丹东性乳房疼痛的原因雅安士体检一般有哪几项,嘉峪关体爆瘦原因是什么,肇庆悸是什么原因造成的,长春面体检一次多少,洛阳体检去哪里,天津检电话预约,泉州院健康体检项目

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — An investigation has found many California state agencies have failed to provide sexual harassment training for all their supervisors as required by state law.Capital Public Radio reported Tuesday its investigation found nearly 60 percent of agencies surveyed by the State Personnel Board did not provide the training, up from 25 percent in 2016 and 32 percent in 2017.The public radio station reports that since 2016, the State Personnel Board has identified nearly 1,800 state government supervisors at dozens of agencies who did not receive the required training.A state law requires businesses with 50 or more workers and all state agencies to provide two hours of sexual harassment training to new supervisors within six months of being hired or promoted. 794

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California Democratic Party Chairman Eric Bauman announced Thursday that he plans to resign, following a cascade of sexual harassment allegations that emerged against him in recent days.Bauman's decision came hours after Governor-elect Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, called for the embattled chairman to step aside. Bauman said he would immediately give his resignation to party officials.Newsom cited a Los Angeles Times article describing allegations of crude comments and inappropriate physical touching by Bauman, including asking two young women if they were sexually involved."I have made the realization that in order for those to whom I may have caused pain and who need to heal, for my own health, and in the best interest of the party that I love and to which I have dedicated myself for more than 25 years, it is in everyone's best interest for me to resign my position as chair of the California Democratic Party," Bauman said in a statement.RELATED: Top California Democrat on leave amid sex misconduct inquiryHe did not directly address the allegations against him.Bauman's resignation announcement came after he said Wednesday he is seeking treatment for alcohol abuse and other health issues while he takes leave from the party chairmanship he narrowly won in early 2017. He is the party's first openly gay chairman.The party shake up comes as California Democrats celebrate sweeping victories in the November election that furthered the party's grip on power in Congress and the state Legislature.He has faced mounting pressure to quit since the party's vice chairman, Daraka Larimore-Hall, made allegations of sexual harassment and assaults by Bauman against unnamed victims.RELATED: Top California Democrat faced allegations before electionBefore Larimore-Hall's accusations, someone made a sexual harassment complaint to the party against Bauman days ahead of the midterm election, said David Campos, chairman of the San Francisco Democratic Party.He told The Associated Press that two young women reported drinking and comments about sex by Bauman during a state Democratic Party bus tour. The Los Angeles Times quoted two 21-year-old women describing Bauman asking them if they were sexually involved at a stop on the tour.Newsom, the incoming Democratic governor, "is troubled by the serious allegations," his spokesman Nathan Click said in a statement.RELATED: California Democrats investigate sex claims against chairman"Sexual harassment shouldn't be tolerated — no person or party, no matter how powerful, is above accountability," the statement said.Newsom's statement said the investigation should continue so victims can be heard, "but given the numerous detailed, severe and corroborated allegations reported by the Times, he believes the best course of action for the party is for the chair to resign."California Democratic Party Secretary Jenny Bach also called Thursday for Bauman to resign, citing the "harrowing and upsetting" allegations. 3004

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

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — California is exempting about two-dozen more professions from a landmark labor law designed to treat more people like employees instead of contractors. Gov. Gavin Newsom on Friday signed Assembly Bill 2257, ending what lawmakers said were unworkable limits on services provided by freelance writers and still photographers, photojournalists, and freelance editors and newspaper cartoonists under Assembly Bill 5.It also exempts various artists and musicians, along with some involved in the insurance and real estate industries. More job specifics covered can be found here on Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez's website, who authored both AB 5 and AB 2257. The law that took effect this year was primarily aimed at ride-hailing giants Uber and Lyft, which are fighting it in court and in a November ballot measure, Proposition 22, which would allow ride-hailing drivers to work as independent contractors.RELATED: Emergency stay granted to prevent Uber, Lyft shutdown in California 1012

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — A California appeals court has denied the latest parole bid by Charles Manson follower Leslie Van Houten.Two of the three appellate judges on Friday upheld former Gov. Jerry Brown's decision to block her parole last year. She is serving a life sentence for helping Manson and others kill Los Angeles grocer Leno LaBianca and his wife, Rosemary, in August 1969.Current Gov. Gavin Newsom again denied her parole in June, saying she is still a threat at age 70.The appellate judges said that Brown's reasoning for denying Van Houten's parole is supported by some evidence. He said she has not taken full responsibility for her actions and remains dangerous.Van Houten's attorney, Rich Pfeiffer, said he'll appeal the decision to the state Supreme Court. 784