宜宾隆胸医院哪个医院好宜宾眼部细纹怎么去,宜宾整容隆鼻的后遗症,宜宾怎么眼部祛皱纹,宜宾无痛隆鼻手术,宜宾假体隆鼻的坏处,宜宾假体隆胸多大合适,宜宾那个医生割双眼皮好

Papa John won't leave Papa John's alone.The company has tried hard to distance itself from founder John Schnatter, who blamed the NFL for poor pizza sales last fall and then admitted using the N-word on a conference call this spring.Sales slumped, and Papa John's stock declined. CEO Steve Ritchie and the current leadership blame Schnatter, who stepped down as chairman in July.Schnatter told CNNMoney in an interview Tuesday that he's being scapegoated."You can't blame everything on two comments," he said. "I wish I had that kind of power, but I don't."Instead, Schnatter pinned the company's problems on Ritchie, who became CEO in January. Schnatter described him as a poor leader who has created a culture of intimidation at Papa John's, and let quality and customer service slip."We need new leadership," he said. "He struggles as a CEO.""Steve'll make a great executive somewhere else," he added. "He's just the wrong guy for the job."He described upper management under Ritchie as vindictive and controlling."People right now are scared to talk," he said.Schnatter, who is still the largest shareholder and owns almost a third of the company, insists he doesn't want to return as CEO. But he has mounted a scorched-earth campaign to drive Ritchie out of his job.In a letter to franchisees posted to his personal website on Monday, the founder said the company is struggling because of "rot at the top."In a statement, Papa John's called the accusations "untrue and disparaging," characterizing them as "a self-serving attempt to distract from the damaging impact his own words and actions have had on the company and our stakeholders.""John Schnatter also publicly supported Steve Ritchie's appointment as CEO at the end of last year," the statement said.Schnatter flipped that argument around."There's a little bit of a farce going on here," he said. "Steve Ritchie promises great things, and then bad things happen, and then he blames somebody else."Schnatter's lawyer Garland Kelley said the company allowed Schnatter's comments about the NFL and his use of the racial slur to be misrepresented in the press."There's a critical disconnect between what John actually says and how the company permits it to be portrayed publicly," Kelley said. "We think there's a reason this is occurring."In July, Forbes reported that Schnatter had used the N-word while on a conference call with his marketing agency."Colonel Sanders called blacks n-----s," Schnatter reportedly said during a training on how to avoid gaffes like the NFL comments. Forbes said Schnatter was complaining that Sanders didn't receive backlash, even though his comments were worse than Schnatter's own. KFC did not immediately respond to a request for comment.After the Forbes story broke, Schnatter apologized and resigned as chairman.On Tuesday, he described the conversation differently."I simply said, 'Colonel Sanders said what he said, and we're not going to say that,'" he said, adding that he regrets saying the slur."What I said was anti-racist," he added. "I don't talk that way.""I think the company has made the situation a lot worse," Schnatter said. "[The comment has] been misquoted, it's out of context, it's been portrayed in a way that's not truthful. But I'm still going to feel bad about that.""I love my employees. I love my franchisees," he said. "For anything that hurts them, then I'm going to feel bad about that, and I do."Schnatter also thinks his remarks about the NFL leadership have been misconstrued.Last year, some NFL players knelt during the National Anthem to protest treatment of black Americans, particularly by police. The protests sparked a controversy, and the NFL ultimately ruled that players can't kneel during the anthem."I felt like the situation was not a winning situation for the fans, the sponsors, the players and the owners," he continued.A few months after Schnatter called out NFL leadership, Papa John's ended its NFL sponsorship. Pizza Hut took its place.Papa John's is trying to put both comments, and Schnatter himself, behind it.The company is stripping Schnatter's image from its marketing materials and has taken the unusual step of approving a provision that would prevent him from gaining more control of the company.Ritchie went on a listening tour, mandated bias training for all employees and promised to increase diversity among staff. The company also launched a social campaign acknowledging customers' concerns.Papa John's has also commissioned an investigation into its diversity and inclusion practices.Asked whether the investigation would find any examples of misconduct by him, Schnatter said: "At the end of the day, I'm the principal owner of the company.""They've got to point bad results on somebody, and that's probably going to be me." 4908

PINELLAS COUNTY, Fla. -- A woman was arrested for child abuse on Sunday after deputies say she placed a 3-year-old girl unbuckled in the front seat of her vehicle and slammed on the brakes, sending the child into the windshield. Officials say that Justine Olesky, 33, was in a physical altercation with her boyfriend while the child was standing next to her. Once the boyfriend left, Olesky picked up the child and placed her in the front passenger seat without a seatbelt or car seat, according to the arrest affidavit.Pinellas County deputies say that the child is 3-years-old and weighs approximately 35 pounds.Deputies say that Olesky then proceeded after her boyfriend and accelerated to high speeds in a residential neighborhood. A witness saw the child in the front seat of the vehicle when they say Olesky was driving roughly 90 mph through the neighborhood. Once she saw her boyfriend, deputies say she slammed on her brakes causing the child to be ejected forward. This caused the child's head to strike the windshield at such a high force it shattered the windshield roughly 20 inches in diameter.Deputies say that blonde strands of hair were left in the glass from the child. According to the arrest affidavit, Olesky did not appear to be concerned for the child and continued to talk about her boyfriend even when deputies brought up the child's safety. Olesky was arrested for child abuse and domestic battery.Post Miranda, deputies say that Olesky told law enforcement that she does not remember and denies the incident. She did say that the window was not shattered prior to the incident, according to the arrest affidavit.The child was transported to the hospital. "Luckily no serious injury," the Pinellas County Sheriff's Office told Tampa-based WFTS.Mary Stringini is a digital reporter for ABC Action News. Follow her on Twitter @MaryWFTS. 1928

Police have arrested a dog groomer and her boyfriend for stealing a dog from a salon in Mesa, Arizona last month.Mesa police say Izabella Bujanda, an employee at the Animal Clipper grooming salon where Bebe?was dropped off on Feb. 24, confessed to concealing the 2-year-old Biewen Terrier and handing the dog to her boyfriend as he waited outside the business that Saturday morning.Bujanda's boyfriend, Anthony Barrera, was interviewed Thursday and confessed to his part in the crime.According to the suspects, both 20, they decided to get rid of Bebe after the publicity the case started receiving in the media.On Tuesday, Barrera reportedly drove Bebe to a neighborhood near Power and Thomas roads, where he said she was released near the front yard of a home.Police say Bebe has still not been located, and they are asking residents in the Las Sendas area to help bring Bebe home to her owner.Barrera and Bujanda have both been charged with theft.  984

PASADENA, Calif. (AP) — A legal challenge to the Trump administration's planned border wall Tuesday hinged on whether the state of California and environmental groups can even fight such a project in lower courts.A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struggled with a law that gave the Homeland Security secretary broad authority to waive all laws to expedite constructing sections of border wall. The law also restricted some legal challenges to the Supreme Court.Attorneys for the state and environmental organizations argued that the 2005 law had expired and the court should consider their claims that the federal government overstepped its authority and must comply with environmental laws.RELATED: Congress watchdog: Border wall may cost more, take longerAt issue before a three-judge panel in Pasadena, California, is a 2005 law that gave the Homeland Security secretary broad authority to waive all legal requirements, including the National Environmental Policy Act, Clean Air Act and Endangered Species Act. Those laws require time-consuming reviews and are subject to prolonged legal challenges that can delay or even derail projects.The case heard Tuesday is an appeal of a decision by U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel of San Diego, who sided with the administration in February. The president had repeatedly berated Curiel during the 2016 campaign over an unrelated case involving fraud allegations and now-defunct Trump University.About 15 demonstrators gathered outside the courthouse Tuesday morning chanting, "Stand up, fight back" and carrying signs that said, "No walls in the wild" and "Freedom for immigrants."RELATED: Trump: billion for border wall funding isn't a red lineCalifornia argued that the waiver authority expired in 2008, when Homeland Security satisfied congressional requirements at the time on how much wall to build. It was joined in the appeal by the Center for Biological Diversity, the Sierra Club, Defenders of Wildlife and Animal Legal Defense Fund."It was a truncated Congressional debate from 13 years ago," attorney Brian Segee of the Center for Biological Diversity, who did not argue the case, said outside court. "All the discussion was, 'We want to complete the San Diego wall.' Now all that has been translated to 'We have the authority to waive all laws forever and in perpetuity.'"The administration has issued three waivers in the last year, two to build in parts of California and one in part of New Mexico. President George W. Bush's administration issued the previous five waivers, allowing the government to quickly extend barriers to about one-third of the border.RELATED: Trump: 'I would have no problem doing a shutdown' if no action on immigrationIn California, the government began replacing barriers on a 14-mile (23-kilometer) stretch in San Diego and a 2-mile (3-kilometer) stretch of Calexico. The waivers also cleared the way for it to build eight prototypes in San Diego to guide future designs.Trump is seeking billion over 10 years for the border wall and other border security technology and has held out the possibility of a government shutdown if Congress doesn't fund one of his signature campaign pledges. The administration received .6 billion this year and has requested the same amount in next year's budget, largely to build in Texas' Rio Grande Valley.Legal challenges to border barriers have failed over the years amid national security concerns. The Congressional Research Service said in a report last year that it saw no legal impediments to construction if deemed appropriate for controlling the border. 3637

PARK COUNTY, Colo. — A Discovery Channel reality show about gold mining is dividing the small Colorado mountain town that provided its setting — even as the show plans to move on. The show “Gold Rush” turned a small old mine in Fairplay into a much bigger operation. Fairplay is located about 85 miles southwest of Denver. Producers of “Gold Rush” said they will not return to Park County, but the residents say they are still feeling the impacts and worrying about future expansion."It's hard to describe what a four-foot boulder sounds like getting dropped into metal," said Jamie Morrow, whose home is about a quarter of a mile away from the mining operation. Morrow and her family purchased their property before the reality show began — when the mining in town was minor and mostly unobtrusive.  "It was quiet. It didn't make a lot of noise and was a small two or three man operation," Krissy Barrett, who also lives in the county, said. Some citizens in Fairplay have filed lawsuits seeking to reverse rezoning approved by county leaders that converted residential land into mining areas. Even though “Gold Rush” is moving on, residents are still fighting in court. They say large mining equipment remains in the area.Some residents say they’re worried the mining operation will continue to grow.  "Me and a bunch of other of our folks said we can't allow this because if they can rezone that parcel from residential to mining, they can do any parcel. They could rezone next door to us, next door to anybody," Barrett said. Leaders of the small town have embraced the national attention the reality show brings. "We've had a huge uptick in visitors coming to the visitors center. A lot of them are expressing their desire to go out and see the show, the mining," Fairplay town mayor Frank Just said. Some residents said the show’s presence in town was positive. Keith Wortman said he made extra money renting a home to the crew. A server in a local restaurant said the location got more business when production was happening. "Pretty exciting to have a big show come to town," bartender Melissa Mcaninch said. But opponents argued the town’s mountain beauty is also a big draw, and that beauty could be impacted if mining continues to expand. "The population that comes up here to look at the beauty, to enjoy the beauty, is way bigger. We believe the overall economic impact from our maintaining our aesthetics here is way bigger than a small TV show and way longer lasting. You know gold mining is a boom and bust," Barrett said. The town’s mayor said mining has been around in Fairplay since 1856 and it’s here to stay. “I'm sure a negative effect on some of the folks that were the closest to the mine, but all in all, those folks [the miners] have a right to do what they've done," Just said.  2958