天津龙济医院主要科室是哪个(天津市龙济阳痿早泄价格) (今日更新中)

The Transportation Security Administration is considering eliminating passenger screening at more than 150 small and medium-sized airports across the US, according to senior agency officials and internal documents obtained by CNN.The proposal, if implemented, would mark a major change for air travel in the US, following nearly two decades of TSA presence since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and comes as the Trump administration has stepped up screening measures for items such as laptops and tablets.Internal documents from a TSA working group say the proposal to cut screening at small and some medium-sized airports serving aircraft with 60 seats or fewer could bring a "small (non-zero) undesirable increase in risk related to additional adversary opportunity."The internal documents from June and July suggest the move could save 5 million annually, money that could be used to bolster security at larger airports.According to the proposal, passengers and luggage arriving from these smaller airports would be screened when they arrive at major airports for connecting flights instead of the current practice of joining the already screened population at the larger airport. The high-volume airports have greater capacities and more advanced security measures than smaller locations, the documents say.CNN terrorism analyst Paul Cruickshank said it was "stunning that this is even seriously being considered.""Al Qaeda and ISIS still regard aviation as a priority target -- that includes aircraft where you have fewer than 60 people on board," he said. "They would see that as a way to hit the headlines. They would see that as a way to inflict severe economic damage on the United States. If you have an aircraft of 50 or so people being blown out of the sky there is going to be a great amount of panic and there will indeed be significant economic reverberations, and of course significant loss of life.""This is so dangerous," a TSA field leader at a large airport said. The individual is not authorized to discuss the matter publicly.Two senior TSA officials, who asked not to be identified, expressed serious national security concerns over the proposal. They said the idea was explored as far back as 2011 and has been resurrected. The documents referred to some 150 small airports in addition to some midsize ones. TSA currently screens passengers at 440 airports, according to its website.The working group determined that the policy change would affect about 10,000 passengers who are screened by 1,299 TSA employees daily, which amounts to about 0.5% of the people who fly out of US airports on any given day. The report does not list specific airports that could be affected by the policy change.TSA spokesman Michael Bilello said the study reflects a recurring debate within the agency about its legal requirements."This is not a new issue," he said via email. "The regulations which established TSA does not require screening below a certain level, so every year is 'the year' that TSA will reconsider screening." Bilello did not respond to a request for the text of the regulations.The two TSA senior officials said the level of activity around the proposal this year -- the formation of a working group to conduct a risk and cost analysis -- mean this is more than an annual exercise.The documents said a TSA working group of 20 people, including a representative of the agency's administrator's office, met on June 21 to examine the potential risks of the policy change. An internal TSA memo dated July 17 from TSA Director of Enterprise Performance and Risk Strategy Jerry Booker to the TSA administrator's chief of staff, Ha Nguyen McNeill, outlines the group's findings. It contains no formal recommendation. 3761

The US Food and Drug Administration announced on Wednesday that southwest veggie stuffed sandwiches sold at exclusively at Aldi have been recalled due to suspected Listeria monocytogenes and Salmonella contamination. The sandwiches were sold under the brand name "Fit and Active" and have production dates of Julian code: 20027230003106:15 BEST BY FEB 09 2019 and Julian code: 20027235003115:13 BEST BY FEB 14 2019.The affected sandwiches were sold in Alabama, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, Vermont and West Virginia. The FDA said that no illnesses were reported in connection with these products and this recall has been initiated as a precautionary measure.Customers should discard the sandwiches, or return them to the place of purchase for a refund.  985

The White House physician assigned to Vice President Mike Pence, Jennifer Pena, has resigned, his office told CNN in a statement Friday. Pena worked in the White House Medical Unit."The vice president's office was informed today by the White House Medical Unit of the resignation. Physicians assigned to the vice president report to the White House Medical Unit and thus any resignation would go entirely through the Medical Unit, not the vice president's office," Alyssa Farah, Pence's press secretary, said in a statement to CNN.This comes after CNN reported Tuesday that Pence's doctor privately raised alarms within the White House last fall that President Donald Trump's doctor Ronny Jackson may have violated federal privacy protections for a key patient -- Pence's wife, Karen -- and intimidated the vice president's doctor during angry confrontations over the episode.A White House official later told CNN they felt Pence's doctor had misrepresented the extent of Jackson's actions.Trump nominated Jackson to lead the Department of Veterans Affairs, but Jackson withdrew his nomination last week amid burgeoning allegations of professional misconduct."The allegations against me are completely false and fabricated," Jackson said in a statement. "If they had any merit, I would not have been selected, promoted and entrusted to serve in such a sensitive and important role as physician to three presidents over the past 12 years."Though he returned to the White House Medical Unit, Jackson is no longer Trump's attending physician.According to copies of internal documents obtained by CNN, Pence's doctor accused Jackson of overstepping his authority and inappropriately intervening in a medical situation involving the second lady as well as potentially violating federal privacy rights by briefing White House staff and disclosing details to other medical providers -- but not appropriately consulting with the vice president's physician.The vice president's physician later wrote in a memo of feeling intimidated by an irate Jackson during a confrontation over the physician's concerns. The physician informed White House officials of being treated unprofessionally, describing a pattern of behavior from Jackson that made the physician "uncomfortable" and even consider resigning from the position.Farah, press secretary for the vice president, said Pence's physician "brought the issue to Mr. Ayers, who appropriately referred the matter to the proper channels."Current and former coworkers accused Jackson of abusive behavior and professional misconduct in interviews with Democratic staff on the Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee, which sources briefed on the matter say has investigated those episodes as well as the one involving Karen Pence. The Senate Armed Services Committee, which is considering Jackson's promotion in the Navy to become a two-star admiral, is aware of the incidents, according to sources familiar with the matter.Jackson and the vice president's physician have long had a "strained relationship," according to a former White House medical official.The-CNN-Wire 3109

The United States Supreme Court is expected to rule on several major cases next week impacting everything from abortion rights to the presidential election. Traditionally, the court issues all of it's rulings by the end of June to go on recess by early July. It's unclear this year however if the Supreme Court will extend its rulings if they are behind because of the pandemic. The Supreme Court said in advance what days justices will issue opinions, but would not announce which specific opinions will be announced on those days. Rulings typically come down around 10 a.m. ET.EXPECTED CASE #1 SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE CHANGES?In Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue, the ruling could allow students in religious schools the ability to seek private scholarships funded through state income-tax credits. For years such programs were thought to be incompatible with Montana's constitutional ban on public aid to religious schools, however the Supreme Court could allow the program to exist. Because similar bans exist in 38 states, the ruling could change the definition of the separation of church and state. EXPECTED CASE #2CHANGE TO ABORTION RIGHTS?In June Medical Services LLC v. Russo, the ruling could impact the future of abortion rights across the country. The ruling examines whether a Louisiana law, which requires abortion providers to have admitting privileges in nearby hospitals, is constitutional. Abortion-rights activists say it will lead to clinics being shut down because most providers don't work with hospitals. More importantly, the ruling could tell anti-abortion leaders across the country that the High Court may be open to changes to Roe v Wade in the future. EXPECTED CASE #3ELECTORAL COLLEGE CONFUSION?In Colorado Department of State v. Baca, the ruling could result in major confusion in the 2020 election. The case is out of Colorado where in 2016, state electors to the electoral college attempted to vote for someone other than the winner of Colorado, Hillary Clinton. The electors were removed and replaced with someone to deliver the actual result, however it raised questions over how much power do these electors really have. EXPECTED CASE #4PRESIDENT TRUMP TAX RETURNS?In Trump v. Mazars USA, LLP and Trump v. Deutsche Bank, the question is whether the president has to comply with subpoenas for personal records. Does the power of the presidency allow President Donald Trump to say "no" when it comes to revealing his tax returns? If the Supreme Court rules against President Trump, it could create a new controversy for the President ahead of the election. 2615

The Trump administration is considering a new travel ban to replace its original executive order, which has had its legality questioned and is up for a Supreme Court hearing next month, White House national security adviser H.R. McMaster said Sunday."Well, this is something that we're looking at, is how to protect the American people better, how to ensure that we know who these people are who are moving," McMaster told George Stephanopoulos on ABC's "This Week."This renewed discussion of the travel ban comes after Friday morning's terrorist attack in London, in which 30 passengers on a London Underground train were injured after a bomb went off.In a tweet Friday in response to the attack, President Donald Trump called for a "larger, tougher and more specific" travel ban and also called for shutting down terrorist group's use of the internet for indoctrination and recruitment.McMaster echoed the point Sunday."Because of the strength of these terrorist organizations -- why this is a greater danger than ever -- is, first of all, their ability to communicate, to connect what would otherwise be disconnected cells in other places in the world," he said. "The second part of this is their ability to travel and to move and to move people and money and weapons, oftentimes drugs and other illicit goods, internationally. So part of the strategy must be to interdict these networks, interdict them from how they use information, and communicate, but how they move physically, as well.The Supreme Court is set to hear?oral arguments in the travel ban case early next month.The President's executive order would suspend travel from six Muslim-majority countries (Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen) for 90 days while the secretary of homeland security and others submit a report on the results of a worldwide review to identify what additional information will be needed from each country to make sure an individual seeking entrance is not a public-safety threat.Responding to a lawsuits from states challenging the ban, the Supreme Court let much of the ban take effect in late June, meaning the 90-day clock started and will hit on or around September 24.Administration officials have not divulged the specifics of their future plans.At a recent homeland security conference in Washington DC, acting Customs and Border Protection Deputy Commissioner Ronald Vitiello said, "We are in the process of action planning about each of the opportunities that the US government has to interview and/or vet potential inbound travelers."That could include "looking at things like social media, looking at things like smart phones, those kinds of windows, if you will, into people's backgrounds and their activity," he said.The-CNN-Wire 2771

来源：资阳报