郑州近视多少度做手术最佳郑州飞秒价格,郑州眼科最好的医院,郑州郑州全飞秒哪里好,郑州滴眼液能治近视吗,郑州斜视矫正手术多少钱,郑州小孩子近视可以矫正吗,郑州四百度可以做眼睛近视手术

San Diego, Calif. (KGTV) - Some military legal experts are raising concerns about President Donald Trump's involvement in the war crimes trial of Navy Seal Eddie Gallagher. This comes after the President ordered that medals and honors for prosecutors in the case be revoked."I think it's troubling," said University of San Diego Law Professor Robert Muth in an interview with 10News. "As the Commander in Chief, it would be his prerogative to weigh in if he felt there was something wrong. However, that would be done in a very different way. You would expect it to be done discreetly."Gallagher was accused of several war crimes during a tour of duty in Iraq. The central charge was that he murdered a prisoner of war, a wounded teenage ISIS fighter. Gallagher was acquitted of that charge. The case drew national attention, including from President Trump, who suggested that Gallagher was a hero who was being treated unfairly. Several people criticized how the JAG prosecutors handled the case."President Trump saw that they were abusing their power," said John Dadian, a San Diego political strategist who also served in the Marine Corps. "Not only manacling him during the trial, but confining him to quarters, he had a hard time taling to his lawyers. That's not fair." Dadian says many military veterans believe the President did the right thing by stepping in.Muth is worried about the President's actions setting a precedent. "The fact that the President went and used the bully pulpit, specifically his Twitter account, to essentially punch down at relatively junior folks who by law can't punch back, they just have to take it, is particularly problematic." Muth says the President's public criticism could have a chilling effect on JAG prosecutors who may feel pressured not to handle a case in the way they believe it should be handled because they feel they would be attacked by the President for political reasons. "These are folks who signed up to serve their country and are now being personally attacked by the President of the United States when they're trying to do their job. This isn't the way to do it. It's not how someone should lead. It's certainly not how the President should lead as Commander in Chief." 2240

SAN DIEGO (KGTV)— As the heat wave continues across San Diego County, businesses operating outside are forced to deal with another challenge during this pandemic.While the county has been removed from the state’s monitoring list, no guidance on reopening businesses has been provided, so many continue to work outside.“It’s super-hot,” said Elise Ha, owner of Master Hair & Nails in Ramona. By noon the temperature had reached over 100 degrees, causing discomfort for employees, and slowing down her business.“Not everybody can handle the heat,” she said “It’s brutal.”Ha said working in the heat is a new struggle businesses are facing, especially having to move equipment back and forth to set up outside every day.“I almost fainted because of the heat,” she said. “I can’t wait to back inside.”For now she's using wet towels to cool down and offering cold water to clients.ABC 10News spotted utility workers in Alpine using umbrellas to shield themselves from the scorching sun as temperatures continued to climb Tuesday.The high heat and humidity is making things uncomfortable across the county and the dry fuel causing concerns of fire danger, still some are managing to get by.“We still get a rush,” said Carlos Legaspi, a cook at Tapatio Mexican Grill in Alpine. “We get a lot of city workers and construction workers and stuff that come in for lunch.”Legaspi said the restaurant owners moved tables outdoors before it was required by the state as a safety precaution.While it may be uncomfortable currently, he said things have been running smoothly and the employees have adapted to the changes.“It’s super hot, it’s like 100 degrees right now,” he said before noon Tuesday. “People are kind of used to it now.”As the heat wave continues, SDG&E is urging everyone to limit energy use to avoid power outages.You can do your part by turning off unnecessary lights, precooling your home early in the day, and setting your thermostat to 78 degrees or higher in the afternoon. 1997

SAN DIEGO (KGTV): A new study from the Public Religion Research Institute paints a grim picture of people struggling to make ends meet in San Diego.The study polled more than 3,300 people across the state. It says 45% of San Diegans fall into an auspicious category: people who work full time and still struggle with poverty.The study looked for income levels below 250% of what the US Census Bureau considers the local poverty level. While it doesn't provide an exact dollar amount for that, the study's author says that percentage seemed to be the tipping point for people who could or could not withstand a financial emergency."In this group, a majority of them say they would have a difficult time even coming up with 0 for an emergency expense," says PRRI CEO Robert Jones. "About 4 in 10 say they have put off going to the doctor or cut down on meals to save money. So these are people who are really living right on the edge."At 45%, San Diego falls near the middle of California regions when looking at working people who struggle to make ends meet. On the low end, the Bay Area had just 27% of people in that category. Los Angeles was at 49%. The San Joaquin Valley had the highest percent at 68%.Jones says things like the cost of housing, gas and other necessities in San Diego stretch people's budget to the breaking point."What the survey shows is people working very very hard feel like the deck is stacked against them in a number of ways," says Jones.Other numbers showed a loss of faith in the American Dream, especially in California.In San Diego, 60% of people think it's harder to achieve the American Dream in California than in other parts of the country. 52% of people surveyed say they don't think they'll retire, or they will have to wait until after they're 65 to do so.And 68% of the people surveyed say they'd tell young adults to leave the state to find better opportunities.You can read the full report at the PRRI?website. 1979

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- A federal judge blocked on Friday President Donald Trump from building sections of his long-sought border wall with money secured under his declaration of a national emergency. U.S. District Judge Haywood Gilliam Jr. on Friday immediately halted the administration's efforts to redirect military-designated funds for wall construction. His order applies to two projects, scheduled to begin as early as Saturday, to replace 51 miles of fence in two areas on the Mexican borderGilliam issued the ruling after hearing arguments last week in two cases. California and 19 other states brought one lawsuit; the Sierra Club and a coalition of communities along the border brought the other. His ruling was the first of several lawsuits against Trump's controversial decision to bypass the normal appropriations process to pay for his long-sought wall."The position that when Congress declines the Executive's request to appropriate funds, the Executive nonetheless may simply find a way to spend those funds `without Congress' does not square with fundamental separation of powers principles dating back to the earliest days of our Republic," the judge wrote in granting a temporary injunction to stop construction.At stake is billions of dollars that would allow Trump to make progress in a signature campaign promise heading into his campaign for a second term.Trump declared a national emergency in February after losing a fight with the Democratic-led House over fully paying for the wall that led to a 35-day government shutdown. As a compromise on border and immigration enforcement, Congress set aside .375 billion to extend or replace existing barriers in Texas' Rio Grande Valley, the busiest corridor for illegal crossings.Trump grudgingly accepted the money, but he declared the emergency to siphon money from other government accounts because he wanted to spend billion on wall construction. The funds include .6 billion from military construction funds, .5 billion from Defense Department counterdrug activities and 0 million from the Treasury Department's asset forfeiture fund.The president's adversaries say the emergency declaration was an illegal attempt to ignore Congress, which authorized far less wall spending than Trump wanted."We welcome the court's decision to block Trump's attempts to sidestep Congress to build deadly walls that would hurt communities living at the border, endanger wildlife, and have damaging impacts on the environment," said Andrea Guerrero, a member of the Southern Border Communities Coalition.The administration said Trump was protecting national security as unprecedented numbers of Central American asylum-seeking families arrive at the U.S. border.The courtroom showdowns come amid a flurry of activity to accelerate wall construction.Kenneth Rapuano, an assistant secretary of defense, said in a court filing last month that work on the highest-priority, Pentagon-funded projects could begin as soon as Saturday. The Defense Department has transferred .5 billion to border wall coffers. The Defense Department transferred billion to border wall coffers in March and another .5 billion earlier this month. Patrick Shanahan, the acting defense secretary, is expected to decide soon whether to transfer an additional .6 billion.The Army Corps of Engineers recently announced several large contacts with Pentagon funding. Last month, SLSCO Ltd. of Galveston, Texas, won a 9 million award to replace 46 miles (74 kilometers) of barrier in New Mexico.Last week, Southwest Valley Constructors of Albuquerque, New Mexico, won a 6 million award to replace 63 miles (101 kilometers) in the Border Patrol's Tucson, Arizona, sector. Barnard Construction Co. of Bozeman, Montana, won a 1.8 million contract to replace 5 miles (8 kilometers) in Yuma and 15 miles (24 kilometers) in El Centro, California. The administration has planned to use 1 million in Treasury money to extend barriers in the Rio Grande Valley. 4013

SAN DIEGO, Calif. (KGTV) -- A group of University City residents is suing the city of San Diego over its plan to pump sewage under their neighborhood to be turned into tap water. The nonprofit University City Community Foundation filed the lawsuit after raising ,000 from residents to challenge the environmental impact report for the city's Pure Water pipeline. The suit doesn't challenge the city's goal of making heavily treated reclaimed water one-third of its supply by 2035. The city says that will protect against future shortages and price increases. The lawsuit, however, says the city did not explore alternatives and did not adequately notify the public of the project's pipeline. It will pump sewage from the Morena Area, through Clairemont and University City, to a treatment plant at UTC. "There's no 100 percent guarantee that there could not be a leak, there could not be some discharge," said U.C. resident Barry Bernstein, who supports the lawsuit. "There could be some discharge. There may be some problems with the purification system."Ruth DeSantis, who heads the foundation, said the city and foundation are now in settlement talks. A city spokesman declined to comment on the lawsuit, but said there are multiple protections in place - including a system designed to immediately cut off to avoid sewage geysers. He said the city still plans to break ground on the project by early next year.  1476