast majority of people who are called by pollsters decline to participate, so the researchers have to make a huge number of phone calls, bend over backwards to reach a representative sample of people, and weight their results accordingly.Some polls are higher quality than others. Most news outlets tend to favor live interviewers, as opposed to computerized systems, and a mix of landline and cell phone calls. But some outlets are wading into web-based polling. CNN's polling standards preclude reporting on web polls.This fall The New York Times pulled back the curtain by conducting "live polling" and publishing the results in real time, call by call. Working with Siena College, the surveyors made 2,822,889 calls and completed 96 polls of House and Senate races."We wanted to demystify polling for people," said Nate Cohn of The Times' Upshot blog."From our point of view, it's almost a miracle how accurate polls usually are, given all the challenges," Cohn said in an interview with CNN.He emphasized that polls are "very fuzzy things." And the real-time polling showed this to the public. The researchers sought to interview about 500 people for each race that was examined.In Iowa's fourth congressional district, for example, 14,636 calls resulted in 423 interviews.The results showed the incumbent, far-right congressman Steve King, with 47% support, and his Democratic challenger J.D. Scholten with 42%.The Times characterized this as a "slight edge" for King, with lots of room for error. "The margin of sampling error on the overall lead is 10 points, roughly twice as large as the margin for a single candidate's vote share," the Times explained on its website.Cohn's final pre-election story noted that "even modest late shifts among undecided voters or a slightly unexpected turnout could significantly affect results."That's the kind of language that lots of polling experts are incorporating into their stories and live shots, especially in the wake of the 2016 election."With polling, you never actually get to the truth," Cohn said. "You inch towards it, and you think you end up within plus or minus 5 points of it at the end."As Enten put it, "polls are tools," not meant to be perfect. But that message needs to be reinforced through the news media. 6753

The production company behind the American version of the Russian state-funded network RT has officially filed as a foreign agent with the Department of Justice.T&R Productions LLC formally registered on November 10 as an agent of ANO TV-Novosti, described in the forms as a non-governmental organization "under Russian Federation law," which has principal "responsibility for creating a TV network that will be competitive with other TV networks operating around the world." The DOJ identified ANO TV-Novosti as the "Russian government entity responsible for the worldwide broadcasts of the RT Network"In its announcement, the DOJ said T&R Productions LLC "has operated studios for RT, hired and paid all U.S.-based RT employees, and produced English-language programming for RT, which is both shown on cable networks across the United States and available on RT's website."The DOJ announced the registration and published the forms on Monday. The National Security Division's FARA Registration Unit is reviewing T&R's filings for sufficiency, the DOJ said."Americans have a right to know who is acting in the United States to influence the U.S. government or public on behalf of foreign principals," Acting Assistant Attorney General for National Security Dana J. Boente said in a statement on Monday. "The Department of Justice is committed to enforcing FARA and expects compliance with the law by all entities engaged in specified activities on behalf of any foreign principal, regardless of its nationality."The filing comes after weeks of public pronouncements and increasing tension between Russia and the U.S. over media outlets in the two countries. RT said after initially skipping its October deadline to register under FARA, they were forced to file or their employees could face imprisonment and have their assets seized. While this is technically true under the law, harsh enforcements under Foreign Agents Registration Act are rare, experts say.The DOJ's registration request has prompted Russian officials to retaliate by threatening to enforce harsher restrictions against American news organizations operating in Russia, especially government-funded outlets such as Radio Free Europe and its television sister network Current Time.The filing was made under news director Mikhail Solodovnikov, a former reporter for a Russian TV outlet who said in the forms that he is a U.S. citizen by marriage. He listed his salary as 0,000 a year. He is the sole member and owner over the LLC and produces the various shows for ANO TV-Novosti, according to the filing.Solodovnikov disputed the need for the FARA registration in the filing."The production of shows remains under the independent editorial control of registrant," he wrote. "Registrant respectfully disagrees that FARA should apply."T&R confirms in the paperwork that ANO TV-Novosti is financed by a foreign entity, but the production company also said on the forms that it was not "sufficiently aware" of who controls or funds the NGO.In the filing, Solodovnikov wrote that he does not see RT as political actors, saying that the "primary purpose of T&R Productions LLC is to produce news, talk show, and entertainment programs that are designed merely to inform, not influence. Programs produced cover a broad range of news and talk show topics, reflect balance regarding commentary, and are not aimed to primarily benefit any foreign government or political party."RT was singled out in a January intelligence community report for the impact it may have had on the 2016 U.S. election. The report said RT "conducts strategic messaging for [the] Russian government" and "seeks to influence politics, [and] fuel discontent in the U.S." The report also mentioned a separate Russian-government-controlled website Sputnik as "another government-funded outlet producing pro-Kremlin radio and online content."Federal investigators are also reportedly looking into whether Russian government-funded outlets such as RT and Sputnik were part of Russia's influence campaign aimed at the 2016 presidential election. Yahoo News has separately reported that the FBI interviewed a former Sputnik correspondent about his work at the website.Russian government officials, including President Vladimir Putin said they'd take a "tit for tat" measure against American outlets in Russia in retaliation for the pressure on RT. Last week Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said that new action against American outlets would come this week. 4546

The man accused of killing 22 people and wounding two dozen more at a Walmart in Texas is expected to be reindicted Thursday as he faces another murder charge in the mass shooting that targeted Mexicans, prosecutors said.Patrick Crusius of Allen, Texas, is currently being held without bond on one count of capital murder of multiple people under Texas state law. The 21-year-old has also been charged with several federal hate crimes related to the shooting, according to a 90-count indictment unsealed in February.District Attorney Jaime Esparza said the latest murder charge will account for 36-year-old Guillermo “Memo” Garcia, who died nine months after the Aug. 3 massacre in the Texas border of El Paso that’s considered one of the deadliest attacks on Latinos in recent U.S. history. Esparza said Crusius will also face more counts in relation to the dozens of people injured in the shooting. The new charges will be added to the indictment prior to the grand jury’s term ending on June 30, Esparza said.“We’re reindicting the defendant to include the additional death and to include all of those injured in the Walmart shooting in order to give the next DA all of their options,” Esparza added. “We just want to cover all our bases.”The upcoming reindictment comes more than 10 months after the mass shooting in the majority Latino and Hispanic city federal prosecutors say was sparked by militant racism. They have said Crusius carried out the attack to scare Latinos into leaving the U.S., a plot they allege he outlined in a racist screed published online before the attack.More than 20 people survived the shooting and suffered from injuries. Some underwent surgery, and one remains in the hospital. Hundreds more have suffered psychological trauma either because they were present or because a loved one was wounded, according to local officials.Esparza, who’s set to retire after 28 years in office, said he hopes that the added charges will help provide continuity in the case and eventually lead to justice should the DA succeeding him decide to pursue the state case against Crusius.Voters will pick a new DA in a runoff election on July 14th. It’s one of several factors that will help answer some legal and financial questions, including the trial’s start date and location.The Department of Justice will prosecute on a parallel track with Texas officials. Crusius already faces the death penalty on a state capital murder charge to which he pleaded not guilty last year. 2499

The Oklahoma State Supreme Court will hear a lawsuit appeal to enforce safety measures at President Donald Trump's rally on Saturday.Tulsa attorney Clark Brewster will make a court appearance before the Oklahoma Supreme Court on Thursday by phone at 3 p.m., according to court records.Earlier this week, a judge denied a lawsuit from the Tulsa law firm to enforce masks and social distancing at President Trump's rally.Attorneys Brewster and Paul DeMuro filed the suit claiming the rally will endanger the public's health.They argued coronavirus cases in the city of Tulsa and the state of Oklahoma increased since June 1. Despite the increase, the Trump rally is bringing thousands of people into an indoor arena."All credible, qualified medical experts agree that this type of mass-gathering indoor event creates the greatest possible risk of community-wide viral transmission," said the law firm.The lawsuit aimed to enforce the use of face masks and social distancing for all guests and employees, abiding by the restrictions the State of Oklahoma has put in place.The "Make America Great Again" rally is planned for Saturday, June 20 at the BOK Center with overflow audiences going to the Cox Convention Center.The BOK Center released the following statement: 1272