宜宾鼻子打一针玻尿酸价格宜宾玻尿酸丰胸多少钱,宜宾哪里做双眼皮技术好,宜宾的医院开双眼皮价格,宜宾韩式全切双眼皮好不好,宜宾开外眼角一般多少钱,宜宾祛斑最好的,宜宾埋线双眼皮费用是多少

The jury in Bill Cosby's retrial found the TV icon guilty of all three counts of aggravated indecent assault on Thursday for drugging and sexually assaulting Andrea Constand at his home in a Philadelphia suburb in 2004.The 80-year-old comedian faces up to 10 years in prison on each count, but would likely serve them concurrently. A sentencing hearing has not yet been scheduled, and he remains out on bail.Cosby did not have an audible reaction to his conviction, but erupted shortly afterward. Minutes after the verdict, prosecutors asked the judge to revoke Cosby's bail because they say he is a flight risk and has a private plane.Cosby, who did not testify in the trial and has sat quietly throughout the proceedings, then stood up and yelled in a loud, booming voice: "He doesn't have a plane, you asshole."Judge Steven O'Neill ruled that Cosby should not leave his Pennsylvania home, and that he would need to be fitted with a GPS tracking device.What the case was aboutThe case against Cosby centered on testimony from Constand, a former employee with Temple University women's basketball team. She testified that Cosby, a powerful trustee at Temple, drugged her and sexually assaulted her when she visited his home to ask for career advice.Cosby's defense team argued that their interaction was consensual. Constand is a con artist, they argued, who wanted a piece of Cosby's fortune.After the trial concluded, Constand left through a side door in the courtroom, walking into a hallway with her arms around two women and a huge smile on her face.The case is the first celebrity sexual assault trial since the #MeToo movement began last fall, and as such, represents a test of how the cultural movement will translate into a courtroom arena.In closing arguments, defense attorney Kathleen Bliss positioned Cosby's legal team as standing up against "witch hunts, lynchings (and) McCarthyism."Attorney Gloria Allred, who represents many of the women who have accused Cosby of misconduct, said this was the happiest she had been with a verdict in 42 years."We are so happy that finally we can say, women are believed. And not only on #MeToo but in a court of law where they are under oath, where they testified truthfully, where they are attacked," Allred said. "After all is said and done, women were finally believed."Cosby's attorney, Tom Mesereau, said he plans to appeal "very strongly.""We are very disappointed by the verdict. We don't think Mr. Cosby's guilty of anything and the fight is not over," he said.The guilty verdict is a remarkable turn of events for the man once known as "America's Dad." Cosby was a groundbreaking actor and the first African-American performer to win an Emmy for his role on "I Spy." His portrayal of the sweater-loving Cliff Huxtable on "The Cosby Show" was one of the first mainstream TV shows to feature a black upper-middle class family.Previous trial ended in a hung juryAlthough dozens of women have accused Cosby of sexual misconduct, only Constand's allegations resulted in criminal charges."I feel like I'm dreaming," Lili Bernard, who has accused Cosby of assault, said afterward. "I feel like my faith in humanity is restored."The verdict came a year after Cosby's previous trial ended in a mistrial, as a different panel of jurors said they were deadlocked and could not unanimously agree on a verdict. This jury began deliberating Wednesday around 11 a.m., and worked for more than 14 hours over two days to reach the verdict.At the retrial, five other Cosby accusers testified as "prior bad acts" witnesses and said that Cosby had drugged and assaulted them decades ago. Prosecutors said these women's stories showed that Cosby had a pattern in his actions and did not make a one-time mistake in his interactions with Constand.The-CNN-Wire 3806

The only way this stops is if people rise up. You get what you accept. #FreedomMatters #StepUp https://t.co/8QKBszgKTM— Scott W. Atlas (@SWAtlasHoover) November 15, 2020 177

The holiday season is here and small businesses, particularly restaurants, need all the help they can get.Many have had to close their doors a second time as coronavirus cases soar and more states implement more stringent shutdown measures.“We’ve got to do what we’ve got to do,” said Alejandro Landa, a server at his family’s diner in Denver.Last week, Landa’s family had to decrease its indoor dining capacity from 50 percent to zero as the state implemented its “code red” COVID-19 lockdown, which only allows for limited outdoor dining, while also allowing to-go and delivery orders.He says the family learned that tips on any take out orders are a big help. Most servers rely on them for most of their income.“This is all we have right now,” said Landa. “It’s a family restaurant. It’s just my mom, my two sisters, and my grandma at home. It’s all we have, and we really need to keep it up because there’s no other place to go.”Other restaurants suggest checking to see if gift cards are available. Purchasing one can give the establishment a quick influx of cash, while offering the guest a dining experience once things return to normal once more.“When our GM said we won’t be able to do dine-in for close to the rest of the year, we’re like that’s crazy talk, this is going to get better,” said Sierra Taruini, an assistant manager at an Italian Eatery. “It hasn’t gotten better. I’m a little biased but I think our food would make for a great gift.”Tarquini is one of four people on staff at diFranco’s. Typically, the bistro employs 8-10 people, but the initial and subsequent lockdowns have forced them to cut staff to barely stay profitable.Tarquini says food delivery services such as Uber Eats and Door Dash can give them additional revenue, but she suggests ordering the food from the restaurant’s website directly. Oftentimes, those carrier services charge the restaurants a small fee per order. Tarquini says by calling the restaurant directly, they can save a few additional dollars, and more menu options may be available.“The phone doesn’t stop and that has really helped me,” said Ron Robinson, owner of Gaetano’s, an upscale Italian restaurant.Robinson says he never tried takeout before COVID because his dishes are made fresh and transporting them with the same quality can be difficult. Ever since he adjusted as a way to stay in business, however, he says people have shown massive support as they order directly from him for date nights and other occasions.“I had a guy the other night come in and get eight martinis to go,” said Robinson. “You know, they buy bottles of wine to go, so every little bit helps.”Robinson says if a restaurant offers alcohol, ordering a craft cocktail to go is beneficial. He says it allows restaurants to use and order more alcohol, which can be difficult since many of their bars are closed. He also says it can create more ambiance for a special event. 2920

The Pennsylvania Department of Health is encouraging people who were at President Donald Trump’s campaign rally at Harrisburg International Airport on Saturday to get tested if they are feeling sick.Trump announced earlier Friday that he and the first lady have tested positive for the coronavirus.The department is asking people to download the COVID Alert PA phone app if they do test positive to anonymously alert people they may have come in contact with.Thousands attended the outdoor rally, held hours after the president introduced his Supreme Court nominee, Amy Coney Barrett, from the Rose Garden at the White House. Those at the rally were required to pass through a security checkpoint and get their temperatures taken.The president had another rally in the last week, on Wednesday in Duluth, Minnesota. Three Republicans boarded Air Force One in the Twin Cities and flew with the president to the Duluth rally location. Two of them, Congressman Tom Emmer and Congressman Jim Hagedorn, told local media they are taking a COVID-19 test after possible exposure to the president or a member of his team. Other lawmakers who interacted with the president while he stopped at Twin Cities International Airport have taken steps to protect their health, according to KARE11. 1287

The polling industry has a lot on the line heading into Tuesday's midterm election.Critics blamed pollsters when voters were caught off guard by Donald Trump's election in 2016. Old cries of "don't believe the polls" became fevered shouts. And the president has encouraged distrust by calling certain polls "fake" and claiming they are used to "suppress" the vote.Although there is no evidence to suggest that is true, there is persistent and widespread suspicion about polling, according to, you guessed it, a McClatchy-Marist poll. And it exists on both sides, albeit in different forms."I think Democrats may have felt let down by the polls but don't think it was an intentional error. I think many Republicans believe the polling errors of 2016 were intentional," GOP pollster and co-founder of Echelon Insights Kristen Soltis Anderson told CNN.So can the industry regain trust?Since 2016 there's been a whole lot of self-reflection in the polling world. Pollsters have tweaked their techniques; pundits have become more cautious when talking about polls; and news outlets have conducted some fascinating experiments.On Tuesday, all the efforts are being put to the test."Some pollsters would disagree with this, but the way that the public generally views whether or not polling is accurate is whether or not it gets the results of the election right," CNN analyst Harry Enten said on "Reliable Sources.""I'm not necessarily sure that's fair," Enten said, "but I do think that there is more pressure on pollsters this year to get it right given the president's rhetoric and given what happened in 2016."Many, though not all, 2016 polls underestimated support for Trump. This effect was particularly pronounced at the state level, where there were embarrassing "misses," showing Hillary Clinton with safe leads in states Trump actually carried.Most national polls accurately showed Clinton winning the popular vote. But reporters and commentators made lots of mistakes in their interpretations of the polls. Readers and viewers did, too. Many people discounted the margin and other factors and made faulty assumptions that Trump would lose to Clinton.There were other problems, too. Predictive features on websites gained lots of traffic before the election but caused lots of consternation afterward. HuffPost's model infamously showed Clinton with a 98 percent chance of winning. "We blew it," the site admitted afterward.But just as importantly, HuffPost's Natalie Jackson tried to explain why.Other news outlets have also tried to be more transparent and remind voters of what polls cannot convey.In special elections since 2016, Democrats have repeatedly outperformed polls of their races.The top example was the Virginia governors' race. "Ralph Northam was favored by three points. He ended up winning by nine," Enten said.But past outcomes are not an indicator of future results."I think many pollsters and forecasters have tried to be much more intentional about explaining uncertainty and being humble about what data can and can't tell us," Anderson said. "Because I think there was a big sense that in 2016, there was more certainty conveyed than may have been justified by the available data."So political pros and reporters are communicating poll results differently this time. Time magazine's Molly Ball, who has a no-predictions rule for herself, said that even people who do make predictions are adding more caveats: There's "less of the, 'Well, the needle shows this' and more of, 'Here's what it doesn't show, here's what we should always remember can happen about probabilities.'"Early voting has been explosive in the midterms, indicating above-average enthusiasm among both Democrats and Republicans. Pollsters have to make assumptions about turnout when contacting "likely voters," and this is a difficult election to forecast.The 2018 electorate is "a universe that doesn't exist yet," Democratic pollster Margie Omero said. "I mean, people don't know whether they're going to vote, some people."They may tell a pollster that they're sure to vote, but never make it to the ballot box. Or they might change who they're voting for.Conversely, certain subsets of voters may have a big impact on the final results without really showing up in the pre-election polling. If pollsters assume relatively low youth turnout, but lots of young people vote for the first time, that could cause big surprises in certain races.The vast majority of people who are called by pollsters decline to participate, so the researchers have to make a huge number of phone calls, bend over backwards to reach a representative sample of people, and weight their results accordingly.Some polls are higher quality than others. Most news outlets tend to favor live interviewers, as opposed to computerized systems, and a mix of landline and cell phone calls. But some outlets are wading into web-based polling. CNN's polling standards preclude reporting on web polls.This fall The New York Times pulled back the curtain by conducting "live polling" and publishing the results in real time, call by call. Working with Siena College, the surveyors made 2,822,889 calls and completed 96 polls of House and Senate races."We wanted to demystify polling for people," said Nate Cohn of The Times' Upshot blog."From our point of view, it's almost a miracle how accurate polls usually are, given all the challenges," Cohn said in an interview with CNN.He emphasized that polls are "very fuzzy things." And the real-time polling showed this to the public. The researchers sought to interview about 500 people for each race that was examined.In Iowa's fourth congressional district, for example, 14,636 calls resulted in 423 interviews.The results showed the incumbent, far-right congressman Steve King, with 47% support, and his Democratic challenger J.D. Scholten with 42%.The Times characterized this as a "slight edge" for King, with lots of room for error. "The margin of sampling error on the overall lead is 10 points, roughly twice as large as the margin for a single candidate's vote share," the Times explained on its website.Cohn's final pre-election story noted that "even modest late shifts among undecided voters or a slightly unexpected turnout could significantly affect results."That's the kind of language that lots of polling experts are incorporating into their stories and live shots, especially in the wake of the 2016 election."With polling, you never actually get to the truth," Cohn said. "You inch towards it, and you think you end up within plus or minus 5 points of it at the end."As Enten put it, "polls are tools," not meant to be perfect. But that message needs to be reinforced through the news media. 6753