昆明台俪妇科在哪里昆明朝外附近 打胎多少钱,昆明去检查妇科多少钱,昆明怀孕1个月打胎吗手术,昆明好的流产医院在附近那里,昆明市流产手术好医院,昆明市医院打胎多钱,昆明保宫式无痛人流医院

A former Nazi SS guard known as "the bookkeeper of Auschwitz" has died before serving a four-year jail term, authorities in Germany said.Oskar Groening, 96, was sentenced for being an accessory to murder in 2015, but never went to jail due to a series of appeals for clemency on grounds of old age and ill-health.He died in a hospital on Friday, according to Spiegel Online. The Hannover public prosecutor's office said it had been informed of Groening's death by his lawyer.Groening was found guilty of being an accessory to the murder of 300,000 people at the Auschwitz death camp in Nazi-occupied Poland during World War II.He was accused of counting the cash found in the belongings of new arrivals at the camp and sending it to Nazi headquarters in Berlin.At least 1.1 million people were killed in the camps at Auschwitz, the vast majority of them Jewish victims of the Nazi genocide, but also Poles, gay people, disabled people and other persecuted minorities.About six million Jewish people died in Nazi concentration camps during the war.For many years after the war, Groening worked as an accountant in a factory and suppressed what he had witnessed and participated in at Auschwitz.But in the mid 1980s he finally came forward to say he had seen the mass killings in response to claims by Holocaust deniers.This admission opened him up to public attention and scrutiny -- and ultimately prosecution.During his trial, Groening admitted that he was "morally complicit" in the crimes but denied that he was legally guilty.Groening insisted in a 2005 interview with Der Spiegel that he had been no more than a "cog in the gears".His first plea for clemency was denied by German prosecutors a day after it was made public, but he never served the sentence due to a raft of further appeals. His latest appeal was denied in January.The legal doctrine under which Nazis can be tried in Germany began to evolve with the conviction in 2011 of another convicted Nazi war criminal, John Demjanjuk, as an accessory to the murder of 28,000 Jews in the Sobibor death camp in Poland.Groening's conviction extended the doctrine further, opening a door to further trials of alleged Nazi criminals.In 2016, Reinhold Hanning, a former SS guard at Auschwitz, was convicted of having assisted in the deaths of 170,000 people and sentenced to five years in prison.The trial of Hubert Zafke -- then 95 and accused of being an accessory to at least 3,681 murders at the same camp -- also began in 2016, but ended in September last year after he was deemed no longer fit to stand trial due to dementia, according to Reuters.In statement posted online, Dr Efraim Zuroff, chief Nazi-hunter at the Simon Wiesenthal Center, a Holocaust research group, said Groning's death just before he was due to serve his sentence was "unfortunate, at least on a symbolic level.""Without at least symbolic justice, these trials -- as important as they are -- lose an important part of their significance," he said."Their victims never had any appeals, nor did their tormentors have any mercy. Consequently these perpetrators don't deserve either."The-CNN-Wire 3135

A local teen helping other teens is the latest recipient of the 10News Leadership Award.Chloe Gubbay thought she was being interviewed for a news segment on teen volunteers. Chloe started the Teen Giving Club at her school and has even helped other schools start similar volunteer clubs. 300

A hearing is scheduled Friday morning in federal court in Manhattan related to the FBI search of the office, home and hotel room of President Donald Trump's personal attorney Michael Cohen.No other information has been released yet about the hearing.Monday's raids included seeking records and communications related to efforts to suppress negative information ahead of the election, including communications that Trump had with Cohen regarding the infamous "Access Hollywood" tape that captured Trump making lewd remarks about women that surfaced a month before the election, CNN reported this week. 608

A Las Vegas personal injury lawyer has been arrested in a theft case stretching back years.Beginning in March, Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department detectives began to receive reports from multiple victims regarding a local personal injury lawyer. Victims that have to this date filed police reports, all allege that their personal injury attorney, later identified as 53-year-old Matthew Dunkley, misappropriated financial settlements the victims were to receive as a result of their cases in which Dunkley represented them.The reports indicated that Dunkley, in addition to misappropriating the settlements to the victims, also took money from the insurance companies that were intended to cover the victims’ medical bills. The victims never received their settlements and are now being held personally responsible for the unpaid medical bills. On Monday, Dunkley was located by detectives with the LVMPD Major Violators Section Repeat Offender Program and taken into custody. He was transported to the Clark County Detention Center where he faces at least 39 counts of theft.As of his arrest, detectives believe approximately .8 million was taken from victims.Detectives are asking any additional clients of Dunkley Law who may be awaiting settlements and were victimized by this scheme, to contact the LVMPD Theft Crimes Bureau at 702-828-3483.Clear Counsel Law Group has assumed some of the cases, but these clients may still have been victimized by Dunkley.In 2017, the Nevada bar asked Clear Counsel to assist Mr. Dunkley's former clients with open legal matters. Clear Counsel Law Group has no other relationship with Mr. Dunkley.Many of these cases were from personal injury cases that had occurred as far back as 2012, and one of the incidents involved a 5-year-old child who had been the victim of a dog attack. These victims also filed complaints with the State Bar of Nevada.According to the website of the State Bar of Nevada, Dunkley was suspended from practicing law in October of 2017. 2047

A federal judge in Texas said on Friday that the Affordable Care Act's individual coverage mandate is unconstitutional and that the rest of the law must also fall."The Court ... declares the Individual Mandate ... unconstitutional," District Judge Reed O'Connor wrote in his decision. "Further, the Court declares the remaining provisions of the ACA ... are inseverable and therefore invalid."The case against the ACA, also known as Obamacare, brought by 20 Republican state attorneys general and governors, as well as two individuals. It revolves around Congress effectively eliminating the individual mandate penalty by reducing it to <云转化_句子> as part of the 2017 tax cut bill.The Republican coalition is arguing that the change rendered the mandate itself unconstitutional. They say that the voiding of the penalty, which takes effect next year, removes the legal underpinning the Supreme Court relied upon when it upheld the law in 2012 under Congress' tax power. The mandate requires nearly all Americans to get health insurance or pay a penalty.The Trump administration said in June that it would not defend several important provisions of Obamacare in court. It agreed that the zeroing out the penalty renders the individual mandate unconstitutional but argued that that invalidates only the law's protections of those with pre-existing conditions. These include banning insurers from denying people policies or charging them more based on their medical histories, as well as limiting coverage of the treatment they need.But the administration maintained those parts of the law were severable and the rest of the Affordable Care Act could remain in place.Because the administration would not defend the law, California, joined by 16 other Democratic states, stepped in. They argued that the mandate remains constitutional and that the rest of the law, in any event, can stand without it. Also, they said that eliminating Obamacare or the protections for those with pre-existing conditions would harm millions of Americans.In oral arguments in September, a lawyer for California said that the harm from striking down the law would be "devastating" and that more than 20 million Americans were able to gain health insurance under it.The lawsuit entered the spotlight during the midterm elections, helping propel many Democratic candidates to victory. Protecting those with pre-existing conditions became a central focus of the races. Some 58% of Americans said they trust Democrats more to continue the law's provisions, compared to 26% who chose Republicans, according to a Kaiser Family Foundation election tracking poll released in mid-October.The consumer protections targeted by the administration are central to Obamacare and transformed the health insurance landscape. Their popularity is one of the main reasons GOP lawmakers had such difficulty repealing Obamacare last year."Guaranteed issue" requires insurers to offer coverage to everyone regardless of their medical history. Prior to the Affordable Care Act, insurers often rejected applicants who are or had been ill or offered them only limited coverage with high rates.Under the law's community rating provision, insurers are not allowed to set premiums based on a person's health history. And the ban on excluding pre-existing conditions from coverage meant that insurers cannot refuse to pay for treatments because of a policyholder's medical background.All these provisions meant millions of people with less-than-perfect health records could get comprehensive coverage. But they also have pushed up premiums for those who are young and healthy. This group would have likely been able to get less expensive policies that offered fewer benefits prior to Obamacare. That has put the measures in the crosshairs of Republicans seeking to repeal the law and lower premiums.It's no wonder that politicians on both sides of the aisle promised to protect those with pre-existing conditions during the election. Three-quarters of Americans say that it is "very important" for the law to continue prohibiting health insurers from denying coverage because of medical histories, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation's September tracking poll -- 58% of Republicans feel the same way. And about the same share of Americans say it's "very important" that insurers continue to be barred from charging sick people more. 4383