杭州多点触控中医经络腧穴解剖教学系统长沙模拟心脏除颤起搏器,福州足针灸模型 13CM (代号左脚）,太原颈部浅层解剖模型,东营足针灸模型13CM 17CM 22CM 32CM 45CM,海口自动体外模拟除颤与CPR模拟人训练组合,福建足底肌肉解剖模型,十堰高级电子踝关节穿刺模型

White House adviser Stephen Miller is pushing to expedite a policy that could penalize legal immigrants whose families receive public benefits and make it more difficult to get citizenship, three sources familiar with the matter tell CNN.The White House has been reviewing the proposal since March at the Office of Management and Budget, which is the last stop for regulations before they are final. But concerns over potential lawsuits have delayed the final rule, and the draft has undergone numerous revisions, multiple sources say.The crux of the proposal would penalize legal immigrants if they or their family members have used government benefits -- defined widely in previous drafts of the policy.The law has long allowed authorities to reject immigrants if they are likely to become a "public charge" -- or dependent on government. But the draft rule in its recent forms would include programs as expansive as health care subsidies under the Affordable Care Act, as well as some forms of Medicaid, the Children's Health Insurance Program, food stamps and the Earned Income Tax Credit.The rule would not explicitly prohibit immigrants or their families from accepting benefits. Rather, it authorizes the officers who evaluate their applications for things like green cards and residency visas to count the use of these programs against applicants and gives them authority to deny visas on these grounds -- even if the program was used by a family member.Two non-administration sources close to US Citizenship and Immigration Services, which would publish and enforce the proposal, say that Miller has been unhappy by the delay and has pushed the agency to finish it quickly. The sources say Miller even instructed the agency to prioritize finalizing the rule over other efforts a few weeks ago.Miller is an immigration hardliner within the administration, a veteran of Attorney General Jeff Sessions' Senate office who has been at President Donald Trump's side since the early stages of his presidential campaign.But two other administration sources downplayed the idea of any instructions to defer other policies until it's done, though they acknowledged Miller is keenly interested in the rule.The White House and Department of Homeland Security did not respond to a request for comment.Earlier this year, DHS spokesman Tyler Houlton said the administration is concerned about taxpayer dollars."The administration is committed to enforcing existing immigration law, which is clearly intended to protect the American taxpayer," Houlton said. "Any potential changes to the rule would be in keeping with the letter and spirit of the law -- as well as the reasonable expectations of the American people for the government to be good stewards of taxpayer funds."In one illustration of how many avenues there may be to challenge the complex rule, it was sent over to the Office of Management and Budget designated as not "economically significant" despite the possible impact to millions of immigrants and federal spending.Executive director of the pro-immigration group America's Voice Frank Sharry alleged that Trump and Miller are using a "deeply cynical and cruel strategy" and accused Republicans of "race-baiting.""Trump and Miller have concluded that the best 2018 political strategy is a divisive and desperate three-step: 1) do something cruel to immigrants; 2) sit back as Democrats, the fact-based media and the majority of Americans denounce the cruelty; 3) step in and claim that the President is standing up for his white base and against 'the other' while working to define Democrats as doing the opposite," Sharry said. "They did this on DACA. They did this on family separation. Now they are planning to do the same on public charge."The-CNN-Wire 3775

Whoa. Just after noon, a BIG fireball flashed through the sky over Niagara. The @EarthCam CN Tower cameras caught the flash from it at ~12:03:32! Wow, it was bright!#Fireball @amsmeteors pic.twitter.com/6piLtC1Kqt— Scott Sutherland (@ScottWx_TWN) December 2, 2020 271

White House press secretary Sarah Sanders issued a rare correction Tuesday night after falsely declaring that President Donald Trump has created three times as many jobs for African-American workers as former President Barack Obama did during his two terms in office."Correction from today's briefing: Jobs numbers for Pres Trump and Pres Obama were correct, but the time frame for Pres Obama wasn't. I'm sorry for the mistake, but no apologies for the 700,000 jobs for African Americans created under President Trump," Sanders wrote in a tweet.During the briefing, as she sought to defend the President's record on race, Sanders said Trump has already tripled Obama's record over eight years for creating jobs for black workers."This President since he took office, in the year and a half that he's been here, has created 700,000 new jobs for African-Americans," Sanders said from the White House podium. "That's 700,000 African-Americans that are working now that weren't working when this President took place. When President Obama left, after eight years in office, he had only created 195,000 jobs for African-Americans."But that's not even close to true, according to Labor Department figures.Hours after the briefing, after Bloomberg News pointed out the inaccuracy, the White House Council of Economic Advisers apologized for the figure. It posted a tweet citing a "miscommunication" to Sanders.While it's true that the US economy has added about 700,000 jobs held by African American workers since Trump took office, it added about 3 million black jobs while Obama was in office, according federal labor statistics.When Obama took office in 2009, 15.5 million African Americans had jobs in an economy filleted by one of the country's worst recessions. When he left office, the economy had 18.4 million black workers.Sanders made the claim as she was answering questions about whether she could guarantee Trump had never been recorded using the N-word while producing "The Apprentice.""I can't guarantee anything, but I can tell you that the President addressed this question directly," Sanders said. "I can tell you that I've never heard it."Then, Sanders went on to argue that Trump has created more jobs for black Americans than Obama did."This is a President who is fighting for all Americans, who is putting policies in place that help all Americans, particularly African Americans," Sanders said. "Just look at the economy alone." 2467

While answering a question about how she would rule in potential Supreme Court cases involving LGBTQ+ people's rights during her confirmation hearing Tuesday, Judge Amy Coney Barrett used the term "sexual preference" — a term classified as "offensive" by GLAAD.Barrett used the term while denouncing discrimination against gay and lesbian people, during questioning by Senate Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Dianne Feinstein, D-California."Senator, I have no agenda, and I do want to be clear: I have never discriminated on the basis of sexual preference and would not ever discriminate on the basis of sexual preference," Barrett said. "Like racism, I think discrimination is abhorrent."Later in the day, Sen. Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, followed up with Barrett about the term."Sexual preference is an offensive and outdated term. It is used by anti-LGBTQ activists to suggest that sexual orientation is a choice. It is not. Sexual orientation is a key part of a person's identity," Hirono said.In response, Barrett apologized, saying "I certainly didn't mean and would never mean to use a term that would cause any offense in the LGBTQ community. So if I did, I greatly apologize for that."The term "sexual preference" is generally deemed to be outdated. On its website, GLAAD lists the term on its website as "one to avoid" as it implies that sexuality is a "choice" that can be "cured."Instead, GLAAD says the preferred term to use is "sexual orientation," saying it is the "accurate description" of "an individual's enduring physical, romantic and/or emotional attraction" to another person.Prior to Barrett's initial comment, Feinstein asked how she would rule in potential cases regarding LGBTQ+ rights given the judge's relationship with Justice Antonin Scalia, who dissented in the case that gave gay people the right to marry in 2015.While Barrett gave credit to Scalia, her former mentor, in her opening statements, she stated multiple times during Tuesday's questioning that she would be her own judge."You'll be getting Justice Barrett, not Justice Scalia," if confirmed, Barrett said Tuesday. 2114

What if there was a way to make money, while saving money?An app called Grand claims to do just that, motivating people to save by entering them into a sweepstakes.How does it work?You'll need to link up your bank account to the app.Then, you’ll designate how much money you want to set aside each week.Each dollar gives you an entry into a sweepstakes; you get extra entries if you refer friends or reach certain milestones, like paying off debt.The prize money varies. You could win a prize, or you could win up to ,000. If you wait until October, you could win ,000!But even if you don't win, you are still making some money off your savings.Grand guarantees users a 1% return on their savings.You will, however, need to pay /month to keep your account.So if you do all the math, that means you'll need to keep about ,100 in your account to make it count.If you feel hesitant about linking up your bank account to an app, just know that the app is FDIC insured. 984