天津市武清区龙济泌尿外科割包皮要多少钱天津武清区龙济超赞泌尿科,天津武清龙济医院看男科好,天津市龙济医院必尿外科医院,天津市男性专科龙济男科医院,天津市武清区龙济医院男科研究所割包皮什么价,天津武清区龙济医院泌尿科,天津武清区龙济电话地址

CORONADO, Calif., (KGTV)— Residents and visitors of Coronado have enjoyed using the Coronado Bridge for more than 16 years without paying a toll. But would reinstating a toll on the island’s main artery be beneficial in curbing overcrowding? Some residents who are fed up with tourists taking over their streets are exploring this idea.From every angle, the town of Coronado is a picturesque retreat, and admission is free. 431

CINCINNATI, Ohio — A dozen people connected to various moving companies were indicted in Ohio.The United States Attorney's Office in Cincinnati unsealed an indictment Tuesday that charged the people with conspiring in a racketeering enterprise to defraud customers through their moving companies.WMAR television station in Baltimore, Maryland has reported extensively on the activities of the moving companies. In the last year, they've been connected to four different companies in as many states including Flagship Van Lines, Unified Van Lines, Presidential Moving LLC, and Public Moving Services.The U.S. Attorney's Office has identified more than 900 victims and believes the companies operated in at least 10 states, according to an email sent to WMAR-2 News.A news briefing will be help at 1:30 p.m. Eastern and lives-treamed on WMAR-2 News Facebook.READ MORE:?FBI helping with investigation into Baltimore rogue moving companyREAD MORE: Unlicensed moving company mimics name of reputable Maryland businessREAD MORE: Moving company's license revoked over safety violationsREAD MORE: Complaint-ridden moving company linked to other businesses 1175

COMPTON, Calif. (KGTV) -- The 24-year-old Los Angeles County Sheriff’s deputy shot in an ambush-style attack last week has been released from the hospital, the department said.“Great news, one of those deputies was released from the hospital today. He has a long road ahead for recovery. But he's not alone. We, as a community, are in this together,” Sheriff Alex Villanueva said Wednesday evening.The department had no update on the condition of the 31-year-old female deputy and mother of a 6-year-old who was also shot.RELATED STORIESGunman sought in ambush shooting of two Los Angeles deputies in ComptonSan Diego law enforcement agencies voice support for Los Angeles deputies shot during ambushThe deputies were shot on September 12 while sitting inside their patrol vehicle at the Metro Blue Line Station in Compton.Authorities in LA said both deputies were rushed to the hospital with multiple gunshot wounds.Video shows the suspect approaching the deputies from behind the vehicle before walking along the passenger side, raising a pistol, and opening on fire.The shooting also sparked a protest outside the hospital where the deputies were taken. Authorities said on Twitter that demonstrators shouted “we hope they die.”No suspect has been identified in the attack. A 0,000 reward has been offered for information leading to the arrest of the suspect.A GoFundMe page set up for the two deputies had raised 1,428 toward the page's new goal of 0,000 as of late Wednesday morning. City News Service contributed to this report. 1551

Critics are calling Sinclair's promos pro-Trump propaganda. Now the company is defending the initiative, and calling it something much more mundane: A "corporate news journalistic responsibility promotional campaign."Sinclair, America's largest operator of local TV stations, is in the spotlight after a controversial promo video went viral over the weekend.Some staffers say they're embarrassed by the promos and concerned about their own credibility as journalists. A few local anchors and reporters are even reacting publicly, risking the ire of management.But Sinclair senior vice president of news Scott Livingston is defending the promos as a "well-researched journalistic initiative focused on fair and objective reporting."In an internal memo obtained by CNNMoney, Livingston slammed what he called "misleading, often defamatory stories" about the company. (The full memo is below.)Last month, at Livingston's direction, anchors at Sinclair's stations were required to read a script decrying "fake stories" and biased news coverage. Some of the language echoes President Trump's anti-media messaging. And it's written to make it sound like the opinion of the local anchors, when in fact it's a mandate from management.Concerned journalists contacted CNNMoney about the promos last month. When the promos started airing, the Deadspin blog produced a video compilation of the exact same script being read by anchors across the country, reiterating the robotic and manipulative nature of the message. 1518

CNN is filing a lawsuit against President Trump and several of his aides, seeking the immediate restoration of chief White House correspondent Jim Acosta's access to the White House.The lawsuit is a response to the White House's suspension of Acosta's press pass, known as a Secret Service "hard pass," last week. The suit alleges that Acosta and CNN's First and Fifth Amendment rights are being violated by the ban.The suit is being filed in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. on Tuesday morning, a CNN spokeswoman confirmed.Both CNN and Acosta are plaintiffs in the lawsuit. There are six defendants: Trump, chief of staff John Kelly, press secretary Sarah Sanders, deputy chief of staff for communications Bill Shine, Secret Service director Joseph Clancy, and the Secret Service officer who took Acosta's hard pass away last Wednesday. The officer is identified as John Doe in the suit, pending his identification.The six defendants are all named because of their roles in enforcing and announcing Acosta's suspension.Last Wednesday, shortly after Acosta was denied entry to the White House grounds, Sanders defended the unprecedented step by claiming that he had behaved inappropriately at a presidential news conference. CNN and numerous journalism advocacy groups rejected that assertion and said his pass should be reinstated.On Friday, CNN sent a letter to the White House formally requesting the immediate reinstatement of Acosta's pass and warning of a possible lawsuit, the network confirmed.In a statement on Tuesday morning, CNN said it is seeking a preliminary injunction as soon as possible so that Acosta can return to the White House right away, and a ruling from the court preventing the White House from revoking Acosta's pass in the future."CNN filed a lawsuit against the Trump Administration this morning in DC District Court," the statement read. "It demands the return of the White House credentials of CNN's Chief White House correspondent, Jim Acosta. The wrongful revocation of these credentials violates CNN and Acosta's First Amendment rights of freedom of the press, and their Fifth Amendment rights to due process. We have asked this court for an immediate restraining order requiring the pass be returned to Jim, and will seek permanent relief as part of this process."CNN also asserted that other news organizations could have been targeted by the Trump administration this way, and could be in the future."While the suit is specific to CNN and Acosta, this could have happened to anyone," the network said. "If left unchallenged, the actions of the White House would create a dangerous chilling effect for any journalist who covers our elected officials."During his presidential campaign, Trump told CNN that, if elected, he would not kick reporters out of the White House. But since moving into the White House, he has mused privately about taking away credentials, CNN reported earlier this year. He brought it up publicly on Twitter in May, tweeting "take away credentials?" as a question.And he said it again on Friday, two days after blacklisting Acosta. "It could be others also," he said, suggesting he may strip press passes from other reporters. Unprompted, he then named and insulted April Ryan, a CNN analyst and veteran radio correspondent.Trump's threats fly in the face of decades of tradition and precedent. Republican and Democratic administrations alike have had a permissive approach toward press passes, erring on the side of greater access, even for obscure, partisan or fringe outlets.That is one of the reasons why First Amendment attorneys say CNN and Acosta have a strong case.As the prospect of a lawsuit loomed on Sunday, attorney Floyd Abrams, one of the country's most respected First Amendment lawyers, said the relevant precedent is a 1977 ruling in favor of Robert Sherrill, a muckraking journalist who was denied access to the White House in 1966.Eleven years later, a D.C. Court of Appeals judge ruled that the Secret Service had to establish "narrow and specific" standards for judging applicants. In practice, the key question is whether the applicant would pose a threat to the president.The code of federal regulations states that "in granting or denying a request for a security clearance made in response to an application for a White House press pass, officials of the Secret Service will be guided solely by the principle of whether the applicant presents a potential source of physical danger to the President and/or the family of the President so serious as to justify his or her exclusion from White House press privileges."There are other guidelines as well. Abrams said the case law specifies that before a press pass is denied, "you have to have notice, you have to have a chance to respond, and you have to have a written opinion by the White House as to what it's doing and why, so the courts can examine it.""We've had none of those things here," Abrams said.That's why the lawsuit is alleging a violation of the Fifth Amendment right to due process.Acosta found out about his suspension when he walked up to the northwest gate of the White House, as usual, for a Wednesday night live shot. He was abruptly told to turn in his "hard pass," which speeds up entry and exit from the grounds."I was just told to do it," the Secret Service officer said.Other CNN reporters and producers continue to work from the White House grounds, but not Acosta."Relevant precedent says that a journalist has a First Amendment right of access to places closed to the public but open generally to the press. That includes press rooms and news conferences," Jonathan Peters, a media law professor at the University of Georgia, told CNN last week. "In those places, if access is generally inclusive of the press, then access can't be denied arbitrarily or absent compelling reasons. And the reasons that the White House gave were wholly unconvincing and uncompelling."The White House accused Acosta of placing his hands on an intern who was trying to take a microphone away from him during a press conference. Sanders shared a distorted video clip of the press conference as evidence. The White House's rationale has been widely mocked and dismissed by journalists across the political spectrum as an excuse to blacklist an aggressive reporter. And Trump himself has cast doubt on the rationale: He said on Friday that Acosta was "not nice to that young woman," but then he said, "I don't hold him for that because it wasn't overly, you know, horrible."Acosta has continued to do part of his job, contacting sources and filing stories, but he has been unable to attend White House events or ask questions in person -- a basic part of any White House correspondent's role.Acosta is on a previously scheduled vacation this week. He declined to comment on the lawsuit.On CNN's side, CNN Worldwide chief counsel David Vigilante is joined by two prominent attorneys, Ted Boutrous and Theodore Olson. Both men are partners at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher.Last week, before he was retained by CNN, Boutrous tweeted that the action against Acosta "clearly violates the First Amendment." He cited the Sherrill case."This sort of angry, irrational, false, arbitrary, capricious content-based discrimination regarding a White House press credential against a journalist quite clearly violates the First Amendment," he wrote.David McCraw, the top newsroom lawyer at The New York Times, said instances of news organizations suing a president are extremely rare.Past examples are The New York Times v. U.S., the famous Supreme Court case involving the Pentagon Papers in 1971; and CNN's 1981 case against the White House and the broadcast networks, when CNN sued to be included in the White House press pool.The backdrop to this new suit, of course, is Trump's antipathy for CNN and other news outlets. He regularly derides reporters from CNN and the network as a whole.Abrams posited on "Reliable Sources" on Sunday that CNN might be reluctant to sue because the president already likes to portray the network as his enemy. Now there will be a legal case titled CNN Inc. versus President Trump.But, Abrams said, "this is going to happen again," meaning other reporters may be banned too."Whether it's CNN suing or the next company suing, someone's going to have to bring a lawsuit," he said, "and whoever does is going to win unless there's some sort of reason."The-CNN-Wire 8437