喀什取节育环适合时间喀什阴道紧缩术有后遗症吗,喀什妇科较好的妇科医院,喀什验孕棒怎么使用图,喀什切包皮怎么治疗比较好,喀什怎么看勃起障碍,喀什女人在什么时候上环好,喀什那家男科医院好一些

WASHINGTON – Americans will soon pay more for Scotch and Irish whiskies, Parmesan cheese and French wine after the Trump administration said it would impose 168

WASHINGTON, D.C. — He’s a 250-pound four-year-old, heading for his homeland.For more than a week now, crowds have gathered at the National Zoo in Washington, D.C., to say bye-bye to Bei Bei.“He's captured our hearts for over four years and we want to say thank you for all the joy, smiles, happiness, laughter he's given us,” said Gena Kim, who flew in all the way from Los Angeles to see Bei Bei one last time.Bei Bei — a name that means “precious treasure” in Mandarin Chinese — embarked on a 16-hour flight back to China on Tuesday. It is part of an agreement between the zoo and the Chinese government. It’s something the panda keepers knew would happen one day, but still find tough to face.“There's the very professional side of me that's known from the moment he was born, per the loan agreement, that he has to return to China,” said National Zoo panda keeper Marty Dearie. “But the personal side of me, I know he's one of my favorite animals I've ever worked with.”Pandas in zoos around the world are — for all intents and purposes — on loan from China. The agreement between the National Zoo and China is part of a conservation program designed to save the giant panda, listed as "vulnerable" in the wild by the International Union for Conservation of Nature. The pandas are sent back to China to be reintroduced to the wild. In Washington, Bei Bei’s parents will stay for now. Their agreements are up next year.“They are on loan with us through December of next year, at which point there will be a renegotiation about what we're doing with those guys,” Dearie said.Other than the National Zoo, only two others in the U.S. have pandas: Atlanta and Memphis. The San Diego zoo’s pandas had to be returned to China in April when their agreement was not renewed by the Chinese government. Zoo officials there said the contract was up and the panda’s return had nothing to do with U.S.-China tensions over trade and tariffs.Back in the nation’s capital, panda fans hope Bei Bei’s parents, Mei Xiang and Tian Tian, get to stay in D.C. for years to come.“We're so attached to Mei Xiang and Tian Tian,” Kim said. “We really wish that they can stay longer here in Washington, D.C. because they're the power couple in D.C.”They are a power couple in a town that can, at times, be panda-monium. 2311

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin punted again Wednesday when pressed about an Obama-era plan to put Harriet Tubman on the bill.Rep. Ayanna Pressley, a Massachusetts Democrat, questioned Mnuchin during a House Financial Services Committee hearing, asking about 296

WESTERVILLE, Ohio – Democrats on Tuesday tackled a wide range of issues at the fourth Democratic presidential debate in Ohio. There were also a wide range of issues not discussed at Tuesday’s debate. Issues such as climate change, affordable housing and immigration were left off the table during Tuesday’s three-hour-long debate. Following the debate, former HUD Secretary Julian Castro tweeted his frustration that these topics were not addressed. The final question of Tuesday’s debate probed the candidates on if they have an unusual friendship like Ellen DeGeneres’ friendship with George W. Bush.“Three hours and no questions tonight about climate, housing, or immigration. Climate change is an existential threat. America has a housing crisis. Children are still in cages at our border. But you know, Ellen," Castro said.According to a 855

WASHINGTON – A federal appeals court has largely upheld the Federal Communications Commission's controversial repeal of its net neutrality rules for internet providers, finding the agency didn't overreach when it decided in 2018 to deregulate companies such as Comcast and Verizon.The decision marks a victory for the Republican-led commission in light of opposition by consumer groups, tech companies and local government officials who had sued the agency in a years-long battle over the future of the open internet.But there is an important caveat: The court struck down a key aspect of the agency's order that could lead to further battles at the state level.Tuesday's opinion by the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit is a win for the broadband industry, which had argued the regulations created uncertainty for internet providers and were too restrictive. But the decision also handed a partial victory to net neutrality advocates in that it provides a path for states to create their own net neutrality rules.Both sides were quick to declare victory.In a statement Tuesday, FCC Chairman Ajit Pai said the decision is a win "for consumers, broadband deployment, and the free and open Internet." He added: "A free and open Internet is what we have today and what we'll continue to have moving forward."Democratic FCC commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel, a net neutrality advocate, cheered the court's decision as it "vacates the FCC's unlawful effort to block states and localities from protecting an open internet for their citizens."For years, consumer groups have pushed for tough net neutrality rules. Advocates say providers should not be allowed to slow down websites, block access to apps or give faster service to preferred partners, which could distort the market for online services. Under those principles, Verizon, for example, would not be allowed to speed up loading times for, say, Yahoo, which it owns. Similarly, Spectrum could not downgrade Netflix as a way to deter cord-cutting.In light of the decision, Mozilla, maker of the Firefox browser and one of the lead plaintiffs in the case, said the fight to preserve the principle of net neutrality "is far from over."Consumer groups succeeded in 2015 when the FCC decided to regulate internet providers much like legacy telephone companies. The agency imposed clear rules banning the blocking, throttling or accelerating of Web content by internet providers and reserved the right to investigate business practices that risked violating the spirit of net neutrality.Opponents charged that the rules were a gross overreach by the government. Industry groups argued the constant danger of FCC investigations created business uncertainty and the rules opened the door to direct federal regulation of broadband prices.When President Trump took the White House, Republicans gained control of the FCC. Among the first acts Pai took as the new chairman was a plan to unwind the rules. Pai argued that the net neutrality regulations were heavy-handed and discouraged internet providers from upgrading their networks. In 2017, the FCC voted to repeal major parts of the rules, including the bans on blocking and slowing of websites.Internet providers say they are not interested in blocking or slowing down websites anyway.USTelecom, an association representing broadband providers, said the litigation showed how "Congress must end this regulatory rinse and repeat cycle by passing a strong national framework that applies to all companies."But internet providers have lobbied for the freedom to strike deals with websites to provide premium service, possibly in exchange for extra fees.Some policymakers have argued that practice, known as "paid prioritization," could benefit advanced applications like self-driving cars and telemedicine. Critics worry it could become an unbearable cost for some websites and tech companies — giving wealthy, established firms the power to dominate while marginalizing smaller businesses that can't afford to pay.Those arguments figured prominently in the legal battle over net neutrality. A coalition of critics led by Mozilla sued the FCC in hopes of blocking Pai's deregulation.The case was decided with the panel's three judges concluding the FCC acted lawfully when it decided to undo the Obama-era rules and regulate internet providers more lightly.But the opinion also struck down efforts by the FCC to prevent state governments from enacting their own net neutrality laws and regulations. The court on Tuesday rejected that approach, saying it amounted to an attempt to "categorically abolish all fifty States' ... authority to regulate intrastate communications." The FCC could still seek to preempt states on a case-by-case basis, setting the stage for multiple legal tussles.Andy Schwartzman, a lecturer in law at Georgetown University, said the decision "provides a roadmap to rules that can protect the promise of a vibrant internet that serves people, not the big cable and telcom companies." 5018