喀什学生意外怀孕(喀什晚上硬不起来怎么回事) (今日更新中)

The news out of El Paso is devastating. I'm heartbroken for the victims and their families. Far too many communities have suffered through tragedies like this already. We must act now to end our country's gun violence epidemic.— Elizabeth Warren (@ewarren) August 3, 2019 293

The government of the Democratic Republic of Congo declared an outbreak of Ebola hemorrhagic fever, a rare and deadly disease, on Tuesday, the World Health Organization reported. The declaration came after laboratory results confirmed two cases of the disease in the province of Bikoro."Our top priority is to get to Bikoro to work alongside the Government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo and partners to reduce the loss of life and suffering related to this new Ebola virus disease outbreak," said Dr Peter Salama, WHO Deputy Director-General, Emergency Preparedness and Response. "Working with partners and responding early and in a coordinated way will be vital to containing this deadly disease."This is Congo's ninth outbreak of Ebola virus disease since the discovery of the virus in the country in 1976. In the past five weeks, there have been 21 suspected cases of viral hemorrhagic fever, including 17 deaths.Ebola virus disease, which most commonly affects people and nonhuman primates (monkeys, gorillas and chimpanzees), is caused by one of five Ebola viruses.The WHO said it is working closely with the government to rapidly scale up its operations and mobilize health partners, including Medicin sans Frontieres (Doctors Without Borders), using the model of a successful response to a similar Ebola outbreak in 2017.  1352

The New York attorney general is trying to break up the National Rifle Association over allegations of mismanagement and the abuse of member money.Adam Winkler, a UCLA law professor who specializes in the Second Amendment, says this is just the start. The legal battle could go for another year or two.If the NRA dissolves at that point, it would have a huge impact on American politics, but that doesn't mean the end of the gun debate.“What happens is the resources of the NRA would be distributed in a way that is designed to match the donors' intent,” said Winkler. “And that means that money would go to gun rights organizations and would go towards fighting against gun control in most, most circumstances.”Winkler says the NRA dissolving isn't the only potential outcome. The attorney general is also seeking less drastic repercussions, like removing certain in-house lawyers or board members. That includes Wayne LaPierre, the executive vice president.We don't yet know exactly what evidence there is. Winkler says the AG’s case has at least one advantage, the NRA’s former public relations firm, Ackerman McQueen, is cooperating.“And so, the attorney general is going to have on her side an insider who's seen everything that's happened in the NRA for the last three decades,” said Winkler. “I think the NRA is in big trouble.”He says the lawsuit could also impact the November election by energizing pro-gun voters looking to support the NRA and the Republicans.Winkler says it's also likely to mean less NRA spending compared to 2016. 1552

The National Transportation Safety Board is launching a probe that will focus on how first responders handled a fatal crash of a Tesla Model S in Florida this week.Two people died Tuesday evening in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, after a gray 2014 Tesla Model S ran off the road and collided with a concrete wall. The vehicle then caught on fire, engulfing the car in flames, local police said.The NTSB said in a statement Wednesday that the investigation will "primarily focus on emergency response in relation to the electric vehicle battery fire, including fire department activities and towing operations."The driver and front seat passenger were pronounced dead at the scene. A third passenger in the back seat survived and was taken to the hospital, authorities said.Police said the car's speed was likely a factor in the incident. The NTSB did not indicate that it suspects first responders did something wrong. Nor does it indicate that something was wrong with the vehicle.Related: Elon Musk spends million of his own money on Tesla sharesNTSB chairman Robert Sumwalt said in a statement that the "NTSB has a long history of investigating emerging transportation technologies, such as lithium ion battery fires in commercial aviation, as well as a fire involving the lithium ion battery in a Chevrolet Volt.""The goal of these investigations is to understand the impact of these emerging transportation technologies when they are part of a transportation accident," Sumwalt said.Tesla said in a statement that it is "working to establish the facts of the incident and offer our full cooperation to the local authorities.""We have not yet been able to retrieve the logs from the vehicle, but everything we have seen thus far indicates a very high-speed collision and that Autopilot was not engaged," Tesla said.The NTSB also said in its statement Wednesday that it "does not, at this time, anticipate autopilot being a part of this investigation."Several crashes have occurred in the past with Tesla's Autopilot function engaged, including a fatal incident in March.The Autopilot feature is not fully autonomous. It handles some driving functions, but not all, and drivers are expected to stay engaged when the feature is activated. Tesla said after the March incident that the driver was given "several visual and one audible" cue from the vehicle to grab the wheel "earlier in the drive" before the crash.Tesla CEO Elon Musk recently lashed out at reporters who have written articles "that would lead people to believe that autonomy is less safe.""Because people might actually turn it off, and then die," Musk said during an earnings call last month. "So anyway, I'm very upset by this."Tesla has repeatedly referred to a government report from January 2017, which has been widely criticized, that found that Autopilot reduced crash rates for Tesla by 40%. 2889

The man taking over the Justice Department following Jeff Sessions' firing as attorney general has argued that special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation went too far.Matthew Whitaker, who was Sessions' chief of staff, is expected to take over oversight of Mueller's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and whether Trump campaign associates colluded with Russia. A source close to the President told CNN that the idea of Whitaker ending or suppressing the Russia probe is not an option as of now.In a CNN op-ed written last year, Whitaker argued that Mueller is "dangerously close to crossing" a red line following reports?that Mueller was looking into Trump's finances.He argued that Mueller does not have "broad, far-reaching powers in this investigation," but that the investigation's limits are clearly defined by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein's?May 2017 letter appointing Mueller."It is time for Rosenstein, who is the acting attorney general for the purposes of this investigation, to order Mueller to limit the scope of his investigation to the four corners of the order appointing him special counsel," he wrote then. "If he doesn't, then Mueller's investigation will eventually start to look like a political fishing expedition."Back in 2017, Whitaker also told CNN's Don Lemon that he could see a scenario where Sessions is replaced with an attorney general who "reduces (Mueller's) budget so low that his investigation grinds to almost a halt."Trump announced on Twitter Wednesday that Whitaker would fill the role of attorney general while he finds a permanent replacement to be "nominated at a later date."Sessions recused himself from the Russia investigation after it emerged that he had failed at his Senate confirmation hearing to disclose two pre-election meetings with Russia's ambassador to Washington at a time when Moscow was accused of interfering in the presidential race. The recusal was harshly criticized by Trump and led to the deterioration of their relationship.Whitaker was a CNN legal commentator and former US attorney who directed the Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust (FACT), a conservative ethics watchdog group. He ran in the Republican primary for Iowa Senate in 2014.--This opinion article was originally published on August 6, 2017, and authored by now acting AG Matthew Whitaker:Last month, when President Donald Trump was asked by The New York Times if special counsel Robert Mueller would be crossing a line if he started investigating the finances of Trump and his family, the President said, "I think that's a violation. Look, this is about Russia."The President is absolutely correct. Mueller has come up to a red line in the Russia 2016 election-meddling investigation that he is dangerously close to crossing.According to a CNN article, Mueller's investigators could be looking into financial records relating to the Trump Organization that are unrelated to the 2016 election. According to these reports, "sources described an investigation that has widened to focus on possible financial crimes, some unconnected to the 2016 election." The piece goes on to cite law enforcement sources who say non-Russia-related leads that "involve Trump associates" are being referred to the special counsel "to encourage subjects of the investigation to cooperate."This information is deeply concerning to me. It does not take a lawyer or even a former federal prosecutor like myself to conclude that investigating Donald Trump's finances or his family's finances falls completely outside of the realm of his 2016 campaign and allegations that the campaign coordinated with the Russian government or anyone else. That goes beyond the scope of the appointment of the special counsel.In fact, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein's letter?appointing special counsel Robert Mueller does not give Mueller broad, far-reaching powers in this investigation. He is only authorized to investigate matters that involved any potential links to and coordination between two entities -- the Trump campaign and the Russian government. People are wrongly pointing to, and taking out of context, the phrase "any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation" to characterize special counsel's authority as broad.The word "investigation" is clearly defined directly preceding it in the same sentence specifically as coordination between individuals associated with the campaign of Donald Trump and Russia. The Trump Organization's business dealings are plainly not within the scope of the investigation, nor should they be.Indeed, Sunday on Fox News, Rod Rosenstein acknowledged Mueller had limited authority and would need to seek his permission to expand the investigation.Beyond the legal reading, the broad authority argument defies plain logic: If the special counsel could investigate anything he wants, why would there even need to be a letter spelling out the specific limits of the investigation?One of the dynamics at play here is that people are conflating this investigation and Kenneth Starr's 1994 investigation into President Bill Clinton. While partly understandable at first glance, the two investigations are not comparable -- not only have more than two decades passed since then, but a completely new law and legal framework governing separate investigations has also passed. Starr was an independent counsel and Mueller is a special counsel, the two words are different for a reason.Any investigation into President Trump's finances or the finances of his family?would require Mueller to return to Rod Rosenstein for additional authority under Mueller's appointment as special counsel.If he were to continue to investigate the financial relationships without a broadened scope in his appointment, then this would raise serious concerns that the special counsel's investigation was a mere witch hunt. If Mueller is indeed going down this path, Rosenstein should act to ensure the investigation is within its jurisdiction and within the authority of the original directive.I've prosecuted several financial crimes at the federal level and I've also defended plenty in my private practice. From this unique vantage point, I can understand how a motivated prosecutor, in a broad investigation into the financial affairs of high-profile individuals, can become overzealous toward the targets of such probes -- with calamitous results. While no one is above the law, in situations such as this, any seasoned prosecutor must use discretion both judiciously and expertly.It is time for Rosenstein, who is the acting attorney general for the purposes of this investigation, to order Mueller to limit the scope of his investigation to the four corners of the order appointing him special counsel.If he doesn't, then Mueller's investigation will eventually start to look like a political fishing expedition. This would not only be out of character for a respected figure like Mueller, but also could be damaging to the President of the United States and his family -- and by extension, to the country. 7167

来源：资阳报