*******www.drandrewcohen**** Beverly Hills plastic surgeon, Dr. Andrew Cohen identifies some of the products that he utilizes on patients seeking non-surgical facial rejuvenation to rid themselves of facial: lines, wrinkles and blemishes. Dr. Cohen explains how most patients that come to him are looking for more facial volume and more of a 3 dimensional look. For more detailed information about facial rejuvenation options with Dr. Andrew Cohen, please visit our website or contact us directly to schedule your 1-on-1 consultation with Dr. Cohen.
Cest avec une honnêteté désarmante que les trois gourous en plus dAndrew Cohen sentretiennent dans cet extrait de ce quest concrètement lunivers dun maître spirituel.
Maltese player Andrew Cohen in the Match Hibernians vs Hamrun
Qu'est-ce que le développement moral pour un individu évoulé vivant dans un contexte postmoderne? Le développement moral, nous dit Andrew Cohen, est tout simplement le fait pour cet individu de se soucier de l'autre, des autres, du monde, de l'univers et du processus évolutionnaire lui-même en oubliant le soi avec ses désirs et ses peurs conditionnés.
*******www.drandrewcohen**** Beverly Hills plastic surgeon Dr. Andrew Cohen talks about the historical significance of The Lasky Clinic, located in Beverly Hills. After practicing at Cedars Sinai for over 8 years, Dr. Cohen decided to move his practice to The Lasky Clinic for it’s commitment to excellence & impeccable reputation. For more detailed information on Dr. Andrew Cohen or The Lasky Clinic, please visit our website or contact us directly.
*******www.drandrewcohen**** Dr. Andrew Cohen is a board certified plastic surgeon in practice at The Lasky Clinic in Beverly Hills. In this video, Dr. Cohen defines the clear distinction between a board certified plastic surgeon versus a plastic surgeon that is not board certified. For more information about plastic surgery procedures performed by Dr. Andrew T. Cohen at The Lasky Clinic, please visit our website or contact us directly.
and other stuff..........
BY VICTORIA CRAIG
Another court has dismissed a challenge against the Affordable Health Care Act.
Thursday-- the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Virginia has no case for suing the government over the health care plan.
The Washington Post reports, Virginia’s Attorney General...
“...argued that Virginia and its residents would be harmed because the federal mandate would obliterate the Virginia Health Care Freedom Act (VHCFA). The act says no resident of Virginia ‘shall be required to obtain or maintain a policy of individual insurance coverage.’”
But according to The Wall Street Journal’s Jess Bravin-- the court determined the AG’s argument had no legal standing.
“The issue here is that in order to go to court, you have to have an injury. In other words, you’ve got to be able to say, ‘The defendant did something to me or is violating my rights.’ The issue here is that the defendant, in this case, the US government, didn’t do anything to Virginia. In other words, it wasn’t making Virginia take any steps or do anything. Virginia’s only interest was protecting it’s own residents’ rights against a policy of the federal government.”
Andrew Cohen writes for the Atlantic, this is a double win for the President, noting that not only did the three-judge panel dismiss the challenges to the law...
“...But it did so on jurisdictional grounds, which means the justices of the United States Supreme Court now may have other viable legal options available to them next year should they wish to avoid resolving this battle on the merits.”
But a Fox News reporter counters- saying the decision may actually be a win for opponents of the law.
“The 4th circuit today never actually got to the question of whether or not the individual mandate is constitutional. It simply ruled today that two different lawsuits one involving the state of Virginia and one involving Liberty University, would be tossed out because those parties lacked standing.”
As The Hill explains-- the legal future of the law is blurred because there’s been a mixed bag of court opinions on the constitutionality of the individual mandate.
“The 6th Circuit upheld the requirement in a June decision, while the 11th Circuit - which heard the high-profile challenge filed by 26 state attorneys general — ruled the mandate is unconstitutional. Those 26 states didn’t use the same argument as [Virginia’s AG], so they’re likely unfazed by the 4th Circuit’s decision in that case.”
According to The Hill, legal analysts expect the Supreme Court to take up the case early next year.
BY EMILY SPAIN
You're watching multisource U.S. news analysis from Newsy.
A Nigerian man admitted Wednesday in federal court to trying to blow up Northwest Flight 253 with a bomb hidden in his underwear. MSNBC reports Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab is now pleading guilty to the eight counts against him.
“Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab’s attorney surprised the court in the second day of the trial with that announcement of a guilty plea. The judges reviewing the charge could possibly look at penalties with Abdulmutallab in court. Abdulmutallab could spend the rest of his life in prison.”
Abdulmutallab -- known as the “underwear bomber” -- is accused of trying to blow-up a Detroit-bound plane with nearly 300 passengers on board. In court, the 24-year-old called the bomb a “blessed weapon” and is currently representing himself.
Here’s what his stand-by attorney told CBS News about the plea change:
“His demeanor was very peaceful. I’m sure that he prayed with regard to his situation and made what he considered to be the most informed decision.”
CBS Radio News chief legal analyst Andrew Cohen said in an article from CBS that Abdulmutallab’s plea change didn’t shock him.
"This isn't a terrible surprise because he had no legitimate legal defense," Cohen said. "All those witnesses on the plane saw what he did, and there was a confession as well. And the judge clearly wasn't going to let him put on a political defense."
A writer for the Guardian notes that Abdulmutallab’s guilty plea to counts including attempted murder and attempted use of a weapon of mass destruction stunned the court room -- and will change the course of the trial.
“Pleading guilty dodged a lengthy terror trial, but also allowed Abdulmutallab the opportunity to address the court. Dressed in a black jacket and a brown tunic, he gave out a five-minute statement in which he explained that he wanted to carry out the attack to protest against US and Israeli policy towards Muslims.”
The Wall Street Journal notes - the plea was not because of a deal offered by prosecutors.
And adds these remarks from Abdulmutallab:
“While pleading guilty to the charges—two of which carry mandatory life prison sentences—Mr. Abdulmutallab repeatedly said, "I'm guilty under U.S. law, but not under the Koran," according to two witnesses.”
Abdulmutallab says his actions were in response to “U.S. wreckage of Muslim lands and property.” According to the Wall Street Journal, prosecutors say the underwear bomber is scheduled to be sentenced in January.
Transcript by Newsy.