喀什有时能硬有时不能硬(喀什成人包皮手术什么季节做好) (今日更新中)

Rudy Giuliani's assertion to CNN this week that President Donald Trump can't be indicted by the special counsel, and thus can't face a subpoena, banks on a series of internal Justice Department policies.The question to this day is untested in the court system. Yet the step-by-step process Robert Mueller or any special counsel could follow for a President under investigation has several possible outcomes.According to several legal experts, historical memos and court filings, this is how the Justice Department's decision-making on whether to indict a sitting president could play out:First, there must be suspicion or allegations of a crime. Did the President do something criminally wrong? If the answer is no, there would be no investigation.But if the answer is maybe, that puts federal investigators on the pursuit. If they find nothing, Justice Department guidelines say they'd still need to address their investigation in a report summarizing their findings.If there could be some meat to the allegations, the Justice Department would need to determine one of two things: Did the potentially criminal actions take place unrelated to or before to the presidency? Or was the President's executive branch power was crucial in the crime?That determination will come into play later, because Congress' power to impeach and remove a president from office was intended by the framers of the Constitution to remedy abuse of the office, legal scholars say.Perhaps, though, the special counsel decides there's enough evidence to prove that the President broke the law.That's where the Office of Legal Counsel opinions come in.In 1973 and 2000, the office, which defines Justice Department internal procedure, said an indictment of a sitting president would be too disruptive to the country. This opinion appears to be binding on the Justice Department's decision-making, though it's possible for Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to choose to override the opinion, give Mueller permission to ignore it and take it to court, or ask the office to reexamine the issue by writing a new opinion.This sort of legal briefing has been done before, like in the year after the 1973 opinion, when then-special prosecutor Leon Jaworski wrote a Watergate-era memo describing why the President should not be above the law.Of course, there's another immediate option if a special counsel finds the President did wrong. Prosecutors could use the "unindicted co-conspirator" approach. This would involve the special counsel's office indicting a group of conspirators, making clear the President was part of the conspiracy without bringing charges against him.At any time, in theory, a special counsel could decide to delay an indictment until the President leaves office -- so as not to interfere with the functioning of the executive branch. The other options would be to drop the case or send an impeachment referral to Congress. As evidenced by Mueller's actions previously in the investigations of Trump's personal attorney Michael Cohen and former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, any steps this special counsel takes will likely come with the full support of the acting attorney general on the matter, Rosenstein.The question of whether a President could be subpoenaed is a story for another day. 3303

Rev. Dr. Monica Cummings doesn’t have to look far from her Kenosha, Wisconsin church to see the damage left by protests that turned violent after the police shooting of Jacob Blake.“Our church shares a property line with the car dealership that was destroyed by fire," Cummings said.Flames spared the Bradford Community Church, but in Kenosha, it's easy to see what wasn't.Bradford's lead pastor, Erik Carlson, sees why.“The anger that produced these demonstrations doesn’t come from a vacuum. It comes from problems in our society dating back in cases hundreds of years that we have not addressed," Carlson said.Carlson is a Unitarian Universalist minister. His sermons are often are about bringing diverse ideas together."We’re not as much united by a specific idea of God, as much as we are netted around a commitment to positive social change and to the idea that we are charged with bringing love into this world," Carlson explained.It’s a faith fit for a city wounded by issues of race and equality.“The church can play a role in terms of having a partnership with the police department, in terms of bringing the community and police together," Cummings said. “It’s a challenge, how to interact with someone who represents a group of people who have historically oppressed you, who have historically traumatized you. How do you engage in an interaction with an individual without being defensive?”Cummings says she also understands the trauma police officers endure, too."Police have trauma, as well. There is no way they could do their job day in and day out without their mental health suffering," she said.Society has many views on how to police, protest, and pray. In this Kenosha church, diversity in race and viewpoints are welcome in finding a path beyond the heartbreak."We don’t like destruction of property, but we understand and appreciate the pain that it comes from," Carlson said. "We rather lose our building and 100 buildings than lose another life to police violence.” 1999

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — A California lawmaker is proposing to restrict the sharing of manipulated videos depicting politicians amid mounting concerns that increasingly convincing "deep fakes" could give rise to misinformation in the approaching 2020 election.A state Senate committee has backed a bill by Democratic Assemblyman Marc Berman of Palo Alto that would prohibit the distribution of such videos in the 60 days before an election. They could still be used if distributors include a disclaimer.But as policymakers grapple with an emerging technology, proposals to regulate videos have spurred debate about free speech and the government's role in regulating political discourse.Some experts say proposals to ban "deep fakes" altogether would face serious constitutional challenges.___The legislation is Assembly Bill 730. 839

SACRAMENTO (KGTV) - Wildfires are more dangerous and costly than ever, according to California Governor Gavin Newsom's strike force team's report released Friday."We are in a very precarious state," he said at a press conference. He highlighted 5 main points in the report, the first pertained to preventing and fighting catastrophic wildfires, "213.6M of that was specific for fuels reduction." Millions in the budget dedicated to clearing brush and other potential fire hazards on private and public land, build the workforce to do it and invest in technology to monitor fire risk."There's the world without climate change, here's the world we're living in," Newsom said referring to a chart showing skyrocketing wildfire damage in terms of acres burned, in recent years. He said he wants to break the cycle, creating more clean energy to reverse the effect of climate change, focused on electric cars and utility companies."The soaring costs of wildfires, the good old days and now the new normal," Newsom said referring to another chart showing the jump in costs related to wildfire damage. The governor's plan outlined options to pay for wildfire damage, including helping utility companies if they're at fault, and spreading costs among everyone, including tax payers."The state has suffered from their neglect," Newsom said taking aim at utility companies. He wants the California Public Utilities Commission strengthened, to hold utility companies accountable while passing wildfire damage costs to customers. "SDGE which is in that San Diego area, which is a credit rating just above junk bond status, one fire away from going into junk bond status," he said. 1678

Rudy Giuliani said Sunday that special counsel Robert Mueller is aiming to finish the probe into potential wrongdoing by President Donald Trump by Sept. 1.Giuliani, Trump's attorney, confirmed to CNN that Mueller's office shared its timeline with him about a month ago.The former New York mayor said, however, that Mueller gave him the information within the context of a discussion about whether Trump would do an interview with the special counsel. Giuliani said the impression he got was that Mueller was saying if the President did do an interview, then the investigation into Trump's actions, including any potential obstruction of justice or possible collusion with Russia's interference in the 2016 election, could be wrapped up by that date. 762

来源：资阳报