濮阳东方医院男科看早泄评价比较好(濮阳东方妇科评价好收费低) (今日更新中)

Former Trump Attorney General Jeff Sessions and former Auburn football coach Tommy Tuberville will advance to a primary runoff after a tough US Senate GOP primary in Alabama. The two Republicans will face off one on one in a primary runoff after neither candidate came close to reaching 50% of the vote. Sessions, who previously served in the US Senate before agreeing to become Trump's Attorney General, was slightly ahead of Tuberville with 70% of the vote. Sessions had 32.03% compared to Tuberville's 31.75%. Sessions' relationship turned sour toward the end of his AG tenure. President Trump expressed his disappointment that Sessions recused himself during the Department of Justice's investigation into Russian meddling during the 2016 election. Tuberville enters as a well-known football figure in the state. Tuberville, who also coached at Cincinnati, Texas Tech and Ole Miss, was the 2004 National Coach of the Year while at Auburn. 954

GRAPHIC CONTENT: The photo below may be disturbing to some.NAPLES, Fla. -- The recent discovery of two dead dolphins off Florida's Gulf Coast has prompted NOAA's Office of Law Enforcement to 203

Fear of an economic slowdown is rocking Wall Street and the oil markets.The Dow plunged 600 points and broke below 23,000 on Thursday, while the Nasdaq is flirting with a bear market. US oil prices plummeted more than 4% to the lowest level since August 2017.The latest wave of selling shows how worried investors have become about the eventual demise of the economic expansion. Those jitters were exacerbated by concerns that the Federal Reserve is making a mistake by 482

Former Special Counsel Robert Mueller told Congress on Wednesday that his investigation did not "totally exonerate" President Donald Trump as the President has claimed."The finding indicates that the President was not as exculpated for the acts that he allegedly committed," Mueller said. "It is not what the report said."But beyond that response, Mueller's exchanges with lawmakers were at times shaky, with answers that were often halting and stilted in the face of rapid-fire questions. Mueller frequently referred them back to the report, asked for questions to be repeated and answered with short "true" or "that's correct" responses.Mueller is testifying at the most highly anticipated hearing of the Trump presidency, with the potential to reset the narrative about his two-year investigation into the President's conduct.After weeks of negotiations, twists and turns over Mueller's appearance and a pair of subpoenas, the former special counsel is now answering questions about his probe for the first time before the House Judiciary Committee, and will appear at noon ET before the House Intelligence Committee.The former special counsel's testimony is the closest thing to a make-or-break moment as it gets for Democrats in their investigations into the President. It's a potential turning point for the House Democratic impeachment caucus that's banking Mueller can reset the conversation about the special counsel investigation and convince the public -- and skeptical Democratic colleagues -- that the House should pursue an impeachment inquiry into Trump.Democrats have pointed to Mueller's report as a reason to take up impeachment, but he declined to engage on the question."Is it true that there's nothing in Volume II of the report that says the President may have engaged in impeachable conduct?" asked Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner, a Wisconsin Republican."We have studiously kept in the center of our investigation, our mandate," Mueller responded. "And our mandate does not go to other ways of addressing conduct. Our mandate goes to what — developing the report and turning the report into the attorney general."Democrats walked Mueller through the key passages of his report, while Republicans sought to undercut the special counsel investigation, raising questions about his decision to write a lengthy report about the President's conduct when he did not decide to prosecute the Trump on obstruction of justice."Volume two of this report was not authorized under the law," charged Rep. John Ratcliffe, a Texas Republican and a former prosecutor. "I agree with the chairman, this morning, when he said Donald Trump is not above the law. He's not. But he damn sure shouldn't be below the law, which is where this report puts him."In his opening statement, Mueller defended the work that his team did."My staff and I carried out this assignment with that critical objective in mind: to work quietly, thoroughly, and with integrity so that the public would have full confidence in the outcome," Mueller said.But Mueller also telegraphed that he would not engage on many of the questions both Democrats and Republicans will want him to answer, from the origins of the investigation to how he decided whether or not to prosecute the President."As I said on May 29: the report is my testimony. And I will stay within that text," Mueller said.Even if there isn't a bombshell revelation, Democrats are hopeful that the recitation of the key points of Mueller's investigation and what it uncovered about the President can move the needle."Although Department policy barred you from indicting the President for this conduct, you made clear that he is not exonerated. Any other person who acted this way would have been charged with a crime. And in this nation, not even the President is above the law," House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler said in his opening statement."We will follow your example, Director Mueller. We will act with integrity. We will follow the facts where they lead. We will consider all appropriate remedies. We will make our recommendation to the House when our work concludes," Nadler added. "We will do this work because there must be accountability for the conduct described in your report, especially as it relates to the President."But if Mueller's testimony fails to shift the conversation, it could spell the beginning of the end for 4385

For Monica Cooper, making it on the outside was tougher than she thought it would be. After spending more than a decade behind bars, Cooper came out of prison ready to rebuild her life. She finished college, earned a bachelor's degree to make herself marketable, and set out to find employment.Monica isn't alone. The National Employment Law Project says an estimated 70 million people, or one in three adults, have a prior arrest or conviction record. And while many exit prison ready to rejoin and contribute to their communities, they're often stopped by one little box. On an initial job application, many employers ask if applicants have been convicted of a felony. This forces many returning from incarceration to check yes, explain their conviction, or leave it blank. Advocates say that pesky box is leaving thousands of qualified workers on the shelf. Since 2004, a growing number of states have taken actions to get that box removed. The latest effort is happening in Maryland.Kimberly Haven says she was haunted knowing she'd have to check "yes" on her application for decades after completing her sentence. She's spent years advocating to get rid of that box, first successfully in Baltimore. The first version of the bill was passed in Baltimore City, and then several other counties adopted their own version. Now a statewide bill has made it to the capitol in Annapolis for consideration.Maryland Delegate Nick Mosby is pushing a statewide bill that would get rid of the box on the initial application. An employer can ask about a criminal history in the first interview but must wait to run a background check until a conditional offer has been made. He says it's just about getting employers to meet these applicants face-to-face.Certain jobs, like ones in law enforcement or one that would require you to work with minors, are excluded from the bill. Those who support it say it reduces recidivism and hits an untapped skilled resource. Put simply, they say it's a smart economic decision.But Cailey Locklair Tolle, who testified against the bill, says employers have a right to know up front whether the potential employee has a criminal history.A 2012 ruling at the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission said employers should only consider convictions directly related to a job and whether the applicant is likely to commit the same crime again. The EEOC made discrimination based on conviction records a violation of federal employment law. Maryland hopes to be the 12th state to pass the law mandating the box removal in both the public and private sectors. A federal bill has also been introduced in Congress. Kimberly says laws like these will make the difference to thousands of returning from incarceration every year. 2792

来源：资阳报