濮阳东方医院治疗阳痿咨询电话濮阳东方线上咨询,濮阳东方医院看男科病可靠,濮阳东方妇科技术非常专业,濮阳东方医院割包皮收费公开,濮阳东方医院割包皮贵吗,濮阳东方男科治病便宜吗,濮阳东方医院治疗阳痿非常便宜

The St. Louis Police Department is investigating one of their own after he issued a ticket to a man who honked at him.According to an interview in the Riverfront Times, Scott Smith was on his way back to work when he honked at a car stopped at a green light. Video shot by the driver and given to the RFT shows a very tense interaction.The car was an unmarked police car. When pulled over, Smith says "seriously?"The officer than replies "Seriously, is your horn stuck?" to which Smith replies "Is your brake stuck?"That's when the officer cusses at the driver asking again "Is your f-ing horn stuck?"He demands to see his driver's license.Smith says he will, but asks for what."I'll tell you what, you can either show your driver's license or you'll get a ticket and I'll tow your car and lock you up," said the officer.Once again Smith asks why he's been pulled over and the officer says it is for a traffic violation."For honking at someone who's stopped at a green light?" Smith asks. He then calls the situation "f-ing ridiculous." "Well you know what? Maybe you shouldn't be a f-ing a-hole," the officer responds.The officer issued the driver a ticket, but the city counselor's office reportedly will not prosecute it, saying they do not believe it should be pursued."The Department has launched an Internal Affairs investigation into the incident you are inquiring about. At this point, it would be premature for the Department to comment on an ongoing investigation before it concludes," a St. Louis Police spokesperson said.  1557

The Time Warner building in New York City, where CNN has a studio, is one of several places to receive a potentially explosive device this week. It is being investigated as an act of terrorism.The package was located in the building's mailroom, CNN reported on air today. Employees said authorities told them it looked like a pipe bomb and had wires attached.Police believe it is a very serious incident and a real explosive that was delivered. The Time Warner building's other businesses were evacuated and folks moved farther away from the location at what is a busy time of day in metro New York City. 617

The White House said late Friday it is prepared to veto a bill proposed by House Democrats to infuse the cash-strapped Postal Service with funds.The White House’s announcement comes a week after President Donald Trump said he supported funding the Postal Service with Congressional funds. Last week marked a period of the Postal Service removing machines and collection boxes, as mail service has slowed for many across the country.The bill introduced by House Democrats would, in addition to providing funds, require the post office to maintain its current level of service, not close any locations and would lift a prohibition of overtime. Those measures would be in effect through at least the end of the year.According to the Congressional Budget Office, the bill would provide an estimated billion in funding for the post office.The White House pushed back in a policy memo, claiming that reports of slowdowns are an “overreaction.”“This bill misses an opportunity to improve USPS,” the White House said.“USPS does not need a billion bailout. It needs reforms that will return it to a trend of long- term financial self-sufficiency,” the White House added.The Trump administration said that USPS has enough funds to operate through August 2021. But during his Senate testimony on Friday, Postmaster Louis DeJoy said that the post office is losing billion on an annual basis.“Without change our losses will only increase in the years to come,” DeJoy said.The USPS has historically been self-sufficient. But declining volume and increased pension costs have cut into the service’s bottom line. But the post office remains a lifeline for many who rely on mail for medicines, important documents, and other supplies. 1736

The state of Michigan has agreed on a 0 million settlement in lawsuits regarding the Flint Water Crisis, Attorney General Dana Nessel announced Thursday.The settlement will be given to parties who claim they were affected by the city of Flint's 2014 transition of its public water supply to the Flint River; the majority of the money will be going to settle claims filed on behalf of children.The settlement was reached by the state parties and legal counsel after 18 months of negotiations.“Providing relief for the people of Flint and resolving these long-standing legal disputes has been a top priority for me since taking office,” Nessel said in a press release. “Flint residents have endured more than most, and to draw out the legal back-and-forth even longer would have achieved nothing but continued hardship. This settlement focuses on the children and the future of Flint, and the State will do all it can to make this a step forward in the healing process for one of Michigan’s most resilient cities. Ultimately, by reaching this agreement, I hope we can begin the process of closing one of the most difficult chapters in our State’s history and writing a new one that starts with a government that works on behalf of all of its people.”The preliminary agreement specifies that about 80 percent of the net settlement fund will be spent on claims of children who were minors when first exposed to the Flint River water, with a large majority of that amount to be paid for claims of children age 6 and younger, and earmarking 2 percent to go to special education services in Genesee County. Another 18 percent of the net settlement funds are to be spent on claims of adults and for property damage. Roughly 1 percent will go toward claims for business losses.If the settlement receives final court approval, it is likely to be the largest in Michigan state government history, affecting tens of thousands of people and resolving more than a hundred cases in state and federal trial and appellate courts."Protecting all Michiganders and their access to clean water is a priority for my administration to make sure nothing like this ever happens again," Governor Gretchen Whitmer said in a press release. "What happened in Flint should have never happened, and financial compensation with this settlement is just one of the many ways we can continue to show our support for the city of Flint and its families.""We acknowledge that this settlement may not completely provide all that Flint needs, and that many will still feel justifiable frustration with a system and structure that at times is not adequate to fully address what has happened to people in Flint over the last six years. We hear and respect those voices and understand that healing Flint will take a long time, but our ongoing efforts and today’s settlement announcement are important steps in helping all of us move forward."View a summary of the settlement below:Terms of Settlement 699810 7 by WXYZ-TV Channel 7 Detroit on Scribd This story was first reported by WXYZ in Detroit, Michigan. 3079

The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to weigh in on the battle over pension reform in the city of San Diego. The decision leaves in place a California Supreme Court decision from last year that called pension reform into question and required a lower court to come up with a remedy. It could end up costing the city billions. In 2012, San Diego voters approved Proposition B with 65 percent in-favor. The measure ended pensions for nearly all new city hires, instead switching them to 401(k) type plans. Around the time, the city faced a billion pension liability, comprising 20 percent of the budget. "It is saving us, literally, hundreds of millions of dollars," Mayor Kevin Faulconer said Monday. "That's why it's important, so we can invest dollars back into neighborhoods."The city, however, is now on the legal defensive. Back in 2012, then-mayor Jerry Sanders campaigned on behalf of the measure. Labor unions argued Sanders' involvement required the city to meet and confer with unions before changing their terms of employment. The city argued that Sanders was exercising his First Amendment right to endorse the measure, which got to the ballot via a citizens initiative. The state Public Employee Retirement Board sided with the unions. So did the California Supreme Court, which last year ordered lower courts to decide a remedy. "There is not even a breath of a suggestion in this case that any public officials First Amendment rights have been violated," said Ann Smith, the attorney representing the labor unions. In a statement, Sanders, who now heads the San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce, called the Supreme Court's decision disappointing but not unexpected. Smith said a lower court decision could make a decision within 30 days. It could impact as many as 4,000 city employees. 1813