梅州月经性阴道炎影响怀孕吗梅州人流在线观看,梅州脂肪填充术,梅州泪沟怎么治,梅州治疗滴虫阴道炎多少钱,梅州做去眼袋,梅州医院妇科哪个好,梅州割个双眼皮价格

Roseanne Barr apologized after a bizarre, racist Twitter rant Tuesday morning, and then announced she's "now leaving Twitter." Following the rant, one of the show's consulting producers, Wanda Sykes, said she's done with the show."I will not be returning to @RoseanneOnABC," Sykes tweeted.Her announcement came just minutes before ABC announced that it is canceling "Roseanne."Earlier on Tuesday, Bar tweeted an apology to Valerie Jarrett and "all Americans.""I am truly sorry for making a bad joke about her politics and her looks,"Barr tweeted. "I should have known better. Forgive me-my joke was in bad taste." Barr then said she's leaving Twitter.The star of ABC's hit reboot of "Roseanne" wrote early Tuesday morning, "Muslim brotherhood & planet of the apes had a baby=vj." Barr was responding to a comment about Jarrett, a top former aide to president Obama. She later deleted the tweet.CNN reporter Andrew Kaczynski responded to Roseanne on Twitter about the Jarrett comment, which she replied was "a joke."Social media immediately lit up with criticism of both Barr and ABC, with some demanding a response from the broadcast network. ABC has not replied to CNNMoney's request for comment.In the past, ABC executives have privately said that they hold their noses when Barr tweets. They know some of her posts have been problematic -- full of pro-Trump conspiracy theories that mislead her fans.The executives want Barr to focus on her show. But they seem to take the position that there's no controlling Barr, and that's what makes her the successful comic she is.ABC employees shared these views on condition of anonymity earlier this year, before the current Twitter controversy.Barr also made comments on Twitter about Chelsea Clinton, tweeting, "Chelsea Soros Clinton." She later replied in the comments that Clinton is "married to Soros nephew." Soros is a billionaire liberal benefactor who has been the subject to many right-wing conspiracy theories over the years.Clinton responded to Barr shortly after."Good morning Roseanne - my given middle name is Victoria. I imagine George Soros's nephews are lovely people. I'm just not married to one," she wrote.Barr responded back to Clinton saying, "Sorry to have tweeted incorrect info about you! Please forgive me!"She then continued, "By the way, George Soros is a nazi who turned in his fellow Jews 2 be murdered in German concentration camps & stole their wealth-were you aware of that? But, we all make mistakes, right Chelsea?"This conspiracy theory about Soros has been debunked many times. The fact-checking site Snopes called it "false" back in 2016.Roseanne's rant is nothing new to those who follow the sitcom star on Twitter. The star bred controversy on the site before.The premiere of Roseanne's reboot was one of the highest-rated new shows of the season, and Barr is one of the network's biggest stars, if not its biggest.However, after the huge debut, which brought in more than 18 million live viewers, the show saw its audience come back down to earth. Its finale, which aired last week, nabbed roughly 10 million viewers.MSNBC's "Morning Joe" host, Joe Scarborough, was critical of ABC on Twitter following the rant."Hey @ABC, Roseanne Barr compared Valerie Jarrett to an ape. There is no apology she can make that justifies @ABC turning a blind eye to this bigotry by airing another second of her show," he tweeted. "Even in the Age of Trump, there are red lines that can never be crossed. This is one."Others like civil rights activist DeRay Mckesson called on the network to cancel the show.".@ABC, how desperate are you to profit from Roseanne's racism? We know racism sells in this country, it always has. But you don't have to participate in it," he tweeted. "This apology is meaningless. Cancel Roseanne."The-CNN-Wire 3823

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California lawmakers are abandoning a proposal by Gov. Jerry Brown to shield electrical utilities from some financial liability for wildfires. For now.There's not enough time to settle the contentious and complex issues involved before the legislative session ends Aug. 31, Napa Democratic Sen. Bill Dodd told the San Francisco Chronicle on Saturday."It was a tough fight ... so we are pivoting," said Dodd, co-chairman of the legislative conference committee on wildfire preparedness and response.Brown's proposal would have let judges decide how much utilities pay when their equipment causes wildfires. It would have softened a legal standard that generally holds them entirely responsible for the costs of fires triggered by their power lines or other infrastructure.Current California law holds utilities responsible for damage from fires ignited by their equipment even if they have followed safety rules.Those who want to change the law fear utilities could go bankrupt or significantly raise prices for California residents as climate change makes wildfires even more severe.Lawmakers raised concerns about Brown's plan at an Aug. 9 hearing on the proposal. They said it would give utility companies too much protection without ensuring they safely maintain equipment.The issue was raised last fall when Pacific Gas and Electric Co. launched a lobbying campaign with other big utility companies to change the system.It's unlikely they'll drop their fight but they will lose a key ally in Brown, whose term ends in January. 1574

RICHMOND, Ind. — Shots were fired at a Richmond middle school Thursday morning.The incident happened at Dennis Middle School, at about 8 a.m. local time. Police say a teenaged suspect is dead after taking his own life.The school district confirmed on Twitter there was an active shooter. The school is secure.The suspect is contained, WRTV in Indianapolis reports.All Richmond Community Schools are on lockdown, the district posted on Facebook. Nobody may leave or enter the buildings.It is unknown if anybody was hurt. This story will be updated.  566

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — High-capacity gun magazines will remain legal in California under a ruling Friday by a federal judge who cited home invasions where a woman used the extra bullets in her weapon to kill an attacker while in two other cases women without additional ammunition ran out of bullets."Individual liberty and freedom are not outmoded concepts," San Diego-based U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez wrote as he declared unconstitutional the law that would have banned possessing any magazines holding more than 10 bullets.California law has prohibited buying or selling such magazines since 2000, but those who had them before then were allowed to keep them.In 2016, the Legislature and voters approved a law removing that provision. The California arm of the National Rifle Association sued and Benitez sided with the group's argument that banning the magazines infringes on the Second Amendment right to bear arms.Benitez had temporarily blocked the law from taking effect with a 2017 ruling.Chuck Michel, an attorney for the NRA and the California Rifle & Pistol Association, said the judge's latest ruling may go much farther by striking down the entire ban, allowing individuals to legally acquire high-capacity magazines for the first time in nearly two decades."We're still digesting the opinion but it appears to us that he struck down both the latest ban on possessing by those who are grandfathered in, but also said that everyone has a right to acquire one," Michel said.Attorney General Xavier Becerra said in a statement that his office is "committed to defending California's common sense gun laws" and is reviewing the decision and evaluating its next steps.The goal of the California law is to deter mass-shootings, with Becerra previously listing as an example the terrorist assault that killed 14 and injured 22 in San Bernardino.Benitez, an appointee of Republican President George W. Bush, called such shootings "exceedingly rare" while emphasizing the everyday robberies, rapes and murders he said might be countered with firearms.The Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, named after a former congresswoman who survived a mass shooting, is also still evaluating whether the decision applies more broadly, said staff attorney Ari Freilich.But Freilich predicted the "extreme outlier decision" will be overturned on appeal and criticized a judge "so deeply out of touch that he believes mass shootings are a 'very small' problem in this country."Becerra previously said similar Second Amendment challenges have been repeatedly rejected by other courts, with at least seven other states and 11 local governments already restricting the possession or sale of large-capacity magazines. The conflicting decisions may ultimately be sorted out by the U.S. Supreme Court.Benitez ruled that magazines holding more than 10 rounds are "arms" under the U.S. Constitution, and that the California law "burdens the core of the Second Amendment by criminalizing the acquisition and possession of these magazines that are commonly held by law-abiding citizens for defense of self, home, and state."Benitez described three home invasions, two of which ended with the female victims running out of bullets.In the third case, the pajama-clad woman with a high-capacity magazine took on three armed intruders, firing at them while simultaneously calling for help on her phone."She had no place to carry an extra magazine and no way to reload because her left hand held the phone with which she was still trying to call 911," the judge wrote, saying she killed one attacker while two escaped.The magazine ban was included in 2016 legislation that voters strengthened with their approval of Proposition 63, which was championed by then-Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom.In a statement, Newsom criticized the judge's ruling."This District Court Judge's failure to uphold a ban on high-capacity magazines is indefensible, dangerous for our communities and contradicts well-established case law," the governor said. "I strongly disagree with the court's assessment that 'the problem of mass shootings is very small.' Our commitment to public safety and defending common sense gun safety laws remains steadfast." 4228

Russian hackers are at it again. They’re already targeting this year’s midterm elections.“One, to try to infiltrate our election infrastructure, and second, to try to infiltrate our minds with misinformation,” says David Becker, executive director and founder of The Center for Election Innovation & Research, of the Russian meddling.In 2016, Russian hackers targeted voting systems in at least 21 states, according to Homeland Security officials. While no votes were changed, states are now trying to prepare for what could happen this year.“States are going to need the federal government to step up, because states can’t defend against a nation state as big as Russia,” says Becker.Congress approved 0 million in election security funding for states. Becker said the money will go toward things like new voting machines that are more secure, updating computer software to protect voter information and hiring and training staff on cyber threats. House and Senate Republicans blocked millions in additional funding to bolster election security efforts, saying it’s too soon to allocate additional money and want to see how states use the 0 million already given out. While state and local governments are working to protect our elections, Becker said voters can also do something to help out.“Register to vote; check your registration and then go vote – earlier by mail if possible,” Becker says. “If there has been some kind of incident, if the Russian’s have infiltrated a voter list for instance, we will discover that early thanks to people voting and when we discover it early we can fix it early and make sure it has no impact on the election.” 1690