和田男人性功能怎么样提高(和田那个治疗妇科专业) (今日更新中)

The city of Asheville, North Carolina, released "disturbing, difficult to watch" videos from nine body-worn cameras related to the beating and tasing of a man who was suspected of jaywalking, the city said.One video from an officer on the scene shows Asheville police officer Christopher Hickman wrap his arms around the man's neck from behind as they attempt to subdue him.The footage provides greater insight into the August 2017 arrest of Johnnie Jermaine Rush, the man beaten, choked and tased by an Asheville police officer who suspected him of jaywalking.Hickman, 31, was removed from patrol duty a day after the incident. He resigned from the department in January, the same day that he was to be terminated, according to a timeline of the case released by the city council.Video of the arrest recorded by Hickman's body camera was published by the Asheville Citizen-Times on February 28, setting off outrage in the western North Carolina city. The newspaper has not revealed how it obtained the video.Hickman was taken into custody on March 8 and charged with one count each of assault by strangulation, assault inflicting serious injury and communicating threats, the city said.CNN telephoned and emailed Hickman's attorney on Monday afternoon but has not heard back from him.Nine videos releasedIn one of the videos taken after the use of force, Hickman speaks to a supervisor on the scene and admits to using the taser to punch the man in the face several times."I hit him in the face as if it was a club like three times. That was effective," Hickman says. "That's what happened to his left side, I punched him in the face with it about as hard as I could."A Buncombe County Superior Court Judge granted the city's petition to release the video, which was made public Monday at 2 p.m. The city asked to release the videos "in the interest of transparency," the city said on its website."This incident has created a loss of trust within the community, particularly among people of color. The City of Asheville understands that there is substantial work to do to restore the public's trust," the city said.Rush initially was charged with second-degree trespassing and resisting a public officer. He filed a complaint with police the day he was arrested alleging Hickman used excessive force.Police Chief Tammy Hooper watched the body camera footage and ordered Hickman off the street and told him to turn in his badge and gun, according to a timeline from the city.The district attorney and Asheville police agreed to dismiss the charges against Rush in September after watching the body camera footage, according to documents from the City Council.What Hickman's video showedThat video begins as Hickman and his partner stop Rush, then 32, for allegedly jaywalking in the early morning hours of August 25, 2017. After some initial words are exchanged, Hickman moves to arrest Rush, who then flees on foot."(He) thinks it's funny," Hickman is heard saying as he chases Rush. "You know what's funny is you're gonna get f---ed up hardcore."The officers catch Rush and tackle him to the ground. As Rush is being restrained on the ground, Hickman punches him in the head several times, shoots him with a stun gun and puts his hand around Rush's neck."I can't breathe! I can't breathe!" Rush repeatedly yells. "Help! Help!"Later in the video, Hickman speaks with another officer on the scene."I beat the s--- out of his head," Hickman says. "Not gonna lie about that."The ACLU of North Carolina was one of a number of organizations and residents that criticized the officer's actions."There is no excuse for what happened to Johnnie Rush," the ACLU of North Carolina said in a tweet. "Police must protect and serve everyone, regardless of race. Instead, a Black man gets beaten, tased, and choked over jaywalking. That's right, jaywalking."Asheville Mayor Esther Manheimer apologized last month to Rush in a statement on behalf of the City Council."The City Council and I immediately contacted city administration to express our outrage at the treatment of Mr. Rush and our outrage of not being informed about the actions of APD officers," Manheimer wrote. "We will have accountability and, above all, transparency." 4269

The entertainment world is still reeling from the loss of Chadwick Boseman, who died on Friday at the age of 43. Boseman had reportedly been privately fighting colon cancer since 2016, meaning some of his most iconic roles — including those in films like Black Panther, Marshall and 21 Bridges — were likely filmed between grueling chemo treatments.In the face of such an insurmountable loss, doctors and medical professionals hope that Boseman's cancer battle can shine a light on the dangers of colon cancer in young and middle-aged people and encourage them to undergo annual screenings.According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, colon cancer is currently the second-leading cause of cancer deaths in the United States. In 2017, more than 50,000 people died of the disease.And while colon cancer is most common in people 50 years and older, researchers say cases among younger people are on the rise.Researchers say that doctors have been able to catch the disease early in older people because of a push for increased screenings, but they're still at a loss for why the disease is increasing in young people — though rising rates of obesity may be a factor.Furthermore, Boseman's death is highlighting the rates of colon cancer in Black Americans — according to the American Cancer Society, Black people have the highest rates of colorectal cancer of any racial or ethnic group in the U.S.But what are the symptoms of the disease?According to the American Cancer Society, colon cancer typically presents with:Change of bowel habitsFeeling the need to go, but not feeling relief afterRectal bleeding with bright red bloodBlood in the stool making it look dark brown or blackCramping or abdominal painWeakness or fatigueUnintended weight lossWhile those symptoms don't necessarily guarantee a cancer diagnosis, the American Cancer Society recommends anyone with those symptoms visit a doctor.The Mayo Clinic adds that the following could leave a person with a higher risk of colon cancer:Old age (50 and above)Race factors (Black men are 24% more likely to develop colon cancer than white men, and Black men die 47% more likely to die of the disease than white men)History of colon tumors or polypsInflammatory intestinal conditions, like ulcerative colitis or Chron's diseaseFamily history of colon cancerA diet low in fiber and high in fatSedentary lifestyleDiabetesObesitySmoking/alcohol useHistory of radiation treatments in the abdomen 2468

The family of Stephon Clark, the 22-year-old black man shot and killed by Sacramento Police, will be exploring "every legal remedy possible" in search of justice, according to their attorney Benjamin Crump.Speaking to CNN on Sunday, Crump said Clark's death should not be "swept under the rug." Crump also called for accountability from both sides."There's great mistrust" between communities of color and police, Crump told CNN's Dan Simon. The attorney has also represented the families of Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown and Tamir Rice. 545

The fatal shooting of two black people in a Kroger grocery store in Kentucky is being investigated as a hate crime, Jeffersontown Mayor Bill Dieruf told CNN on Monday.Gregory A. Bush, a white 51-year-old, is accused of killing Maurice Stallard, 69, and Vickie Jones, 67, last Wednesday inside the Jeffersontown grocery store and in the parking lot, respectively.Prior to the shooting, Bush allegedly tried to enter a predominantly black church nearby but was unable to get inside, officials said. When that attempt failed, he went to Kroger instead and opened fire in the store. 586

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

来源：资阳报