濮阳东方男科医院割包皮手术收费便宜不濮阳市东方医院收费低吗,濮阳东方医院男科技术值得放心,濮阳东方男科几点上班,濮阳东方医院男科治疗阳痿价格正规,濮阳东方医院割包皮手术好吗,濮阳东方医院妇科做人流很好,濮阳东方男科咨询预约

Judge Amy Coney Barrett remained tight-lipped on how she would rule in politically-charged Supreme Court cases in early questioning during her confirmation hearings on Tuesday morning, citing judicial precedence.Barrett is President Donald Trump's third Supreme Court nominee, and Trump has said that he would only nominate judges that would roll back abortion rights and end the public health care system set up by the Affordable Care Act. And while her judicial history indicates that Barrett fits those qualifications, she continually avoided answering specific qualifications about looming Supreme Court cases.Barrett was asked her views on several politically-charged topics which the Supreme Court could potentially influence, including:2020 ElectionWhen asked by Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-VT, if she would recuse herself should the upcoming election spark a Supreme Court decision, Barrett clarified that she had not made a "commitment to anyone...on how she would decide a case."Barrett later said she would consider the legal requirements of recusal from the eight other Supreme Court judges should the election spark a case.Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-MN, asked Barrett specifically about President Donald Trump's call to have "poll watchers" observe voters ahead of election day and check for fraud — an action that legal experts worry could suppress turnout.When asked if it would be illegal for those "poll watchers" to "intimidate" voters, Barrett said she would not comment on hypothetical cases.AbortionWhen asked repeatedly by Feinstein if she agrees with Justice Antonin Scalia if Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided and that it "can and should be overruled," Barrett attempted to sidestep the answer."If I express a view on a precedent one way or another, whether I say 'I love it or I hate it,' it signals to litigants that I might tilt one way or another in a given case," she said.She later clarified that she does not have an "agenda." She added that her agenda is to "stick to the rule of law."The Affordable Care ActCommittee Chairman Lindsey Graham asked Barrett directly if she would recuse herself from any Affordable Care Act cases, given Trump's call to dismantle the law and her past writings critical on Supreme Court decisions upholding the law. Barrett said she would follow typical recusal procedures should she be asked by the other justices.Later, Feinstein asked Barrett if she had any "thoughts" on an upcoming ACA case, California v. Texas. The Supreme Court will hear arguments on that case on Nov. 10.Barrett said she would not share any thoughts on the case.Finally, Barrett told Sen. Chuck Grassley that she had not been directed by any politicians to strike down the law.Gun controlBarrett was asked directly by Feinstein how she would rule in the event a case regarding gun control came before the court. She said she would "look carefully at text, look...applying law as I best determine it."LGBTQ+ rightsFeinstein also asked Barrett how she would rule in cases regarding LGBTQ+ rights. During the questioning, Barrett said she found both "racism" and "discrimination on sexual preference" to be "abhorrent."According to GLAAD, the term "sexual preference" implies that a person's sexuality is a "choice," meaning it can be cured. The organization prefers the term "sexual orientation."Voting rightsSen. Dick Durbin, D-Illinois, spent a large amount of his time comparing recent Supreme Court decisions on voting rights to decisions on the Second Amendment, noting that some felons in America retain the right to a firearm but lose their right to vote.Durbin related that anecdote to rulings Barrett has made regarding a felon's right to firearms. Barrett accused Durbin of taking her ruling out of context. She later added that she does not have an "agenda" when it comes to certain cases, though Durbin argued that all judges are shaped by their own values and experiences._____________Questioning took place in a marathon-length session on Tuesday, with all 22 members on Senate Judiciary Committee being granted the opportunity to question Barrett for 30 minutes at a time. Members will get an additional 20 minutes of questioning on Wednesday.On Monday, lawmakers were each granted 10 minutes to deliver an opening statement, all of which fell along party lines.Democrats said Barrett's nomination would threaten healthcare for millions of Americans, citing past criticisms of previous Supreme Court rulings that upheld the Affordable Care Act that Barrett has published. They also argued that Republicans were "rushing" Barrett's nomination ahead of election day to, as Sen. Kamala Harris put it, "bypass the will of the American people."Many Democrats took issue with hearings even being held amid a pandemic, claiming Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham had taken lax measures to not require lawmakers to be tested and lambasting Republicans for putting Capitol Building staff at risk. Sen. Thom Tillis, R-NC, who was recently isolated due to the coronavirus, submitted a letter to Graham from his doctor claiming he was following CDC guidelines. They also argued that their time would be better spent working on stimulus legislation.Most Republicans used the time to champion Barrett's character as a working mother of nine children and argue that it was their Constitutional duty to fill the open seat because they control both the Senate and the White House.Following the committee members' opening statements, Barrett delivered her own statement, in which she paid homage to her mentors and Conservative icon, Justice Antonin Scalia, and to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, saying she was "forever grateful for the path she marked and the life she led."Graham has said he hopes to have confirmation hearings completely wrapped up by Thursday. He added that Republicans are on track to wrap up the process by the end of the month —just a week before election day. 5909

Jared Kushner tells CNBC that President Trump’s speech tonight will be “hopeful” and will be about the president’s “right decisions” and needed “steady hand” during a pandemic. He adds the administration is “making great progess” on getting a coronavirus vaccine.— Yamiche Alcindor (@Yamiche) August 27, 2020 316

KILLEEN, Texas — Skeletal remains found in a field in Killeen Friday morning were of missing Fort Hood soldier Gregory Morales.Kim Wedel, his mother, says she was told Saturday morning. Fort hood confirmed the identification Sunday morning. 248

KANSAS CITY, Mo. - Imagine getting a COVID-19 test from the comfort of your own home.That's what Costco is offering by selling saliva test kits online.They come at a steep price. The basic test kit is listed for 9.99, while a kit with video observation is 9.99.The KSHB I-team reached out to Costco for more information about the products. However, the company's corporate communications team was unwilling to respond to any questions, adding that it is not staffed to do so."As always our focus is to have merchandise available for our members at low warehouse prices," a spokesman wrote in an email.According to the Costco website, the kits are administered by Azova, which is a telemedicine platform.A fact sheet for patients found on the Azova website shows the test used is the P23 Labs TaqPath SARS CoV-2 Assay.The test has not been cleared or approved by the Food and Drug Administration. However, like many tests, it has received emergency use authorization from the agency.That means the makers of the test need to continually submit data to the FDA, which will evaluate the information and study the accuracy of diagnoses.Azova claims 98% of positive tests and 99% of negative test results are accurate."Saliva testing can be very accurate. It is probably chosen (for at-home testing) because the chance of having user error is much less than say a nasal swab," Dr. Dana Hawkinson of the University of Kansas Health System said.A customer who purchases a kit from Costco must complete a health assessment online with Azova and register for a lab order and test kit.The actual kit should come the next day, but results won't arrive for one to three days after the lab receives the sample.The kit with video observation, however, promises results in 24-48 hours."If that's the only thing that you're using for diagnosis and you have symptoms, you need to be isolated in your home until those results come back," Hawkinson added.In his opinion, it's not the most efficient way to get tested once the shipping time and wait for results are factored into the equation.However, Hawkinson believes we may see more options like this in the future."The technology is out there. It is progressing quickly," he said. "Hopefully as time goes on we do get more access to people so there can be readily available testing with efficient and accurate test results."The Costco website says both test kits are eligible for flexible medical spending accounts.Although the CARES Act mandated that insurers cover COVID testing costs, Dr. Kent Sepkowitz, a CNN medical analyst, writes whether insurers "will pay fully for more bells and whistles program such as that provided by Costco likely will vary plan to plan."This story was first reported by Cat Reid at KSHB in Kansas City, Missouri. 2794

KANSAS CITY, Mo. – A Kansas City, Missouri Police officer shot a pit bull Friday afternoon after the dog bit a USPS mail carrier.Officers and Animal Control responded around 4:30 p.m. local timeFriday to the 1500 block of NE 79th Street on the call.According to police notes, they located two “large, aggressive pit bull dogs” on the scene.While the animal control officer attempted to capture the dogs, one of them charged toward the officer, prompting the officer to open fire on the dog, striking it in the shoulder.The second dog ran away back to the residence it had escaped from where it was eventually captured.A few minutes after being shot, the dog jumped up and ran around a house where animal control captured it.During the course of the investigation, officers spoke with the owner of the two dogs.The owner was “belligerent” and did not want to accept responsibility for the dogs running loose in the neighborhood, according to police.  977