濮阳东方医院看妇科病口碑好不好-【濮阳东方医院】,濮阳东方医院,濮阳东方看男科收费正规,濮阳东方医院电话咨询,濮阳市东方医院技术很好,濮阳东方医院男科治疗阳痿收费低,濮阳东方医院男科看阳痿评价好很不错,濮阳东方男科价格收费低
濮阳东方医院看妇科病口碑好不好濮阳东方医院非常好,濮阳东方医院割包皮价格偏低,濮阳东方医院男科医生怎么样,濮阳东方男科医院好吗,濮阳东方医院治疗早泄价格比较低,濮阳东方妇科医院上班到几点,濮阳东方医院治疗早泄口碑比较好
Wednesday marks the second of four presidential debates, and the only one featuring the vice presidential candidates.The debate is scheduled to begin at 9 p.m. ET, and will last 90 minutes.Here is what you need to know about Wednesday’s showdown.The candidatesRepublican Vice Presidential nominee Mike Pence and Democratic Party candidate Kamala Harris were the only two candidates invited to Wednesday’s debate based on polling. In order to be invited, a candidate’s ticket must poll at 15 percent or above in a series of national polls.Pence has been serving as President Donald Trump’s vice president since 2017. Before 2017, Pence was the governor of Indiana for four years. Before that, he served in the US House of Representatives for 12 years.Sen. Kamala Harris is in her first term as a US senator from California. Previously, she was a six-year attorney general of California, and a seven-year district attorney in San Francisco. Harris was an opponent of Joe Biden during the presidential primaries, but dropped out before the Iowa Caucuses and later endorsed Biden.The moderatorSusan Page, current Washington Bureau Chief for the USA Today, will serve as moderator. Page is the first primarily print journalist to moderate a presidential or vice presidential debate since 1976. Page is a frequent guest on the Sunday morning talk shows and was a White House Correspondents Association president.The formatThe vice presidential will feature a format similar to last week’s presidential debate. Instead of six, 15-minute segments, Page will break the debate into nine, 10-minute segments. Page will ask a candidate a question that they have two minutes to answer, and the other candidate will then have two minutes to respond. The balance of the time will be used for a deeper discussion on the topic.Why have a vice presidential debate?Vice presidential debates have generally served as an opportunity for candidates to show they are prepared to become president. Nine vice presidents have ascended to the presidency due to death or resignation.With the possibility that one of the two candidates could become president in the next four years, the debate could serve as a presidential litmus test.The biggest questionAre you ready to be commander-in-chief? Now that Trump has turned 74, and Biden is about to turn 78 next month, this year’s campaign has been between the two oldest nominees on record.Should there be a debate?This question has been pondered in recent days as the White House has had a cluster of coronavirus cases. President Donald Trump, first lady Melania Trump, aides, assistants, White House-based journalists, and three US senators have all been among those who have tested positive for the coronavirus in the last week.Not among those testing positive is Pence, who has been tested every day since Trump’s diagnosis. But CDC guidelines call for those with close contact with coronavirus patients to quarantine for 14 days regardless of negative tests as the incubation period for the coronavirus can take that long.The Commission on Presidential Debates announced Monday that a Plexiglas partition will divide the candidates, and that Harris and Pence will sit more than 12 feet apart on the debate stage.Most important VP debate in history?John Hudak, Deputy Director at Brookings’ Center for Effective Public Management,declared Wednesday’s debate as the “most important vice presidential debate in American history.” And given the age of the candidates and recent discussions over the 25thamendment due to Trump’s stay in Walter Reed Medical Center, Hudak argues that this election’s vice presidential debate takes on new meaning.“In a normal election year, vice presidential candidates often serve as presidential nominees’ attack dogs, and surely, there will be plenty of attacks and criticisms during the debate,” Hudak wrote. “However, this is hardly a normal year. While vice presidential candidates almost always wish to project a presidential aura and command at the debate, that approach is paramount Wednesday night. It will be important for both candidates to steer away from outright political warfare and focus on the solemn reality of a country with an ill president and facing multiple other crises.”Pence leads the coronavirus responsePence was tasked in February with leading the White House’s response to the coronavirus, heading the White House coronavirus task force. In the seven months since the coronavirus began spreading in earnest in the United States, more than 210,000 Americans have died from the virus.There has also been extensive economic fallout stemming from the coronavirus.So a question likely to be asked of Pence is on his performance as the leader of the coronavirus task force.Harris on criminal justiceHarris finds herself in a challenging position as both a former prosecutor and a reformer. Her record as a prosecutor became more of an issue at times during her run for the Democratic nomination for president.For Biden and Harris, the two have disappointed some in the liberal wing of the party for not echoing calls to defund police departments. Biden said during last week’s that he wants to increase funding for police departments.With race and police relations a significant issue this year, expect questions to be raised over Harris’ record as a prosecutor.What’s next?A presidential debate is scheduled for October 15, but there are questions on whether Trump will be medically cleared to participate. Assuming the debate moves forward as scheduled, it will be the second of three debates between Biden and Trump. 5606
WASHINGTON, D.C. – A group of bipartisan lawmakers unveiled two emergency relief bills Monday that they hope will help struggling Americans get through the COVID-19 pandemic.The same group of senators and representatives introduced a 8 billion bill earlier this month, but they couldn’t secure enough support. So, they broke the bill up into two with the hopes of passing something as the coronavirus continues to ravage the country.One bill is called the Bipartisan COVID-19 Emergency Relief Act of 2020. It would provide as much as 8 billion in relief to American students, families, businesses, workers, and health care providers.That measure would include additional funding for the Paycheck Protection Program, schools, unemployment insurance, vaccine distribution, coronavirus testing, and contact tracing.The other bill is called the Bipartisan State and Local Support and Small Business Protection Act of 2020. It would provide 0 billion in funding for state and local governments, as well as liability protections. Both of those issues have been sticking points in relief negotiations.During a press conference introducing the legislation, Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) said the bills are a compromise that will carry the American people through April 1, 2021, “to ensure our healthcare crisis doesn’t become an economic catastrophe.”Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) said she hopes leadership on both sides of the aisle use the group's legislation as a basis for a COVID-19 relief package.Negotiations are still ongoing between Democratic and Republican leadership, but both parties have said they hope to come to an agreement to provide aid the country before they leave Washington D.C. for the holidays.Watch the group lawmakers discuss the relief bills below: 1775
WASHINGTON (AP) — The official serving as President Donald Trump’s eyes and ears at the Justice Department has been banned from the building after trying to pressure staffers to give up sensitive information about election fraud and other matters she could relay to the White House, three people familiar with the matter tell The Associated Press.Heidi Stirrup, an ally of top Trump adviser Stephen Miller, was quietly installed at the Justice Department as a White House liaison a few months ago. She was told within the last two weeks to vacate the building after top Justice officials learned of her efforts to collect insider information about ongoing cases and the department’s work on election fraud, the people said.Stirrup is accused of approaching staffers in the department demanding they give her information about investigations, including election fraud matters, the people said. They spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to publicly discuss the matter.The effort came as Trump continues to level baseless claims that he won the election and alleges without evidence that massive voting fraud was responsible for his defeat to President-elect Joe Biden.Stirrup had also extended job offers to political allies for positions at some of the highest levels of the Justice Department without consulting any senior department officials or the White House counsel’s office and also attempted to interfere in the hiring process for career staffers, a violation of the government’s human resources policies, one of the people said.The Justice Department declined to comment. Attempts to reach Stirrup for comment were not immediately successful. 1686
Weather will be boo-tiful but chilly for trick-or-treating as the winds calm through the night ?? A Freeze Warning is in place for many of our desert and valley locales. Protect any sensitive plants and make sure to bundle up if heading out! #cawx #halloween2019 pic.twitter.com/Mv5l58TpT5— NWS San Diego (@NWSSanDiego) October 31, 2019 350
Wendy Vitter, one of President Donald Trump's judicial nominees, refused on Wednesday to say whether a landmark civil rights opinion was correctly decided, triggering outrage and renewed criticism of the President's efforts to reshape the judiciary.At issue was Brown v. the Board of Education -- a seminal opinion that held that state laws requiring separate but equal schools violated the Constitution."I don't mean to be coy," Vitter, who is up for a seat on the US District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, said at her confirmation hearing, "but I think I can get into a difficult, difficult area when I start commenting on Supreme Court decisions -- which are correctly decided and which I may disagree with." 734