阜阳治皮肤病医院在哪儿(阜阳皮肤病皮肤病) (今日更新中)

The percentage of Americans who say they would probably or definitely get a COVID-19 vaccine when one becomes available has sharply decreased in just the last few months.A survey done in mid-September by the Pew Research Center found only 51 percent of respondents would definitely or probably get the vaccine when one became available. A similar survey done in May found 72 percent of participants would definitely or probably get the vaccine. The 21 point drop was all in the “definitely would get the vaccine” category, according to the data.According to the data, a large drop in the number of American who would get the vaccine was seen in both Republican leaning respondents and Democratic leaning.Republican participants went from 65 percent would get the vaccine in May to 44 percent in September. Participants who identified as Democratic went from 79 percent would get the vaccine in May to 58 percent in September.Large drops were seen across gender, race and ethnicity as well.“About three-quarters of Americans (77%) say it is at least somewhat likely that a vaccine for COVID-19 will be approved and used in the U.S. before it’s fully known whether it is safe and effective, including 36% who say this is very likely to happen,” Pew Research Center wrote of their findings.Of the 49 percent who would not get a vaccine, the majority of them are worried about potential side effects.Side effects are also a concern for those who would get the vaccine. Of the 51 percent who said they would probably or definitely get the vaccine, more than half said that if many people were experiencing minor side effects they would reconsider getting the vaccine.The data came from more than 10,000 Americans surveyed between September 8-13. 1748

The Justice Department has dropped its case against a woman who laughed out loud during the confirmation hearing for Attorney General Jeff Sessions, ending months of legal wrangling.The woman, Desiree Fairooz, was protesting with Code Pink, a progressive group whose activists are regularly seen around Washington. She was arrested by a Capitol Police officer after audibly laughing during Sessions' confirmation hearing in January.But prosecutors filed a "nolle prosequi," or notice that it would no longer pursue charges, with the DC Superior Court on Monday.She had been prosecuted by the DC US Attorney's Office and had been convicted of a misdemeanor before a judge threw out the conviction in July and ordered a new trial. The government had decided to retry the case after Fairooz rejected a plea deal, and a trial date had been set for next week.Fairooz tweeted the notice was a "relief" Monday night."Just received this, "Governments Notice of Nolle Prosequi" What a relief! Guess they've got enough "laughing" matters to deal with!" she tweeted.The US Attorney's Office declined to explain what had changed."The US Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia yesterday filed a notice dismissing the case involving Desiree Ali-Fairooz," said spokesman Bill Miller. "The US Attorney's Office typically does not discuss charging decisions, and has no comment on the decision to dismiss this particular case."The original arrest happened after Fairooz laughed after Alabama Republican Sen. Richard Shelby told senators at Sessions' confirmation hearing that his former colleague had a record of "treating all Americans equally under the law."Her laughter lasted a few seconds and Shelby continued with his speech without acknowledging the disturbance.Fairooz's attorney said in a statement his client is "relieved and happy" about the result."Yesterday the government dismissed the case for reasons I can only speculate about. And which I may never fully know (though I have various theories)," Samuel Bogash said in an email. "Though as her lawyer I would have preferred a 'not guilty' at the first trial, I'm happy for Ms. Fairooz." 2156

The incoming White House administration will have to handle dual public health crises, COVID-19 and racism.President-elect Joe Biden and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris met with the top civil rights leaders Tuesday night.During the meeting, Biden and Harris were commended on recent diverse picks for top cabinet positions, like retired Geb. Lloyd Austin as the country's first black Pentagon chief, and Rep. Marcia Fudge to lead the Department of Housing and Urban Development.“And we want to ensure that that momentum and that progress is going to continue through the remainder of the appointments he makes,” said Marc Morial, President of the National Urban League.Morial says the meeting was candid and productive. He says his organization will support but also hold the administration accountable to their commitments on racial equity and it starts with COVID-19.“Ensuring that there's a plan to educate people in the community, to educate Black people and brown people about the process of the vaccine, about the safety and effectiveness of the vaccine, so people can make their own decision,” said Morial.A top concern among civil rights leaders is vaccine access. Morial says the distribution system shouldn't be solely reliant on chain pharmacies, hospitals and doctors.“To be able to distribute the vaccine at schools, at libraries, at community centers, why not use covered stadiums in some communities, that covered staples in places like Indianapolis and New Orleans and Houston,” said Morial.The head of the NAACP also asked the president-elect for a new national adviser position that would focus on creating policy centered around racial justice and equity. 1685

The Justice Department responded to CNN's lawsuit over the revocation of Jim Acosta's press pass on Wednesday, saying in a court filing that the White House rejects the idea that it can't pick and choose which journalists can be given a permanent pass to cover it."The President and White House possess the same broad discretion to regulate access to the White House for journalists (and other members of the public) that they possess to select which journalists receive interviews, or which journalists they acknowledge at press conferences," lawyers say in the filing.Both CNN and Acosta are plaintiffs. The suit alleges that their First and Fifth Amendment rights are being violated by the ban.Judge Timothy J. Kelly, a Trump appointee, has scheduled a hearing for Wednesday at 3:30 p.m.CNN and Acosta are asking Kelly for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction that would restore his access right away.Lawyers for CNN and Acosta are arguing that time is of the essence because his rights are violated every day his pass is suspended.They are also seeking a declaration that Trump's action was "unconstitutional, in violation of the First Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment." This could protect other reporters against similar actions in the future."This is a very, very important case," Ted Olson said. Olson, a Republican heavyweight who successfully argued for George W. Bush in Bush v. Gore, is representing CNN along with another prominent outside attorney, Theodore Boutrous, and the network's chief counsel, David Vigilante.Olson said Tuesday that it was Acosta whose press pass was suspended this time, but "this could happen to any journalist by any politician."He spoke forcefully against Trump's action. "The White House cannot get away with this," he said in an interview with CNN anchor Brooke Baldwin.CNN's lawyers say the case hinges on Acosta and CNN's First Amendment rights; the shifting rationales behind the ban; and the administration's failure to follow the federal regulations that pertain to press passes, an alleged violation of Fifth Amendment rights.Tuesday's lawsuit rejected the White House's claim that Acosta acted inappropriately at a press conference last week. The suit says this is really about Trump's dislike of Acosta.The "reasonable inference from defendants' conduct is that they have revoked Acosta's credentials as a form of content- and viewpoint-based discrimination and in retaliation for plaintiffs' exercise of protected First Amendment activity," CNN's lawsuit alleges.Many media law experts, unaffiliated with CNN, believe the network has a very strong case.Judge Andrew Napolitano, the top legal analyst on Trump's favorite network, Fox News, said the same thing on Tuesday. "I think this will be resolved quickly," he said, adding "I think it will either be settled or CNN will prevail on motion."If there is no settlement, CNN is requesting a jury trial.In an interview with Wolf Blitzer, Boutrous said the government officials are being sued in their "official capacity," but "there is a possibility of damages claims," which would mean suing them personally.Blitzer pointed out that the officials would have to "go out and hire their own attorneys."It is incredibly rare to see a news organization suing a president.Fox News supports CNN in lawsuit against White House, network's president saysFred Ryan, the publisher and CEO of the Washington Post, expressed his support for the action Tuesday night. "We support CNN in its effort to restore the press credentials of its White House reporter," Ryan said. "It is a journalist's role to ask hard questions, hold the powerful to account and provide readers with as much information as possible."The White House Correspondents' Association is also standing behind CNN. The group said Tuesday that the president "should not be in the business of arbitrarily picking the men and women who cover him." 3956

The Keystone State is living up to its name, as potentially the linchpin in who becomes America’s next president.“Their processes just were never anticipating such an influx,” said Matthew Weil, with the Bipartisan Policy Center.It’s an influx of early absentee and mail-in ballots, in numbers Pennsylvania has never dealt with before. The state received about 2.5 million mail-in ballots, 10 times the number they had in 2016. Yet, counting all of the state’s ballots will take a while.Watch Gov. Tom Wolf provide an update about the state's election results:“In some of the biggest jurisdictions--Philadelphia, Pittsburgh--they just didn't have the experience counting those quickly,” Weil said. “And the fact that the legislature did not give them time before Election Day to count those, even knowing that this was coming, means that most likely we're not going to have great results until Friday.”Among the areas to watch in Pennsylvania: the suburban counties around the state’s two biggest cities, Pittsburgh and Philadelphia. That includes Bucks County, which lies just north of Philadelphia.“Counting the ballots is really an uncertain science for us,” said Bob Harvie, Bucks County Board of Elections Chairman.Those mail-in ballots also take longer to count.“There are two envelopes we have to open: the outside envelope and the secrecy envelope,” Harvie said. “So, it's really double the work.”Here in Bucks County alone, they sent out 200,000 mail-in ballots for this election. That’s 10 times the number they did in 2016. And in Bucks County, like everywhere else across Pennsylvania, ballots postmarked on Election Day can still be counted if they’re received through Friday. However, elections officials are preparing for the possibility of a legal challenge involving those ballots.“We do know that there's very likely to be a legal challenge to that claiming that that's not constitutional,” Harvie said. “So, we are going to start segregating any mail we get.”In the end, though, officials in Pennsylvania hope the 2020 election keeps voters confident in the election system.“The people you see here working, you know these are not political appointees,” Harvie said. “They’re county employees, they’re government employees, and so, really, they're they've committed themselves to giving people a fair, accurate, safe election.”It’s an election that doesn’t appear to be over just yet. 2411

来源：资阳报