濮阳东方男科好吗濮阳东方妇科医院收费查询,濮阳东方看病好不好,濮阳东方医院看男科很好,濮阳东方妇科医院收费便宜吗,濮阳东方医院割包皮价格正规,濮阳东方医院男科咨询医生在线,濮阳东方妇科医院评价非常好

The walk to school turned terrifying for a Rochester, Michigan teen who says he was shot at after he stopped to ask for directions.Fourteen-year-old Brennan Walker missed the bus and tried to walk to school, but got lost after he couldn't remember the route.The freshman wasn't hit, as the shot missed him as he ran away.The situation began when Walker's alarm didn't go off. After missing his bus, he thought he could walk the roughly 4 miles to school.Once he became lost, he stopped at a home and knocked."I knocked on her door a few times and she came down yelling at me before I could say anything and she thought I was trying to break into her house," he said. "I was trying to explain to her that I wanted to get directions to go to my school. I told her no, I go to Rochester High I’m just looking for directions to Rochester High."Walker and his mother, Lisa, say the security video from the home shows the woman then yelled for her husband."The man of the house came down, pretty much just grabbed the shotgun to shoot at my son," says Lisa Walker."I saw it. I saw him holding it like this through the window and I guess I put my hand up, I don’t really remember, and I started to run," Brennan Walker says. "I looked back behind me I saw him aiming at me and I turned back. I turned back and I heard the gunshot. And I tried to run faster."The man has been taken into police custody."If someone is running from your house and chase them outside and shoot at them, you’re going to have criminal charges coming from us," Oakland County Sheriff Michael Bouchard said.Both Walker and his mother believe race was a factor in the incident."After watching the video and hearing the wife say 'why did these people choose my house' I knew it was racially motivated. I don't know what other these people she could possible have been talking about. He was by himself," Lisa Walker said."I didn’t want to believe that that type of stuff could happen here," said Brennan, who said he is just trying to process the shock of what happened."I don't, I don't know how you process getting shot at for asking for directions," he says. 2159

The Senate has passed its long-stalled legislation that would overhaul how sexual harassment complaints are made and handled on Capitol Hill and would hold members of Congress personally responsible for paying such settlements out of their own pockets.The legislation moved forward following a deal reached by Missouri Republican Sen. Roy Blunt and Minnesota Democratic Sen. Amy Klobuchar, and praised by leaders of both parties in the Senate.The bill now goes back to the House of Representatives, which passed its version in February and where the expectation is that there will be a conference committee to work out the differences between the two bills after Congress returns from its weeklong Memorial Day recess.The differences between the House's and Senate's versions of the legislation include the language used in describing when a member would be required to pay for settlements -- and when they would not -- and the reporting of settlements.California Republican Rep. Jackie Speier, one of the chief negotiators of the House's bill said that there is "disappointment" in Senate's bill among some members on both sides of the aisle in the House."We will go to conference and hopefully we can iron out some of those differences," Speier said Thursday on CNN's "New Day."There also is criticism of the Senate's bill among some outside advocacy groups, which have written to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Senate Minority Chuck Schumer expressing concern that the House bill became essentially too watered down in the Senate's negotiations."This bill contains numerous provisions that are contrary to key principles we've previously articulated, falls short of an acceptable compromise, and may have unintended negative consequences," says a letter sent to Senate leaders signed by the American Civil Liberties Union, Equal Pay Today, The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights National Women's Law Center and Public Citizen.Additionally, these groups say they see "significant differences" between the House and Senate bills and are "deeply concerned" that "neither senators nor key stakeholders have been given adequate time to fully vet the bill."Congressional sources tell CNN there are numerous areas that the discussion will center on when the two sides meet to work out a compromise.Among the chief areas of concern: The provision for members being held personally responsible in the Senate bill states that they have to pay out of pocket only for sexual harassment, not for any awards that may be ordered for sex discrimination or any other kind of discrimination. Some fear that could provide a loophole for members who are accused of harassment to settle with a victim for sex discrimination, knowing that they won't be required to pay the settlement and it will instead come out of a US Treasury fund.Additionally, there is concern that in the Senate's legislation would empower and involve the Ethics Committee more so than the House's. The Senate version would give the chair and ranking member of the committee the authority to overrule settlement repayments. The House bill would create a third-party investigatory process instead. 3183

The terms "signing bonus: and "recruiting" are usually reserved fro top-paid professional athletes. Now add nurses to that list.Hospitals across the country are facing a shortage of nurses, and they're stepping up the incentives to fill the jobs.Patients aren't the only ones happy that Christina Predo is working at UCHealth. After all, the hospital gave her a ,000 signing bonus as an incentive to take the job."Other offers before that hadn't even come close," Predo said.Predo needed to find a job where her husband was being relocated. With several offers on the table, in the end it was UCHealth's signing bonus and other perks that sealed the deal."They offered all sorts of help to help move here," Predo said. "They offered someone to actually find me a neighborhood to live in which was awesome. None of the other hospitals actually offered to do that."What's behind the big bonuses? A shortage of nurses. With more than 500,000 seasoned registered nurses expected to retire by 2022, there's a projected need for 1.1 million new nurses to avoid a shortage.Hospitals across the country, including UCHealth, are feeling that crunch already."Well I'll tell you what, we have about 300 positions open," said Kathy Howell, Chief Nursing Executive at UCHealth.Howell says growth has created a greater demand for nurses, and a good economy means more nurses are opting to retire. That's why there's a concerted effort to make the offer to work at UCHealth as attractive as possible, even allowing out-of-state nurses to try out the hospital for a year and covering their housing costs."They go from assignment to assignment within our health system," Howell says. "We also give them a housing stipend, and we usually convert between 35 and 40 percent of them to full-time employees."Most new nurse hires get around ,000 to sign, which Howell doesn't think is out of line."When you look at what turnover of nurses costs and what not having the right nursing complement is to your hospital," Howell says. "That is a very reasonable investment."Ultimately, Howell says it's about delivering the right care to patients, and creating the right environment for the nurses they hire."It's a real comradery. Everyone is super super nice, you really have a say in what you're doing here, your opinion actually matters you don't feel like a number," Predo said.A new way to fill the need for nurses, with a payoff, multifold. 2476

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 Trump campaign has officially requested a recount in two Wisconsin counties, just one day after all 72 counties had reported they finished their canvassing.President Donald Trump and his campaign had a deadline of 5 p.m. Wednesday to demand a recount in the state.The Wisconsin Election Commission (WEC) said the request could be delivered to the commission in person or filed electronically, as long as it was received by 5 p.m.On Wednesday, the Trump campaign ordered a recount in both Milwaukee and Dane Counties — two of the most populous and Democratic-leaning counties in the state.The WEC added that the campaign wired million Tuesday evening.The fees for a recount vary based on where the president would like a recount. The whole state is much more expensive than a county by county recount.The news of the recount comes after The Associated Press projected Joe Biden as the winner in Wisconsin. Biden leads Trump statewide by about 0.3%, or 20,000 votes.This story was originally published by Julia Marshall on WTMJ in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. 1065