济南治疗前列腺和早泄的药济南前列腺不好怎么办,济南看男性生殖专科,济南秒射可以治,济南男人怎么就持久了,济南治疗男科疾病,济南性生活疲软,济南阴茎勃起硬度不够可以治吗

Hours after she was sworn in to Congress, Michigan Democratic Rep. Rashida Tlaib used an expletive Thursday in pushing for impeaching President Donald Trump.Speaking to a crowd at an event sponsored by the progressive group MoveOn, Tlaib recalled the moment she won her election in November."And when your son looks at you and says, 'Mama look, you won. Bullies don't win,' and I said, 'Baby, they don't,' because we're gonna go in there and we're going to impeach the motherf****r," Tlaib said Thursday, speaking of Trump, according to a video posted on Twitter by Nestor Ruiz, an activist with United We Dream.Tlaib also penned an op-ed Thursday arguing that "the time for impeachment proceedings is now.""President Donald Trump is a direct and serious threat to our country," she wrote in 804

Former national security adviser John Bolton said Friday the White House barred him from his own Twitter account after he left the administration and suggested it acted out of concern about what he might say.Bolton, a constant if unseen presence during the House impeachment inquiry into Trump, reappeared on Twitter Friday after a months-long public hiatus since his departure from the White House in September."Since resigning as National Security Advisor, the White House refused to return access to my personal Twitter account," Bolton tweeted. "Out of fear of what I may say? To those who speculated I went into hiding, I'm sorry to disappoint!""In full disclosure, the @WhiteHouse never returned access to my Twitter account. Thank you to @twitter for standing by their community standards and rightfully returning control of my account," he added in a separate post later in the afternoon.Bolton's tweet directly contradicts comments that Trump had made earlier in the day to Fox News. Asked during an interview if the White House had frozen Bolton's account, Trump had told Fox News Friday: "No, of course not."The White House also denied that it blocked Bolton from accessing his personal account."The White House did not block Mr. Bolton from accessing his personal Twitter account, and wouldn't have the technical means to do so," a senior administration official told CNN.Twitter declined to comment.Earlier in the day, Bolton had hinted at attempts to suppress his Twitter account."Glad to be back on Twitter after more than two months. For the backstory, stay tuned........" he posted."We have now liberated the Twitter account, previously suppressed unfairly in the aftermath of my resignation as National Security Advisor. More to come....." a second tweet said.The last time Bolton had tweeted was nearly two months ago.Bolton's first set of tweets on Friday prompted a response from former National Security Adviser Susan Rice."When Obama WH senior officials left Govt, we were required by WH ethics lawyers to archive all tweets issued while in Govt and start our accounts afresh. In other words, I had to give up >600k followers and begin at zero. Glad to see the Trump WH is consistent in its corruption," she wrote.Bolton's most recent post had been on September 10, the day of his ouster, in which he disputed Trump's assertion that he was fired."I offered to resign last night and President Trump said, 'Let's talk about it tomorrow,' " it said.A longtime Republican foreign policy operative, Bolton was a key observer of the events that lead to the House impeachment inquiry, but refused to appear before the House committee.Even so, during the hearings Bolton hinted through his lawyer that he had potentially explosive "personal knowledge" of relevant meetings and conversations "that have not yet been discussed in testimonies thus far."It remains unclear how Bolton will utilize his Twitter account going forward, but CNN has learned that it will not be used as a replacement for testimony in the impeachment inquiry or to post anything he might know related to the President's dealings with Ukraine.Bolton's shadow looms over impeachment inquiryBolton has kept a low profile since impeachment proceedings began and stayed tight-lipped about whether he planned to cooperate with the House probe -- not even discussing the matter with some of his closest allies.Still, he left his mark on the impeachment inquiry and is at the center of several key events related to the investigation.Those include suggestions that he had raised concerns about the President and Ukraine, calling efforts by some top officials to push for investigations into former Vice President Joe Biden and matters related to the 2016 election a "drug deal," according to testimony last month from former top Russia adviser Fiona Hill.Several witnesses in the probe have already testified that Bolton had concerns about Trump's dealings with Ukraine and encouraged his staff to sound the alarm about potentially illegal actions by the President's personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani.House committees opted not to subpoena Bolton earlier this month after his attorney threatened to fight such a move in court, according to a committee official. Unsurprisingly, the former national security adviser was a no-show at his scheduled deposition.Bolton featured in Hill testimonyHill, who served under Bolton on the NSC until she left the administration this summer, seemed to suggest that she believes Bolton should testify during her own public hearing Thursday."I believe that those who have information that the Congress deems relevant have a legal and moral obligation to provide it," she told lawmakers.Hill also provided a firsthand account Thursday of Bolton's reaction during a July 10 meeting when US ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland said a White House visit for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was conditioned on him announcing "investigations" sought by his American counterpart."As Ambassador Bolton was trying to move that part of the discussion away -- I think he was going to try to deflect it on another wrap up topic -- Ambassador Sondland leaned in basically to say 'well we have an agreement that there will be a meeting if specific investigations are -- are put underway' and that's when I saw Ambassador Bolton stiffen," Hill testified."I was sitting behind him in the chair and I saw him sit back slightly ... he'd been more moving forward like I am to the table. And for me, that was an unmistakable body language and it caught my attention. And then he looked up to the clock and, you know, at his watch or I suppose his wrist, in any case ... and basically said well, you know, it's been really great to see you, I'm afraid I've got another -- another meeting," she added. 5823

FREEPORT, New York — There's no doubt that the death of George Floyd in the hands of Minneapolis police has sparked outrage across the nation.The protests sparked by his death have people of all ages standing up against injustice, including 7-year-old Wynta-Amor Rogers from Freeport, Long Island.The power and strength of her voice as she chants "no justice, no peace" is undeniable."I want everybody to get together to make sure the community comes in. I just want to make sure it's not like back in the old days," she said.Wynta-Amor walked alongside her mother, Lakyia Jackson, and other protesters during about a 2-mile walk from Freeport to the nearby town of Merrick to stand up against police brutality and the death of George Floyd."She said, 'mom, please let's go.' I said, 'no,' because it's wet outside. She said, 'no, I want to go, mom, I want to go'," Jackson said.Jackson's video of Wynta-Amor garnered attention from across the country on Instagram. Some of the reaction was positive; some was not. Despite the backlash, Jackson says she has no regrets."The negativity doesn't bother me because, at the end of the day, this is what's going on, and this is our future," she said. "So, we have to let our future see what's going on." 1259

IDAHO — If you've ever been to Wallowa Lake in eastern Oregon, you may have seen some seemingly tame deer. That has a lot to do with the fact that people are feeding them. But biologists in Idaho say feeding wild animals is a bad idea.Normally wild animals like deer are wary of humans, so why was a mule deer in the middle of McCall, Idaho, and why did it approach a KIVI reporter when he was pointing a camera at it? Darrel Meints, Idaho Fish and Game's deer and elk coordinator, thinks he knows."I'm guessing that deer has been fed based on its behavior,” Meints said. “I think she's going to see if you're going to throw her a handout."Deer that have been fed become habituated to humans, and what may begin as a seemingly compassionate act — feeding a hungry deer or two — can become a major nuisance for landowners."People will call us and the call will start out 'well, last week there was one or two deer in my yard and I felt a little sorry for them and I threw them a little hay and now there's 10 or 20 or 30 in my backyard, and they're eating all my shrubs and trees,' " said Meints. Getting that close to a deer is an interesting encounter to say the least, but feeding deer can actually increase their odds of dying, especially during winter."Mule deer don't do well eating alfalfa. They're browsers. They eat woody shrubs and trees and things of that nature. So, you can make them sick and they don't do well," Meints said.People who feed wildlife in high traffic areas like McCall, Idaho, greatly increase their likelihood of being hit by a car, which could kill the animal and cause thousands of dollars in damage. But that's not the only hazard habituated animals bring to humans and their pets. "When you have large numbers of animals like that, you will draw in predators like mountain lions or coyotes of that nature," said Meints.As tempting as it may be, these are just some of the many reasons biologists say, with the possible exception of song birds, feeding wild animals is a bad idea."Oftentimes people think they're doing the right thing and helping wildlife, but over the long run they're not. In fact, they could be doing more damage than good,” said Meints.During severe winters, fish and game departments perform emergency feeding operations, providing starving animals with the proper nutrition. 2378

Federal officials on Wednesday banned electrical shock devices used to discourage aggressive, self-harming behavior in patients with mental disabilities.The announcement from the Food and Drug Administration follows years of pressure from disability rights groups and mental health experts who have called the treatment outdated, ineffective and unethical. The agency first announced its intent to ban the devices in 2016.For years, the shock devices have been used by only one place in the U.S., the Judge Rotenberg Educational Center of Canton, Massachusetts, a residential school for people with autism and other psychiatric, developmental or mental disabilities. The FDA said Wednesday it estimates 45 to 50 people at the school are currently being treated with the device.School administrators have called the shocks a last resort to prevent dangerous behaviors, such as head-banging, throwing furniture or attacking teachers or classmates. The center has continued to use the shock devices under a decades-old legal settlement with the state of Massachusetts, but needs court approval before beginning use on each resident.School officials said in a statement they plan to challenge the government ban in court. A parents’ group also defended the practice and said it would fight the ban.“FDA made a decision based on politics, not facts, to deny this life saving, court-approved treatment,” the school said. Electric shocks and other painful or unpleasant treatments known as “aversive conditioning” were more widely accepted decades ago. But mainstream psychiatry now relies on behavioral modification, prescription drugs and other therapies that have proven more effective.“Through advancements in medical science, there are now more treatment options available to reduce or stop self-injurious or aggressive behavior,” said Dr. William Maisel, a director in the FDA’s device center, in a statement.The Rotenberg school has used shock devices carried in students’ backpacks, which were attached to their arms and legs via electrodes. School staffers could trigger a two-second shock to a patient’s skin by using a remote controller.Some patients from the Rotenberg center have compared the shocks to a bee sting or worse. The school has faced several lawsuits brought by families who said their children were traumatized by the shocks.Other parents say that the technique is the only thing that prevents violent, sometimes life-threatening behavior in their children.“We will continue to fight to keep our loved ones safe and alive and to retain access to this treatment of last resort which has allowed them to live a productive life,” said members of the Rotenberg’s parents association, in a statement. “There is simply no alternative.” The FDA, echoing psychiatric experts, said that the shock therapy can exacerbate dangerous behaviors and lead to depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder. Patients have also suffered burns and tissue damage due to the device, the agency said.Regulators said patients should instead receive treatments that focus on eliminating factors that trigger the behaviors or teaching patients coping skills to deal with them. The FDA has only banned two other products in more than 40 years of regulating medical devices -- powdered surgical gloves, which can cause allergic reactions, and fake hair implants, which caused infections and didn’t work. Typically, the FDA addresses safety issues by adding new warning labels or modifying instructions for devices. But the agency concluded that the problems with the shock devices could only be addressed by banning them.___Follow Matthew Perrone on Twitter: @AP_FDAwriter___The Associated Press receives 3717