濮阳东方医院男科地址在哪-【濮阳东方医院】,濮阳东方医院,濮阳市东方医院口碑很好,濮阳东方医院男科技术很哇塞,濮阳东方医院割包皮手术很不错,濮阳东方医院价格合理,濮阳东方医院男科治早泄怎么收费,濮阳东方医院男科坐公交路线

The US Office of Special Counsel announced Tuesday that White House aide Kellyanne Conway violated the Hatch Act on two occasions by "advocating for and against candidates" in last year's Alabama Senate special election.In a new report, the OSC special counsel, Henry Kerner, pointed to Conway's TV interviews conducted in her "official capacity" in November and December of last year. The agency said Conway "impermissibly mixed official government business with political views about candidates in the Alabama special election."One of the two interviews was on CNN's "New Day," and the second was on Fox News' "Fox & Friends."In a letter to President Donald Trump, Kerner said he is referring her violations for the President's "consideration of appropriate disciplinary action."The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.During the "Fox & Friends" interview November 20, Conway was introduced by the show's hosts as a "counselor to President Trump" and spoke from White House grounds. She said about Democratic Senate candidate Doug Jones: "Folks, don't be fooled. He'll be a vote against tax cuts. He's weak on crime, weak on borders. He's strong on raising your taxes. He's terrible for property owners."During the "New Day" interview December 6, Conway -- again speaking from White House grounds and introduced by CNN anchor Chris Cuomo as "counselor to President Trump" -- said among other things that Jones will be a reliable vote "for tax hikes," "against border security," "against national security," "against the Second Amendment" and "against life," according to the OSC report.Conway went on to tell Cuomo that Jones is "out of step for Alabama voters, according to the President," and that Trump "doesn't want a liberal Democrat representing Alabama in the United States Senate."The Office of Special Counsel is unrelated to the investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller. 1940
The Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that the Trump administration can end census field operations early, in a blow to efforts to make sure minorities and hard-to-enumerate communities are properly counted in the crucial once-a-decade tally.The decision was not a total loss for plaintiffs in a lawsuit challenging the administration’s decision to end the count early. They managed to get nearly two extra weeks of counting people as the case made its way through the courts.However, the ruling increased the chances of the Trump administration retaining control of the process that decides how many congressional seats each state gets — and by extension how much voting power each state has.The Supreme Court justices’ ruling came as the nation’s largest association of statisticians, and even the U.S. Census Bureau’s own census takers and partners, have been raising questions about the quality of the data being gathered — numbers that are used to determine how much federal funding and how many congressional seats are allotted to states.After the Supreme Court’s decision, the Census Bureau said field operations would end on Thursday.At issue was a request by the Trump administration that the Supreme Court suspend a lower court’s order extending the 2020 census through the end of October following delays caused by the pandemic. The Trump administration argued that the head count needed to end immediately to give the bureau time to meet a year-end deadline. Congress requires the bureau to turn in by Dec. 31 the figures used to decide the states’ congressional seats — a process known as apportionment.By sticking to the deadline, the Trump administration would end up controlling the numbers used for the apportionment, no matter who wins next month’s presidential election.In a statement, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called the Supreme Court’s decision “regrettable and disappointing,” and said the administration’s actions “threaten to politically and financially exclude many in America’s most vulnerable communities from our democracy.”Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissented from the high court’s decision, saying “respondents will suffer substantial injury if the Bureau is permitted to sacrifice accuracy for expediency.”The Supreme Court ruling came in response to a lawsuit by a coalition of local governments and civil rights groups, arguing that minorities and others in hard-to-count communities would be missed if the census ended early. They said the schedule was cut short to accommodate a July order from President Donald Trump that would exclude people in the country illegally from being counted in the numbers used for apportionment.Opponents of the order said it followed the strategy of the late Republican redistricting guru, Thomas Hofeller, who had advocated using voting-age citizens instead of the total population when it came to drawing legislative seats since that would favor Republicans and non-Hispanic whites.Last month, U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh in San Jose, California sided with the plaintiffs and issued an injunction suspending a Sept. 30 deadline for finishing the 2020 census and a Dec. 31 deadline for submitting the apportionment numbers. That caused the deadlines to revert back to a previous Census Bureau plan that had field operations ending Oct. 31 and the reporting of apportionment figures at the end of April 2021.When the Census Bureau, and the Commerce Department, which oversees the statistical agency, picked an Oct. 5 end date, Koh struck that down too, accusing officials of “lurching from one hasty, unexplained plan to the next ... and undermining the credibility of the Census Bureau and the 2020 Census.”An appellate court panel upheld Koh’s order allowing the census to continue through October but struck down the part that suspended the Dec. 31 deadline for turning in apportionment numbers. The panel of three appellate judges said that just because the year-end deadline is impossible to meet doesn’t mean the court should require the Census Bureau to miss it.The plaintiffs said the ruling against them was not a total loss, as millions more people were counted during the extra two weeks.“Every day has mattered, and the Supreme Court’s order staying the preliminary injunction does not erase the tremendous progress that has been made as a result of the district court’s rulings,” said Melissa Sherry, one of the attorneys for the coalition.Besides deciding how many congressional seats each state gets, the census helps determine how .5 trillion in federal funding is distributed each year.San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo said that his city lost 0 million in federal funding over the decade following the 2010 census, and he feared it would lose more this time around. The California city was one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit.“A census count delayed is justice denied,” Liccardo said.With plans for the count hampered by the pandemic, the Census Bureau in April had proposed extending the deadline for finishing the count from the end of July to the end of October, and pushing the apportionment deadline from Dec. 31 to next April. The proposal to extend the apportionment deadline passed the Democratic-controlled House, but the Republican-controlled Senate didn’t take up the request. Then, in late July and early August, bureau officials shortened the count schedule by a month so that it would finish at the end of September.The Senate Republicans’ inaction coincided with Trump’s order directing the Census Bureau to have the apportionment count exclude people who are in the country illegally. The order was later ruled unlawful by a panel of three district judges in New York, but the Trump administration appealed that case to the Supreme Court.The Supreme Court decision comes as a report by the the American Statistical Association has found that a shortened schedule, dropped quality control procedures, pending lawsuits and the outside politicization of some parts of the 2020 census have raised questions about the quality of the nation’s head count that need to be answered if the final numbers are going to be trusted.The Census Bureau says it has counted 99.9% of households nationwide, though some regions of the country such as parts of Mississippi and hurricane-battered Louisiana fall well below that.As the Census Bureau winds down field operations over the next several days, there will be a push to get communities in those two states counted, said Kristen Clarke, president and executive director of the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, one of the litigants in the lawsuit.“That said, the Supreme Court’s order will result in irreversible damage to the 2020 Census,” Clarke said.___Follow Mike Schneider on Twitter at https://twitter.com/MikeSchneiderAP 6792

The US Department of Justice said it is working on two fronts to ensure a fair and free election: To protect against voting fraud and to ensure voters’ civil rights are protected.As President Donald Trump continually claims that voting fraud is prevalent throughout the US, the Department of Justice said it has launched voting fraud hotlines to handle claims of voting fraud.While Trump has claimed that voting fraud could cast doubt on the legitimacy on the elections, there have been relatively few instances of recorded voting fraud. The White House released a Heritage Foundation report that found 1,071 instances of voting fraud, but those instances date back into the 20th century, making up a very small fraction of 1% of all votes cast since then.Department of Justice attorneys say they stand at the ready to assist voters in ensuring they will be able to vote on Election Day.“Ensuring free and fair elections depends in large part on the cooperation of the American electorate,” the US Attorneys’ Office said in a statement. “It is imperative that those who have specific information about discrimination or election fraud make that information available.”The DOJ said it will have FBI special agents available in each field office and resident agency throughout the country to receive allegations of election fraud and other election abuses on Election Day. In addition, those who believe federal voting rights have been violated can reach the FBI at 800-253-3931, or by filing a report here.What are possible violations of law?“Federal law protects against such crimes as intimidating or bribing voters, buying and selling votes, impersonating voters, altering vote tallies, stuffing ballot boxes, and marking ballots for voters against their wishes or without their input,” the US Attorneys Office said. “It also contains special protections for the rights of voters, and provides that they can vote free from acts that intimidate or harass them. For example, actions of persons designed to interrupt or intimidate voters at polling places by questioning or challenging them, or by photographing or videotaping them, under the pretext that these are actions to uncover illegal voting may violate federal voting rights law. Further, federal law protects the right of voters to mark their own ballot or to be assisted by a person of their choice (where voters need assistance because of disability or illiteracy).”For those looking to report possible instances of voting fraud, the Department of Justice encourages voters to call their region’s US Attorneys Office. 2586
The Republican mayor of a Kansas town resigned on Tuesday saying that she "no longer felt safe" in the position due to threats she received while attempting to institute a mask mandate.Dodge City Mayor Joyce Warshaw submitted a letter informing the city of her immediate resignation on Tuesday, according to the city's website.According to the Washington Post, Warshaw was thrust into the national spotlight last Friday, when USA Today published a feature story on Dodge City's struggle to contain COVID-19. According to the article, 1 in 10 people in the town of 27,000 had contracted the virus by the time Warshaw instituted the mask mandate on Nov. 16.Though at least a dozen people in the small town had died, USA Today reported that the local police department chose not to enforce the mandate and that few in the city were actually complying with the order.But Warshaw says that Dodge City's defiance went beyond ignoring the rules. She told the Washington Post on Tuesday that threats toward her and her family prompted her resignation."They were loud, and they were aggressive, and they frightened me and my family," Warshaw told the Post. "There's a strong part of me that wants to say they are only words. But people are angry right now, and I don't know that for sure."Warshaw said she received numerous anonymous voicemails from angry constituents."...the messages grew more frequent and aggressive," the Post reported. "Burn in hell. Get murdered. One person simply wrote, 'We're coming for you.'"Warshaw, who was serving in her second stint as the town's mayor, said in her resignation letter that it was the threats that led to her stepping down."Life has dealt out many challenges in our world that have perhaps caused many people to act inappropriately but I do not feel safe in this position anymore and am hopeful in removing myself this anger, accusations and abuse will not fall on anyone else and will calm down," she wrote.Warshaw isn't the first public official to resign amid threats during the COVID-19 pandemic. In June, Ohio Department of Health Director Dr. Amy Acton submitted her resignation after leading the state's fight against the virus for several months.While Acton stated in her resignation letter that she was seeking to spend more time with her family, she regularly received threats from Ohioans angered by public health measures she took to prevent the spread of the virus. Protesters even accosted Acton at her home.In September, hours after Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine named Dr. Joan Duwve as Acton's replacement, Duwve removed herself from consideration for "personal reasons." 2625
The Swan Dive in Toronto was preparing to close at the beginning of December due to the pandemic, and with little to no revenue, the bar’s owner did not know how long the bar would be able to pay for its rent.Within days after announcing to the community that the bar would be forced to closed due to the pandemic, customers came and bought the bar’s entire stock of beers. Now it appears the bar, unlike many other small businesses in Toronto, will have a chance to reopen in the future.The Swan Dive now hopes to reopen in February, with occasional days as a to-go bottle shop between now and then."We were blowing through our savings and I wasn't sure if I was going to be able to pay rent towards the end of the month," bar owner Abra Shiner told CNN. "So, I wrote on Facebook asking people to come buy the beer we had in our stock room ... and it worked. The post went viral."Shiner told CNN that the sales coupled with government subsidies will allow the bar to survive until March. 996
来源:资阳报