梅州未婚意外早孕后微管流产价格梅州提眉筋膜悬吊,梅州有人流的医院,梅州人流手术费多少,梅州美容整形医院排名,梅州怀孕一周能打胎吗,梅州宫颈炎2度怎样治疗,梅州无痛人流在线预约

WASHINGTON (AP) — Nine witnesses. Five hearings. Three days.The Trump impeachment inquiry is charging into a crucial week as Americans hear from some of the most important witnesses closest to the White House in back-to-back-to-back live sessions.Among them, Ambassador Gordon Sondland, the wealthy donor whose routine boasting about his proximity to Donald Trump is now bringing the investigation to the president’s doorstep.The witnesses all are testifying under penalty of perjury, and Sondland already has had to amend his earlier account amid contradicting testimony from other current and former U.S. officials. White House insiders, including an Army officer and National Security Council aide, will launch the week’s hearings Tuesday.It’s a pivotal time as the House’s historic inquiry accelerates and deepens. Democrats say Trump demanded that Ukraine investigate his Democratic rivals in return for U.S. military aid it needed to resist Russian aggression and that may be grounds for removing the 45th president. Trump says he did no such thing and the Democrats are just out to get him any way they can.On Monday, Trump said he was considering an invitation from Speaker Nancy Pelosi to provide his own account to the House, possibly by submitting written testimony. That would be an unprecedented moment in this constitutional showdown between the two branches of U.S. government.Trump tweeted: “Even though I did nothing wrong, and don’t like giving credibility to this No Due Process Hoax, I like the idea & will, in order to get Congress focused again, strongly consider it!”A ninth witness, David Holmes, a State Department official who overheard Trump talking about the investigations on a phone call with Sondland while the ambassador was at a restaurant in Kyiv, was a late addition Monday. He is scheduled to close out the week Thursday.Tuesday’s sessions at the House Intelligence Committee will start with Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, an Army officer at the National Security Council, and Jennifer Williams, his counterpart at Vice President Mike Pence’s office.Both are foreign policy experts who listened with concern as Trump spoke on July 25 with the newly elected Ukraine president. A government whistleblower’s complaint about that call led the House to launch the impeachment investigation.Vindman and Williams say they were uneasy as Trump talked to President Volodymyr Zelenskiy about investigations of potential 2020 political rival Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden.Vindman reported the call to NSC lawyers. Williams found it “unusual” and inserted the White House’s readout of it in Pence’s briefing book.“I did not think it was proper to demand that a foreign government investigate a U.S. citizen,” said Vindman, a wounded Iraq War veteran. He said there was “no doubt” what Trump wanted.Pence’s role remains unclear. “I just don’t know if he read it,” Williams testified in a closed-door House interview.Vindman also lodged concerns about Sondland. He relayed details from an explosive July 10 meeting at the White House when the ambassador pushed visiting Ukraine officials for the investigations Trump wanted.“He was talking about the 2016 elections and an investigation into the Bidens and Burisma,” Vindman testified, referring to the gas company in Ukraine where Hunter Biden served on the board.Burisma is what Tim Morrison, a former official at the National Security Council, who will testify later Tuesday referred to as a “bucket of issues” -- the Bidens, Democrats, investigations -- he had tried to “stay away” from.Along with former special envoy to Ukraine Kurt Volker, their accounts further complicate Sondland’s testimony and characterize Trump as more central to the action.Sondland met with a Zelenskiy aide on the sidelines of a Sept. 1 gathering in Warsaw, and Morrison, who was watching the encounter from across the room, testified that the ambassador told him moments later he pushed the Ukrainian for the Burisma investigation as a way for Ukraine to gain access to the military funds.Volker provided investigators with a package of text messages with Sondland and another diplomat, William Taylor, the charge d’affaires in Ukraine, who grew alarmed at the linkage of the investigations to the aid.Taylor, who testified publicly last week, called that “crazy.”Republicans are certain to mount a more aggressive attack on all the witnesses as the inquiry reaches closer into the White House and they try to protect Trump.The president wants to see a robust defense by his GOP allies on Capitol Hill, but so far they have offered a changing strategy as the fast-moving probe spills into public view.Republicans first complained the witnesses were offering only hearsay, without firsthand knowledge of Trump’s actions. But as more witnesses come forward bringing testimony closer to Trump, they now say the president is innocent because the military money was eventually released.Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, during an appearance Monday in Louisville, Kentucky, acknowledged the House will likely vote to impeach the president.But the GOP leader said he “can’t imagine” a scenario where there is enough support in the Senate -- a supermajority 67 votes -- to remove Trump from office.McConnell said House Democrats “are seized with ‘Trump derangement syndrome,’” a catch-phrase used by the president’s supporters. He said the inquiry seems “particularly ridiculous since we’re going into the presidential election and the American people will have an opportunity in the very near future to decide who they want the next president to be.”GOP senators are increasingly being drawn into the inquiryHouse Republicans asked to hear from Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, who has firsthand knowledge of some of the meetings. GOP Sen. Rob Portman disputed an account from Morrison that he attended a Sept. 11 White House meeting urging Trump to release the Ukraine military aid. Portman’s office said the senator phoned in to the session.Pelosi said the president could speak for himself.“If he has information that is exculpatory, that means ex, taking away, culpable, blame, then we look forward to seeing it,” she said in an interview that aired Sunday on CBS. Trump “could come right before the committee and talk, speak all the truth that he wants if he wants,” she said.Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer said Trump “should come to the committee and testify under oath. And he should allow all those around him to come to the committee and testify under oath.” He said the White House’s insistence on blocking witnesses from cooperating raises the question: “What is he hiding?”The White House has instructed officials not to appear, and most have received congressional subpoenas to compel their testimony.Those appearing in public have already giving closed-door interviews to investigators, and transcripts from those depositions have largely been released.Sondland, Trump’s ambassador to the European Union, is to appear Wednesday.The wealthy hotelier, who donated million to Trump’s inauguration, is the only person interviewed to date who had direct conversations with the president about the Ukraine situation.Morrison said Sondland and Trump had spoken about five times between July 15 and Sept. 11 — the weeks that 1 million in U.S. assistance was withheld from Ukraine before it was released.Trump has said he barely knew Sondland.Besides Sondland, the committee will hear on Wednesday from Laura Cooper, a deputy assistant secretary of defense, and David Hale, a State Department official. On Thursday, Fiona Hill, a former top NSC staff member for Europe and Russia, will appear.___Associated Press writers Jill Colvin and Hope Yen in Washington and Bruce Schreiner in Louisville, Kentucky, contributed. 7797

WARNER SPRINGS, Calif. (KGTV) - Lightning from Thursday’s monsoonal storms sparked a brush fire burning in East San Diego County near Warner Springs. The fire started about 3:45 p.m. at the Hot Springs Lookout on Hot Springs Mountain at the Los Coyotes Reservation, Cal Fire reported. Flames were moving through one acre of heavy brush and timber, officials said."Access is difficult, so air resources are keeping fire spread to a minimum while ground resources make access and begin constructing handline around the fire," Cal Fire posted on Twitter.Check 10News Pinpoint Weather conditionsImages from two of San Diego Gas and Electric's Alert Wildfire cameras showed plumes of smoke amid trees.Hot Springs Mountain is in a remote area and home to a fire lookout station and hiking trail, according to californiathroughmylens.com. 839

WASHINGTON (AP) — Elizabeth Warren’s proposal to gradually move the country to a government-funded health care system has further inflamed the debate over “Medicare for All,” likely ensuring the issue will play a significant role in this week’s Democratic presidential debate.The Massachusetts senator announced Friday that her administration would immediately build on existing laws, including the Affordable Care Act, to expand access to health care while taking up to three years to fully implement Medicare for All. That attempt to thread the political needle has roiled her more moderate rivals, who say she’s waffling, while worrying some on the left, who see Warren’s commitment to a single-payer system wavering.The divide could complicate plans by Democrats to turn health care into a winning issue in 2020. The party successfully took back control of the House last year by championing programs that ensure that people with preexisting medical conditions keep their insurance coverage while arguing that Republicans want to weaken such provisions. But the Medicare for All debate is more delicate as advocates including Warren grapple with concerns that a new government-run system won’t provide the same quality of coverage as private insurance — and would be prohibitively expensive.“The Medicare for All proposal has turned out to be a real deal-breaker in who gets the Democratic nomination,” said Robert Blendon, a Harvard University School of Public Health professor whose teaching responsibilities include courses on political strategy in health policy and public opinion polling. “This is not just another issue.”Warren’s transition plan indicates she’d use her first 100 days as president to expand existing public health insurance options. That is closer to what has been supported by former Vice President Joe Biden and Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Indiana. Both Democratic presidential candidates have criticized Medicare for All for wiping out private insurance — something they say many Americans aren’t ready for.Warren insists she’s simply working to expand health insurance in the short term to people who don’t have it while remaining committed to the full plan in the long run.“My commitment to Medicare for All is all the way,” Warren said while campaigning in Iowa over the weekend.Still, the transition signified a step toward pragmatism and an acknowledgement that the government has ways to expand health insurance coverage before embracing a universal system — something that would be difficult for any president to get through Congress. Consider that current entitlements, such as Social Security and Medicare, were phased in over years, not all at once.“If she’s looked at it and decides the sensible thing to do in order to not cause too much disruption in employment situations and within the medical system is to gear up over three years, she's probably right,” said Cindy Wolf, a customer service and shipping manager who attended the California state Democratic Convention on Saturday in Long Beach.Still, the move may prove politically problematic for a candidate who has long decried others settling for consultant-driven campaigns seeking incremental changes at the expense of big ideas.Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders is the original architect of Medicare for All and has made fighting for it the centerpiece of his 2020 White House bid. He tweeted following the release of Warren’s transition plan: “In my first week as president, we will introduce Medicare for All legislation.”Campaigning in Nevada on Monday, California Sen. Kamala Harris said, “I believe that government should not be in a position of taking away people's choice.”“Especially on one of the most intimate and personal decisions people can make,” Harris said, “which is about how to address their health care needs.”The criticism from others was far sharper. Top Biden adviser Kate Bedingfield dismissed Warren’s plan as “trying to muddy the waters” by offering “a full program of flips and twists.” Buttigieg spokeswoman Lis Smith said it was a “transparently political attempt to paper over a very serious policy problem.”It’s easy to see the issue spilling into Wednesday’s debate because Warren rode a steady summer climb in the polls to become one of the primary field’s front-runners — but no longer seems to be rising. Polls recently show her support stabilizing, though not dipping, as focus on her Medicare for All ideas intensifies.The last two debates featured Warren failing to answer direct questions on whether she would be forced to raise middle class taxes to pay for the universal health care system she envisions. That set up a plan released two-plus weeks ago in which Warren vowed to generate -plus trillion in new government revenue without increasing taxes on the middle class — but that’s been decried by critics who accuse Warren of underestimating how much Medicare for All would really cost.And, though Warren never promised to begin working toward Medicare for All on Day 1 of her administration, the release of the transition plan, which spelled out that the process will take years, has unsettled some.Una Lee Jost, a lawyer who was holding “Bernie” signs in Chinese and English at the California Democratic Convention, called any lengthy transition to Medicare for All “a serious concern.”“We should have implemented this decades ago,” she said.___Associated Press writers Kathleen Ronayne and Michael R. Blood in Long Beach, Calif., and Michelle Price in North Las Vegas, Nev., contributed to this report. 5566

VISTA, Calif. (KGTV) - The mother of a 14-year-old girl sexually assaulted by a San Diego Deputy filed a civil lawsuit citing negligence and invasion of privacy.Deputy Timothy Wilson pleaded guilty to lewd acts on a minor and two counts of unlawfully taking computer data. He’s serving jail time. The victim’s mother, Jennifer Tanis, says Wilson accessed her daughter’s police file 44 times. He was able to get her home address, videos, and pictures of her daughter. She tells 10News she’s suing the county, not for money, but change. Currently, all deputies are allowed to access police files, but she thinks the only person who should have access to them is the lead investigator.She says the county failed her.“There was no system in place to protect my daughter, her story or the pictures they took of her during the investigation," Tanis said.Tanis is pushing for change not only in the county but the entire country. She reached out to Congressman Mike Levin’s office for help. San Diego County has said they have the capability of making police reports private, but only in some cases. Deputy Wilson’s case wasn’t reportedly one of them. 1152

WASHINGTON (AP) — Democrats ignored a veto threat and rammed legislation through the House Tuesday that would stymie President Donald Trump's bid for billions of extra dollars for his border wall, escalating a clash over whether he was abusing his powers to advance his paramount campaign pledge.The House's 245-182 vote to block Trump's national emergency declaration throws the political hot potato to the Republican-run Senate, where there were already enough GOP defections to edge it to the cusp of passage. Vice President Mike Pence used a lunch with Republican senators at the Capitol to try keeping them aboard, citing a dangerous crisis at the border, but there were no signs he'd succeeded."I personally couldn't handicap the outcome at this point," said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., who's planning a vote within the next three weeks.Senate passage would force Trump's first veto, which Congress would surely lack the votes to override. But the showdown was forcing Republicans to cast uncomfortable votes pitting their support for a president wildly popular with GOP voters against fears that his expansive use of emergency powers would invite future Democratic presidents to do likewise for their own pet policies.Underscoring their desire to avoid a tally suggesting that Trump's hold on lawmakers was weakening, House Republican leaders worked to keep the number of GOP supporters below 53. That's how many would be needed to reach a two-thirds majority of 288 votes, assuming all Democrats vote "yes," the margin required for a veto override.Thirteen House Republicans joined all voting Democrats Tuesday to support the Democratic resolution.The White House wrote to lawmakers formally threatening to veto the legislation. The letter said blocking the emergency declaration would "undermine the administration's ability to respond effectively to the ongoing crisis at the Southern Border."Republicans said Democrats were driven by politics and a desire to oppose Trump at every turn, and said Trump had clear authority to declare an emergency to protect the country. They also defended the president's claims of a security crisis along the boundary with Mexico, which he has said is ravaged by drug smugglers, human traffickers and immigrants trying to sneak into the U.S. illegally."We are at war on the Southern border with the drug cartels," said Rep. Pete Olson, R-Texas.Trump has asserted that barriers would stop drugs from Mexico from entering the U.S. In fact, government figures show that 90 percent of drugs intercepted from Mexico are caught at ports of entry, not remote areas where barriers would be constructed.Democrats said Republicans repeatedly accused former President Barack Obama of flouting the Constitution, which gives Congress control over spending, but are ignoring Trump's effort to do the same."Is your oath of office to Donald Trump, or is your oath of office to the Constitution?" House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., asked Republicans.They said Trump's push for the wall reflected a continuation of the anti-immigrant views that helped fuel his election."Since when do we call human beings in need a national emergency?" said Mexican-born Rep. Jesus "Chuy" Garcia, D-Ill. "Is he running out of insults for people like me?"Democrats also said the crisis is a fiction manufactured by Trump to dance around Congress' vote this month to provide less than .4 billion for barrier construction. That was well below the .7 billion Trump demanded as he futilely forced a record-setting 35-day federal shutdown."The president does not get to override Congress in a raucous temper tantrum over his inability to broker a deal" with lawmakers for more money, said Rep. Hank Johnson, D-Ga. Rep. Joaquin Castro, D-Texas, sponsor of the one-sentence measure blocking the declaration, called Trump's move "constitutional vandalism."Trump used a 1976 law to declare a national emergency and ordered the shift of .6 billion from military construction projects to wall building. Citing other powers, he intends to shift another .1 billion from Defense Department anti-drug efforts and a fund that collects seized assets.The money would be used to build steel barriers up to 30 feet tall and other barriers and for "law enforcement efforts," said a White House statement.In the Senate, three Republicans have said they will back Democrats' drive to block the emergency declaration: Maine's Susan Collins, Alaska's Lisa Murkowski and North Carolina's Thom Tillis. One more GOP defection would provide enough votes to approve the Democratic measure, assuming all Democrats and their independent allies back it.Republicans said senators asked Pence numerous questions about which projects Trump would divert to pay for the wall, with Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., saying the discussion was "hearty." Shelby, who chairs the Senate Appropriations Committee, which controls spending, said his panel would quickly "backfill" money for military construction with other funds he did not identify."That issue won't stay alive long," Shelby told reporters.Sen. John Thune of South Dakota, the chief GOP vote counter, said there may be GOP attempts to amend the House measure, saying Republicans "think they have amendments that would improve it."That suggests that McConnell may try finding a way to add language that could sink the Democratic resolution or, perhaps, make it more palatable for Republicans. The law requires the Senate to vote on a measure within 18 days of receiving it from the House.Though presidents have declared 58 emergencies under the law, this is the first aimed at acquiring money for an item Congress has explicitly refused to finance, according to Elizabeth Goitein, co-director for national security at New York University Law School's Brennan Center for Justice. This is also the first time Congress has cast votes on whether to annul an emergency declaration, she said.Even with Democrats' effort near-certain to ultimately fail, several lawsuits have been filed aimed at blocking the money, including by Democratic state attorneys general, progressive and environmental groups. Those suits at the very least are likely to delay access to those funds for months or years.___AP Congressional Correspondent Lisa Mascaro and reporter Colleen Long contributed. 6336