濮阳东方医院看男科病技术专业濮阳东方妇科医院可靠,濮阳东方医院割包皮非常靠谱,濮阳东方医院治阳痿收费低,濮阳东方医院看妇科病专业吗,濮阳东方医院妇科做人流价格标准,濮阳东方妇科医院做人流评价非常好,濮阳东方医院男科治疗早泄口碑非常高

CORONADO, Calif. (KGTV) - On Wednesday, Rear Adm. Collin Green sent notice to Chief Petty Officer Edward Gallagher that his status as a SEAL is under review, according to his lawyer.The process, commonly called a Trident Review, could strip Gallagher of his trident pin and remove him from the SEAL teams, though his rank and paygrade in the Navy would not be changed.“It’s ordinarily a procedure used for a substandard performer or somebody who’s committing safety violations,” said Timothy Parlatore, a civilian attorney for Gallagher.RELATED: Trump restores rank of San Diego Navy SEAL following war crimes caseParlatore said Gallagher is planning on retiring as soon as possible, so the move to strip his trident pin would not have any dramatic effect on his current role.“It has no legitimate value for someone about to retire,” said Parlatore. “It is purely a retaliation. They want to get their pound of flesh because they weren’t able to get it in the trial."In July, a jury acquitted Gallagher of war crime charges, including the allegation that he murdered a teenage ISIS captive and fired into a crowd of Iraqi civilians.RELATED: Navy upholds sentencing of Navy SEAL for posing with corpseBut the jury did find him guilty of posing for a photo with the ISIS captive’s dead body. He was sentenced to four months behind bars and a demotion to E-6 — or Petty Officer First Class.Last week, President Donald Trump stepped in, restoring Gallagher’s rank and pay grade back to Chief Petty Officer.The White House released a statement that read, in part, “As the President has stated, 'when our soldiers have to fight for our country, I want to give them the confidence to fight.‘"RELATED: Navy SEAL Edward Gallagher demoted a rank, docked pay for four monthsParlatore said the decision to initiate a Trident Review for his client is mostly symbolic but plans to fight it.“Chief Gallagher has no intention of quietly retiring,” he said.Parlatore also directly targeted Rear Adm. Green, who oversees the Navy SEALS.RELATED: Navy SEAL on trial: DNA experts, more SEALs testify in Edward Gallagher trial“If I were in charge, I would arrest Admiral Green and have him charged with witness retaliation,” Parlatore told 10News.A spokesperson for the Navy SEALS did not respond to requests for comment by 10News. Cmdr. Sarah Higgins, a spokesperson for Navy Secretary Richard V. Spencer, did not comment directly on the review, but wrote in a statement, “Secretary Spencer supports his commanders in executing their roles, to include Rear Adm. Green.”The review hearing is scheduled for Dec. 2 and 4 in Coronado. 2617

CREST, Calif. (KGTV) - The forward rate of spread of the Dehesa Fire burning in East County has been stopped, Cal Fire tweeted just after 5 p.m. The flames broke out about 3 p.m. east of Dehesa and Sloane Canyon Roads near Sycuan Casino, Cal Fire officials told 10News. Sky10 video indicated the flames were on a ridge above the Sweetwater River and Beaver Hollow.By 8 p.m. the fire had burned 200 acres and was 10 percent contained, Cal Fire reported. The San Diego County Sheriff's Office tweeted evacuations were underway for a "handful of structures" at Sycuan Truck Trail and Japatul Road. Employees of the nearby Dehesa School District offices were told to go home. By 8 p.m., all evacuations were lifted. Fire danger was increased due to dry weather Tuesday. Check conditions here."Today will bring mild Santa Ana winds with gusts of 25 to 35 miles per hour far inland to the mountains with humidity down to 15 to 30 percent with elevated fire danger," said 10News Meteorologist Angelica Campos.There was no indication of what may have caused the fire.The agency said it had 26 fire engines, 12 hand crews, and 3 water tenders on scene to mop up and construct containment lines Tuesday night. Watch video from the fire below: #DehesaFire in Dehesa [update] PIO en route to Sloan Canyon Road and Dehesa Rd. pic.twitter.com/IX75TBXXBE— CAL FIRE/SAN DIEGO COUNTY FIRE (@CALFIRESANDIEGO) September 24, 2019 1417

CNN is filing a lawsuit against President Trump and several of his aides, seeking the immediate restoration of chief White House correspondent Jim Acosta's access to the White House.The lawsuit is a response to the White House's suspension of Acosta's press pass, known as a Secret Service "hard pass," last week. The suit alleges that Acosta and CNN's First and Fifth Amendment rights are being violated by the ban.The suit is being filed in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. on Tuesday morning, a CNN spokeswoman confirmed.Both CNN and Acosta are plaintiffs in the lawsuit. There are six defendants: Trump, chief of staff John Kelly, press secretary Sarah Sanders, deputy chief of staff for communications Bill Shine, Secret Service director Joseph Clancy, and the Secret Service officer who took Acosta's hard pass away last Wednesday. The officer is identified as John Doe in the suit, pending his identification.The six defendants are all named because of their roles in enforcing and announcing Acosta's suspension.Last Wednesday, shortly after Acosta was denied entry to the White House grounds, Sanders defended the unprecedented step by claiming that he had behaved inappropriately at a presidential news conference. CNN and numerous journalism advocacy groups rejected that assertion and said his pass should be reinstated.On Friday, CNN sent a letter to the White House formally requesting the immediate reinstatement of Acosta's pass and warning of a possible lawsuit, the network confirmed.In a statement on Tuesday morning, CNN said it is seeking a preliminary injunction as soon as possible so that Acosta can return to the White House right away, and a ruling from the court preventing the White House from revoking Acosta's pass in the future."CNN filed a lawsuit against the Trump Administration this morning in DC District Court," the statement read. "It demands the return of the White House credentials of CNN's Chief White House correspondent, Jim Acosta. The wrongful revocation of these credentials violates CNN and Acosta's First Amendment rights of freedom of the press, and their Fifth Amendment rights to due process. We have asked this court for an immediate restraining order requiring the pass be returned to Jim, and will seek permanent relief as part of this process."CNN also asserted that other news organizations could have been targeted by the Trump administration this way, and could be in the future."While the suit is specific to CNN and Acosta, this could have happened to anyone," the network said. "If left unchallenged, the actions of the White House would create a dangerous chilling effect for any journalist who covers our elected officials."During his presidential campaign, Trump told CNN that, if elected, he would not kick reporters out of the White House. But since moving into the White House, he has mused privately about taking away credentials, CNN reported earlier this year. He brought it up publicly on Twitter in May, tweeting "take away credentials?" as a question.And he said it again on Friday, two days after blacklisting Acosta. "It could be others also," he said, suggesting he may strip press passes from other reporters. Unprompted, he then named and insulted April Ryan, a CNN analyst and veteran radio correspondent.Trump's threats fly in the face of decades of tradition and precedent. Republican and Democratic administrations alike have had a permissive approach toward press passes, erring on the side of greater access, even for obscure, partisan or fringe outlets.That is one of the reasons why First Amendment attorneys say CNN and Acosta have a strong case.As the prospect of a lawsuit loomed on Sunday, attorney Floyd Abrams, one of the country's most respected First Amendment lawyers, said the relevant precedent is a 1977 ruling in favor of Robert Sherrill, a muckraking journalist who was denied access to the White House in 1966.Eleven years later, a D.C. Court of Appeals judge ruled that the Secret Service had to establish "narrow and specific" standards for judging applicants. In practice, the key question is whether the applicant would pose a threat to the president.The code of federal regulations states that "in granting or denying a request for a security clearance made in response to an application for a White House press pass, officials of the Secret Service will be guided solely by the principle of whether the applicant presents a potential source of physical danger to the President and/or the family of the President so serious as to justify his or her exclusion from White House press privileges."There are other guidelines as well. Abrams said the case law specifies that before a press pass is denied, "you have to have notice, you have to have a chance to respond, and you have to have a written opinion by the White House as to what it's doing and why, so the courts can examine it.""We've had none of those things here," Abrams said.That's why the lawsuit is alleging a violation of the Fifth Amendment right to due process.Acosta found out about his suspension when he walked up to the northwest gate of the White House, as usual, for a Wednesday night live shot. He was abruptly told to turn in his "hard pass," which speeds up entry and exit from the grounds."I was just told to do it," the Secret Service officer said.Other CNN reporters and producers continue to work from the White House grounds, but not Acosta."Relevant precedent says that a journalist has a First Amendment right of access to places closed to the public but open generally to the press. That includes press rooms and news conferences," Jonathan Peters, a media law professor at the University of Georgia, told CNN last week. "In those places, if access is generally inclusive of the press, then access can't be denied arbitrarily or absent compelling reasons. And the reasons that the White House gave were wholly unconvincing and uncompelling."The White House accused Acosta of placing his hands on an intern who was trying to take a microphone away from him during a press conference. Sanders shared a distorted video clip of the press conference as evidence. The White House's rationale has been widely mocked and dismissed by journalists across the political spectrum as an excuse to blacklist an aggressive reporter. And Trump himself has cast doubt on the rationale: He said on Friday that Acosta was "not nice to that young woman," but then he said, "I don't hold him for that because it wasn't overly, you know, horrible."Acosta has continued to do part of his job, contacting sources and filing stories, but he has been unable to attend White House events or ask questions in person -- a basic part of any White House correspondent's role.Acosta is on a previously scheduled vacation this week. He declined to comment on the lawsuit.On CNN's side, CNN Worldwide chief counsel David Vigilante is joined by two prominent attorneys, Ted Boutrous and Theodore Olson. Both men are partners at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher.Last week, before he was retained by CNN, Boutrous tweeted that the action against Acosta "clearly violates the First Amendment." He cited the Sherrill case."This sort of angry, irrational, false, arbitrary, capricious content-based discrimination regarding a White House press credential against a journalist quite clearly violates the First Amendment," he wrote.David McCraw, the top newsroom lawyer at The New York Times, said instances of news organizations suing a president are extremely rare.Past examples are The New York Times v. U.S., the famous Supreme Court case involving the Pentagon Papers in 1971; and CNN's 1981 case against the White House and the broadcast networks, when CNN sued to be included in the White House press pool.The backdrop to this new suit, of course, is Trump's antipathy for CNN and other news outlets. He regularly derides reporters from CNN and the network as a whole.Abrams posited on "Reliable Sources" on Sunday that CNN might be reluctant to sue because the president already likes to portray the network as his enemy. Now there will be a legal case titled CNN Inc. versus President Trump.But, Abrams said, "this is going to happen again," meaning other reporters may be banned too."Whether it's CNN suing or the next company suing, someone's going to have to bring a lawsuit," he said, "and whoever does is going to win unless there's some sort of reason."The-CNN-Wire 8437

CORONADO, Calif. (KGTV) — An iconic Coronado bookstore says it is being forced out after 27 years at its home on Orange Avenue. Bay Books employees say landlord Kleege Enterprises has found a new tenant for the site and that it has to be out by March."I'm obsessed with this bookstore," said manager Barbara Chambers. "I don't know what I'm going to do."Building owner Bruce Kleege says this is not the case. He said he believes negotiations with the bookstore are ongoing and that he would like to keep the bookstore, albeit smaller. Last year, Kleege's company bought almost the entire block of buildings on Orange Avenue, the bookstore included, for million. Already, two high-end restaurants and a poke restaurant are on the way, replacing previous tenants. Kleege says the bookstore is paying a fraction of market rent, a gap that needs to narrow, but not close.Meanwhile, bookstore owner Angelica Muller says some of the spaces offered are off the main street, half the space, and double the rent to about ,000 a month. That's a rate she says an independent bookstore can't afford.Kleege says he is willing to work with the bookstore and wants to continue to negotiate. 1190

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. (KMGH) – Colorado Springs police say a woman has repeatedly done her businesses in people’s yards over the past several weeks.A witness snapped photos of the female runner, who has apparently been caught treating people’s yards as toilets on several occasions since July.The latest instance happened at a house in the Pine Creek neighborhood, near Briargate Parkway. A woman there told officers her children spotted the woman right in the middle of things. 498