石景山区甲颜悦色美甲加盟电话多少钱(银川市如画美甲加盟电话多少钱) (今日更新中)

SACRAMENTO (AP) — California is seeking to join the Justice Department in its antitrust lawsuit against Google parent Alphabet Inc. The Justice Department sued Google in October, saying it has abused its dominance in online search and advertising. The case, filed in federal court in Washington, D.C., alleges that Google uses billions of dollars collected from advertisers to pay phone manufacturers to ensure Google is the default search engine on browsers. Eleven states, all with Republican attorneys general, joined the federal government in the lawsuit at the time. California is the first Democratic state announcing its intent to join the Justice Department’s case. 681

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California Gov. Gavin Newsom has ordered the state police training program to stop teaching officers how to use a hold that can block the flow of blood to the brain. It is Newsom's first action following two weeks of protests across the country after the death of George Floyd. Floyd died on Memorial Day after a police officer put his knee on his neck for nearly 10 minutes.Since then, some police departments have moved to end the use of carotid holds that stop or slow the flow of blood to the brain. RELATED: More San Diego law enforcement agencies are dropping the use of carotid restraintSan Diego Police was the first local agency to ban the restraint technique and was soon followed by several other departments:Carlsbad Police DepartmentChula Vista Police DepartmentCoronado Police DepartmentEl Cajon Police DepartmentEscondido Police DepartmentLa Mesa Police DepartmentNational City Police DepartmentOceanside Police DepartmentSan Diego Community College Police DepartmentSan Diego County Sheriff’s DepartmentSan Diego Harbor Police DepartmentSan Diego State University Police DepartmentSan Diego Unified School District Police DepartmentUniversity of San Diego Police DepartmentNewsom said that hold has no place in the 21st century. 1278

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (KGTV) -- A proposition that would authorize billions for California educational facilities will appear on the March 2020 ballot. Proposition 13 authorizes a billion bond that would go to preschool and K-12 schools as well as universities and community colleges, according to Ballotpedia. A total of billion would be used for preschool and K-12 schools while billion will go to universities. Meanwhile, billion is set aside for community colleges. The California Legislative Analyst says the state would pay billion in total - billion in principal and billion in interest. The payments would be made over 35 years from the General Fund, Ballotpedia says. RELATED: Here's what happens if voters approve Measure B - Newland SierraThe analysis also shows that Prop 13 would cost taxpayers an additional 0 million per year for 35 years. According to Cal Matters, those in favor of the measure, including Governor Gavin Newsom, say it will focus on modernizing schools as opposed to new construction. Those against proposition 13, including the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, say it would cause an increase in local property taxes and add to state debt and interest costs. “Like all bond debt, that must be paid ahead of any other priorities, even law enforcement,” the association says. “If there is a recession, too much debt puts us at risk of a reduction in services or demands for emergency tax increases at the worst possible time.”RELATED: Here's what happens if Measure C passesClick here to read more from the association. A “yes” vote supports proposition 13 while a “no” vote opposes the measure. Check out the breakdown below of how the money would be spent if approved: billion for preschool and K-12.8 billion for new construction of school facilities.2 billion for modernization of school facilities0 million for providing school facilities to charter schools0 million for facilities for career and technical education programs billion for universities billion for capital outlay financing needs of the California State Universities billion for capital outlay financing needs of the University of California and Hastings College of LawCommunity colleges billion billion for capital outlay financing needs of community colleges 2322

Rudy Giuliani just contradicted the White House and the Justice Department on a very sensitive subject: The AT&T-Time Warner deal."The president denied the merger," Giuliani, a new member of President Trump's legal team, said in an interview with HuffPost on Friday.Giuliani was seemingly trying to defend the president against any suggestion that Michael Cohen improperly influenced the administration after the revelation that Cohen, Trump's longtime personal attorney, was paid large sums of money by AT&T and several other corporate clients."Whatever lobbying was done didn't reach the president," Giuliani said, repeating a claim he made to CNN's Dana Bash on Thursday.But then Giuliani went further, telling HuffPost's S.V. Date that "he did drain the swamp... The president denied the merger. They didn't get the result they wanted."In other words: If AT&T hired Cohen to win government approval of the deal, AT&T wasted its 0,000.But the assertion that "the president denied the merger" flies in the face of everything the government has previously said about the deal."If Giuliani didn't misspeak, this is major news," former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti tweeted Friday night. "It is highly unusual for the president to be involved in DOJ merger decisions."It is possible that Giuliani misspoke, or that he simply does not know what he's talking about. He was not working for Trump at the time the Justice Department was reviewing the deal. Since he began representing Trump, he has had to change the story he has been telling in public about Stormy Daniels and what Trump knew or didn't know and when about the payment Cohen made to her. And he may simply have meant "the president" as a stand-in for "the administration."But this is not the first time that there have been questions about whether politics and Trump influenced the DOJ's decision.On the day AT&T announced its bid to buy Time Warner, the parent company of CNN, then-candidate Trump said he opposed the deal. So when he took office, there were concerns within AT&T and Time Warner that he or his aides would try to block the deal.AT&T said earlier this week that it hired Cohen, in part, to gain "insights" about the Trump administration's thinking about the deal.Throughout 2017, career officials at the Justice Department's antitrust division conducted a standard review of the proposed deal.The DOJ traditionally operates with a lot of independence. But there were persistent questions about possible political interference, especially in light of the president's well-publicized disdain for both CNN and attorney general Jeff Sessions.Still, AT&T and Time Warner executives believed the deal would receive DOJ approval, much like Comcast's acquisition of NBCUniversal did nearly a decade ago. By October, they thought the thumbs-up was right around the corner.They were wrong. In November, the DOJ went to court to block the deal, alleging that the combination of the two companies would give AT&T too much power in the marketplace.That's when questions about Trump's hidden hand really got louder. Democratic lawmakers raised alarms. So did AT&T and Time Warner. Other critics pointed out Trump's complaints about Sessions and the DOJ. Trump had recently been quoted saying "I'm not supposed to be involved in the Justice Department," adding, "I'm not supposed to be doing the kinds of things I would LOVE to be doing, and I'm very frustrated by it."But White House aides like Kellyanne Conway insisted that the White House was not interfering.The DOJ's antitrust chief, Makan Delrahim, said the same thing. He denied being influenced by Trump.In an affidavit, Delrahim said "all of my decisions" about suing to block the deal "have been made on the merits, without regard to political considerations."Ahead of the trial, AT&T and Time Warner sought discovery on any relevant communications between the White House and the Justice Department. But a judge denied the request, and the companies dropped any argument that the case was motivated by politics.The Justice Department and AT&T had no immediate comment Friday night.The-CNN-Wire 4182

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (KGTV) — California has become the third state to declare a state of emergency due to the threat of the coronavirus.Gov. Gavin Newsom told reporters Wednesday that the state is declaring a statewide emergency in order to take advantage of additional government resources. The declaration comes after developments that a California patient died of coronavirus after reportedly being infected on a cruise from San Francisco to Mexico from Feb. 11 to Feb. 21.The victim was an elderly adult with underlying health issues and was in isolation at the time of death, Placer County health officials said. The cruise ship that the victim had been on earlier is currently being investigated by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Another passenger who is infected is in stable condition at a Sonoma County hospital.The ship is currently at sea, but testing kits will be flown out to its crew for passengers to be tested before the ship docks in San Francisco."There’s a reason that we didn’t want the ship in the Port of San Francisco and in the state of California at this time," Newsom said. "The ship will not come on shore until we appropriately assess the passengers."RELATED: Screener at Los Angeles airport tests positive for coronavirusPassengers currently aboard who were also on the February voyage will also be tested. The CDC is working to identify other passengers from the ship's previous trip and where they got off the vessel. At least nine counties have declared an emergency over the virus, according to state officials. There are at least 53 confirmed cases of coronavirus in California, the Associated Press reported, and has been one death in the state.San Diego County health officials are scheduled to given an update of the local response on Thursday. 1805

来源：资阳报