president

FILE PHOTO: A taxi driver holds a flag reading
FILE PHOTO: A taxi driver holds a flag reading “No more Uber” during a nationwide strike to protest against Uber Technologies in Santiago, Chile July 30, 2018. To match Insight UBER-CHILE/ REUTERS/Ivan Alvarado/File Photo

March 19, 2019

By Aislinn Laing

SANTIAGO (Reuters) – The Uber driver pulled up to the international airport outside Chile’s capital. As his passenger jumped into his gleaming Suzuki, he glanced around furtively for signs of trouble.

“Working in the airport isn’t easy,” he told a Reuters reporter, a rosary on the rearview mirror swaying as he raced towards the motorway. “Uber in Chile isn’t easy.”

That is because Uber drivers can be fined or have their vehicles impounded if caught by authorities ferrying passengers. Chile has yet to work out a regulatory framework for ridesharing.

“This (Uber) application is not legal,” Chile´s Transport Minister Gloria Hutt said last year. “It does not at present comply with Chilean legislation to carry paying passengers.”

Uber’s unregulated status in fast-growing markets such as Chile poses a potential risk for the firm as it prepares for a much-anticipated IPO.

It has also launched a cat-and-mouse game of sometimes comical proportions in this South American nation. Drivers warn each other of pick-up and drop-off points where police officers and transport department inspectors are lurking.

They also enlist passengers as accomplices. Riders are routinely instructed to sit in the front seat and memorize a cover story – just in case.

“If anyone asks, I’m your friend’s Uncle Diego,” one so-named Uber driver told Reuters on another recent run.

Another, 41-year-old Guillermo, told Reuters his standard alibi for male passengers is that they are his football mates. He and other drivers declined to give their surnames for fear of being identified by authorities.

Uber’s app and website make no mention of its unsettled legal status in Chile, where it now boasts 2.2 million monthly users and 85,000 drivers since its launch here in 2014.

The company advertises prominently on billboards around Santiago and through promotional emails as if nothing were amiss.

Veronica Jadue, the company’s spokeswoman in Chile, insisted Uber was legal. She cited a 2017 Supreme Court ruling that thwarted efforts by Chilean taxi firms and unions looking to halt the service in the northern city of La Serena. The court cited legislation introduced in 2016 by the government of former President Michelle Bachelet to regulate ride-hailing services. “The intention is to regulate it, not to prevent its development,” the three-judge panel said.

That legislation, nicknamed the Uber law, is still pending as the government, powerful taxi unions and app-based startups try to strike a deal.

Jadue declined to confirm whether the company knew that drivers in Chile were coaching passengers to help them mislead transit officials. “We have stressed the importance of cooperating with authorities,” she said.

A series of scandals has already damaged Uber’s reputation. The company has been excoriated for its frat-house culture, sharp-elbowed business tactics and pitched battles with regulators worldwide. While the San Francisco-based start-up has been valued at as much as $120 billion, its growth has slowed. [uL1N20925L]

Clearing up its status in Chile and elsewhere will help. Still, would-be shareholders likely will be more interested in Uber’s ability to maintain its dominance in Latin America and other places where rivals such as China’s Didi Chuxing are moving in, according to Nathan Lustig, managing partner of Magma Partners, a Santiago-based seed stage venture capital fund.

“They’ll be more bothered by market share and whether Uber can be profitable in places…where there´s competition,” Lustig said.

PARKING LOT RENDEZVOUS

In a statement to Reuters, Uber said it is “working diligently” to ensure that ridesharing regulation moves forward in Chile.

In the meantime, penalties keep piling up. Since 2016, inspectors from Chile’s Ministry of Transport have issued 7,756 fines ranging from $700 to $1,100 to Uber drivers. Local cops have doled out thousands of citations as well.

Drivers told Reuters Uber reimburses them the cost of their fines to keep them rolling. Uber said it does so “on a case by case basis.”

The company’s technology is helping too. For example, Santiago-area riders had complained on social media that drivers were frequently cancelling rides to and from the airport, a hot zone for citations.

The solution: a special category of service on Uber’s Chilean app known as UberX SCL, named for the code for the Comodoro Arturo Merino Benitez International Airport. Those runs are handled by daring souls willing to run the risk of getting fined, drivers told Reuters.

Securing a driver can be only half the battle. On its Chilean website, Uber instructs passengers who are leaving the airport to meet their drivers in a short-term parking lot. Drivers told Reuters they use the Uber app´s messaging system to switch meeting points if they suspect citation writers are hovering.

Uber declined to discuss the reasons for its tailored communication in Chile. Spokeswoman Jadue said Uber’s Chile products “are designed to deliver a positive experience to riders and drivers.”

Matias Muchnick, a member of Chile’s vibrant start-up community, said the “chaos” is embarrassing. The country touts its orderliness and sophistication to foreign investors, who might not see the adventure in ducking transit cops after stepping off their international flights.

“People get a bad first impression,” the artificial intelligence entrepreneur said at a December investment conference in Santiago.

But David Brophy, professor of finance at the University of Michigan, said such tales could be a selling point for some IPO investors.

“The key thing is that people want to use it, even though it’s not comfortable if you´re stopped by the cops,” he said.

EVEN POLICE USE UBER

Uber has tangled with regulators across the globe, including in other parts of Latin America.

In Argentina, for example, the company remains unregulated years after entering the market. Lawmakers in Buenos Aires have largely sided with taxi drivers, who complain Uber charges artificially low fares while avoiding all the overhead born by cabbies.

But the region’s commuters are hooked on the price and convenience, while car owners see opportunity. Uber says it has 25 million active monthly riders in Latin America and one million drivers.

In country after country, it has found success by following a familiar playbook: expand quickly in a legislative vacuum, then leverage popularity and market power to shape regulation.

Still, some local governments are reasserting their authority. In the United States, for example, New York City last year capped the number of rideshare vehicles on its streets. Los Angeles is contemplating a ride-hailing tax to reduce road congestion.

In Chile, negotiations on the Uber Law have been slow.

Taxi unions want lawmakers to limit the number of rideshare drivers and ensure their fares do not undercut those of cabs. Transport startups, led by Uber, have run their own energetic lobbying efforts. Riders have voted with their smartphones; many have little sympathy for “taxi mafias” that long kept prices high and delivered patchy service.

Caught in the middle are Chilean officials. Hutt, the transport minister, admitted publicly that her children used the app and that she had too until she took her post last year. Uber drivers told Reuters that public servants – including police officers – are frequent customers.

In an interview in his Santiago office, Jose Luis Dominguez, the country’s subsecretary for transport, acknowledged his agency’s dilemma.

“(Uber) shouldn’t be operating. Passengers shouldn’t be using it,” Dominguez said. “But…ignoring that it exists would be like trying to block out the sun with your finger.”

(Reporting by Aislinn Laing; Additional reporting by Cassandra Garrison in Buenos Aires and Helen Murphy in Bogota; Editing by Christian Plumb and Marla Dickerson)

Source: OANN

U.S. President Donald Trump attends the Greek Independence Day Celebration at the White House in Washington, U.S.
U.S. President Donald Trump attends the Greek Independence Day Celebration at the White House in Washington, U.S., March 18, 2019. REUTERS/Carlos Barria

March 19, 2019

By Rich McKay

(Reuters) – President Donald Trump will nominate a Washington attorney, Christopher Landau, to be the next United States Ambassador to Mexico, the White House Press Office said on Monday.

The nomination comes at a time of strained relations between the neighbors amid trade disputes, Trump’s complaints about undocumented immigrants crossing the border, and his efforts to build an extended border wall.

Roberta Jacobson, the previous U.S. ambassador, stepped down in May, joining a list of senior U.S. State Department officials to resign during Trump’s presidency.

Landau, now a partner at the law firm of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan LLP, was a law clerk for Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who died in 2016, and then for Justice Clarence Thomas, both considered court conservatives.

The White House described Landau as a constitutional and appellate attorney who has briefed and argued appeals before the Supreme Court, Federal courts of appeals, and State appellate courts.

He previously headed the appellate litigation practice at the firm of Kirkland & Ellis LLP.

In 2017, Landau served a three-year term as a member of the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Appellate Rules, the White House said.

No formal diplomatic experience was mentioned in the White House statement, which said Landau is fluent in Spanish.

Landau could not immediately be reached for comment.

(Reporting by Rich McKay; Editing by Darren Schuettler)

Source: OANN

FILE PHOTO: Tsunekazu Takeda, President of the Japanese Olympic committee, attends a news conference in Tokyo
FILE PHOTO: Tsunekazu Takeda, President of the Japanese Olympic committee, attends a news conference in Tokyo, Japan January 15, 2019. REUTERS/Issei Kato/File Photo

March 19, 2019

TOKYO (Reuters) – Japanese Olympic Committee (JOC) chief Tsunekazu Takeda, who is expected to announce plans to step down on Tuesday, is also set to resign as a member of the International Olympics Committee, Kyodo News reported.

French prosecutors placed Takeda under formal investigation in December for suspected corruption in Japan’s successful bid to host the 2020 Summer Games.

(Reporting by Chris Gallagher; Editing by Peter Rutherford)

Source: OANN

Kimberly Guilfoyle definitely got everyone’s attention Monday when she posted a jaw-dropping shot of her wearing a sleeveless yellow dress during a trip to Palm Beach.

The former Fox News host looked just as terrific as ever in the bright dress that had a large ruffle trim and went down to her knees as she posed for pictures with Donald Trump Jr. on their recent trip to Florida for spring break.

She captioned the series of snaps in the gorgeous outfit simply, “Lovely spring break with @donaldjtrumpjr and our kids. Incredibly blessed to have our special family time together. #family #springbreak #kidsrule #momlife #blessings #momlifeisthebestlife @themaralagoclub @trumpgolfpalmbeach.” (RELATED: Guilfoyle: President Trump’s State Of The Union Was A Grand Slam)

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Kimberly Guilfoyle (@kimberlyguilfoyle) on

Guilfoyle’s social media account is truly can’t miss with some amazing shots she’s shared from her various speaking engagements to trips with friends and family. (RELATED: Celebrate Melania’s Birthday With Her Greatest Looks As First Lady [SLIDESHOW])

Here are a few that really stood out, including one picture of her wearing a stunning vanilla-colored dress as she posed for a group shot with Tiffany and Ivanka Trump and more after President Donald Trump’s State of the Union address. (RELATED: Celebrate Ivanka Trump’s Birthday With Her Greatest Looks [SLIDESHOW])

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Kimberly Guilfoyle (@kimberlyguilfoyle) on

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Kimberly Guilfoyle (@kimberlyguilfoyle) on

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Kimberly Guilfoyle (@kimberlyguilfoyle) on

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Kimberly Guilfoyle (@kimberlyguilfoyle) on

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Kimberly Guilfoyle (@kimberlyguilfoyle) on

Source: The Daily Caller

Scott Morefield | Reporter

President Donald Trump on Monday tweeted nearly five minutes of Fox News host Tucker Carlson’s Monday night show, which featured a detailed explanation of how the “Russia hoax began in the first place” as a tool to delegitimize the president.

Carlson compared how Democrats said the contention that “Barack Obama was born in Kenya” “hurt America” and “delegitimized” the former president. “Fair points,” he contended, but “somehow Democrats learned the opposite lesson.”

“For three years they pushed their own far more harmful conspiracy, the theory of Russia collusion,” said the Fox News host before laying out the timeline of how the infamous Steele dossier was created, publicized and used as a weapon against the president.

“It was fake then, it is fake now,” said Carlson. “But it still caused an awful lot of damage,” including helping “destroy our relationship with Russia.” (RELATED: Tucker Carlson: ‘If Michael Cohen Had The Dime’ On Trump, ‘He Would Drop It’)

What then, Carlson asked, will Democrats “explain to their followers” when the Mueller report drops with no evidence against the president? “Will those people be disappointed? Or will they assume that Putin got to Mueller too?”

Follow Scott on Twitter

Source: The Daily Caller

The hate-Trump media's attempts to tie the mass shootings in New Zealand to President Donald Trump "is hateful, dishonest, and insulting the American public," Bill O'Reilly said on Newsmax TV.

"As soon as I saw the Trump haters try to tie the president of the United States into mass murder in New Zealand, I turned the channel – I turned it off," O'Reilly said during an appearance on Monday night's "The Wayne Allyn Root Show."

"Because I've had enough. And I think my feeling reflects the majority of Americans: Enough.

"President Trump didn't have anything to do with the New Zealand mass murder, and to try to tie him into it is hateful, dishonest, and insulting the American public."

O'Reilly lamented the American media's weak effort to damage their own president at any opportunity, no matter how remote the attack is, because of a nonstop anti-Trump agenda.

"There's no other story for the media other than Donald Trump," O'Reilly told Root. "If Donald Trump isn't in the news, they don't have anything to report on.

"And that's really sad for this country. Really, really, sad."

Important: Newsmax TV is now carried in 65 million cable homes on DirecTV Ch. 349, Dish Network Ch. 216, Comcast/Xfinity Ch. 1115, U-verse Ch. 1220, FiOS Ch. 615 or More Systems Here.

Source: NewsMax Politics

Kevin Daley | Supreme Court Reporter

  • Five Democratic presidential candidates are contemplating proposals to expand the Supreme Court. 
  • The push to “pack the courts” follows a concerted Republican effort to install judicial conservatives at every level of the federal judiciary.
  • The threat of court expansion could itself deter the Supreme Court’s conservatives from moving the law sharply in new directions.

A growing number of Democratic presidential candidates are entertaining a push to add seats to the Supreme Court, as Republican success at filling the courts with judicial conservatives has infuriated progressive voters.

Democratic presidential candidates Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, Robert “Beto” O’Rourke, Pete Buttigieg, and Kirsten Gillibrand have expressed willingness to consider proposals for expanding the composition of the Supreme Court as of this writing.

The Trump campaign charged that those suggestions, called court-packing, keeps with other structural reforms to the U.S. political system some Democrats have endorsed since the 2016 election.

“This is just what the Democrats always do,” the Trump campaign told TheDCNF. “When they lose, they try to change the rules. This is no different from when they attack the Electoral College every time they lose the White House. Now it’s court-packing. They want to change our institutions to fit their own political desires.”

Another presidential candidate, Democratic Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey, advanced a more modest proposition. Speaking Monday night on MSNBC, the senator said term limits for Supreme Court justices might be appropriate, but he seemed reluctant to endorse expansion of the Court.

Democrats frame the issue as a credibility problem. By their telling, the campaign began when Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell refused to fill the vacancy occasioned by Justice Antonin Scalia’s death until after the 2016 election, and continued apace with the abolition of the filibuster for high court nominees.

“We are on the verge of a crisis of confidence in the Supreme Court,” Harris told Politico. “We have to take this challenge head on, and everything is on the table to do that.”

O’Rourke struck a similar note Friday at a Burlington, Iowa coffee shop, telling onlookers that an expanded Court is “an idea that we should explore” to curb partisanship and political dysfunction. The former El Paso congressman floated a proposal to add six justices to the high court. Under that system, Democrats and Republicans would each appoint five justices. Those 10 would then unanimously select the remaining five.

Other procedural changes for lower court nominations have inflamed Democratic anger, such that packing the courts — once thought radical — is now a viable political position.

“The GOP has also undermined virtually all of the customs that protected the minority and home state senators in the judicial selection process, such as White House consultation and blue slips, while ramming through circuit nominees with little process,” Carl Tobias, a law professor at the University of Richmond, told The Daily Caller News Foundation.

After President Donald Trump took office, the Republican-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee began holding confirmation hearings in which multiple circuit court nominees appear for testimony. Democrats say that’s a break with historical practice. (RELATED: Is Chief Justice John Roberts Tacking Left?)

The committee has also effectively abandoned the minority party’s blue slip veto for appeals court nominations, which allows senators to block nominees tapped for judgeships in their state. Republicans say the blue slip process has not been consistently observed for circuit court confirmations and makes little sense for appellate nominees.

Interest in court-packing has also waxed due to a sustained interest group campaign. Career Democratic operatives, attempting to put liberal interest in the judiciary at parity with conservatives, founded a dark money political group that is urging Democratic candidates to endorse court-expansion ideas.

A Democratic Court-packing bid would likely require a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. Given that daunting prospect, a near-term effort to expand the Court is unlikely to succeed. Yet the Democratic flirtation with court-packing might itself bring the justices to heel. Tobias suggested that a threat to the institution’s composition, even if unlikely, could deter the justices from moving the law rightward.

“Discussing that prospect and other proposals like term limits for justices or adding lower court judges may signal to the Court that it should not veer sharply to the right, as Chief Justice John Roberts seemed to be signaling to Trump and the nation with his rebuff of Trump regarding ‘Obama judges,’” Tobias said, referencing an episode in 2018 in which Roberts rebuked Trump for deriding a district court judge who enjoined the administration’s asylum reforms.

The justices of the Supreme Court pose for their official photo at the Supreme Court in Washington, DC on November 30, 2018. (Mandel Ngan/AFP/Getty Images)

The justices of the Supreme Court pose for their official photo at the Supreme Court in Washington, DC on November 30, 2018. (Mandel Ngan/AFP/Getty Images)

Carrie Severino, chief counsel for the Judicial Crisis Network, accused Democrats of browbeating the Court’s newly entrenched conservative majority.

“Democrats will try anything to politicize the judicial selection process and the courts,” Severino told TheDCNF. “Now they are trying to bully and intimidate the Supreme Court’s justices into serving as a rubber stamp for a liberal political agenda.”

Popular history holds that a similar tactic animated an important change on the Supreme Court during the 1930s. A conservative coalition on the high court struck down much of President Franklin Roosevelt’s domestic economic program during his first term. Flush with victory after his landslide reelection in 1936, Roosevelt asked Congress for authority to appoint as many as six new justices.

Though the Democratic Congress overwhelmingly repudiated that request, Justice Owen Roberts, then the “swing vote” on the bench, began voting to uphold progressive economic measures, like the constitutionality of minimum wage laws. That shift was widely interpreted as a strategic move to protect the Court from Roosevelt’s scheme. Recent scholarship questions the accuracy of this view, sometimes called “the switch in time that saved nine.”

Still, Roosevelt’s plot is widely seen as notorious and misguided, and may explain why no candidate has yet given a court-packing alternative their unqualified endorsement. Instead, the Democratic 2020 contenders urge further discussions or decline to rule out the possibility.

Follow Kevin on Twitter

Send tips to kevin@dailycallernewsfoundation.org

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Source: The Daily Caller

FILE PHOTO: Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida
FILE PHOTO: A police boat patrols in front of U.S. President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida, U.S., February 17, 2019. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque/File Photo

March 19, 2019

By Mark Hosenball

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Democratic congressional leaders have asked the FBI to investigate the founder of a Florida massage parlor chain who is an alleged acquaintance of President Donald Trump, according to a letter released on Monday.

House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer released the letter, signed by four other lawmakers. It asked investigators to look into “public reports about alleged activities by Ms. Li ‘Cindy’ Yang and her apparent relationship with the president.”

A chain of massage parlors founded by Yang is “suspected of involvement” in human trafficking and prostitution which involves female immigrants being forced to serve as “sex workers,” said the letter to the FBI and other federal investigative agencies.

Senators Mark Warner and Dianne Feinstein and Representatives Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler signed the letter. It said Yang also reportedly created a business called GY US investments which they allege “may be selling access to the president and members of his family to clients from China.”

Michelle Merson, a Florida lawyer who says she is representing Yang, could not immediately be reached for comment. On a website, Merson posted a video in which she said Yang is scared and in hiding.

Merson said Yang denies the allegations made against her. “Ms. Yang is not concerned because she feels she’s speaking the truth and the truth will free her,” Merson said in the video.

The Democrats’ letter said Yang’s website, which has been taken down, once offered clients the “opportunity to interact” with Trump and other political figures as well as participation in White House and Capitol Hill dinners.

The letter said that, if proven, such allegations “raise serious counterintelligence concerns.”

It asked if Yang had been the focus of earlier federal or state probes and for an assessment of “counterintelligence risks” which Yang’s activities might have posed.

The Democrats also asked if other individuals have used Mar-a-Lago, the president’s Palm Beach estate, to offer foreigners access to Trump or people around him, as well as whether Yang or her foreign clients have had access to Trump or U.S. officials at the White House, Mar-a-Lago, or other Trump properties.

The FBI had no comment on the legislators’ letter. The White House, the Office of Director of National Intelligence, and the Secret Service did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

(This story corrects throughout to show Pelosi and Schumer released, but did not sign the letter, which four other lawmakers signed)

(Reporting by Mark Hosenball; Editing by Kevin Drawbaugh and Tom Brown)

Source: OANN

  • Google barred a Christian video on same-sex marriage from advertising on YouTube after backlash from employees, internal communications show.
  • The video said gay people are welcome as Christians but are called to follow Christian teachings on sex and marriage.
  • A Google VP agreed the video was too offensive to air as an advertisement.
  • Google HR highlighted the video and response in an internal newsletter dedicated to policing “microaggressions.”

Google banned a video explaining Christian teaching on same-sex marriage from advertising on YouTube after backlash from upset employees, according to internal Google communications reviewed by The Daily Caller News Foundation.

The video was flagged in June 2018 in an internal listserv, “Yes at Google,” which is run by Google’s human resources department, according to those communications and other internal documents, which a source shared with TheDCNF on the condition of anonymity.

The listserv has more than 30,000 members and is devoted to policing “microaggressions” and “micro-corrections” within the company, according to its official internal description.

The internal backlash to the video grew large enough to merit a response from a Google vice president, who said the video would no longer be eligible to run as an advertisement, the human resources team announced to the listserv. (RELATED: ‘Disrespectful’: Google Employees Melt Down Over The Word ‘Family’)

REUTERS/ Stephen Lam

A Google logo is seen at the company’s headquarters in Mountain View, California, U.S. REUTERS/ Stephen Lam

Christian radio host Michael L. Brown argues in the video that gay people are welcome as Christians but that, like every other person, they are called to follow Christian teachings on sex and marriage.

Brown has spoken out in the past against “homo-hatred” and “ugly rhetoric” directed at gay and lesbian people by fringe groups like the Westboro Baptist Church.

In the video, he describes same-sex relationships as “like other sins, but one that Jesus died for.”

The belief that sex is meant to take place in the context of a male-female marriage — as argued by Brown — is central to most major Christian denominations’ marital teachings.

WATCH: 

Google HR highlighted in the listserv a “representative” comment from an employee who took offense that Brown’s video had appeared as an advertisement on channels operated by gay and lesbian YouTubers, the documents show.

“I cannot see how this can be allowed when the specific idea of LGBT videos is to allow the creators to feel free to share their content and be comfortable that anti-LGBT advertisers would not be attached to their content,” the employee wrote. “This seems very counter to our mission, specifically around PRIDE 2018 timeframe.”

Google’s vice president for product management and ads, Vishal Sharma, agreed that the video was too offensive to air as an advertisement.

“Thank you for raising this very important issue. It means a lot to me personally and those of us working on this across the Ads and YouTube teams. YouTube is an open platform and we support the free expression of creators with a wide range of views,” Sharma wrote in his response, which was included in the listserv.

“But we don’t allow advertising that disparages people based on who they are – including their sexual orientation – and we remove ads that violate this basic principle,” Sharma continued.

“After careful and multiple reviews over the course of a few days, our teams decided to remove the ad in question here as it violates our policy. We’ve communicated this to the advertiser and have been in touch with creators who have been actively engaged on this issue,” Sharma added, again expressing his gratitude for the internal feedback.

Brown first noted in a June 2018 blog post that his video was barred from running on ads.

(JOSH EDELSON/AFP/Getty Images)

A man rides a bike past a Google sign and logo at the Googleplex in California. (JOSH EDELSON/AFP/Getty Images)

The episode is indicative of the tension between Google’s liberal office culture and its public commitment to free expression.

Other internal documents previously obtained by TheDCNF showed Google employees melted down after an executive used the word “family” in a weekly, company-wide presentation.

Many Google employees became angry that the term was used while discussing a product aimed at children because it implied that families have children, those documents showed.

Then, too, the internal backlash caught the attention of executives at Google. A company vice president addressed the controversy and solicited feedback on how Google could become more inclusive.

Additional internal communications previously obtained by TheDCNF showed that Google employees debated whether to bury right-of-center media outlets in the company’s search function as a direct response to President Donald Trump’s election in 2016.

The Daily Caller and Breitbart were singled out as outlets to potentially bury, those communications revealed. A Google spokeswoman said in response that the conversation did not lead to manipulation of search results for political purposes.

Follow Hasson on Twitter @PeterJHasson

Email Google-related tips securely to PeterJHasson@ProtonMail.com

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Source: The Daily Caller

FILE PHOTO: NFL: Pro Bowl-AFC Practice
FILE PHOTO: Jan 25, 2019; Kissimmee, FL, USA; Kansas City Chiefs receiver Tyreek Hill (10) does a backflip during AFC practice at ESPN Wide World of Sports Complex. Mandatory Credit: Kirby Lee-USA TODAY Sports – 12055388

March 19, 2019

Linebacker Vontaze Burfict was released by the Cincinnati Bengals after seven seasons, the team confirmed Monday.

“As we continue to build our roster for the 2019 season, we felt it best to give both the team and Vontaze a fresh start,” head coach Zac Taylor said in a statement.

Burfict, 28, had two seasons remaining on a $33.2 million contract extension, but releasing him results in a cap charge of only $1.8 million.

Burfict appeared in only 43 games in the past five seasons, encountering repeated head injuries — seven documented concussions — and three suspensions. According to the Cincinnati Enquirer, Burfict amassed more than $4 million in on-field conduct fines.

–Defensive lineman Haloti Ngata went to great lengths — rather heights — to announce his retirement.

The 13-year-NFL veteran posted a heartfelt message along with a photo on Instagram showing him standing atop Mount Kilimanjaro holding a banner that read, “I’m retiring from the NFL on top.”

“Just a man standing on top of the world with a heart full of gratitude. Thank you Lord for letting play the game I love for 13 unforgettable years,” read the social media post by Ngata, a 35-year-old who played for the Philadelphia Eagles last season.

–New York Giants general manager Dave Gettleman said that he traded star wideout Odell Beckham Jr. because the Cleveland Browns made an offer that was impossible to pass up.

“We didn’t sign him to trade him, but things changed,” he said. “Frankly, what changed is another team made us an offer we couldn’t refuse.”

The trade last Wednesday ended months of speculation that Beckham was on his way out of New York. After signing Beckham to a five-year, $95 million contract in 2018, the Giants saw their season spiral downward.

–Adrian Peterson is officially back with Washington after the Redskins announced his signing.

Multiple outlets reported last Wednesday that Peterson agreed to a two-year, $8 million deal.

Peterson rushed for 1,042 yards and seven touchdowns in 16 games for the Redskins last season. He signed late in training camp after Derrius Guice sustained a torn ACL.

–Free agent wide receiver Jordy Nelson will visit the Seattle Seahawks on Tuesday, ESPN reported.

The New England Patriots, Tennessee Titans and Kansas City Chiefs reportedly are among other teams interested in Nelson. He became available last week when the Oakland Raiders released him following their trade for former Pittsburgh Steelers star wideout Antonio Brown and the acquisition of Tyrell Williams in free agency.

–Kansas City agreed to sign cornerback Bashaud Breeland to a three-year contract, ESPN reported.

Breeland, 27, played seven games with Green Bay last season, starting five, after originally agreeing to a three-year, $24 million free agent deal with the Carolina Panthers last March. That agreement was nixed because of a failed physical (foot).

–Running back and kick returner Ameer Abdullah signed a one-year deal with Minnesota.

Abdullah, 25, was Minnesota’s primary kick returner for the final seven games of last season after he was claimed off waivers from Detroit. He returned 10 kicks for 258 yards, with a long of 33.

–Philadelphia announced a one-year deal with veteran strong safety Andrew Sendejo.

Sendejo spent the past eight seasons with Minnesota. The 31-year-old became a free agent earlier this month when the Vikings declined the $5.5 million 2019 option on his contract.

–Washington signed free agent offensive tackle Ereck Flowers to a one-year, $4 million deal, according to multiple reports.

Flowers was the ninth overall selection by the Giants in 2015 but didn’t pan out as an impact lineman and was released last October. He finished last season with Jacksonville, where he started the final seven games of the season.

–ESPN apparently is trying to convince Peyton Manning to join the “Monday Night Football” broadcast team.

The Hollywood Reporter revealed that ESPN president Jimmy Pitaro and content chief Connor Schell flew to Denver a week ago to meet with the future Hall of Fame quarterback. It’s unclear if 42-year-old Manning is interested in assuming the analyst role.

–The investigation into allegations of battery against Kansas City wide receiver Tyreek Hill remains open.

Steve Howe, district attorney in Johnson County, Kan., acknowledged in a written statement that his office “has received numerous requests for information” about the status of the investigation into Hill but could provide no additional details.

Hill, 25, has not been charged with any crimes but is under investigation for an alleged battery incident involving a juvenile, according to multiple published reports. The Kansas City Star reported that Hill’s 3-year-old son sustained a broken arm in the incident.

–Field Level Media

Source: OANN


Current track

Title

Artist