濮阳东方医院看妇科价格不高濮阳东方医院妇科技术很靠谱,濮阳东方妇科专不专业,濮阳东方医院看妇科收费低吗,濮阳东方医院治疗早泄口碑非常高,濮阳东方收费高不,濮阳东方妇科医院很好,濮阳东方妇科好

The swarm happening now south of the Salton Sea, near Westmoreland is over 30 km south of the end of the San Andreas. It is in the Brawley seismic zone, a common source of swarms. So far largest is M4.4. Too far from the San Andreas to change the probability of a quake on it.— Dr. Lucy Jones (@DrLucyJones) September 30, 2020 340

The White House on Monday backed down from its threats to revoke Jim Acosta's press pass."Having received a formal reply from your counsel to our letter of November 16, we have made a final determination in this process: your hard pass is restored," the White House said in a new letter to Acosta. "Should you refuse to follow these rules in the future, we will take action in accordance with the rules set forth above. The President is aware of this decision and concurs."The letter detailed several new rules for reporter conduct at presidential press conferences, including "a single question" from each journalist. Follow-ups will only be permitted "at the discretion of the President or other White House officials."The decision reverses a Friday letter by the White House that said Acosta's press pass could be revoked again right after a temporary restraining order granted by a federal judge expires. That letter -- signed by two of the defendants in the suit, press secretary Sarah Sanders and deputy chief of staff for communications Bill Shine -- cited Acosta's conduct at President Trump's November 7 press conference, where he asked multiple follow-up questions and didn't give up the microphone right away."You failed to abide" by "basic, widely understood practices," the letter to Acosta claimed.CNN won the temporary restraining order earlier on Friday, forcing the White House to restore Acosta's press access for 14 days. Judge Timothy J. Kelly ruled on Fifth Amendment grounds, saying Acosta's right to due process had been violated. He did not rule on CNN's argument that the revocation of Acosta's press pass was a violation of his and the network's First Amendment rights.Many journalists have challenged the administration's actions against Acosta, pointing out that aggressive questioning is a tradition that dates back decades.But Trump appeared eager to advance an argument about White House press corps "decorum," no matter how hypocritical.Since the judge criticized the government for not following due process before banning Acosta on November 7, the letter looked like an effort to establish a paper trail that could empower the administration to boot Acosta again at the end of the month.The letter gave Acosta less than 48 hours to contest the "preliminary decision" and said a "final determination" would be made by Monday at 3 p.m.CNN's lawyers had signaled a willingness to settle after prevailing in court on Friday. Ted Boutrous, an attorney representing CNN and Acosta, said they would welcome "a resolution that makes the most sense so everyone can get out of court and get back to their work."But in a new court filing on Monday morning, CNN's lawyers said the defendants "did not respond to this offer to cooperate." Instead, the letter from Shine and Sanders was an "attempt to provide retroactive due process," the filing alleged.So CNN and Acosta asked the judge to set a schedule of deadlines for motions and hearings that would give the network the chance to win a preliminary injunction, a longer form of court-ordered protection to Acosta's press pass.They were seeking a hearing "for the week of November 26, 2018, or as soon thereafter as possible," according to the court filing.A preliminary injunction could be in effect for much longer than the temporary restraining order, thereby protecting Acosta's access to the White House.In a response Monday morning, government lawyers called the CNN motion a "self-styled 'emergency'" and sought to portray the White House's moves as a lawful next step."Far from constituting an 'emergency,' the White House's initiation of a process to consider suspending Mr. Acosta's hard pass is something this Court's Order anticipated," they said.The DOJ lawyers continued to say that the White House had made "no final determination" on Acosta's access, and asked the court to extend its own deadline, set last week, for a status report due at 3 p.m. Monday, in light of the White House's separate self-imposed deadline for the Acosta decision.At lunchtime, Kelly granted the government's request and extended the status report deadline to 6 p.m. Monday.The case was assigned to Judge Kelly when CNN filed suit last Tuesday. Kelly was appointed to the bench by Trump last year, and confirmed with bipartisan support in the Senate. He heard oral arguments on Wednesday and granted CNN's request for a temporary restraining order on Friday."We are disappointed with the district court's decision," the Justice Department said in response at the time. "The President has broad authority to regulate access to the White House, including to ensure fair and orderly White House events and press conferences. We look forward to continuing to defend the White House's lawful actions."Trump seemed to shrug off the loss, telling Fox's Chris Wallace in an interview that "it's not a big deal."He said the White House would "create rules and regulations for conduct" so that the administration can revoke press passes in the future."If he misbehaves," Trump said, apparently referring to Acosta, "we'll throw him out or we'll stop the news conference.""This is a high-risk confrontation for both sides," Mike Allen of Axios wrote in a Monday item about Trump's new targeting of Acosta. "It turns out that press access to the White House is grounded very much in tradition rather than in plain-letter law. So a court fight could result in a precedent that curtails freedom to cover the most powerful official in the world from the literal front row."The-CNN-Wire 5546

The U.S. Army has announced previously-scheduled leadership changes at Fort Hood as well as an investigation into the chain-of-command actions surrounding the case of Spc. Vanessa Guillen.Gen. Michael X. Garrett, commanding general of U.S. Army Forces Command, is directing that Maj. Gen. John B. Richardson IV formally assume duties as deputy commanding general for operations of III Corps and acting senior commander of Fort Hood.The change will take effect on Sept. 2.Army officials say the change in leadership was previously-scheduled and will enable "continuity of command" as III Corps returns from its role leading the Combined Joint Task Force-Operation Inherent Resolve.Maj. Gen. Richardson previously served as FORSCOM's director of operations from 2019-20 and was selected in March 2020 by the Department of the Army to serve as the next DCG for III Corps.Maj. Gen. Scott Efflandt will continue to serve as the deputy commanding general for support and will remain at Fort Hood to assist with the reintegration of III Corps as they return from their mission supporting Operation Inherent Resolve.With Maj. Gen. Efflandt remaining at Fort Hood, the Army will announce the name of a new commander for the 1st Armored Division, which Efflandt had previously been designated to lead. That announcement is expected in the coming days.The Army also announced that Sen. Garrett will appoint Gen. John Murray, commanding general of Army Futures Command, and one of the Army’s most senior commanders, to lead an in-depth investigation into the chain-of-command actions related to Spc. Vanessa Guillen.There are currently several investigations underway at Fort Hood. The Army says those investigations are tasked with reviewing a wide range of topics and concerns. According to the Army, Gen. Murray will roll those efforts into a more complete and comprehensive investigation that will delve into all activities and levels of leadership.Murray’s investigation, which will be conducted under the provisions of Army Regulation 15-6, is separate from the Independent Review of Fort Hood, which began in August.Full release: This story was first reported by Sydney Isenberg at KXXV in Waco, Texas. 2228

The travel industry is still reeling from the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic as millions of people have lost their travel-related jobs. Now, Congress is debating a bill that would provide thousands of dollars in travel tax credits to families."This could be used for airfare, for hotel stays, for meals and attractions within a certain distance away from home, let's say." says Tori Emerson Barnes with the U.S. Travel Association.Modeled after the homebuyer tax credit that was created in the recession of 2008, Barnes says, if passed, this financial incentive would be crucial toward putting the travel industry and the millions of people it employs back to work."Post 9/11, it took about 18 months for the travel industry to come back. From an economic standpoint, this is nine times worse than 9/11, so really what we have to do is get people moving again to get the economy back," says Barnes.The travel tax credit would pay back families 50% of their travel expenses up to ,000. The refund would be for travel expenses made between the time of the bill's enactment and the end of 2021."We know that we need to get people traveling again in a health and safe way so we think that establishing an individual travel tax credit that can help motivate folks and push them a little bit into the market will go a long way. We’ve been working with members of Congress on both sides of the aisle and administration," says Barnes.Chris Gahl of Visit Indy says the travel tax credit would be huge for businesses in Indianapolis."The tourism eco-system is made up of lots of different businesses. Most consumers would think of hotels, airlines, museums, restaurants and bars. But there are also companies that clean linens for the hotels, flower companies," says Gahl.As for easing travelers concerns amid COVID-19, Gahl says, "From Indiana’s perspective, from the capital of Indianapolis, we have taken great strides in putting people first and foremost and the health of our residents and subsequently our visitors.""We all believe that there needs to be appropriate sanitation, there needs to be appropriate barriers in place and we support the use of masks. You know, we think a phased and layered approach is critical to the health and safety of the American public but we don’t think you have to pick between the public health or the economic health of the country," says Barnes.In the Indianapolis area, Visit Indy says more than 83,000 people rely on tourism for their jobs."This goes well beyond the glossiness of hotels and restaurants and wanting a getaway. There's real people, real Americans who are working and depending on tourism for a paycheck," says Gahl.The US Travel Association hopes Congress votes on the bill by early August. 2754

The state of Oregon became the first in the nation to decriminalize small amounts of hard drugs like heroin and cocaine by overwhelmingly passing Measure 110 on Tuesday.According to The Oregonian, the measure will reduce misdemeanor drug possession to a non-criminal violation, punishable by measures similar to a traffic stop. Violators will be given a ticket and a 0 fine, or be given the option of being screened for a subtance abuse disorder.Those found with larger amounts of drugs, who would have previously been charged with a felony, will now face a misdemeanor charge. The measure also redirects tax revenue from the sale of legal marijuana in the state toward Addiction Recover Centers, where people are screened for drug use and can also receive treatment for drug addiction.Supporters of the measure say the new policy will reduce the state's jail population, and in particular, free many offenders of non-violent crimes. Supporters also say the bill will promote racial equality in the state, as drug laws disproportionately affect Black people and other people of color.Opponents of the measure say it promotes drug use and will lead to more overdose deaths and overwhelm addiction centers in the state.The Oregonian also reports that the measure received funding from many out-of-state donors, including Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg.The Associated Press reports that the measure passed with about 60% support.In addition to decriminalizing hard drug use, Oregon also legalized the sale and recreational use of Psilocybin, or magic mushrooms. The Associated Press reports that the measure passed with 56% support. 1650