濮阳东方医院看妇科病收费正规(濮阳市东方医院医生电话) (今日更新中)

The E.W. Scripps Company is a partner with The Associated Press and has been following guidance from their election desk on 2020 race updates.Early Wednesday morning, the AP called the presidential race in Arizona for Joe Biden. The state is continuing to count ballots, and in the hours since, President Donald Trump has significantly cut into Biden's lead.Thursday afternoon, officials said there were about 450,000 votes still to be counted in the battleground state. As of 12:30 p.m., Biden had a 2.35 percentage point lead over Trump, an advantage of about 68,000 votes.At 9 p.m. ET, a new trove of votes from Maricopa County, the largest county in the state. Trump gained nearly 11,000 votes, cutting Biden's lead to 46,257. AP executive director Sally Buzbee released the following statement regarding its Arizona projection: "The Associated Press continues to watch and analyze vote count results from Arizona as they come in. We will follow the facts in all cases."All election results remain unofficial until each state verifies its election count.Below is the AP's explanation as to how it made the decision to call the state for Biden.The Associated Press has declared Democrat Joe Biden the winner in Arizona, flipping a longtime GOP state that President Donald Trump won in 2016.The AP called the race at 2:50 a.m. EST Wednesday, after an analysis of ballots cast statewide concluded there were not enough outstanding to allow Trump to catch up.With 80% of the expected vote counted, Biden was ahead by 5 percentage points, with a roughly 130,000-vote lead over Trump with about 2.6 million ballots counted. The remaining ballots left to be counted, including mail-in votes in Maricopa County, where Biden performed strongly, were not enough for Trump to catch up to the former vice president.Arizona has a long political history of voting Republican. It's the home state of Barry Goldwater, a five-term, conservative senator who was the Republican nominee for president in 1964. John McCain, the party's 2008 presidential nominee, represented the state in Congress from 1983 until his 2018 death.But changing demographics, including a fast-growing Latino population and a boom of new residents — some fleeing the skyrocketing cost of living in neighboring California — have made the state friendlier to Democrats.Many of the gains have been driven by the shifting politics of Maricopa County, which is home to Phoenix and its suburbs. That's where Biden sealed his victory. Maricopa County accounts for 60% of the state's vote, and Biden ran up huge margins there.In 2016, Trump carried the county by 4 percentage points, which helped propel him to a win. But two years later, Democratic Sen. Kyrsten Sinema flipped a Senate seat from Republican control by winning the county by 5 points.When the AP called the race for Biden, he was leading there by 9 percentage points.Biden flipping Arizona is a sign of Democrats' ascendant influence in the state.In 2018, Sinema became the first Democrat in three decades to win a U.S. Senate seat in Arizona. Democrats also won three statewide offices and five of nine congressional seats and made gains in the state legislature that year.In 2016, voters ousted Republican Joe Arpaio, Maricopa County's hardline sheriff, who built a national profile on his harsh treatment of immigrants. 3349

The Cruise Lines International Association announced Monday new regulations for cruising in the Americas.The association, which represents major global cruise lines, said cruises could start back up soon "with support and approval of regulators and destinations.""We recognize the devastating impact that this pandemic, and the subsequent suspension of cruise operations, has had on economies throughout the world, including the nearly half a million members of the wider cruise community and small businesses in the Americas who depend on this vibrant industry for their livelihoods," CLIA president, CEO Kelly Craighead said in the press release. "Based on what we are seeing in Europe, and following months of collaboration with leading public health experts, scientists, and governments, we are confident that these measures will provide a pathway for the return of limited sailings from the U.S. before the end of this year."The new rules include everyone being tested for COVID-19 before embarking and mandatory mask-wearing for everyone onboard.Also, everyone must abide by physical distancing. There will be an increase of fresh air through the ventilation system, medical capability with risk-based response plans, and shore excursions must abide by cruise operators' prescribed protocols.The CLIA announced back in August that its ocean-going cruise line members will suspend their U.S. operations until at least Oct. 31. 1439

The Dan Ryan Expressway roars with cars that feature the power of hundreds of horses. But on Monday, a man and a lone horse disrupted traffic at rush hour.News helicopters followed a man going down the busy freeway late Monday afternoon riding the horse. Police followed the man off the freeway on the city’s south side.Footage then showed the man jumping off the horse and being detained. The Illinois State Police confirmed that Adam Hollingsworth was arrested on three criminal counts. The counts were for reckless conduct, disobeying a police officer and criminal trespass of state-supported property.He was accompanied by several others on motorcycles.Another man, Darron Luster, was arrested for obstruction and resisting arrest. Police accused Luster of trying to gain control of the horse, and disobeyed officers who asked him released the horse.The Illinois State Police confirmed the horse sustained several injuries, including bleeding from the left hoof, the right hoof was injured, and the right side of the horse’s body had sores from the saddle. The horse was taken to Animal Care and Control.The Illinois State Police said that it had met with Hollingsworth on Sept. 9 as he planned on staging a protest on the interstate. The police told Hollingsworth that “he would not be allowed on the Dan Ryan Expressway because it is dangerous and illegal for pedestrians to access the expressway in that manner.”According to CNN, Hollingsworth — also known as the "Dreadhead Cowboy" — was attempting to raise awareness for the U.S. Census so his community could receive more funding for children's services. 1622

The COVID-19 pandemic has given a new perspective to many people across the world. For some women, it's made them consider whether the career they've chosen is the right one.A new survey by AllBright Collective, a membership-based club created by women that aims to provide inspiration, career coaching, networking and more for women around the world, shows many women are ready for a change."And so what we wanted to do was, rather than just guess what people were thinking, we wanted to do this global survey to really try and understand how women were thinking about their careers when we emerge," said Anna Jones, the CEO of AllBright Collective. "And we were actually very pleasantly surprised."Jones says AllBright surveyed 800 members during the pandemic, and 61% of them said they were going to be pivoting in their career."Now, that may mean pivoting to a different industry or different job, or it may be pivoting within the organization they're working in. But we were very pleasantly surprised that it was quite positive and women were very keen to kind of grab this time as an opportunity and make their ambitions a reality," Jones said.The survey also showed 25% of women were already in the process of changing their careers."I think we've all gotten used to working in a different way," Jones said. "We're all sitting on Zoom and connecting digitally in a way that we could never have imagined. I think for many women who wanted to work more flexibly, they're proving that they can."Elizabeth Middleton, a former teacher and mom of four, isn't surprised by the survey's results. She, too, is in the middle of a career change, starting her own business, Forward Function Health."It's been a major life shift," Middleton said. "I knew — and it wasn't just because of this pandemic, fortunately — before the pandemic, I was making this shift. But the pandemic just confirmed that it's the best for my family and self, and I think the pandemic has woken everybody up. It woke me up."Middleton is nearly finished with her courses relating to nutrition and wellness counseling and is thrilled to find a career that fills her soul."We launch fully in 2021. However, I've had already quite a few people on board with needs with this coronavirus," Middleton said. "I'm looking forward to helping people.""I also think that maybe it's just that we've had a bit of time," Jones said. "Admittedly, people have been juggling a lot. Juggling their households, chores and household responsibilities and their work but I think we've all had a little bit more time to think about, Well what would we like to do?"AllBright is hoping to continue working with its members who need additional support to make their new career moves — taking newfound time at home and turning a business idea into a reality. 2809

The first hearing in CNN and Jim Acosta's federal lawsuit against President Trump and several top White House aides lasted for two hours of tough questioning of both sides.At the conclusion of the hearing, Judge Timothy J. Kelly said he would announce his decision Thursday afternoon.CNN and Acosta are alleging that the White House's suspension of his press pass violates the First and Fifth Amendments.The hearing started around 3:40 p.m., Kelly began by probing CNN's arguments for the better part of an hour. Then he turned to questioning a lawyer representing the government.Lawyers for the network and Acosta asked for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction that would restore his press pass right away, arguing that time is of the essence because his rights are violated every day his pass is suspended.Kelly opened the hearing by quizzing CNN attorney Theodore Boutrous on the network's First Amendment claim and asking how the President's history of attacks on CNN should be viewed in the context of the lawsuit.Boutrous rattled off examples of Trump's missives against CNN, including his claim that the network is an "enemy of the people."Kelly expressed skepticism that this proves the Acosta ban is "content-based discrimination," as CNN is alleging.Kelly said there is some evidence that Acosta's conduct -- not his content -- led the White House to suspend his press pass.But Boutrous disputed that and said there "never will there be more evidence of facial discrimination and animus against an individual reporter" than in this case.Kelly said "we've all seen the clip" of the White House press conference where Trump and Acosta had a combative exchange last week. Kelly said that Acosta "continued speaking after his time expired" and "wouldn't give up his microphone" -- points that the Trump administration made in its briefs earlier Wednesday.Under questioning from the judge, Boutrous cited Trump's words to Acosta from the press conference, and said, "'Rudeness' is really a code word for 'I don't like you being an aggressive reporter.'"Kelly peppered CNN's attorney with hypotheticals as he tried to determine what a lawful move by the White House, responding to Acosta's actions, would look like."Could they let him keep the pass but tell him he couldn't come to presidential press conferences?" Kelly asked.Boutrous contended that even a partial response like that would be a violation of Acosta's First Amendment rights.Boutrous called the White House's move to revoke Acosta's hard pass "the definition of arbitrariness and capriciousness.""What are the standards?" Boutrous asked. "Rudeness is not a standard. If it were no one could have gone to the press conference."Boutrous separately brought up evidence that hadn't been available when CNN filed its suit: A fundraising email that the Trump campaign sent Wednesday.The email touted the decision to revoke Acosta's credentials and attacked CNN for what it called its "liberal bias." Boutrous said that by grouping that all together in the same breath, the email made it clear that it was Acosta's coverage and not his conduct at a press conference that triggered the revocation of his press pass.Kelly asked CNN's lawyers to state the company's position regarding the original White House accusation that Acosta placed his hands a White House intern as she tried to grab his microphone away."It's absolutely false," Boutrous said.Boutrous also pointed out that Trump administration never mentioned that accusation against Acosta in the 28-page brief that Justice Department lawyers filed with the court earlier on Wednesday."They've abandoned that" claim, Boutrous said.In his first question in a back and forth with the government, Kelly asked Justice Department attorney James Burnham to clear up the government's shifting rationale for revoking Acosta's pass."Why don't you set me straight," Kelly said. "Let me know what was the reason and address this issue of whether the government's reason has changed over time.""There doesn't need to be a reason because there's no First Amendment protection and the President has broad discretion," Burnham said.Still, Burnham called the White House's stated reasonings "pretty consistent throughout," and walked through a series of statements that the administration has made — from Trump's first comments at the press conference to Sanders' tweets announcing the revocation to the official statement put out Tuesday after CNN filed its suit.Burnham said Sanders' claim that Acosta had inappropriately touched a White House intern was not a part of their legal argument."We're not relying on that here and I don't think the White House is relying on that here," Burnham said.Burnham said that it would be perfectly legal for the White House to revoke a journalist's credentials if it didn't agree with their reporting.He made the assertion under questioning from Kelly, who asked him to state the administration's position in this hypothetical situation.The judge asked if the White House could essentially tell any individual journalist, "we don't like your reporting, so we're pulling your hard pass." Burnham replied, "as a matter of law... yes."Pressed again by the judge on Sanders' claim that Acosta had inappropriately touched the intern, Burnham said "we don't have a position" on that."The one consistent explanation," Burnham said, "is disorder at the press conference."Burnham contended that revoking Acosta's hard pass was not "viewpoint discrimination" — part of a legal threshold for a First Amendment claim."A single journalist's attempt to monopolize a press conference is not a viewpoint and revoking a hard pass in response to that is not viewpoint discrimination," Burnham said.Kelly tried to press for details about how Acosta's pass came to be revoked, asking Burnham who made the actual decision.Burnham said he didn't have any information beyond what had been filed in court documents: that the revocation was first announced by Sanders on November 7 and then "ratified" by Trump the next day."Do you have any information to suggest that it was anyone other than Ms. Sanders that made the decision?" Kelly asked."No, not that I'm offering today. I'm not denying it but I don't know anything beyond what's been filed," Burnham said.Later, Burnham argued that revoking Acosta's press pass does not infringe on his First Amendment rights because he can still call White House staffers for interviews or "catch them on their way out" of the building."I think the harm to the network is very small," Burnham said."Their cameras are still in there," he added.Burnham said CNN had made an "odd First Amendment injury" claim and suggested that Acosta could do his job "just as effectively" watching the President's appearances piped into a studio on CNN."The President never has to speak to Mr. Acosta again," Burnham said. "The President never has to give an interview to Mr. Acosta. And the President never has to call on Mr. Acosta at a press conference.""To be in a room where he has no right to speak... this seems to me like an odd First Amendment injury that we're talking about," Burnham said.Boutrous, the CNN attorney, fired back on rebuttal."That's not how reporters break stories. It's simply a fundamental misconception of journalism," Boutrous said, adding how unscheduled gaggles and source meetings throughout the White House amounted to "invaluable access."In a legal filing by the Justice Department on Wednesday, the White House asserted that it has "broad discretion" to pick and choose which journalists are given a permanent pass to cover it.That position is a sharp break with decades of tradition. Historically both Republican and Democratic administrations have had a permissive approach to press access, providing credentials both to big news organizations like CNN and obscure and fringe outlets.Acosta's suspension -— which took effect one week ago — is an unprecedented step. Journalism advocates say it could have a chilling effect on news coverage.CNN and Acosta's lawsuit was filed on Tuesday morning, nearly one week after Acosta was banned.Before the hearing began, CNN's lawyers said 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. The lawsuit asserts that this ban 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.In addition to the temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction that CNN is seeking at the hearing, CNN and Acosta are also seeking what's known as "permanent relief." The lawsuit asks the judge to determine 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."If the press is not free to cover the news because its reporter is unjustly denied access, it is not free," former White House correspondent Sam Donaldson said in a declaration supporting CNN that was filed with the court on Tuesday. "And if denying access to a reporter an organization has chosen to represent it -- in effect asserting the president's right to take that choice away from a news organization and make it himself -- is permitted, then the press is not free."Ted Olson, a Republican heavyweight who successfully argued for George W. Bush in Bush v. Gore, is representing CNN, along with Boutrous — himself another prominent attorney — and the network's chief counsel, David Vigilante.Olson said Tuesday that while it was Acosta whose press pass was suspended this time, "this could happen to any journalist by any politician."He spoke forcefully against Trump's action. "The White House cannot get away with this," Olson said.Most of the country's major news organizations have sided with CNN through statements and plan to file friend-of-the-court briefs. 10291

来源：资阳报