怎么去天津市龙济医院男科天津龙济男科怎么去,天津市龙济男科价格,天津市龙济医院泌尿外科医院有哪些科室,天津市龙济医院泌尿专科医院在哪,武清区龙济男科星期天上班吗,龙济武清龙济泌尿外科,武清男子医院龙济专科

The White House has issued a new warning to CNN's Jim Acosta, saying his press pass could be revoked again at the end of the month.In response, CNN is asking the U.S. District Court for another emergency hearing."The White House is continuing to violate the First and 5th Amendments of the Constitution," the network said in a statement Sunday. "These actions threaten all journalists and news organizations. Jim Acosta and CNN will continue to report the news about the White House and the President."Last Friday CNN won a temporary restraining order, forcing the White House to restore Acosta's press access to the White House for 14 days. Judge Timothy J. Kelly ruled on Fifth Amendment grounds, saying Acosta's right to due process had been violated. He did not rule on CNN's argument about First Amendment violations.Later that same day, the White House sent Acosta a formal letter outlining a "preliminary decision" to suspend his pass again once the restraining order expires. The letter cited his conduct at President Trump's November 7 press conference.The letter was signed by two of the defendants in the suit, press secretary Sarah Sanders and deputy chief of staff for communications Bill Shine.The letter signaled that the Trump administration wants to continue fighting Acosta, despite the round one setback in court, rather than seeking an out-of-court settlement.It looked like an effort to establish a paper trail that will empower the administration to boot Acosta again at the end of the month.In a court filing on Monday, CNN's lawyers said the network and Acosta "remain hopeful" that the parties "can resolve this dispute without further court intervention."But the new letter from Shine and Sanders is an "attempt to provide retroactive due process," the lawyers said.So CNN and Acosta are seeking a hearing on a preliminary injunction "for the week of November 26, 2018, or as soon thereafter as possible," according to Monday's filing.Such an injunction could be in effect for much longer, thereby protecting Acosta's access to the White House.Lawyers were already expected to be back in court this week to discuss the timeline for further proceedings. 2186

The subject of the hit podcast “Serial” could be days away from hearing whether he’ll receive a new trial.On Saturday, Adnan Syed's defense attorney Justin Brown tweeted that he's expecting a ruling from the Maryland Court of Special Appeals in the coming week.I expect a ruling from the appeals court this coming week. #FreeAdnan https://t.co/0eQmLaaxFn— Justin Brown (@CJBrownLaw) February 25, 2018 408

The White House is again rejecting calls for a national mask-wearing mandate.White House chief of staff Mark Meadows says in an appearance on “Fox and Friends” Monday morning that the president sees the issue as a “state-to-state” matter.He says that, “certainly a national mandate is not in order” and that “we’re allowing our local governors and our local mayors to weigh in on that.”New Jersey’s Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy has said he’d like to see a national strategy on the coronavirus, including a mask requirement. He says his state is seeing “small spikes in reinfection” from residents coming back from Florida, South Carolina and other virus hotspots, and the U.S. is “as strong as our weakest link right now.”Vice President Mike Pence has also rejected the idea of a national mandate, saying that’s up to governors and local health officials. 862

The Washington Post's executive editor condemned a robocall made during the U.S. Senate race in Alabama. "Hi, this is Bernie Bernstein," the caller says, according to The Hill. "I’m a reporter for The Washington Post calling to find out if anyone at this address is a female between the ages of 54 to 57 years old willing to make damaging remarks about candidate Roy Moore for a reward of between ,000 and ,000 dollars," says the caller. "We will not be fully investigating these claims. However, we will make a written report."The call comes after the Washington Post reported on four women accusing Republican candidate Roy Moore of pursuing them when the women were between the ages of 14 and 18. Moore was in his 30s at the time. In a later report, a fifth woman accused Moore of sexual misconduct.  835

The U.S. House of Representatives voted in a bipartisan manner to remove statues honoring Confederate leaders from the Capitol. The bill was approved by a 305-113 vote on Wednesday, with 72 Republicans joining Democrats in support of the bill.The bill also would remove the bust of Roger Brooke Taney and replace it with Thurgood Marshall’s bust. Taney’s bust is located in the Old Supreme Court Chamber inside the Capitol complex.Taney infamous;y ruled in 1857 that Blacks could not be full US citizens in the Dred Scott v Sandford case. Taney wrote the Supreme Court opinion which upheld slavery in the United States.Previously, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi targeted 11 statues for removal.The statues are held in Statuary Hall, and is a prominent spot for visitors of the US Capitol. The hall is frequently seen in the background of media interviews with members of Congress.Each state sends two statues to be viewed in Statuary Hall. States largely decide on the statues to be displayed in the hall. Among the statues in Statuary Hall include Confederacy president Jefferson Davis and Confederate commander Robert E. Lee.Democratic Rep. Steny Hoyer of Maryland sponsored the bill.“I believe that most Americans are deeply distressed by racial injustice and want to see the progress of the Civil Rights Movement continue,” Hoyer said. They want our nation and our democracy to grow, mature, and become more perfect. Part of that process is making it clear, through our symbols and public displays of honor, what our country stands for and, as importantly, what it must never stand for again."Republican Paul Mitchell, R-Mich., joined Hoyer in calling for the removal of the statues.“The history of this nation is so fraught with racial division, with hatred, and the only way to overcome that is to recognize that, acknowledge it for what it is. So I support this resolution,” Mitchell said.Mitchell added that the statues should be returned to the states and be used for appropriate historical context.“Tearing it down does not do justice for the history of this nation and what our young people must understand,” Mitchell added.Whether the bill gets heard in the Senate remains doubtful, as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said last month the removal of the statues is a “bridge too far.” 2306