濮阳东方男科医院割包皮口碑怎么样(濮阳东方医院男科看早泄评价比较高) (今日更新中)

WASHINGTON, D.C. – President-elect Joe Biden is nominating the education commissioner in Connecticut to serve as secretary of the Department of Education.After initial reports, Biden confirmed Tuesday that he would like Miguel Cardona to take over the role that Secretary Betsy DeVos has held since President Donald Trump took office in 2017.Watch Biden introduce Cardona below:Cardona has served as his state’s commissioner of education since August 2019. Before that, he served as assistant superintendent for teaching and learning in Meriden, according to Connecticut State Colleges and Universities.The 45-year-old began his career as an elementary school teacher and served as a school principal for 10 years. He also taught for four years as an adjunct professor at the University of Connecticut in the Department of Educational Leadership.Cardona is a low-profile candidate who The Washington Post says has pushed to reopen schools and hasn’t been aligned with any particular side in recent education policy battles. When schools moved to remote learning this year, The Associated Press reports Cardona hurried to deliver more than 100,000 laptops to students across The Constitution State.In his announcement, Biden said Cardona will lead the administration’s efforts to invest in all students, support educators, and make reopening schools safely a national priority. They hope to safely reopen the majority of classrooms within the first 100 days of Biden’s term.Biden says Cardona will strive to eliminate long-standing inequities and close racial and socioeconomic opportunity gaps — as well as expand access to community colleges, training and public four-year colleges and universities to improve student success and grow a stronger middle class.Cardona’s parents are from Puerto Rico. If confirmed by the Senate, he would be another diverse member of the administration’s Cabinet, which Biden has promised will be the most diverse in U.S. history.Biden issued this statement about Cardona: 2012

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and a coalition of 48 attorneys general have filed lawsuits against Facebook, accusing the company of illegally stifling its competition to protect its “monopoly power.”The lawsuits allege that Facebook illegally acquired competitors in a predatory manner and cut services to smaller threats, depriving users from the benefits of competition and reducing privacy protections along the way. They claim Facebook took these actions to boost its bottom line through increased advertising revenue.The FTC says it's seeking a permanent injunction in federal court that could require divestitures of assets, including Instagram and WhatsApp. It could also prohibit Facebook from imposing anticompetitive conditions on software developers and require the company to seek prior notice and approval for future mergers and acquisitions.New York Attorney General Letitia James is leading the bipartisan coalition, which includes attorneys general from 46 states, Washington D.C. and Guam. Their goal is to “stop Facebook’s anticompetitive conduct,” according James.“Today, we are taking action to stand up for the millions of consumers and many small businesses that have been harmed by Facebook’s illegal behavior,” said James in a statement. “Instead of competing on the merits, Facebook used its power to suppress competition so it could take advantage of users and make billions by converting personal data into a cash cow.”The coalition's lawsuit claims Facebook employs a variety of methods to impede competing services and “build a competitive moat” around the company. The plaintiffs claim the two most utilized strategies have been to acquire smaller rivals and potential rivals before they can threaten Facebook’s dominance, as well as suffocating and squashing third-party developers that Facebook invited to utilize its platform.The attorneys general use Facebook’s purchases of Instagram and WhatsApp as examples. They claim Facebook saw Instagram as a direct threat quickly after the company launched, so they acquired it for billion in 2012. The company then bought WhatsApp for billion in 2014.The coalition of AGs is asking the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to halt Facebook’s “illegal, anticompetitive conduct” and block the company from continuing this behavior in the future.Additionally, the collation is asking the court to restrain Facebook from making further acquisitions valued at million or more without advance notice to the states.Finally, they’re asking the court to provide any additional relief it determines is appropriate, including the divestiture or restructuring of illegally acquired companies, or current Facebook assets or business lines.Responding to the lawsuits, Facebook released this statement on Twitter: 2831

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Two conservative Supreme Court justices are taking aim at the landmark case that legalized same-sex marriage across the U.S. in 2015.Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito released a four-page opinion Monday about the religious liberty implications from the Obergefell v. Hodges decision.Thomas and Alito argue that the decision threatens the religious liberty of Americans who believe that marriage is a “sacred institution” between a man and woman.“Due to Obergefell, those with sincerely held religious beliefs concerning marriage will find it increasingly difficult to participate in society without running afoul of Obergefell and its effect on other antidiscrimination laws,” wrote the justices.Thomas and Alito were among the four justices who voted against legalizing same-sex marriage five years ago, arguing that it should have been left to the states to the decide.“If the states had been allowed to resolve this question through legislation, they could have included accommodations for those who hold these religious beliefs,” they wrote.Monday’s opinion came as the court declined to hear the case involving Kentucky clerk Kim Davis, who made headlines in 2015 as she declined marriage licenses to gay couples, despite the Supreme Court ruling. Thomas wrote that he agreed with not taking up the case, because it didn’t “cleanly present” important questions raised about Obergefell v. Hodges.In their opinion, Thomas and Alito say Davis may have been “one of the first victims” of the court’s “cavalier treatment of religion” in the Obergefell decision, but she won’t be the last.They claim, “Obergefell enables courts and governments to brand religious adherents who believe that marriage is between one man and one woman as bigots, making their religious liberty concerns that much easier to dismiss.”Thomas and Alito ended the opinion saying the court’s decision in the Obergefell case has “created a problem that only it can fix,” suggesting there’s a possibility the justices could move to overturn the 2015 decision.This comes weeks after the death of liberal justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. President Donald Trump and his fellow Republicans are working hard to appoint Judge Amy Coney Barrett to that seat, which would give conservatives a 6-3 majority. 2300

WASHINGTON (AP) — The number of U.S. active-duty troops deployed to the U.S.-Mexico border has "pretty much peaked" at the current total of 5,800, the Pentagon's No. 2 official said Thursday.That is far below the 10,000 to 15,000 that President Donald Trump initially said would be needed to secure the border against what he called an "invasion" of migrants.Deputy Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan was asked about the military mission one day after his boss, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, visited troops near McAllen, Texas, and defended the use of the military for border security.Mattis said that within a week to 10 days, the troops currently deployed along the border in Texas, Arizona and California will have accomplished all the tasks initially requested by Customs and Border Protection, although he said additional requests were expected.Shanahan did not go into detail beyond saying substantial additional troops do not appear to be required."We've pretty much peaked in terms of the number of people that are down there," he told reporters at the Pentagon. He noted that the current mission is scheduled to end Dec. 15, adding, "That could always be amended."Mattis, while on his way to visit troops along the border in south Texas on Wednesday, declined to provide an estimate of how much the mission will cost.In his most extensive remarks about the hastily arranged mission, Mattis argued that it fits an historical pattern dating to early in the 20th century. He noted that President Woodrow Wilson deployed tens of thousands of National Guard and active duty troops to the border in 1916 in response to a Mexican military raid into the U.S. led by Gen. Francisco "Pancho" Villa.He noted that more recently, National Guard troops were used in border missions ordered by President George W. Bush and President Barack Obama, although not on the cusp of a midterm election.Mattis did not say how soon the mission might end.In addition to the 5,800 active duty troops in the border area, about 2,100 National Guard troops have been providing border support since April.Critics have questioned the wisdom of using the military on the border where there is no discernible security threat. Since the Nov. 6 election, Trump has said little about the matter, and no border threat has yet materialized.Asked whether he believes there is a security threat at the border that justifies the use of the active duty military, Mattis said he defers to the judgment of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen, who joined him at the border Wednesday.Mattis said the short-term objective is to get sufficient numbers of wire and other barriers in place along the border as requested by Customs and Border Protection. The longer-term objective, he said, is "somewhat to be determined."Mattis said the mission, which does not include performing law enforcement tasks, was reviewed by Department of Justice lawyers and deemed a legal undertaking. "It's obviously a moral and ethical mission to support our border patrolmen," he said.___AP Radio correspondent Sagar Meghani contributed to this report. 3109

Washington state has a new law to protect net neutrality at a time when the feds are getting rid of it.In a bipartisan effort, the state's legislators passed House Bill 2282. which was signed into law Monday by Gov. Jay Inslee."Washington will be the first state in the nation to preserve the open internet," Inslee said at the bill signing.The state law, approved by the legislature last month, is to safeguard net neutrality protections, which have been repealed by the Federal Communications Commission and are scheduled to officially end April 23. Net neutrality requires internet service providers to treat all online content the same, meaning they can't deliberately speed up or slow down traffic from specific websites to put their own content at advantage over rivals.The FCC's decision to overturn net neutrality has been championed by the telecom industry, but widely criticized by technology companies and consumer advocacy groups. Attorneys general from more than 20 red and blue states filed a lawsuit in January to stop the repeal.Inslee said the new measure would protect an open internet in Washington, which he described as having "allowed the free flow of information and ideas in one of the greatest demonstrations of free speech in our history."HB2282 bars internet service providers in the state from blocking content, applications, or services, or slowing down traffic on the basis of content or whether they got paid to favor certain traffic. The law goes into effect June 6.  1512

来源：资阳报