梅州慢性淋菌性尿道炎怎么治疗(梅州怎么治疗重度宫颈糜烂好) (今日更新中)

Ensa Cosby, daughter of embattled comedian Bill Cosby, has died at the age of 44, TMZ reported and the Associated Press confirmed on Monday. Ensa Cosby reportedly died Friday night in Massachusetts. The cause of her death is unknown as of Monday afternoon. Ensa Cosby was a steadfast supporter of her father, who has been battling accusations of sexual misconduct. Bill Cosby faced a sexual assault trial in 2017, which ended in a mistrial. Ensa Cosby issued a statement on last year on "The Breakfast Club" radio show backing her father. "The accusations against my father have been one-sided from the beginning. When he tried to defend himself, he was sued in civil court," she said. "I've seen the accusations become more horrific and extreme with time and I've witnessed my father's reputation and legendary works be dismissed without any proof."I strongly believe my father is innocent of the crimes that are alleged against him and I believe that racism has played a big role in all aspects of this scandal. How the charges came against him, how people believed them before they were ever scrutinized or tested, how people who questioned the claims were shut down and ignored."Ensa Cosby did not follow her father into show business. Her only acting credit came in 1989, appearing in one episode of "The Cosby Show."Ensa is the second of Bill Cosby's five children to have died. In 1997, Cosby's son Ennis died during an armed robbery.  1510

FALLBROOK, Calif. (KGTV) -- A 60-year-old man died after crashing his motorcycle in Fallbrook early Sunday morning, according to California Highway Patrol. CHP says the man was driving east on Mission Road when he began to weave before striking a curb and tumbling down an embankment just after 1 a.m. According to CHP, someone gave the man CPR, but he died at the scene. CHP says the San Diego County Medical Examiner will determine whether or not a medical condition played a role in the crash. 505

Federal authorities are investigating after officials in Massachusetts confirm that a ballot drop box in Boston was set on fire early Sunday morning.According to WCVB-TV in Boston, a ballot drop box out front of the Boston Public Library's main branch in Copley Square was set ablaze around 4 a.m. ET on Sunday morning. Crews eventually extinguished the fire with water.According to WCVB, an "incendiary device" was used to start the fire. WBTS-TV reports that the FBI is investigated in the incident."For the next several weeks, it is a top priority of our offices to help maintain the integrity of the election process in Massachusetts by aggressively enforcing federal election laws," the FBI and U.S. Attorney's Office in Massachusetts said in a joint statement.Boston Mayor Marty Walsh and Secretary of the Commonwealth William Galvin also both condemned the incident in a joint statement.“What happened in the early hours of this morning to the ballot drop box in Copley Square is a disgrace to democracy, a disrespect to the voters fulfilling their civic duty, and a crime,” the statement read. “Our first and foremost priority is maintaining the integrity of our elections process and ensuring transparency and trust with our voters, and any effort to undermine or tamper with that process must be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. We ask voters not to be intimidated by this bad act, and remain committed to making their voices heard in this and every election.”Officials later determined that there were 122 ballots inside the drop box at the time of the wire. Of those ballots, 87 were legible and able to processed. Thirty-five ballots were damaged, and WBTS reported that "up to 10" cannot be counted.Officials say any Massachusetts voter who dropped off their ballot at the library between 2:30 p.m. ET on Saturday and 4 a.m. ET on Sunday should check the status of their ballot on the state's tracking website or contact the city's Elections Department.The incident comes just over a week after a ballot box in southern California was set on fire in an apparent act of arson. 2109

FALLBROOK (CNS) - Authorities Saturday were continuing to seek a driver who was involved in a crash with another car in Fallbrook early Friday then fled, was pursued by the other car's driver and escaped when the other driver was involved in a second crash.Officers said the driver of the Mustang was in critical condition at a hospital as a result of the crash.The dangerous chain of events began shortly before 9:40 a.m. when a brown SUV, possibly a GMC Envoy, and a Ford Mustang collided on southbound South Mission Road at Stage Coach Lane, just west of Fallbrook High School, according to information from CHP Officer Mark Latulippe.The "involved vehicles began to chase each other," Latulippe said, and the two cars initially headed south, but later turned around and continued north on South Mission Road.As the cars approached the intersection with Stage Coach Lane -- the same area where the first collision occurred -- a Honda CRV was also nearing the signal, heading west on Stage Coach.The SUV made it through the intersection, but the Mustang was struck by the CRV, which was heading into the intersection with a green light, Latulippe said.Another two cars, a Toyota Tundra and a Volvo V60, were also struck by the Mustang after the impact with the CRV.The driver of the Mustang, a 19-year-old Fallbrook man, suffered "major injuries" and was taken to Palomar Medical Center, where he was listed in critical condition Friday night, Latulippe said.A female passenger in the Mustang, also 19, was being treated at Sharp Memorial Hospital for injuries described as minor.Drivers and passengers in the other cars involved in the second crash had complaints of pain, but no other injuries, according to Latulippe.It is believed the car involved in the initial crash is possibly an early 2000s GMC Envoy driven my a man. Its driver continued north on South Mission Road after the collision, and was last seen near Rocky Crest Road.The intersection of South Mission Road and Stage Coach Lane was closed for about an hour-and-a-half on Friday while officers investigated. 2085

Even during this time of strong political divisiveness, lawmakers agree there should be changes to Section 230. Congressional committees have subpoenaed the CEOs and heads of major tech companies like Facebook, Twitter and Google multiple times to answer questions about possible bias, eliminating competition, allowing misinformation to flourish, etc., all trying to get to the heart of what should be done about Section 230.So, what is it?Section 230 refers to a section of just 26 words within the 1996 Communications Decency Act.It reads: “no provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.”This particular section makes it so internet companies are generally exempt from liability for the material users post on their networks.Which means, if a news website article makes false malicious statements about a person, that person can sue the publication for libel. However, if that article is posted on social media and spread to hundreds of thousands of people, the person can only sue the individual who posted the article and cannot hold the social media company responsible for spreading the article.The wording of Section 230 also allows internet companies, and more specifically social platforms, to moderate their content by removing or censoring posts that are obscene, violent or otherwise violate that specific platform’s terms of service and standards, so long as the social platform is acting in “Good Samaritan’ blocking” of harmful content.This has allowed online social platforms to grow and thrive, offering a space for users to share their thoughts and opinions, without the fear that those thoughts and opinions will get the platform in trouble. The wording for Section 230 came from established case law, including a Supreme Court ruling in the middle part of the 20th Century, which held that bookstore owners cannot be held liable for selling books containing what some might consider obscene content. The Supreme Court said it would create a “chilling effect” if someone was held responsible for someone else’s content.“Today it protects both from liability for user posts as well as liability for any clams for moderating content,” said Jeff Kosseff, who wrote a book about Section 230 and how it created the internet as it is today.President Donald Trump in May signed an executive order that would clarify the scope of the immunity internet companies receive under Section 230.“Online platforms are engaging in selective censorship that is harming our national discourse,” the order reads.One of the issues raised in the executive order is the question of when does a social platform become a so-called “publisher” by making editorial decisions about the content on the platform. Those decisions include controlling the content allowed on the platform, what gets censored, and creating algorithms that spread certain content further or faster.Content publishers are held to different rules and responsibilities by the Federal Communications Commission. News publishers can be held liable for the content they share on their platform, either in print or online.The president’s executive order came after Twitter started adding a fact-check warning to his tweets that contain false or misleading information. The executive order does not allow the president to change the law, but rather encourages his administration to take a look at Section 230.Lawmakers on both sides have concerns about how social platforms are abusing the protection they receive under Section 230, and have held several committee meetings.Many experts agree Section 230 cannot just be removed.If social platforms are suddenly held responsible for the content on their sites, there could be a whole new level of moderation and censorship as they clamp down on anything remotely controversial and unproven - possibly including some of the president’s own posts.Instead, lawmakers are investigating what changes, if any, could be made to Section 230 to offer clarity for both users and internet companies, as well as set boundaries for potential liability. 4178

来源：资阳报