濮阳东方男科医院咨询专家在线-【濮阳东方医院】,濮阳东方医院,濮阳东方男科医院价格透明,濮阳东方男科医院收费低吗,濮阳东方医院妇科很正规,濮阳东方医院男科治疗早泄价格收费合理,濮阳东方妇科医院做人流口碑非常高,濮阳东方价格低
濮阳东方男科医院咨询专家在线濮阳东方医院男科治疗阳痿,濮阳东方医院男科治早泄价格比较低,濮阳东方医院几路车,濮阳东方医院治疗阳痿口碑非常高,濮阳东方很正规,濮阳东方医院妇科做人流评价好收费低,濮阳东方男科医院价格便宜
President Donald Trump's 2017 inaugural committee is currently being investigated by federal prosecutors in New York for possible financial abuses related to the more than 0 million in donations raised for his inauguration, according to a source familiar with the matter.The investigation was first reported by The Wall Street Journal Thursday afternoon.Citing conversations with people familiar with the investigation, which is being handled by the US Attorney's office in Manhattan, the Journal reported that prosecutors are also looking into whether the committee accepted donations from individuals looking to gain influence in or access to the new administration.The newspaper notes that "giving money in exchange for political favors" is illegal, as is misuse of any donated funds. The committee was registered as a nonprofit.In a statement, Trump's inaugural committee said the celebration was "in full compliance with all applicable laws.""The (committee) is not aware of any pending investigations and has not been contacted by any prosecutors. We simply have no evidence the investigation exists," the statement read."The (committee's) finances were fully audited internally and independently and are fully accounted. Moreover, the inauguration's accounting was provided both to the Federal Election Commission and the IRS in compliance with all laws and regulations. These were funds raised from private individuals and were then spent in accordance with the law and the expectations of the donors. The names of donors were provided to the FEC and have been public for nearly two years and those donors were vetted in accordance with the law and no improprieties have been found regardng the vetting of those donors."When asked by reporters about the story Thursday, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said, "That doesn't have anything to do with the President or the first lady. The biggest thing the President did, his engagement in the inauguration, was to come here and raise his hand and take the oath of office. The President was focused on the transition at that time and not on any of the planning for the inauguration."According to the Journal, sources told the paper that the investigation "partly arises out of materials seized in the federal probe of former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen's business dealings."During a raid of Cohen's properties last spring, a recorded conversation between him and Stephanie Winston Wolkoff, a former adviser to first lady Melania Trump, was seized, according to the newspaper. Wolkoff expressed concern in the conversation about how the inaugural committee was spending money, a person familiar with the Cohen investigation told the Journal.Rick Gates, Trump's former campaign aide who has been cooperating with special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election, was asked by prosecutors about the committee's spending and its donors, the Journal reported, citing conversations with people close to the matter.Tom Barrack, a real estate developer who ran the inaugural committee, has not yet spoken with investigators since an interview he had with the special counsel last year, a source familiar with the matter told CNN. During his conversation with Mueller, the inaugural fund was only raised briefly, the source said."The inaugural committee hasn't been asked for records or been contacted by prosecutors. We are not aware of any investigation," the source told CNN.The committee, which CNN previously reported had raised a record-setting 7 million, received much of its funding from wealthy donors who gave million or more, according to the Journal. Some of the fund's top donors, including billionaire Sheldon Adelson, AT&T Inc. (the parent company of CNN) and Boeing Co. are not currently under investigation, the newspaper reported. 3876
Restaurant servers dodged a bullet this week with a provision tucked into the .3 trillion federal spending bill.Late last year, the Department of Labor proposed a rule?that would have authorized restaurants to share tips between servers and cooks. That would allow employers to keep some tip money for themselves, as long as each worker made at least the full federal minimum wage of .25 an hour.Workers' rights groups argued the rule change would lower the pay of those who work at restaurants, hotels and bars. Opponents of the rule held splashy public protests. The Labor Department received more than 218,000 mostly negative comments on the proposal.It appeared to have worked. The spending bill, which President Donald Trump signed into law on Friday, includes a section that makes it clear that employers may not pocket any portion of tips that diners leave for workers."We beat them," said Saru Jayaraman, president of the nonprofit Restaurant Opportunities Center. "I think they realized how outrageous what they were proposing sounded to the public, and basically they backed down."Representatives for the restaurant industry, however, are also pleased.The National Restaurant Association said it never asked for employers to be allowed to keep tips in the first place. Angelo Amador, senior VP at the trade group, argued that most employers wouldn't skim tips even if they were allowed to."A decision by a restaurant to retain some or all of the customer tips rather than distributing them to the hourly staff would be unpopular with employees and guests alike, and it could severely damage the public's perception of the restaurant," Amador wrote in his comment on the proposed rule.The left-leaning Economic Policy Institute disagreed, saying that many employers take a portion of tips even in places where it's forbidden, and would do so even more often if it were legal. In a recent report, it estimated that servers would lose some .8 billion in tips annually to their employers.The language in the spending bill also effectively does another big thing: It allows employers to pool tips and distribute them among staff, as long as the employer also pays the full minimum wage. Many owners have long sought to boost the pay of kitchen workers and bussers by forcing servers to share their tips."We want to ensure that servers, bussers, dishwashers, cooks, and others who work as a team to provide great customer service in the industry have access to share in tips left by customers, as this legislation clearly allows," said Amador.That's fine with labor advocates at the National Employment Law Project, who say that pooling tips is a good way to create wage equity, as long workers are paid the full minimum wage and tips aren't shared with managers or any other supervisors. "We enthusiastically support this compromise," said Judy Conti, the group's director of federal affairs.Going forward, however, there may be less agreement between workers' rights advocates and the National Restaurant Association.Currently, the federal minimum wage for workers who get tips is .13 an hour. Seven states have done away with the two tiers and made the minimum for tipped workers the same as it is for employees who earn regular wages.Many cities and states have already raised their overall minimum wages, as the federal level has remained unchanged since 2009. The question of eliminating lower tipped minimum wages will be on the ballot this year in Washington, D.C., and Michigan and New York is considering the proposal.All of these efforts have generally come over the objections of the restaurant industry, which argues that the economy and nature of the jobs have changed."The minimum wage, with all due respect, is a 1938 income support system for a workforce that worked in manufacturing and agriculture," said Cicely Simpson, executive vice president for public affairs at the National Restaurant Association, at a panel discussion?last month. "In our workforce, we have people who drive an Uber during the day and work in restaurants at night. They have no desire to spend their entire career in an entire industry."Simpson later softened her stance and said that the National Restaurant Association would like to see policies such as the minimum wage and overtime thresholds be "updated," not trashed entirely. 4411
Rebecca Luker was one of the most beautiful voices on Broadway and a lovely person ,,We are all devastated for Danny and for ourselves,,we will never get to witness her talents on stage again ????????RIP Dear Dear Girl?? pic.twitter.com/6qSKhEZZ2c— Bernadette Peters (@OfficialBPeters) December 23, 2020 320
Residents on the Big Island face several threats Monday from Kilauea: In addition to the possibility of more eruptions, lava is oozing into the ocean, sending hydrochloric acid and volcanic glass particles into the air.That's producing laze, a dangerous mix of lava and haze, which is adding to the ongoing challenges. Levels of sulfur dioxide have tripled in emissions. And Kilauea Volcano's summit had several small ash emissions Sunday, releasing plumes of gas and billowing steam. 492
Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minnesota, has responded to comments President Donald Trump made at a rally on Tuesday in which he implied that because Omar's is a Somali immigrant that it lessened her status as a lawmaker.Trump made the comments Thursday while attacking the Democratic party's progressive wing, a group that goes by "The Squad.""We're going to win the state of Minnesota because of (Omar), they say," Trump said during a rally in Pennsylvania on Tuesday. "She's telling us how to run our country. How did you do where you came from? How is your country doing?"Omar was born in Somalia, but her family fled the war-torn country when she was a child. She arrived in the United States in the 1990s and her family moved to Minneapolis in 1997. She is a naturalized American citizen.Omar is the first Somali-American representatives in Congress and the first woman of color to represent Minnesota.Omar responded to Trump's comments in a series of tweets on Tuesday night."Firstly, this is my country & I am a member of the House that impeached you. Secondly, I fled civil war when I was 8. An 8-year-old doesn't run a country even though you run our country like one," Omar said. 1191