濮阳东方看男科很好濮阳东方医院男科看病好,濮阳东方看男科病非常可靠,濮阳东方妇科医院治病便宜吗,濮阳东方医院看男科病收费低不低,濮阳东方男科价格透明,濮阳东方妇科医院口碑好很放心,濮阳东方医院妇科做人流手术好

Less than two weeks after announcing that he had contracted COVID-19, Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, appeared at Judge Amy Coney Barrett's confirmation hearing in-person on Monday and delivered his opening remarks without a mask.On Oct. 2, Lee announced that he had tested positive for COVID-19. He was one of about a dozen high-ranking government officials — including President Donald Trump — who attended Barrett's Sept. 26 nomination ceremony at the White House and later contracted the virus.Lee said he had received a letter from Congress's attending physician, Dr. Brian Monahan, clearing him to return to his in-person duties — though the letter did not note that Lee had tested negative for the virus."Based upon current CDC guidelines, you have met criteria to end COVID-19 isolation for those with mild to moderate disease," Monahan's letter read. "Specifically, it has been greater than 10 days since symptom onset, you have had no fever in absence of fever reducing medication for at least 24 hours, and your other symptoms have improved. The CDC does not recommend repeat SARS-CoV-2 PCR testing if these criteria are met.”It's unclear if Lee was tested prior to appearing in the Capitol Building on Monday. A call to Lee's press office in Washington was not returned.Lee was wearing a mask when entering the hearing room, and photos show that he continued to wear one when not speaking. However, Lee did remove his mask for his opening statements.Senators on the Judiciary Committee were permitted to attend Monday's hearing virtually. Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont, Sen. Ted Cruz, D-Texas, and Sen. Kamala Harris, D-California were among the committee members who gave their opening statements via video teleconference.Sen. Thom Tillis, R-North Carolina, a Committee member who announced a positive COVID-19 test the same day that Lee did, chose to deliver his opening statements via teleconference.Lee's appearance comes after Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham refused to take a COVID-19 test ahead of a debate against his Senate seat challenger, Jaime Harrison. Graham's refusal to take a test forced a change in format for the weekend debate.During his opening comments, Leahy claimed that Republican senator's aversion to COVID-19 tests was a political tactic to remove any risk that would delay Barrett's nomination until after election day.In his opening remarks, Graham said that his committee had consulted with Monahan and the Capitol architect officials to set up the hearing room "in a fashion we can safely do our business."Following senators' opening statements, Graham explained that the Capitol architect had deemed the hearing room to be in compliance with CDC social distancing guidelines. He said that he wanted to make sure the room was safe but added that like the rest of America, the Senate needed to get "back to work."He also added that he had tested negative "last Friday" following brief contact with Lee, and said that he would not be tested for the virus at the request of "political opponents."Earlier this year, Monahan asked senators to wear masks while on the Senate floor. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has required them for lawmakers.President Donald Trump — who announced his positive COVID-19 test the same day as Lee and Tillis — has also already resumed in-person activities. He's reportedly been working in the Oval Office, he delivered an address at the White House Saturday in front of hundreds of supporters, and he's scheduled to hold a large rally on Monday evening in Florida. 3550

LA MESA, Calif. (KGTV) - A speeding U-Haul truck turned a neighborhood near La Mesa into a dumping ground Saturday afternoon. Along Tropico Drive, the sound of a speeding vehicle - and then a loud thud - startled Steve Haase in his driveway.  In the middle of the road was a couch, carpet padding, tile and a painting.    Haase lives on a cul-de-sac, so he knew the vehicle would have to come back around.  Haase walked into the road, and saw a mid-sized U-Haul truck.  He saw two men in their early 20s inside, laughing."They're coming down the street and I put my hand up.  They stop, but they get close, so I get out of the way. I then asked him if he was going to pick it up.  They said, 'Of course,' and then took off with big speed," said Haase.  810

LAS VEGAS - From the counting room to the courtroom. That's where things are headed as Nevada has become center stage for a legal showdown.The Trump campaign and the Nevada Republican Party are likely to keep knocking on Nevada courthouse doors as our state is poised to become a pawn in a legal chess game surrounding election results and how votes are counted."The Trump campaign hasn't been shy about sort of foreshadowing this stream of lawsuits," said UNLV associate professor of Political Science Rebecca Gill. "And indeed, they started well before Election Day as well."But in one Nevada case, it appears both sides may have come to an agreement to avoid a court battle.Thursday, a proposed settlement in a pending case before the Nevada Supreme Court.On election night, in a unanimous vote, the state's high court rejected an emergency appeal by the Trump campaign and state Republican party that sought to stop counting mail ballots in Clark County. The appeal was from an earlier loss in a lower court where the GOP raised concerns about observing ballot processing and electronic signature verification, with the implication of potential for fraud."But unfortunately for the Trump campaign, there's really no evidence of widespread voter fraud at all, regardless of what type of voting mechanism is used," said Professor Gill. "Mainly because, among other things, voter fraud is a felony. And the return on investment is very low because you would have to risk a felony in order to have an absolutely small chance of changing any outcome, particularly in a presidential election."The state Supreme Court wouldn't stop the count, but agreed to hear an expedited appeal. Then, Thursday afternoon, the appellants asked for an extra week, citing a pending settlement of the case. That after the Clark County Registrar agreed to make all tables where the ballot duplication process occurs visible to public observers.Once everyone signs off, the appeal will be dismissed.If any issues arise, a decision on how to proceed will come no later than Nov. 11 at 4 p.m.In the meantime, Clark County can continue counting mail ballots. Those postmarked by election day that arrives by Nov. 10 must be counted by Nov. 12.In another lawsuit, the Trump campaign and Nevada GOP sued Clark County to force officials to release records including copies of every registered voter's signature. That likely indicates a potential challenge over signature matches of what's on file versus on the actual ballot.A District Court judge denied that request and said most of the other requested records didn’t have to be produced until Nov. 20, after county officials finish counting votes.Of course, the specter of a recount demand looms large depending on how narrow the margin of votes ultimately is. Recounts are done to confirm accuracy, check for mistakes and settle fraud claims.The most infamous recount in U.S. history was Bush vs. Gore in 2000 in Florida."But I think it's important to remember that what happened in Florida in 2000," explains Professor Gill. " It was a very unusual confluence of events that led to a situation where there was a real technical difficulty with the actual mechanics of voting in Florida. And that was coupled with this extremely small difference in the vote counts."In Nevada, we have no rules that would trigger an automatic recount. The candidate defeated in an initial vote count can ask for a recount if they deposit estimated costs of the effort. And the candidate gets reimbursed if the recount changes the race’s outcome.President Trump has threatened to take his election concerns to the United States Supreme Court."But I think if you couple these wider vote margins with the fact that there isn't this one really solid reason to be concerned with the operation of the electoral system," said Professor Gill. "Then I think that it's probably unlikely that anything that would happen in the courts would have that outcome that the Trump campaign is probably looking for."Legal experts say the way the nation's high court would most likely be brought in, would be to review a specific challenge to ballots in a tight race in a state that could tip the balance in the election.Nevada, with its six electoral votes, could be that state. And the review could stem from last-minute lawsuits challenging the counting process.This story originally reported by Darcy Spears on ktnv.com. 4420

LAKEWOOD RANCH, Fla. — When Lorenzo Liberti met a Vietnam veteran while serving food to the homeless with his church, he says it changed his life."What mattered was that he was a veteran and now he’s homeless. I’m better off than him and I haven’t ever served a day in my life. It made me really realize how much I owed to people like him," said Liberti. 362

Let's make one thing clear - the Cavaliers are not for sale.But if they were, LeBron James says he would "obviously" be interested in potentially buying the team."To be an owner of any team would be crazy," James told The Athletic's Jason Lloyd. "If this thing opened up and I'm in a position financially, and I've got the right team around me, obviously. But who's to say Dan will [sell]? I've always kept it just player/owner at this point. I guess once I come down to that point, if the conversation needed to be had, I'll have it. But I don't have it right now."This lines up with another interview James had with Lloyd back in May when he said, "I will own a team someday. That's my next thing."James said owning a team would "be cool," because it would allow him to "stay part of the game and still be able to put people in positions of power."According to a Forbes report in February, the Cleveland Cavaliers are valued at .2 billion. Owner Dan Gilbert paid 5 million for the team in 2005.According to another Forbes report, James?( million) is the world's second-highest paid athlete this year behind Real Madrid forward Christiano Ronaldo ( million). 1198