濮阳东方医院男科看阳痿口碑好很放心(濮阳东方妇科在哪里) (今日更新中)

Former White House communications director Hope Hicks is not responding to any questions about her time at the White House in a closed-door congressional interview Wednesday, angering Democrats who say they expect to go to court to force her to answer their questions.White House attorneys are objecting to all questions related to the White House, Democrats say, all the way down to where Hicks sat in the West Wing. But Hicks is answering questions about her time on the Trump campaign, which is not covered by executive privilege.The White House is not asserting executive privilege, but arguing that Hicks has absolute immunity from testifying as a senior adviser to President Donald Trump. Democrats called that legal claim "ridiculous" and "absurd" as they signaled they will likely challenge it in court."There is no such thing as absolute immunity that prevents someone from answering questions about any subject related to their work in an administration. It just doesn't exist," said Rep. David Cicilline, a Rhode Island Democrat. "This is an ongoing effort by the president of the United States to obstruct, to prevent Congress from finding the facts and behaving as if he's above the law."House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler told reporters as he exited the interview, which is still ongoing, that she was answering some questions."Ms. Hicks is answering questions put to her and the interview continues," the New York Democrat said. He declined to say what his next steps would be.Although many questions from Democrats were not answered, Hicks did provide some responses, such as when she was asked about her House Intelligence Committee testimony from 2018 in which she said that she sometimes told white lies on behalf of the President.Under Democratic questioning, Hicks told the panel that she never lied about anything "substantial," according to multiple sources. Hicks said that the lies were about small matters such as scheduling, which was similar to her previous testimony.Hicks' appearance is the first time a member of Trump's inner circle is appearing before a Democratic committee investigating the President, which comes as Nadler's committee wrestles with whether to begin an impeachment inquiry.Trump weighed in on Hicks' interview on Twitter Wednesday, accusing Democrats of "extreme presidential harassment.""The Dems are very unhappy with the Mueller Report, so after almost 3 years, they want a Redo, or Do Over. This is extreme Presidential Harassment," Trump tweeted. "They gave Crooked Hillary's people complete Immunity, yet now they bring back Hope Hicks."Republicans criticized Democrats for trying to interview Hicks in the first place. Georgia Rep. Doug Collins, the ranking Republican on the committee, called Hicks' appearance merely an attempt from Democrats to generate a "press release." And Rep. Steve Chabot, an Ohio Republican, called the interview a "total waste of time" as he left the room.The White House's objections to Democrats' questions were expected, as White House Counsel Pat Cipollone sent the House panel a letter Tuesday evening arguing that Hicks was immune from testifying about her time at the White House as one of the President's senior advisers, citing executive privilege protections."Because of this constitutional immunity, and in order to protect the prerogatives of the Office of President, the President has directed Ms. Hicks not to answer questions before the Committee relating to the time of her services as a senior adviser to the President," Cipollone wrote.The White House's stance means that Nadler, a Democrat from New York, could end up in court to try to enforce the subpoena of Hicks, just as the committee says it will do to compel the testimony of former White House Counsel Don McGahn."If she doesn't testify, then Jerry Nadler will, I assume, unleash the full power of the House Judiciary Committee and the United States House of Representatives that could include, but is not limited to, contempt," said Rep. Hakeem Jeffries of New York, the Democratic caucus chairman, who sits on the Judiciary Committee.Asked Tuesday about the White House instructing Hicks not to answer questions, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said: "Obstruction of justice."But Democrats plan to ask Hicks about more than just her time at the White House. Judiciary Committee aides said they also intend to ask one of Trump's longest-serving campaign aides about her knowledge of the payments that were made during the 2016 campaign to silence women alleging affairs with Trump.The decision to focus on the hush-money payments underscores that the committee is broadening the focus of its probe into the President -- which Nadler has said the panel is undertaking before a decision is made on impeachment, to go beyond the episodes outlined in the Mueller report.Still, the committee is eager to speak to Hicks about her time at the White House. Committee aides said there were five episodes Mueller documented that they wanted to press Hicks about, including the firing of then-national security adviser Michael Flynn, the firing of then-FBI Director James Comey, former Attorney General Jeff Sessions' recusal from the Mueller probe and Trump's efforts to dismiss Mueller from overseeing the probe and to curtail the special counsel's investigation.The committee plans to release a transcript of Hicks' interview afterward, potentially within 48 hours. The Judiciary Committee wants to bring in witnesses to talk about the Mueller report publicly, but so far it has held only open hearings with experts."I hope eventually she and all witnesses will be in the public," said Rep. Madeleine Dean, a Pennsylvania Democrat on the committee. "It's our job. I really believe it's our job to get the facts before the American public. ... The best, most effective way to do our oversight is to make sure it's in the public."Also looming: whether the committee will interview Mueller himself publicly -- and if it will need a subpoena to do so. Nadler declined to comment on those negotiations Tuesday.Republicans argued that Hicks' interview is proof that Democrats' claims of White House stonewalling are overblown."Judiciary Democrats have been their own barrier to information by choosing to escalate instead of negotiate at every turn," said Rep. Doug Collins of Georgia, the top Republican on the Judiciary panel. "The White House has offered to negotiate with Democrats for documents that Ms. Hicks can't provide, and the committee could probably have heard from her earlier if Democrats didn't take a scorched-earth approach to pursuing information."Hicks has previously testified behind closed doors before the House and Senate Intelligence committees, and she left her job at the White House the day after appearing before the House panel. At those interviews, Hicks also did not discuss her time at the White House, Cipollone wrote.Democrats have argued that Hicks cannot claim executive privilege when she spoke to the special counsel's office about the same topics, but the Trump administration has countered that being interviewed in an executive branch investigation does not waive privilege for a legislative branch probe. That question is also one that's likely to end up in court for a number of witnesses the panel is seeking to interview.One potential point of contention is the presidential transition before Trump took office. Although Democrats -- and some Republicans, like former Rep. Trey Gowdy of South Carolina -- have argued that executive privilege does not apply to the transition, Cipollone argued in his letter Tuesday that Hicks' transition work would likely be privileged because it involved decisions that would be made after Trump was inaugurated. 7754

Hundreds of cities have put curfews in place because of the protests. That makes it so law enforcement can stop or arrest anyone on the street, but many protesters have ignored the restrictions. So, why do it? We spoke to an expert in policing who says it’s about separating those hiding in the crowd to incite violence and protecting demonstrators trying to have their voices heard.“It doesn't necessarily give power. It gives them the ability to contain better whatever it is that they need to contain,” said Dr. Maria Haberfeld, a professor of law, police science and criminal justice at John Jay College. “Whether it's rioting, whether it's looting, whether it's unlawful gathering of people.”Haberfeld says curfews have a history of controversy. They were used during the Jim Crow era against African Americans and against Japanese populations during World War II.Now, they're normally used for juveniles or during natural disasters like hurricanes. Haberfeld calls that the good use of curfews to protect the general population.Still, the ACLU has criticized curfews as unfair and unconstitutional, saying it gives police too much discretion over who to arrest. Haberfeld doesn't see it that way.“When a city's under siege, when a city's in danger of being burned and destroyed, that has nothing to do with unconstitutional,” said Haberfeld. “That has everything to do actually with serving and protecting people who live in the city.”Haberfeld says it's important to note that curfews are instituted by mayors or local governments, not by police chiefs or commissioners. She says police departments cannot and do not want to arrest everyone. 1660

House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Richard Neal has issued subpoenas for President Donald Trump's tax returns, the committee told CNN on Friday, an escalation in 179

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Monday called for Labor Secretary Alexander Acosta to resign over his handling more than a decade ago of a plea deal for multi-millionaire Jeffrey Epstein, who was recently charged with allegedly having operated a sex trafficking ring in which he sexually abused dozens of underage girls."(Secretary Acosta) must step down. As US Attorney, he engaged in an unconscionable agreement w/ Jeffrey Epstein kept secret from courageous, young victims preventing them from seeking justice. This was known by @POTUS when he appointed him to the cabinet. #AcostaResign," Pelosi, a California Democrat, wrote in a 645

High-tech crooks have figured out a way to get around two-factor authentication and access some customers’ bank, email and cell phone accounts.Two-factor authentication is the process where your bank, email provider or other business texts you a one-time code that must be entered to get access to your account after you enter your password. Without the code, a user cannot log into an account.Businessman Robert Ross says crooks got his cell phone company to change his SIM card without his knowledge so calls, texts and two-factor authentication messages no longer went to his cell phone, but instead to one the hacker had in his possession. A SIM card is the little chip in most phones that tells a cellular company which handset should receive a call or text.“Hackers stole million from me,” Robert Ross said.A 21-year-old man was later arrested.Ross says 0,000 was stolen first and then 0,000 again later."What the hackers did is they called up AT&T and they impersonated me, and they said, ‘Hi my name is Rob Ross and I got a new phone with a new SIM card. And could you please change the SIM card number in my account,’” Ross said.AT&T would not confirm or deny the specifics of Ross situation.The hacker never touched Ross’ cell phone, he says but was able to route all his calls and texts to the hacker's phone. This included two-factor authentication texts needed to get into Ross’ bank accounts and Gmail account."I look up from my phone, to my laptop and I saw that in real time, my Gmail was going from being logged in to logged out and then I looked back down at my phone. I clicked through the lock screen and I saw that I had no service," he said.He says preventing messages from reaching his Gmail might have delayed him finding out that money has been moved from his account.Metropolitan State University of Denver professor Steve Beaty, who is a cybersecurity and information technology expert, says sometimes crooks can get into a customer’s cell phone account by knowing the answers to security questions."What's your mother's maiden name? What is your pet's name? The problem is, all of those can be found out very easily through breaches and through social media," Beaty said.Beaty says the growing number of breaches shouldn't deter you from using two-factor authentication for your Gmail and bank accounts. He says, instead make it harder for people to impersonate you."I recommend lying about your secret security questions so that you’re not using your mother's maiden name, not your pet name, not your favorite car. I can figure out all of those things about you on Facebook and Twitter," Beaty said.The suspect who police say broke into Robert's accounts has been caught. He's from New York City and faces 21 charges.In Ross’ case, his money was stored in a virtual currency.He doesn’t expect to get his money back.AT&T sent the following statement:“We continually look for ways to enhance our policies and safeguards to protect against these sorts of scams. When our customers are victims of identity theft, we strive to reverse activity related to their account with us and restore service as quickly as possible.”AT&T has a web page with news and information about SIM swaps here: 3250

来源：资阳报