濮阳东方医院妇科线上预约(濮阳东方医院看妇科病口碑很好价格低) (今日更新中)

WASHINGTON (AP) — The CEOs of Twitter, Facebook and Google have received a hectoring from Republicans at a Senate hearing for alleged anti-conservative bias in the companies’ social media platforms. And the CEOs are being put on notice about potential restrictions that may be coming. Some lawmakers are looking to challenge the companies' long-enjoyed bedrock legal protections for online speech. The protections stem from Section 230 of a 1996 communications law. Senators in the hearing extracted promises from Twitter's Jack Dorsey, Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg and Google's Sundar Pichai that their companies will take needed measures to help ensure election security.Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., asked the CEOs if they have a plan “if the president uses your platforms to say, on the day of the election, that there is rigging or fraud, without any basis in evidence, or attempts to say the election is over.”President Donald Trump has refused to publicly commit to accepting the results if he loses the presidential contest. He also has raised the baseless prospect of mass fraud in the vote-by-mail process.Testifying via video, the executives said their companies are taking a number of measures, including partnerships with news organizations to get out accurate information. Dorsey said Twitter was working closely with state election officials. “We want to give people using the service as much information as possible,” he said.Republicans, led by Trump, have accused the social media platforms, without evidence, of deliberately suppressing conservative, religious and anti-abortion views.Zuckerberg acknowledged that Congress “should update the law to make sure it’s working as intended.” Dorsey and Pichai urged caution in making any changes.The executives rejected accusations of bias. “We approach our work without political bias, full stop,” Pichai said. “To do otherwise would be contrary to both our business interests and our mission.”The companies have wrestled with how strongly they should intervene with speech. They have often gone out of their way not to appear biased against conservative views — a posture that some say effectively tilts them toward those viewpoints. The effort has been especially strained for Facebook, which was caught off guard in 2016, when it was used as a conduit by Russian agents to spread misinformation benefiting Trump’s presidential campaign. 2413

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump is suggesting without evidence that China — not Russia — may be behind the the grave cyberattack against the United States. And he is trying to downplay the impact, as he comments for the first time on the breach. "I have been fully briefed and everything is well under control. Russia, Russia, Russia is the priority chant when anything happens because Lamestream is, for mostly financial reasons, petrified of ... discussing the possibility that it may be China (it may!)," the president tweeted. Adding that the hack could have included some kind of "hit" on voting machines. There is no evidence of this, and no one within the administration has said this. Trump's tweeted comments on Saturday contradict Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who said during a media interview Friday Russia was “pretty clearly” behind the attack. 877

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Republican-led Senate is expected to move quickly toward a confirmation vote for President Donald Trump’s nominee to replace the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell hasn’t yet said for certain whether a final vote will come before or after the Nov. 3 presidential election, just a little more than five weeks away, but Republicans are eyeing a vote in late October.Ginsburg’s Sept. 18 death put the Senate in uncharted political terrain. A confirmation vote so close to a presidential election would be unprecedented, creating significant political risk and uncertainty for both parties. Early voting is underway in some states in the races for the White House and control of Congress.A look at the confirmation process and what we know and don’t know about what’s to come:WHO DID TRUMP PICK?Trump on Saturday nominated Judge Amy Coney Barrett of Indiana, whose three-year judicial record shows a clear and consistent conservative bent. She is a devout Catholic and mother of seven, who at age 48 would be the youngest justice on the current court if confirmed.WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?It is up to the Senate Judiciary Committee to vet the nominee and hold confirmation hearings. The FBI also conducts a background check. Once the committee approves the nomination, it goes to the Senate floor for a final vote.Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who faces his own tough reelection contest, has said he will move quickly on Trump’s pick. The nominee traditionally meets with individual senators before the confirmation hearings begin.WHEN WILL THE HEARINGS START?Graham has not yet announced a timetable. But if Republicans are able to complete all of the necessary paperwork and Barrett quickly meets senators, three or four days of hearings could start the first or second week of October.WILL THERE BE A VOTE BEFORE THE ELECTION?Republicans are privately aiming to vote before the election while acknowledging the tight timeline and saying they will see how the hearings go. McConnell has been careful not to say when he believes the final confirmation vote will happen, other than “this year.”Senate Republicans are mindful of their last confirmation fight in 2018, when Christine Blasey Ford’s allegations of a teenage sexual assault almost derailed Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination. The process took longer than expected after Republicans agreed to allow Blasey Ford to testify. Kavanaugh, who denied the allegations, was eventually confirmed in a 50-48 vote.DOES THE SENATE HAVE ENOUGH VOTES TO MOVE FORWARD AND CONFIRM?McConnell does appear to have the votes, for now. Republicans control the Senate by a 53-47 margin, meaning he could lose up to three Republican votes and still confirm a justice, if Vice President Mike Pence were to break a 50-50 tie.At this point, McConnell seems to have lost the support of two Republicans — Maine Sen. Susan Collins and Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski, both of whom have said they don’t think the Senate should take up the nomination before the election. Collins has said the next president should decide the nominee, and she will vote “no” on Trump’s nominee on principle.CAN THE DEMOCRATS STOP THE VOTE?There isn’t much they can do. Republicans are in charge and make the rules, and they appear to have the votes for Trump’s nominee, at least for now. Democrats have vowed to oppose the nomination, and they are likely to use an assortment of delaying tactics. None of those efforts can stop the nomination, however.But Democrats will also make the case against Barrett’s nomination to voters as the confirmation battle stretches into the final weeks — and maybe even the final days — of the election. They say health care protections and abortion rights are on the line, and argue the Republicans’ vow to move forward is “hypocrisy” after McConnell refused to consider President Barack Obama’s nominee, Judge Merrick Garland, several months before the 2016 election.HOW DOES THE CAMPAIGN FACTOR IN?Republicans are defending 25 of the 38 Senate seats that are on the ballot this year, and many of their vulnerable members were eager to end the fall session and return home to campaign. The Senate was originally scheduled to recess in mid-October, but that now looks unlikely.While some senators up for reelection, like Collins, have opposed an immediate vote, others are using it to bolster their standing with conservatives. Several GOP senators in competitive races this year — including Cory Gardner in Colorado, Martha McSally in Arizona, Kelly Loeffler in Georgia and Thom Tillis in North Carolina — quickly rallied to Trump, calling for swift voting.HOW LONG DOES IT USUALLY TAKE TO CONFIRM A SUPREME COURT JUSTICE?Supreme Court nominations have taken around 70 days to move through the Senate, though the last, of Kavanaugh, took longer, and others have taken less time. The election is fewer than 40 days away.COULD THE SENATE FILL THE VACANCY AFTER THE ELECTION?Yes. Republicans could still vote on Barrett in what’s known as the lame-duck session that takes place after the November election and before the next Congress takes office on Jan. 3. No matter what happens in this year’s election, Republicans are still expected to be in charge of the Senate during that period.The Senate would have until Jan. 20, the date of the presidential inauguration, to act on Barrett. If Trump were reelected and she had not been confirmed by the inauguration, he could renominate her as soon as his second term began.DIDN’T MCCONNELL SAY IN 2016 THAT THE SENATE SHOULDN’T HOLD SUPREME COURT VOTES IN A PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION YEAR?He did. McConnell stunned Washington in the hours after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia in February 2016 when he announced the Senate would not vote on Obama’s potential nominee because the voters should have their say by electing the next president.McConnell’s strategy paid off, royally, for his party. Obama nominated Garland to fill the seat, but he never received a hearing or a vote. Soon after his inauguration, Trump nominated Neil Gorsuch to fill Scalia’s seat.SO WHAT HAS CHANGED SINCE 2016?McConnell says it’s different this time because the Senate and the presidency are held by the same party, which was not the case when a vacancy opened under Obama in 2016. It was a rationale McConnell repeated frequently during the 2016 fight, and other Republican senators have invoked it this year when supporting a vote on Trump’s nominee.Democrats say this reasoning is laughable and the vacancy should be kept open until after the inauguration. 6630

WASHINGTON, D.C. – It’s been a strange time everywhere, with COVID-19 upending how people normally live.That includes college students, many of whom are now in a hybrid form of learning, with some on campus and some on a computer at home, like Gregory Carnesi.“Something that I've been experiencing myself, something that I've heard my peers experiencing, is just this feeling of being overwhelmed because everything is online now,” Carnesi said.Carnesi goes to Arizona State University, just one of the campuses in the U.S. where the nonprofit and mental health organization “Active Minds” recently surveyed several thousand college students, to see how they are faring in the time of COVID-19.Here’s what they found:- 1 in 4 students said their depression had “significantly increased” since the start of the pandemic- 89% of the students surveyed said they’re experiencing stress or anxiety- 56% said their daily activity had decreased or significantly decreased.“We have to remind people, ‘you know, you used to walk three miles a day to and from class, or you used to be out on the field running around for soccer practice and you're not doing that right now.’ So how else can you fill that gap and that void for yourself?” said Alison Malmon, founder and executive director of Active Minds.Malmon said it’s also important for colleges and universities to tailor student access to mental health services, since so many are no longer on campus as much.“We are still needing to promote access and we are still needing to give people the supports that they need in the way that they are able to reach them,” Malmon said.Yet, there were some positive findings in the survey.- Nearly two-thirds of students, 66%, said they have been helping support others with their mental health- 77% of those surveyed said they feel optimistic about the futureGregory Carnesi said he is just taking it one day at a time.“I really kind of think the best thing that's worked for me is just having grace and mercy with myself,” he said, “and just doing your best day to day. Even if that best is just getting out of bed and like making yourself breakfast, just like these basic things, that's enough.”If you are in need of mental health resources during the pandemic, click here. 2270

We're highlighting people taking action on behalf of racial equality in their everyday life. That includes a woman who started a parody Twitter account centered around the neighborhood network Nextdoor.“I just found that Nextdoor brought so much levity to my day, at least in my neighborhood, because Glenn Park is a really quiet residential neighborhood in San Fran, so I had this one neighbor that would complain about someone rearranging her lawn gnomes every single day at 4 p.m. like on the dot,” said Jenn Takahashi, the creator of the @BestofNextdoor Twitter account.Takahashi says she basically started the twitter account to make other people laugh. She posted passive aggressive arguments between neighbors, people helping each other and other funny posts.However, she says she also got a lot of submissions that weighed heavy on her and highlighted what she described as racism running rampant.“I always struggled with that because I didn’t want to put that negative energy back out there, but at the same time, I feel like those stories need to be told also,” she said.Recently, Takahashi tweeted Nextdoor’s tweet saying “black lives matter” with another person's post that got taken down for the same thing. Since then, people have shared even more stories of unexplained censored or deleted similar posts.A petition was even started to get racial bias training for Nextdoor neighborhood leads or moderators, among other demands.“I did not realize how completely what a mess their lead program was,” said Takahashi. “These people don’t have any training at all.”Since all this, Nextdoor has said it will "better educate our neighbors on what is and is not allowed on the platform, drawing a firm line against racist behavior and removing comments and members who violate the rules.”Nextdoor also ended a feature that allowed users to forward their posts directly to a local police department. 1913

来源：资阳报