宜宾三点一线双眼皮价格宜宾自体脂肪隆胸有效果吗,宜宾眼袋如何消除,宜宾怎么缩小鼻孔,宜宾激光嫩肤祛斑哪好,宜宾玻尿酸丰嘴唇多少钱,宜宾怎么去眼袋最快,宜宾一般丰胸多少钱

RICHMOND, Va. — Crews have arrived to remove a statue of Confederate General J.E.B. Stuart from Richmond's Monument Avenue — an area of the city that contains several Confederate statues that Mayor Levar Stoney has promised to remove.The J.E.B. Stuart monument is one of about a dozen statues Stoney has ordered be removed from city property.Statues of Confederate General Stonewall Jackson and Confederate Naval Commander Matthew Fontaine Maury were removed from Monument Avenue last week and taken to an undisclosed location. A statue of Confederate President Jefferson Davis was toppled by protesters last month.A statue to Confederate General Robert E. Lee is located on state-owned property and could be removed once legal challenges to its removal make their way through court.The Stuart statue, erected in 1907, is the first monument Stoney promised would be removed following the holiday weekend.The mayor said it would cost .8 million to remove the statues. He said the money would come from the Department of Public Works and be reimbursed by a private fund.While city attorney Haskell Brown told Richmond City Council that Stoney did not have the power to remove statues, Stoney said he believed he is on sound legal ground to remove the statues using his emergency powers as the Emergency Management Director."That's in our Emergency Operations Plan. That is also the part of the governor's declaration of emergency that I'm the emergency manager," Stoney said. "And also, the City Council spoke to this in June 8, when they passed a resolution ordinance that gave me such powers."Stoney said over the course of the last several weeks, thousands have gathered in the city, and there have been more than 139 calls of service along the Monument Avenue corridor.The mayor said failing to remove the statues presented a severe, immediate and growing threat to public safety.Stoney said the removed statues would be placed in temporary storage while Richmond enters a 60-day administrative process during which the city will solicit public input while determining the fate of the statues.This story was originally published by Gabrielle Harmon and Scott Wise on WTVR in Richmond, Virginia. 2206

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — The Trump administration cancelled nearly billion in federal money for California's high-speed rail project Thursday, further throwing into question the future of the ambitious plan to connect Los Angeles and San Francisco.The Federal Railroad Administration's announcement it would not give California the money came several months after sniping between President Donald Trump and Gov. Gavin Newsom over the project. The administration will still try to force California to return another .5 billion that has already been spent.Trump had seized on Newsom's remarks in February that the project as planned would cost too much and take too long. Newsom has shifted the project's immediate focus to a 171-mile line in the state's Central Valley, but he said he's still committed to building the full line.Still, federal officials said California has repeatedly failed to make "reasonable progress" and "abandoned its original vision."Newsom declared the action "illegal and a direct assault on California" and said the state would go to court to keep the money."This is California's money, appropriated by Congress, and we will vigorously defend it in court," he said in an emailed statement.Voters first approved about billion in bond funds for the project in 2008. It has faced repeated cost overruns and delays since. It's now projected to cost more than billion and be finished by 2033.The 9 million the state is losing is critical to the chronically under-funded project. 1524

RUNNING SPRINGS, Calif. (KGTV) -- Authorities are searching for a missing skier who reportedly fell off a ski run, according to KABC. The skier went off the path and landed in a canyon, authorities believe. The ski patrol is searching for the man, but visibility is poor at this time. The San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department helicopter plans to join the search. The resort closed early in the evening Thursday and authorities say their search is becoming even more urgent before night falls. 509

Russia is threatening action against U.S. media outlets operating there as soon as next week.On Thursday Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said in an interview on Russian television that Russia is working on practical steps in response to U.S. government pressure on Russian-government owned media operating in the U.S."I think that our patience that is nearly run out will take some legal shape. I don't rule out it will be done next week," she said in the interview according to the state-run news wire TASS. "As of today, there is understanding that a practical phase of these response measures (in respect of US media in Russia over demands the RT broadcaster register itself as a foreign agent in the US) will begin next week."Zakharova did not specify which outlets would be targeted or what the actions would be. But last month, Russian officials sent letters to news organizations in Russia that are backed by the U.S. government, warning them of possible "restrictions."The comments are the latest in the increasing saber rattling from the Russian government regarding American media operations in Russia. Russian officials say it is in reaction to a request from the Justice Department that the Russian state-funded outlets RT and Sputnik register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) in the United States.RT's network is available on cable in the United States and Sputnik has an FM radio station in the U.S. Both have websites that are accessible in the U.S. Though the United States funds news organizations in Russia such as Radio Free Europe and Current, those outlets are not available on radio or on cable but are normally accessed via the internet.According to RT, the DOJ initially gave it an October deadline to register. RT has said it purposely missed that deadline as it tried to fight against the forced registration. Individuals or organizations that register under FARA are asked to disclose their funding, operations and other information, but are allowed to continue their work. Other state-sponsored news organizations like Japan's NHK and The China Daily are already registered under FARA.RT reported on Thursday that the DOJ has given it a new deadline of November 13 and that it plans to register, but will challenge the DOJ's request in court. Editor-in-Chief Margarita Simonyan said in an article on the Russian version of RT's website that the "DOJ left us no choice" and that RT's lawyers have said that the head of its American operations could be arrested and company accounts seized if it does not comply."We believe this requirement is not just contrary to the law, and we intend to prove it in court. This requirement is discriminatory, it contradicts both the principles of democracy and freedom of speech," she said, according to a translation by the AP.Convictions of people or organizations which fail to register under FARA are rare. According to the DOJ, there have only been seven FARA-related criminal cases in the past 50 years. FARA experts told CNN in October that though jail and asset seizure is rare, it can happen in certain cases.RT America was singled out in a January intelligence community report for the impact it may have had on the 2016 election. The report said RT "conducts strategic messaging for [the] Russian government" and "seeks to influence politics, [and] fuel discontent in the U.S." The report also mentioned Sputnik as "another government-funded outlet producing pro-Kremlin radio and online content."Federal investigators are also reportedly looking into whether Russian government-funded outlets such as RT and Sputnik were part of Russia's influence campaign aimed at the 2016 presidential election. Yahoo News has separately reported that the FBI interviewed a former Sputnik correspondent about his work at the website.The Russian Embassy in the United States blasted the DOJ's move in a Facebook post."Blatant pressure on the Russian mass media confirms that the United States pursues the course of deliberately hurting our relations. We consider its demand as a wish to eliminate an alternative source of information, which is an unacceptable violation of the international norms of free press," the post said.The DOJ declined to comment. An RT spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment. 4321

Rudy Giuliani's assertion to CNN this week that President Donald Trump can't be indicted by the special counsel, and thus can't face a subpoena, banks on a series of internal Justice Department policies.The question to this day is untested in the court system. Yet the step-by-step process Robert Mueller or any special counsel could follow for a President under investigation has several possible outcomes.According to several legal experts, historical memos and court filings, this is how the Justice Department's decision-making on whether to indict a sitting president could play out:First, there must be suspicion or allegations of a crime. Did the President do something criminally wrong? If the answer is no, there would be no investigation.But if the answer is maybe, that puts federal investigators on the pursuit. If they find nothing, Justice Department guidelines say they'd still need to address their investigation in a report summarizing their findings.If there could be some meat to the allegations, the Justice Department would need to determine one of two things: Did the potentially criminal actions take place unrelated to or before to the presidency? Or was the President's executive branch power was crucial in the crime?That determination will come into play later, because Congress' power to impeach and remove a president from office was intended by the framers of the Constitution to remedy abuse of the office, legal scholars say.Perhaps, though, the special counsel decides there's enough evidence to prove that the President broke the law.That's where the Office of Legal Counsel opinions come in.In 1973 and 2000, the office, which defines Justice Department internal procedure, said an indictment of a sitting president would be too disruptive to the country. This opinion appears to be binding on the Justice Department's decision-making, though it's possible for Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to choose to override the opinion, give Mueller permission to ignore it and take it to court, or ask the office to reexamine the issue by writing a new opinion.This sort of legal briefing has been done before, like in the year after the 1973 opinion, when then-special prosecutor Leon Jaworski wrote a Watergate-era memo describing why the President should not be above the law.Of course, there's another immediate option if a special counsel finds the President did wrong. Prosecutors could use the "unindicted co-conspirator" approach. This would involve the special counsel's office indicting a group of conspirators, making clear the President was part of the conspiracy without bringing charges against him.At any time, in theory, a special counsel could decide to delay an indictment until the President leaves office -- so as not to interfere with the functioning of the executive branch. The other options would be to drop the case or send an impeachment referral to Congress. As evidenced by Mueller's actions previously in the investigations of Trump's personal attorney Michael Cohen and former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, any steps this special counsel takes will likely come with the full support of the acting attorney general on the matter, Rosenstein.The question of whether a President could be subpoenaed is a story for another day. 3303