长春喉连舌、牙模型南充女性内外生殖器解剖模型,广州男性骨盆带韧带、血管、神经、盆底及器官模型,濮阳马骨骼模型,湖北超声引导下腹腔穿刺技能训练模型,重庆椎骨和脊髓、脊神经关系模型,亳州全身神经传导电动模型,新疆血细胞模型

The defense rested its case Tuesday morning in the trial against former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort without calling any witnesses, setting the stage for closing arguments Wednesday morning.Manafort spoke for the first time in court during the trial, saying he will not testify.Manafort told Judge T.S. Ellis that he would not testify during a brief questioning at the podium before the jury was brought in the room. Manafort is not required to testify because of his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination. Ellis made this clear during his brief conversation with Manafort."You have an absolute right to testify before this jury," Ellis said. "You have an absolute right to remain silent before this jury." 735

The Democratic National Convention gets underway this week. Republicans will hold their convention next week. While this year's convention is virtual for both parties, have you asked yourself what's the point of these anyway?CONVENTIONS YEARS AGO WERE DIFFERENT Americans have known for months that Joe Biden is going to be the Democratic nominee and that Donald Trump would be the Republican nominee. However, before political parties started relying on primaries, conventions were the place the nominee was decided.In 1856, it took Abraham Lincoln three rounds of voting to become the Republican nominee. In 1924, Democrats needed 103 ballots over 16 days to pick John Davis as their party nominee.CONVENTIONS PURPOSE In 1948, networks began televising conventions and since then, many argue conventions have become taxpayer-funded spectacles for insiders. While taxpayers are no longer directly funding conventions, they are paying for security. In 2016, it was estimated that around 0 million of taxpayer funds were spent on convention security. 1952 was the last year both political parties had a contested convention; however, party insiders believe conventions still play a pivotal role. Conventions are where networking can take place and where delegates can debate the party platform. It's also a place where training sessions can occur and speeches can take place. Could Barack Obama have become president in 2008 without his speech at the 2004 convention? Sure, it's possible, but that speech was credited with making the Illinois state senator a household name. WILL 2020 CHANGE CONVENTIONS? With the events now online, after these next two weeks, both parties will likely sit down and see if in-person conventions need to be changed at all. Do parties need a full week of expensive arena space? Or would that money be better spent on staffing in swing states? Will Americans tune in like they did in 2016 this year? These are just some of the questions that will be asked following the conventions. 2023

The CEOs of Twitter, Facebook and Google are facing a grilling by Republican senators making unfounded allegations that the tech giants show anti-conservative bias.The Senate Commerce Committee has summoned Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey, Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg and Google’s Sundar Pichai to testify for a hearing Wednesday. The executives agreed to appear remotely after being threatened with subpoenas.With the presidential election looming, Republicans led by President Donald Trump have thrown a barrage of grievances at Big Tech’s social media platforms, which they accuse without evidence of deliberately suppressing conservative, religious and anti-abortion views.The chorus of protest rose this month after Facebook and Twitter acted to limit dissemination of an unverified political story from the conservative-leaning New York Post about Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden, an unprecedented action against a major media outlet. The story, which was not confirmed by other publications, cited unverified emails from Biden’s son Hunter that were reportedly disclosed by Trump allies.Beyond questioning the CEOs, senators are expected to examine proposals to revise long-held legal protections for online speech, an immunity that critics in both parties say enables the companies to abdicate their responsibility to impartially moderate content.The Justice Department has asked Congress to strip some of the bedrock protections that have generally shielded the tech companies from legal responsibility for what people post on their platforms. Trump signed an executive order challenging the protections from lawsuits under the 1996 telecommunications law.“For too long, social media platforms have hidden behind Section 230 protections to censor content that deviates from their beliefs,” Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., the Commerce Committee chairman, said recently.In their opening statements prepared for the hearing, Dorsey, Zuckerberg and Pichai addressed the proposals for changes to so-called Section 230, a provision of a 1996 law that has served as the foundation for unfettered speech on the internet. Zuckerberg said Congress “should update the law to make sure it’s working as intended.”“We don’t think tech companies should be making so many decisions about these important issues alone,” he said, approving an active role for government regulators.Dorsey and Pichai, however, urged caution in making any changes. “Undermining Section 230 will result in far more removal of online speech and impose severe limitations on our collective ability to address harmful content and protect people online,” Dorsey said.Pichai urged lawmakers “to be very thoughtful about any changes to Section 230 and to be very aware of the consequences those changes might have on businesses and consumers.”Assistant Attorney General Stephen Boyd told congressional leaders in a letter Tuesday that recent events have made the changes more urgent. He cited the action by Twitter and Facebook regarding the New York Post story, calling the companies’ limitations “quite concerning.”The head of the Federal Communications Commission, an independent agency, recently announced plans to reexamine the legal protections, potentially putting meat on the bones of Trump’s order by opening the way to new rules. The move by FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, a Trump appointee, marked an about-face from the agency’s previous position.Social media giants are also under heavy scrutiny for their efforts to police misinformation about the election. Twitter and Facebook have slapped a misinformation label on content from the president, who has around 80 million followers. Trump has raised the baseless prospect of mass fraud in the vote-by-mail process.Starting Tuesday, Facebook was not accepting any new political advertising. Previously booked political ads will be able to run until the polls close next Tuesday, when all political advertising will temporarily be banned. Google, which owns YouTube, also is halting political ads after the polls close. Twitter banned all political ads last year.Democrats have focused their criticism of social media mainly on hate speech, misinformation and other content that can incite violence or keep people from voting. They have criticized Big Tech CEOs for failing to police content, homing in on the platforms’ role in hate crimes and the rise of white nationalism in the U.S.Facebook, Twitter and YouTube have scrambled to stem the tide of material that incites violence and spreads lies and baseless conspiracy theories.The companies reject accusations of bias but have wrestled with how strongly they should intervene. They have often gone out of their way not to appear biased against conservative views — a posture that some say effectively tilts them toward those viewpoints. The effort has been especially strained for Facebook, which was caught off-guard in 2016, when it was used as a conduit by Russian agents to spread misinformation benefiting Trump’s presidential campaign.The unwelcome attention to the three companies piles onto the anxieties in the tech industry, which also faces scrutiny from the Justice Department, federal regulators, Congress and state attorneys general around the country.Last week, the Justice Department sued Google for abusing its dominance in online search and advertising — the government’s most significant attempt to protect competition since its groundbreaking case against Microsoft more than 20 years ago.With antitrust in the spotlight, Facebook, Apple and Amazon also are under investigation at the Justice Department and the Federal Trade Commission.___Follow Gordon at https://twitter.com/mgordonap. 5687

The CDC is recommending restaurants, cafes and places where people eat and drink, and likely are not wearing a mask while they do so, should consider all efforts to limit possible COVID-19 exposure and community spread, following the publication of a study looking at where coronavirus patients visited.Adults in the study with positive COVID-19 test results were "twice as likely to have reported dining at a restaurant than those with negative test results", according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.The study looked at people who had coronavirus symptoms and sought testing and care from 11 health care facilities around the country. It found two situations were connected to a higher rate of positive COVID-19 test results compared to negative results; going to locations offering on-site eating and drinking options, and having close contact with persons known to have COVID-19.“Exposures and activities where mask use and social distancing are difficult to maintain, including going to places that offer on-site eating or drinking, might be important risk factors for acquiring COVID-19. As communities reopen, efforts to reduce possible exposures at locations that offer on-site eating and drinking options should be considered to protect customers, employees, and communities,” the study states.CDC personnel conducted interviews with more than 300 study participants, asking them about their mask-wearing habits, attending community gatherings, and activities in the last two weeks; including going to an office, salon, gym, bar/coffee shop, church, eating at a restaurant, or using public transportation. Participants answered using a five-point scale to indicate how often they did these activities.“Reports of exposures in restaurants have been linked to air circulation. Direction, ventilation, and intensity of airflow might affect virus transmission, even if social distancing measures and mask use are implemented according to current guidance. Masks cannot be effectively worn while eating and drinking, whereas shopping and numerous other indoor activities do not preclude mask use,” the report says.The responses indicated around 42 percent of those who had positive COVID-19 test results had close contact with one or more people with known positive cases. The majority of those “close contacts” were family members. Only 14 percent of those who had symptoms but had negative COVID-19 test results reported having close contact with a person known to have the virus.The CDC recommends that if a family member or member of a household becomes sick and it is possibly COVID-19, additional prevention measures should be taken. This includes isolating the sick person as much as possible in the home, reducing shared meals and common spaces, wearing gloves and masks inside the home, and cleaning and disinfecting the home often.The study was completed during July and the results were released September 10. 2952

The digital news company Mic has laid off most of its staff, a spokesperson for the company confirmed.The layoffs were first reported Thursday by Recode. It is not yet clear exactly how many employees were affected. Mic declined to comment beyond confirming the Recode report.The company was founded in 2011, and for the past several years has branded itself as a news website geared toward millennials.Mic Publisher Cory Haik also resigned Thursday. In a note to staff that was obtained by CNN Business, Haik called journalism a "tough business.""Our business models are unsettled, and the macro forces at play are all going through their own states of unrest," she wrote. "If anyone tells you they have it figured out, a special plan to save us all, or that it's all due to a singular fault, know that is categorically false. Like the truth, it is indeed complicated."Mic was once a digital media darling, attracting around million in funding from investors. Its biggest backers included Lightspeed Venture Partners, Clark Jermoluk Founders Fund, WPP and WarnerMedia. (WarnerMedia owns CNN.)The company's staff swelled to more than 100 people by early 2016, according to The New York Times, which asked in an article published at the time: "What happens when millennials run the workplace?"But the climate is a tough one for digital media publishers right now. Ad revenue alone hasn't been enough to support these businesses, and Google and Facebook have substantial control over the ad market.Refinery29, HuffPost and Vocativ have all cut staff in the past year. So have CNN Digital, Vice and BuzzFeed.Mic laid off 25 employees in August 2017 as part of a pivot to video. Co-founder and CEO Chris Altchek told staff at the time that the shift was needed because "visual journalism already makes up 75% of the time that our audience spends" with the site.There were signs this year that the environment wasn't improving for Mic. Digiday reported in April that traffic to Mic's website had been plunging.The article also noted that Mic was very reliant on Facebook, citing statistics that showed views on the social media site fell to 11 million views in March compared to 192 million about a year earlier.Still, company executives pushed back on some reports that characterized the situation at Mic as particularly dire. When the Columbia Journalism Review reported in September that the company's board discussed a possible shutdown, Altchek called the report "categorically false."Emily Singer, a senior political reporter at Mic, tweeted Thursday that she was leaving the company."I'm so proud of what we've accomplished here," Singer wrote.Kerry Lauerman, Mic's executive news director, tweeted about the "gutting experience" Thursday."But only love for the extremely resilient and open-hearted team of Mic editors, producers, writers and shooters I had the great honor of working with," he added. "They performed brilliantly often under a cloud of uncertainty."Reached by phone, Lauerman declined to comment further, saying only that the team was packing up all of their things.Several other employees also tweeted news of their departures."I have so much to say, but most importantly the time I spent at @mic was the best of my career," wrote Managing Editor Colleen Curry. "I learned so, so much from brilliant people dedicated to keeping journalism alive."Mic is also in talks to sell at least part of the company to Bustle Digital Group, Recode reported Wednesday. A source with knowledge of the potential deal confirmed that report to CNN Business. 3572