The Chumph’s only Hotel in Latin America has removed the Chumph’s name…
The joint has been a magnet for criminal elements and money laundering operations.for the Chumph’s mob and Russian Mafia associates.
The Chumph’s only Hotel in Latin America has removed the Chumph’s name…
The joint has been a magnet for criminal elements and money laundering operations.for the Chumph’s mob and Russian Mafia associates.
First he grows 2″ and loses 100 lbs in his “physical”…
Now the news is “swing” in the sack is weak, too!
Serial international disgrace of America.
The plot thickens in the curious case of President Donald Trump and his alleged dalliance with porn star Stormy Daniels.
Trump’s personal lawyer Michael Cohen denied Friday that Trump had a sexual encounter with the adult the film star in response to a Wall Street Journal report which claimed the president arranged a $130,000 payout to Daniels to keep quiet about it. The Journal also said it received a two-paragraph statement attributed to Daniels, but sent to them by Cohen, which denied a sexual affair with Trump and said reports of “hush money” were “completely false.”
On Tuesday, Slate editor-in-chief Jacob Weisberg published a piece appearing to support the WSJ settlement claims.
Weisberg said he received a tip about Trump and Daniels’s alleged tryst in the latter half of 2016, after Trump officially received the Republican nomination for the presidential election. He began speaking to Daniels—real name Stephanie Clifford—about Trump between August and October 2016. October 2016 marked a month before the election and it is also the month Cohen is reported to have finalized the deal for Daniels’s silence in exchange for a six-figure payout.
Daniels is claimed to have told Weisberg that she was negotiating a settlement with Trump’s lawyer, Cohen, at the time to keep quiet about an affair with Trump. She even texted him a photo of an unsigned document relating to the agreement. Their conversations tailed off in October—the month that WSJ says the agreement was signed.
According to Weisberg, Daniels disclosed to her that she slept with Trump in his hotel room after meeting him at a celebrity golf tournament in 2006. According to the WSJpiece, the tournament was held in July that year at Lake Tahoe in Nevada. Weisberg claims this encounter was the start of a sexual relationship “which continued for nearly a year.” Trump had married his wife Melania Trump, née Knauss, in January 2015—18 months prior to pursuing the alleged affair.
Daniels reportedly told Weisberg that Trump was bad in bed, though in not so many words. “She intimated that her view of his sexual skill was at odds with the remark attributed to Marla Maples,” he wrote, linking to a Reddit post featuring an old New York Post cover touting Trump’s ex-wife apparently saying: “Best sex I’ve ever had.”
Weisberg said that in his conversations with Daniels between August 2016 and October 2016, which was around the time Trump’s treatment of women began dominating the press—including the infamous Access Hollywood tape—”she didn’t allege any kind of abuse, insisting she was not a victim.”
“The worst Trump had done, she said, was break promises she’d never believed he would fulfill,” Weisberg continued, noting that Daniels claimed Trump wanted her to appear on The Celebrity Apprentice, which premiered in January 2008.
Daniels’s friend and fellow adult film star Alana Evans corroborated reports of a relationship between Trump and Daniels in an interview with NBC’s Megyn Kelly TodayTuesday.
Evans said Trump and Daniels also tried to convince her to “have fun” with them.
Adding to that long Chumph losing streak…
A federal judge in Washington on Monday barred President Donald Trump’s administration from excluding transgender people from military service.
U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly ruled that transgender service members who had sued over Trump’s policy were likely to win their lawsuit. She directed a return to the situation that existed before Trump announced his new policy this summer.
Trump had ordered a return to the policy in place before June 2016, under which transgender individuals were barred from joining the military and service members could be discharged for being transgender. Under President Barack Obama, that policy was changed to allow transgender service members.
The Trump administration may appeal Kollar-Kotelly’s decision, but for now, the proposed ban remains unenforceable.
“We are enormously relieved for our plaintiffs and other transgender service members,” said Shannon Minter of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, an attorney handling the lawsuit.
“Their lives have been devastated since Trump first tweeted he was reinstating the ban,” Minter said. “They are now able to serve on equal terms with everyone else.”
White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders, asked about the ruling at the White House briefing, said it was something that had just been announced and said the Justice Department was reviewing it.
Trump announced on Twitter in July that the “the United States Government will not accept or allow transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the U.S. Military.” He followed with an August memo directing the Pentagon to extend indefinitely a ban on transgender individuals joining the military, and gave Defense Secretary Jim Mattis six months to come up with a policy on “how to address” those who are currently serving.
Under the Obama administration, the Department of Defense had announced in 2016 that service members could not be discharged solely based on their gender identity. Transgender individuals were to be allowed to enlist in the military effective Jan. 1, 2018.
Minter said the new court ruling means they will be able to do that.
Anybody else notice that NOAA seems to have had an extraordinarily difficult time in predicting the path of Hurricanes this year? It seems in the case of Irma and Maria the hurricanes had already hit before there was an announcement of where the storms were going.
The reason is yet another Chumph fuck up.
One of President Donald Trump’s first acts after taking office was to institute a hiring freeze across the federal government. That has caused serious problems for essential staff needed to handle a number of major issues, namely the National Weather Service.
According to a Washington Post report, a recently released document released by the Sierra Club after a Freedom of Information Act request, the National Weather Service had 216 vacant positions that Trump’s order prevented them from filling as hurricanes approached.
As of today, there are 248 positions that remain unfilled, and they aren’t limited to low-level staffers either.
Some of the positions were in locations that were recently hit by major hurricanes. It also includes two meteorology positions at the National Hurricane Center in Miami and these posts remain unfilled until as of mid-August.
The freeze also prevented them from hiring two meteorology positions in Jacksonville, Florida, one in Tampa, Florida and an electronics technician in Key West, all of which were hit by Hurricane Irma. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) told The Post that the positions have since been filled.
The federal government’s staffing problem at the weather bureau has been an ongoing problem since 2010. The agency once employed more than 3,800 nonmanagerial and nonsupervisory staffers. In December 2016 that had fallen to 3,425 and as of August staffing is at 3,368. In May, the Government Accountability Office wrote that the problem was so great that employees were challenged in their ability “to complete key tasks.”
“There’s no question that the hiring freeze had an effect,” NWSEO president Dan Sobien told The Post. “But really it was the straw that broke the camel’s back.”
He went on to say, “The camel was already weighed down to the ground.”
NOAA spokesman Christopher Vaccaro admitted that the staffing problem played a key role in the decline of the agency’s ranks.
“Yes, the hiring freeze was a contributing factor” for renewing that decline, he wrote via email. However, the forecasting ability was not a problem.
“As already demonstrated during Harvey, Irma, Jose and Maria, NOAA is prepared for the hurricane season and is operating at full tempo,” Vaccaro said. “Our forecasters at NOAA’s National Hurricane Center, local Weather Service offices, and river forecast centers and elsewhere in the agency are fulfilling the agency’s mission of protecting lives and property as they issue timely and accurate forecasts.”
Prior to the storms, the National Weather Service prepared backup offices that would navigate forecasting in the event the offices in the hurricanes’ paths were unable to communicate. Vaccaro explained that the San Antonio office took over for Key West when Hurricane Irma required people evacuate. Those in Miami stepped in to help those in San Juan, Puerto Rico during Hurricane Maria.
Trump has also failed to nominate, and the Senate has failed to confirm, an official to head NOAA. He has also waited longer than any other president to fill the role.
When the GAO report was released about the staffing problem in May, it was also revealed that those at NOAA “have experienced stress, fatigue, and reduced morale.” Higher NOAA staffers made “limited information” available on the hiring requests to those leading Weather Service filed offices. As a result, managers aren’t able to “effectively plan and distribute workloads,” according to the report.
“People were literally getting sick from the workload,” Sobien, the union president, maintained.
To make matters worse, the Trump administration budget has proposed cuts to the agency’s funding, including a loss of $62 million needed to update weather models and and help the agency be better able to predict changes to hurricanes or other severe weather further out in advance.
Whoops! NBC fired successful and popular host Tamron Hall and replaced her with Megyn Kelly, much to the consternation of many fans.
Things are not working out too well…
NBC executives are concerned that Megyn Kelly’s forthcoming morning show will not pull in ratings with younger people and non-whites after the network fired a popular black host, Tamron Hall, to make room for the former Fox News star.
The Daily Beast reported on Wednesday that the performance of Megyn Kelly’s Sunday night program has left executives in a “total panic” about her morning show, which will debut on Sept. 25. The network made room for Kelly by axing the 9 a.m. hour of the longrunning Today Show.
“A lot of people were watching the [Sunday] magazine show to try to get a sense of her appeal to the daytime demographic and a sense of how she would be outside of the Fox environment,” one insider told The Daily Beast. “Fox News skews very male… I always tend to think of her as more of a guy’s girl than a girl’s girl… It’s extremely challenging, and I’m not sure Megyn’s personality really connects with women.”
According to television news analyst Andrew Tyndall, “The Sunday show laid such an egg that any claims that she had automatic star power, to get people in the door to see what she was doing, have been disavowed… The stardom of the celebrity anchor was a phenomenon of the 1980s back when [flamboyant ABC News president] Roone Arledge was around. In this day and age, the shows make the anchors, not the other way around.”
In the meantime, Hall is planning a daytime talk show with the backing of Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein. She has also hosted a crime show on the Discovery Channel since leaving NBC.
Following Hall’s exit from NBC, the National Association of Black Journalists accusedthe network of “whitewashing” its on-air talent.
“The National Association of Black Journalists (NABJ) is saddened by Tamron Hall’s departure from NBC. She broke ground as the first black female Today show cohost and was enjoying ratings success alongside Al Roker during the show’s third hour of programming,” a statement from the NABJ said at the time. “NBC has been a leader for diversity in broadcasting, but recent reports that Hall and Roker will be replaced by former Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly are being seen by industry professionals as whitewashing.”
Facebook ha supposedly been trying to clean up its act after becoming a recruiting zone for white nationalists and Nazis.
Like all tech companies it tried a technical solution. Unfortunately and in a long running spate of absolute blindness…Nobody at Facebook bothered to look at the motivations of the software creators and moderators. The company’s employee demographics look like this –
The company has no context of what is going on outside there in the real world – so the issues with “banning” Minority posters while allowing Nazi/KKK/white supremacist ones to continue to spew vile messages isn’t really surprising.
Jint to Zuckerberg – If you want to get real about this, move this portion of your company operations to the East Coast, where you can actually recruit some folks of color.
Francie Latour was picking out produce in a suburban Boston grocery store when a white man leaned toward her two young sons and, just loudly enough for the boys to hear, unleashed a profanity-laced racist epithet.
Reeling, Latour, who is black, turned to Facebook to vent, in a post that was explicit about the hateful words hurled at her 8- and 12-year-olds on a Sunday evening in July.
“I couldn’t tolerate just sitting with it and being silent,” Latour said in an interview. “I felt like I was going to jump out of my skin, like my kids’ innocence was stolen in the blink of an eye.”
But within 20 minutes, Facebook deleted her post, sending Latour a cursory message that her content had violated company standards. Only two friends had gotten the chance to voice their disbelief and outrage.
Experiences like Latour’s exemplify the challenges Facebook chief executive Mark Zuckerberg confronts as he tries to rebrand his company as a safe space for community, expanding on its earlier goal of connecting friends and family.
But in making decisions about the limits of free speech, Facebook often fails the racial, religious and sexual minorities Zuckerberg says he wants to protect.
The 13-year-old social network is wrestling with the hardest questions it has ever faced as the de facto arbiter of speech for the third of the world’s population that now logs on each month.
In February, amid mounting concerns over Facebook’s role in the spread of violent live videos and fake news, Zuckerberg said the platform had a responsibility to “mitigate the bad” effects of the service in a more dangerous and divisive political era. In June, he officially changed Facebook’s mission from connecting the world to community-building.
The company says it now deletes about 288,000 hate-speech posts a month.
But activists say that Facebook’s censorship standards are so unclear and biased that it is impossible to know what one can or cannot say.
The result: Minority groups say they are disproportionately censored when they use the social-media platform to call out racism or start dialogues. In the case of Latour and her family, she was simply repeating what the man who verbally assaulted her children said: “What the f— is up with those f—ing n—-r heads?”
Compounding their pain, Facebook will often go from censoring posts to locking users out of their accounts for 24 hours or more, without explanation — a punishment known among activists as “Facebook jail.”
“In the era of mass incarceration, you come into this digital space — this one space that seems safe — and then you get attacked by the trolls and put in Facebook jail,” said Stacey Patton, a journalism professor at Morgan State University, a historically black university in Baltimore. “It totally contradicts Mr. Zuckerberg’s mission to create a public square.”
In June, the company said that nearly 2 billion people now log onto Facebook each month. With the company’s dramatic growth comes the challenge of maintaining internally consistent standards as its content moderators are faced with a growing number of judgment calls.
“Facebook is regulating more human speech than any government does now or ever has,” said Susan Benesch, director of the Dangerous Speech Project, a nonprofit group that researches the intersection of harmful online content and free speech. “They are like a de facto body of law, yet that law is a secret.”
The company recently admitted, in a blog post, that “too often we get it wrong,” particularly in cases when people are using certain terms to describe hateful experiences that happened to them. The company has promised to hire 3,000 more content moderators before the year’s end, bringing the total to 7,500, and is looking to improve the software it uses to flag hate speech, a spokeswoman said.
“We know this is a problem,” said Facebook spokeswoman Ruchika Budhraja, adding that the company has been meeting with community activists for several years. “We’re working on evolving not just our policies but our tools. We are listening.”
Two weeks after Donald Trump won the presidency, Zahra Billoo, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations’ office for the San Francisco Bay area, posted to Facebook an image of a handwritten lettermailed to a San Jose mosque and quoted from it: “He’s going to do to you Muslims what Hitler did to the Jews.”
The post — made to four Facebook accounts — contained a notation clarifying that the statement came from hate mail sent to the mosque, as Facebook guidelines advise.
Facebook removed the post from two of the accounts — Billoo’s personal page and the council’s local chapter page — but allowed identical posts to remain on two others — the organization’s national page and Billoo’s public one. The civil rights attorney was baffled. After she re-posted the message on her personal page, it was again removed, and Billoo received a notice saying she would be locked out of Facebook for 24 hours.
“How am I supposed to do my work of challenging hate if I can’t even share information showing that hate?” she said.
Billoo eventually received an automated apology from Facebook, and the post was restored to the local chapter page — but not her personal one.
Being put in “Facebook jail” has become a regular occurrence for Shannon Hall-Bulzone, a San Diego photographer. In June 2016, Hall-Bulzone was shut out for three days after posting an angry screed when she and her toddler were called lazy “brown people” as they walked to day care and her sister was called a “lazy n—-r” as she walked to work. Within hours, Facebook removed the post.
Many activists who write about race say they break Facebook rules and keep multiple accounts in order to play a cat-and-mouse game with the company’s invisible censors, some of whom are third-party contractors working on teams based in the United States or in Germany or the Philippines.
Others have started using alternate spellings for “white people,” such as “wypipo,” “Y.P. Pull,” or “yt folkx” to evade being flagged by the platform activists have nicknamed “Racebook.”
In January, a coalition of more than 70 civil rights groups wrote a letter urging Facebook to fix its “racially-biased” content moderation system. The groups asked Facebook to enable an appeals process, offer explanations for why posts are taken down, and publish data on the types of posts that get taken down and restored. Facebook has not done these things.
The coalition has gathered 570,000 signatures urging Facebook to acknowledge discriminatory censorship exists on its platform, that it harbors white supremacist pages even though it says it forbids hate speech in all forms, and that black and Muslim communities are especially in danger because the hate directed against them translates into violence in the streets, said Malkia Cyril, a Black Lives Matter activist in Oakland, Calif., who was part of a group that first met with Facebook about their concerns in 2014.
Cyril, executive director for the Center for Media Justice, said the company has a double standard when it comes to deleting posts. She has flagged numerous white supremacist pages to Facebook for removal and said she was told that none was initially found to have violated the company’s community standards even though they displayed offensive content. One featured a picture of a skeleton with the caption, “Ever since Trayvon became white, he’s been a good boy,” in reference to Trayvon Martin, the unarmed black teenager killed by a volunteer neighborhood watchman in Florida in 2012.
Like most social media companies in Silicon Valley, Facebook has long resisted being a gatekeeper for speech. For years, Zuckerberg insisted that the social network had only minimal responsibilities for policing content.
In its early years, Facebook’s internal guidelines for moderating and censoring content amounted to only a single page. The instructions included prohibitions on nudity and images of Hitler, according to a trove of documents published by the investigative news outlet ProPublica. (Holocaust denial was allowed.)
By 2015, the internal censorship manual had grown to 15,000 words, according to ProPublica.
In Facebook’s guidelines for moderators, obtained by ProPublica in June and affirmed by the social network, the rules protect broad classes of people but not subgroups. Posts criticizing white or black people would be prohibited, while posts attacking white or black children, or radicalized Muslim suspects, may be allowed to stay up because the company sees “children” and “radicalized Muslims” as subgroups.
Facebook says it prohibits direct attacks on protected characteristics, defined in U.S. law as race, ethnicity, national origin, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, sex, gender, gender identity, serious disability or disease.
But the guidelines have never been publicly released, and as recently as last summer Zuckerberg continued to insist Facebook was “a tech company, not a media company.”
Unlike media companies, technology platforms that host speech are not legally responsible for the content that appears.
The chief executive has shifted his stance this year. At the company’s “Communities Summit,” a first-ever live gathering for members of Facebook groups held in Chicago in June, Zuckerberg changed the mission statement.
Earlier, he said the company would become, over the next decade, a “social infrastructure” for “keeping us safe, for informing us, for civic engagement, and for inclusion of all.”
The company acknowledged that minorities feel disproportionately targeted but said it could not verify those claims because it does not categorize the types of hate speech that appear or tally which groups are targeted.
In June, for example, Facebook removed a video posted by Ybia Anderson, a black woman in Toronto who was outraged by the prominent display of a car decorated with the Confederate flag at a community festival. The social network did not remove dozens of other posts in which Anderson was attacked with racial slurs….