内蒙古颅内副交感神经立体模型长春龋齿分类模型,南宁外科手术技能训练仿真模型,陕西KAR/S22A高级静脉穿刺注射操作手臂模型 （国赛指定产品）,丽江腹股沟层次解剖模型,哈尔滨狗体针灸模型,乌鲁木齐人体骨骼半边附关节韧带半边附肌肉起止点着色模型,西宁高级手臂皮内注射模型

The White House National Security Council is ending the role of cyber coordinator, according to an internal announcement obtained by CNN on Tuesday.The internal announcement said the elimination of the cyber role, just weeks into the tenure of national security adviser John Bolton, was part of an effort to "streamline authority for National Security Council Senior Directors."The announcement said the cyber coordinator job would end as Rob Joyce, the latest to hold the post, returned to the National Security Agency."With our two Senior Directors for Cybersecurity, cyber coordination is already a core capability," the announcement read. "Eliminating another layer of bureaucracy delivers greater 'decision, activity, secrecy and despatch (sic)' as Alexander Hamilton put it in Federalist Number 70."The elimination of the cyber coordinator job marked the latest of several changes to the National Security Council since President Donald Trump named Bolton his national security adviser.CNN reported last month Bolton pushed out Tom Bossert as homeland security adviser to make room for his own team, as several other officials left the National Security Council, including deputy national security adviser Nadia Schadlow and Joyce, who served as Bossert's deputy.Politico?first reported?on the elimination of the post.Asked about the position at a Senate Homeland Security Committee hearing on Tuesday, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen said she had not discussed the decision with Bolton."I have not had a conversation with Ambassador Bolton about that particular issue," Nielsen told Michigan Democratic Sen. Gary Peters.Nielsen said DHS has "strengthened all of our relationships with the silos" in government that Peters mentioned in his question, and said she is in regular contact with Bolton on cybersecurity, the previous statement notwithstanding."Since Ambassador Bolton has come onto the job, he and I speak regularly," she said, describing cybersecurity strategy work between herself and Bolton as "hand in glove."She added the cybersecurity strategy released by her department on Tuesday was done in "close coordination" with NSC.During his first year in office, then-President Barack Obama?announced he was establishing the role of cybersecurity coordinator and warned at the time the nation needed to bolster its online security efforts.Mississippi Rep. Bennie G. Thompson, the top Democrat on the House Homeland Security Committee, issued a statement responding to the news and accusing Bolton of "wreaking havoc" on the NSC."With cyber threats ever-changing and growing more sophisticated by the day, there is no logical reason to eliminate this senior position and reduce the already degraded level of cyber expertise at the White House," the statement read.Democratic Rep. Jim Langevin, of Rhode Island, said Tuesday he feels the decision was the "first major step backward" on cybersecurity by the Trump administration. He added the Trump administration had mostly followed in the footsteps of the Obama administration before this move."Bad move, big mistake, and just shows how out of touch and uninformed John Bolton is," Langevin said. 3227

The Swan Dive in Toronto was preparing to close at the beginning of December due to the pandemic, and with little to no revenue, the bar’s owner did not know how long the bar would be able to pay for its rent.Within days after announcing to the community that the bar would be forced to closed due to the pandemic, customers came and bought the bar’s entire stock of beers. Now it appears the bar, unlike many other small businesses in Toronto, will have a chance to reopen in the future.The Swan Dive now hopes to reopen in February, with occasional days as a to-go bottle shop between now and then."We were blowing through our savings and I wasn't sure if I was going to be able to pay rent towards the end of the month," bar owner Abra Shiner told CNN. "So, I wrote on Facebook asking people to come buy the beer we had in our stock room ... and it worked. The post went viral."Shiner told CNN that the sales coupled with government subsidies will allow the bar to survive until March. 996

The school buildings in Evanston, Illinois, are still empty. But the district’s recently hired superintendent caused a stir during a public Zoom meeting announcing how the they will decide which students get priority seating when in-person learning resumes.“We have to make sure that students, who have been oppressed, that we don’t continue to oppress them, and we give them opportunity,” said school superintendent Dr. Devon Horton of the Evanston/Skokie school district in late July.“We will be targeting our dependent learners – those are students who are marginalized first,” he said.Low-income students, special needs and those dealing with homelessness are just some who will be first in line. There have been angry letters, petitions and even death threats to the superintendent and school board.“Understanding that other folks are experiencing more vulnerability and more harm than my family is experiencing,” says Anya Tanyavutti, a parent of two and the Evanston district’s school board president. “I'm happy to see those resources go to people who need it more.”For the last four years, the Evanston school district has been working on implementing anti-racism resolutions and curricula to address inequity.“Taking an anti-racist stance requires some sort of sacrifice,” says Dr. Onnie Rogers a professor at Northwestern University’s school of Education and Social Policy. “I think that's really the part of racial equity that our country is still getting used to on the ground.”Here in Evanston, the achievement gap does fall along racial lines where Black and Latino students are one-third as likely as white students to meet college readiness benchmarks.The district acknowledges that its plan to allow some students to return before others falls mostly along racial lines. But it is need, they say, not race, that will be the determining factor.“If we simply said we're gonna just reopen for whoever wants to come, then the people who are most well-resourced and most well-connected would likely be able to get those seats prior to people who are challenged with homelessness or challenged with getting food on the table,” says Tanyavutti.And there has been opposition. Arlington, Virginia, based ‘Students for Fair Admissions’- a non-profit advocacy group that has mounted legal challenges to affirmative action, has called the district’s plan unconstitutional.“If that student has unique special needs then that's fine to take those into consideration,” says Edward Blum, president of Students for Fair Admissions. “What is not fine to take into consideration is the skin color or ethnic heritage of students.”“It has been legally reviewed, and I am confident that we are operating within the bounds of our Constitution,” says Tanyavutti.In-person learning is tentatively scheduled to resume in mid-November. And while the district says it will accommodate as many students as possible the priority remains their most vulnerable student population. 2974

The Trump administration plans to raise pending tariffs on 0 billion in Chinese goods to 25% from 10%, a source familiar with discussions confirmed to CNN.The news was first reported by Bloomberg.The move, which is not finalized and could change, according to the source, comes as the United States and China remain locked in a trade war. Talks between US and Chinese officials have done little to ease tensions.The United States has already imposed 25% tariffs on Chinese goods worth billion. China immediately responded with its own tariffs on US goods worth billion.A second round of tariffs on products worth billion could take effect as soon as this week.US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer earlier this month ratcheted up tensions when he released a list of thousands of additional Chinese exports worth 0 billion that could face 10% tariffs after a public comment period. It included fruit and vegetables, handbags, refrigerators, rain jackets and baseball gloves.Those tariffs, which might now be steeper, could go into effect as soon as September. 1108

The Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that the Trump administration can end census field operations early, in a blow to efforts to make sure minorities and hard-to-enumerate communities are properly counted in the crucial once-a-decade tally.The decision was not a total loss for plaintiffs in a lawsuit challenging the administration’s decision to end the count early. They managed to get nearly two extra weeks of counting people as the case made its way through the courts.However, the ruling increased the chances of the Trump administration retaining control of the process that decides how many congressional seats each state gets — and by extension how much voting power each state has.The Supreme Court justices’ ruling came as the nation’s largest association of statisticians, and even the U.S. Census Bureau’s own census takers and partners, have been raising questions about the quality of the data being gathered — numbers that are used to determine how much federal funding and how many congressional seats are allotted to states.After the Supreme Court’s decision, the Census Bureau said field operations would end on Thursday.At issue was a request by the Trump administration that the Supreme Court suspend a lower court’s order extending the 2020 census through the end of October following delays caused by the pandemic. The Trump administration argued that the head count needed to end immediately to give the bureau time to meet a year-end deadline. Congress requires the bureau to turn in by Dec. 31 the figures used to decide the states’ congressional seats — a process known as apportionment.By sticking to the deadline, the Trump administration would end up controlling the numbers used for the apportionment, no matter who wins next month’s presidential election.In a statement, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called the Supreme Court’s decision “regrettable and disappointing,” and said the administration’s actions “threaten to politically and financially exclude many in America’s most vulnerable communities from our democracy.”Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissented from the high court’s decision, saying “respondents will suffer substantial injury if the Bureau is permitted to sacrifice accuracy for expediency.”The Supreme Court ruling came in response to a lawsuit by a coalition of local governments and civil rights groups, arguing that minorities and others in hard-to-count communities would be missed if the census ended early. They said the schedule was cut short to accommodate a July order from President Donald Trump that would exclude people in the country illegally from being counted in the numbers used for apportionment.Opponents of the order said it followed the strategy of the late Republican redistricting guru, Thomas Hofeller, who had advocated using voting-age citizens instead of the total population when it came to drawing legislative seats since that would favor Republicans and non-Hispanic whites.Last month, U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh in San Jose, California sided with the plaintiffs and issued an injunction suspending a Sept. 30 deadline for finishing the 2020 census and a Dec. 31 deadline for submitting the apportionment numbers. That caused the deadlines to revert back to a previous Census Bureau plan that had field operations ending Oct. 31 and the reporting of apportionment figures at the end of April 2021.When the Census Bureau, and the Commerce Department, which oversees the statistical agency, picked an Oct. 5 end date, Koh struck that down too, accusing officials of “lurching from one hasty, unexplained plan to the next ... and undermining the credibility of the Census Bureau and the 2020 Census.”An appellate court panel upheld Koh’s order allowing the census to continue through October but struck down the part that suspended the Dec. 31 deadline for turning in apportionment numbers. The panel of three appellate judges said that just because the year-end deadline is impossible to meet doesn’t mean the court should require the Census Bureau to miss it.The plaintiffs said the ruling against them was not a total loss, as millions more people were counted during the extra two weeks.“Every day has mattered, and the Supreme Court’s order staying the preliminary injunction does not erase the tremendous progress that has been made as a result of the district court’s rulings,” said Melissa Sherry, one of the attorneys for the coalition.Besides deciding how many congressional seats each state gets, the census helps determine how .5 trillion in federal funding is distributed each year.San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo said that his city lost 0 million in federal funding over the decade following the 2010 census, and he feared it would lose more this time around. The California city was one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit.“A census count delayed is justice denied,” Liccardo said.With plans for the count hampered by the pandemic, the Census Bureau in April had proposed extending the deadline for finishing the count from the end of July to the end of October, and pushing the apportionment deadline from Dec. 31 to next April. The proposal to extend the apportionment deadline passed the Democratic-controlled House, but the Republican-controlled Senate didn’t take up the request. Then, in late July and early August, bureau officials shortened the count schedule by a month so that it would finish at the end of September.The Senate Republicans’ inaction coincided with Trump’s order directing the Census Bureau to have the apportionment count exclude people who are in the country illegally. The order was later ruled unlawful by a panel of three district judges in New York, but the Trump administration appealed that case to the Supreme Court.The Supreme Court decision comes as a report by the the American Statistical Association has found that a shortened schedule, dropped quality control procedures, pending lawsuits and the outside politicization of some parts of the 2020 census have raised questions about the quality of the nation’s head count that need to be answered if the final numbers are going to be trusted.The Census Bureau says it has counted 99.9% of households nationwide, though some regions of the country such as parts of Mississippi and hurricane-battered Louisiana fall well below that.As the Census Bureau winds down field operations over the next several days, there will be a push to get communities in those two states counted, said Kristen Clarke, president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, one of the litigants in the lawsuit.“That said, the Supreme Court’s order will result in irreversible damage to the 2020 Census,” Clarke said.___Follow Mike Schneider on Twitter at https://twitter.com/MikeSchneiderAP 6792