山东中医治尿酸靠谱吗济南人体标准尿酸是多少?,济南痛风积液能抽吗,山东痛风是怎样的表现,山东如何有效的治疗痛风,济南尿酸高喝苏打水好吗,山东痛风吃白萝卜行吗,济南痛风能吃油菜苔吗

Rudy Giuliani said Wednesday that President Donald Trump's legal team has responded to the special counsel, the latest effort in ongoing negotiations over a possible interview."We have now given him an answer. Obviously, he should take a few days to consider it, but we should get this resolved," Giuliani said during an interview on the radio show of fellow Trump attorney Jay Sekulow."We do not want to run into the November elections. So back up from that, this should be over by September 1," Giuliani said.Sekulow confirmed in a statement that the legal team "responded in writing to the latest proposal" from the special counsel, but declined to comment on the substance of the response.Giuliani had previously told CNN that the team planned to send its counteroffer to special counsel Robert Mueller regarding a potential interview on Wednesday."It is a good faith attempt to reach an agreement," Giuliani, one of Trump's lawyers on the Russia investigation, told CNN.The former New York City mayor similarly would not describe the contents of the counteroffer, except to say that "there is an area where we could agree, if they agree."Giuliani wouldn't say if that area has to do with collusion or obstruction.The President has previously said that he wants to speak with the special counsel and has insisted there was no collusion or obstruction, while deriding the investigation as a "witch hunt."But Trump's public attacks on the Russia probe have sparked questions over whether his actions could constitute obstruction of justice. Those questions intensified earlier this month when the President called on Attorney General Jeff Sessions to shut down the investigation, an escalation that Giuliani attempted to downplay as Trump merely expressing an opinion.The President's team has sought to limit any potential interview to questions about collusion. But Giuliani told CNN they would be willing to consider questions relating to any obstruction of justice inquiry as long as they are not "perjury traps," a phrase favored by the Trump legal team as a way to raise questions about the fairness of the special counsel, though it also speaks to the risks of having the President sit down for an interview."For example: 'What did you say about Flynn?' 'Why did you fire Comey?'" They already know our answer," Giuliani said, referring to former national security adviser Michael Flynn and former FBI director James Comey, whom Trump abruptly fired in May 2017. The former FBI director later testified to Congress that Trump had pressed him to drop an investigation into Flynn, a claim that Trump has denied. "If they can show us something in that area that didn't involve those direct questions, that we don't consider perjury traps, we would consider it," Giuliani said, but conceded he "can't think of what that would be."Mueller has indicated to the team that the special counsel wants to ask the President obstruction questions in an interview.The President's lawyers had previously offered the special counsel written answers to obstruction questions and limiting the interview to matters before his presidential inauguration, which are largely confined to collusion.The back and forth over an interview comes as the special counsel investigation faces its first major test in court as Trump's former campaign chairman Paul Manafort stands trial in the Eastern District of Virginia where he is accused of bank fraud, tax evasion and other financial crimes.Manafort's case isn't about the 2016 presidential campaign, but he is the first defendant Mueller's team has taken to trial. 3603

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California would bar forced arbitration and nondisclosure agreements under a bill sent to Gov. Jerry Brown on Wednesday that enjoys celebrity backing from some in the #MeToo movement.It would prohibit employers from requiring nondisclosure agreements related to sexual misconduct as a condition of getting or keeping a job. It also would ban employers from requiring arbitration agreements, which can force employees to settle workplace complaints instead of going to court, as a condition of employment.The bill has the backing of actress and activist Jane Fonda and former Fox News anchor Gretchen Carlson.Current law "allows companies to force employee complaints in to secret proceedings" and can be used to protect "serial offenders" in the workplace, said Democratic Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson of Santa Barbara.Companies can still require arbitration under the bill, but not as a as a condition of employment, she said."To force someone to enter into these agreements is not acceptable, and that's what this bill addresses," she said. The bill "gives people access to justice in a fair and impartial way."The bill would not prevent existing arbitration or nondisclosure agreements from being enforced.Republican Sen. Jeff Stone of Temecula, the only senator who spoke in opposition, called the bill "another job killer" that can drive companies out of California and mainly benefits trial lawyers by forcing more disputes into already overwhelmed courts.Most workers can often get a better and quicker resolution through arbitration than by filing a lawsuit, he said.That may be true for unionized employees whose unions can help choose arbitrators, said Democratic Sen. Connie Leyva of Chino, but she said companies have an unfair advantage over non-union employees because the employer then controls the arbitration process.The measure was approved by the state Senate, 25-12. It was one of a number of bills introduced after dozens of women went public with stories of sexual misconduct.Carlson, who spoke in favor of the bill in May, sued Fox News Channel CEO Roger Ailes in 2016, alleging she was fired for rejecting his sexual advances. Ailes, who died last year, said Carlson's contract prohibited her from going public until both sides first tried closed-door arbitration. Ailes was ultimately forced out of the network because of her allegations. 2393

SACRAMENTO (KGTV) -- Miss the October 22 deadline to vote in California but still want to head to the polls? Conditional Voter Registration is a new safety net for residents who missed the deadline to register.Under conditional voter registration, eligible citizens who missed the deadline can go to their county elections office to register.While you may not be able to vote at your regular polling place or vote by mail, there is still an opportunity to cast a ballot.Your Voice Your Vote: 10News?Election CoverageTheir ballots will then be processed once the county elections office has completed the voter registration verification process.Voters can complete the conditional registration from October 23 through Election Day. To find out where you can complete the process, click here.RELATED: Judicial officer to be on hand Election Day 855

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California's state auditor says the California State Lottery skimped on giving million in revenue to fund public education funding and spent 0,000 on food and travel expenses without considering cheaper options. The auditor's report made public Tuesday says the lottery agency should have accounted for an increase in profits for the fiscal year that ended in June 2018 by providing million in public education financing.The auditor also recommended that the state legislature amend the Lottery Act to ensure audits of the lottery's procurement process at least once every three years.The California State Lottery says in a written response accompanying the audit that it disagrees with the auditor's findings and that the agency gives the most money it can for education.“Lottery revenues and contributions to education were declining in the years prior to the passage of AB 142. The year before this change, the Lottery’s contributions to education were approximately .05 billion. In contrast, last year the Lottery provided .8 billion–the highest contribution to date. Had the Lottery utilized CSA’s interpretation of the law, it would have had to intentionally suppress sales for certain games, resulting in fewer dollars to public education," CA Lottery wrote. “The Lottery disagrees with CSA’s underlying conclusions of the value of its Fairs and Festivals program. The Lottery must continually raise brand awareness, incentivize and persuade California adults to voluntarily purchase Lottery products to meet its mandate to provide supplemental funding to education." 1623

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — A staunchly conservative political party in deep-blue California will get to keep its name after the governor vetoed a bill aimed at banning what state lawmakers say are misleading monikers.Gov. Gavin Newsom announced Wednesday he had vetoed a bill that would have banned political parties from using "no party preference," ''decline to state" or "independent" in their official names.The bill would have applied to all political parties. But it was aimed at the American Independent Party, which has been an option for California voters since 1968.More California voters are registering with no party preference, now accounting for 28.3% of all registered voters. If "no party preference" were a political party, it would be the second largest in the state behind the Democrats.Critics say the American Independent Party has benefited from this trend because its name confuses voters into believing they are registering as independents. The party makes up 2.59% of California's registered voters, making it the third largest political party in the state after the Democratic Party at 43.1% and the Republican Party at 23.6%.In 2016, the Los Angeles Times surveyed the party's registered members and found most did not know they had registered to vote with the party. But Newsom said he vetoed the bill because he worried it was unconstitutional."By requiring one existing political party to change its current name, this bill could be interpreted as a violation of the rights of free speech and association guaranteed by the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution," Newsom wrote in his veto message.Representatives for the American Independent Party did not respond to an email and phone call seeking comment. The party's website says it nominated Donald Trump for president in 2016 and "God willing, 2020."Democratic Sen. Tom Umberg, the bill's author, warned the mistaken registration could have electoral consequences. People registered with another political party would not be allowed to vote in the state's pivotal Democratic presidential primary in March.But Newsom signed another bill by Umberg that could help people rectify any registration mistakes. The law, signed Tuesday, allows voters to register to vote or update their registration at all polling places on election day.If people show up to vote in the Democratic presidential primary and are ineligible because they are registered with the American Independent Party, they can change their registration on the spot and cast a ballot. The ballot would be conditional, meaning it would not be counted until after the person's registration could be verified. 2676