Judge ‘Stripped’ of Position For Helping to Buy Cocaine and Pot for Stripper

December 13th, 2010

AOL News

By: David Knowles

Judge not, lest ye be judged, or something like that.

Today, former U.S. District Judge Jack Camp was stripped of his position on the bench following his admission of guilt to providing a female stripper with cocaine, pot and Roxicodone.

Camp, 67, pleaded guilty to the felony charge of aiding and abetting a felon’s possession of the illegal substances, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported. In addition, Camp, who is married, admitted to giving the exotic dancer his government-issued laptop computer, a misdemeanor offense.

As Surge Desk reported in October, Camp had originally planned to plead not guilty to the drug charges, but confronted with a strong government case, he admitted that he had often accompanied the stripper on drug deals, sometimes carrying handguns he owned along with him. Police were also said to have found two guns in Camp’s car when undercover agents arrested him attempting to purchase the cocaine and Roxicodone.

Camp, who was appointed by President Ronald Reagan, met the stripper at the Goldrush Showbar in Atlanta. During his 33-year career on the bench, Camp had presided over numerous drug cases.

Click here for the full report from AOL News

Duke Cancer Researcher Quits as Papers Questioned

December 13th, 2010

ABC News

A Duke University cancer scientist resigned Friday amid concerns about his research that arose after the university started probing whether he’d lied on a grant application.

School spokeswoman Debbe Geiger also said another researcher at the school is asking the journal Nature Medicine to retract a paper he published with Anil Potti, the scientist who’s stepping down. Potti’s collaborator Joseph Nevins said some of the tests in the research they produced for that paper can not be duplicated.

Other papers submitted by Potti are also being reviewed, and three clinical trials based on his research have been closed, Geiger said.

A phone message left at a listing for Potti was not immediately returned Friday.

Potti was an associate professor of medicine at Duke who has been under investigation by the school since this summer, when his claim on a federal grant application to be a Rhodes Scholar was scrutinized. Geiger didn’t immediately return a call seeking further information on what the school found out about the Rhodes Scholar claim.

Potti’s research was questioned by statisticians at the University of Texas’ M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, who were troubled by methods used in a study that described gene patterns that might help predict a breast cancer patient’s response to chemotherapy.

The December 2007 study also was questioned by 15 European scientists involved in the research, who expressed “grave concerns about the validity of their report” to the National Cancer Institute.

Potti has received a five-year, $729,000 grant from the American Cancer Society, but that award was suspended during the investigation into his work.

Click here for the full report from ABC News

I Am Julian Assange

December 13th, 2010

The Huffington Post

By: James Moore

I am Julian Assange.

I want information so that I can hold my government accountable. If my country acts improperly and in my name, I want the proof. I want to know if there actually is no evidence proving weapons of mass destruction. I want to know if America is working with Israel to overthrow Iran’s leadership. I want data that has not been spun by reporters that work for publishers and broadcasters with political and business goals that conflict with the facts. I want to know.

I am Julian Assange because I know unfettered information is valuable to democracy and a peaceful world. I can make the best decisions with the most knowledge. I can vote for the best candidates. I can support the smartest policies to help my country and the world. I am not naïve; I know that not every operation can be transparent but I have a right to know its outcome and how it has affected my country and me.

I do not believe Julian Assange has done anything wrong. The cables that have been published have all been printed in newspapers and redacted to protect individuals at risk. I do not want my country to prosecute a man whose actions are changing the way we get information and how we make critical decisions. I now know that my president and my country’s military have not been honest about the war in Afghanistan. I know that my country has killed civilians and that we have refused to acknowledge our mistakes. I have learned that our allies are secretly consorting with our enemies.

I am also Pfc. Bradley Manning. I know that if I saw the disturbing information come across my desk that I would have confronted the conflict between my oath of service to my country and the immorality of its behavior. I do not believe I would have been able to ignore American helicopters gunning down journalists carrying cameras. I believe I would have acted on my conscience and found a way to reveal the facts. There was a reporter at the My Lai massacre in Vietnam but there was only a gun camera on the US helicopter in Iraq. And the Internet. And Bradley Manning.

I believe that governments are out of control and citizens have a decreasing belief that they can influence decisions. WikiLeaks and the Internet are empowering individuals and groups with information. Julian Assange and Bradley Manning are the first two faces and voices in a crowd that will soon be too big to control. Their arrests and charges and even prosecution will only spawn a broader resistance against war and deception and corruption. The Internet is now the reporter. This is the way the world is. I do not want to hear that there will always be wars and spying and death. I want information to prevent them and to build peace.

I am saddened that Australia’s government is once more acting as a lapdog for American interests and is not demanding sovereign rights for one of its citizens. I am also distressed that the president of my country who ran for office promising a transparent government is trying to find a way to prosecute a foreign national, and is preventing Pfc Manning from speaking with his family. WikiLeaks has shown there is an America in civics textbooks and an America that functions differently in the real world. Adequate information might move us closer to the ideal. I no longer trust my president. I do not trust my congress. I place my trust in facts and I do not get them from most of the media. But I still want to know.

I am Julian Assange. And if you care about the truth, you are, too.

Click here for the full report from the Huffington Post

Rolaids Recalls 13 Million Packages

December 13th, 2010

CNNMoney.com

By: Parija Kavilanz

Johnson & Johnson’s McNeil division announced a recall Thursday of more than 13 million packages of various Rolaids medicines following consumer complaints of foreign materials, including metal and wood particles.

McNeil Consumer Healthcare, which makes over-the-counter drugs such as Tylenol, Rolaids, and Benadryl, said it was recalling all lots of Rolaids Extra Strength Softchews, Rolaids Extra Strength plus Gas Softchews, and Rolaids Multi-Symptom plus Anti-Gas Softchews distributed in the United States.

This is the latest in a string of recalls this year by McNeil of other non-prescription drugs including Tylenol, Motrin, and Benadryl.

McNeil spokesman Marc Boston said the Rolaids recalls involve products that were made for McNeil by a third-party manufacturer.

The company said it has suspended production of the recalled medicines while it investigates the matter and subsequently implements corrective actions.

The Johnson & Johnson (JNJ, Fortune 500) unit said its investigation has determined that the materials were potentially introduced into the product during the manufacturing process.

McNeil said that while the risk of serious adverse health consequences is remote, it is advising consumers who have purchased these recalled products to discontinue use.

Consumers who purchased the recalled products should contact McNeil Consumer Healthcare, either at http://www.rolaids.com/ or by calling 1-888-222-6036 about receiving a refund.

The company said consumers who have medical concerns or questions should contact their health care provider.

Click here for the full report from CNNMoney.com

Members of Congress Getting Richer, Despite Market Meltdown

December 13th, 2010

Daily Finance

By: Dawn Kawamoto

Congressional members scored big during the steep downturn in the market, posting a 16% gain collectively between 2008 to 2009, according to a study issued Wednesday by the Center for Responsive Politics.

By comparison, the Nasdaq fell 8.4% during that same two-year period.

Not only did this group’s investment portfolio perform well, but any notion of the humble public servant can now be laid the rest. Virtually half of Congressional members are millionaires, compared to 1% for society at large in America, notes a post in the Center’s OpenSecrets blog.

And among this group, eight members of Congress are mega-millionaires, with portfolios above $100 million. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) holds the largest treasure chest, estimated in excess of $300 million. Trailing close behind is Rep. Jane Harman, (D-Calif.) with her portfolio averaging $293,454,761. Rounding out the top three is Sen. John Kerry, (D-Mass.), with $238,812,296.

Shelia Krumholz, the Center’s executive director, had this to say about the findings:
Few federal lawmakers must grapple with the financial ills — unemployment, loss of housing, wiped out savings — that have befallen millions of Americans.

Congressional representatives on balance rank among the wealthiest of wealthy Americans and boast financial portfolios that are all but unattainable for most of their constituents.
Last year, the median wealth of a House of Representative was $765,010 — up from $645,503 the previous year, the report noted. And the median wealth for senators jumped up to nearly $2.38 million last year, from $2.27 million a year earlier.

Sources of Wealth

The top industries that are bringing the bacon home for Congressional members leads off with the real estate industry, which accounted for a collective maximum value of $898.3 million last year. Next up is the live entertainment and recreational industry, which represented $255 million in Congressional members’ portfolios. Electronics manufacturing, securities and investments, and the computers and Internet industry contributed to the top ranks.

Adding some sugar to the mix are the campaign contributions by players in these respective industries. Microsoft (MSFT), a member of the computer and Internet industry, plunked down $21 million in campaign contributions between 1989 and 2010. Morgan Stanley (MS) coughed up $19.8 million, while JPMorgan (JPM) dished up $20.3 million in the period. The largest contributed by far was AT&T (T), with $45.6 million

Click here for the full report from Daily Finance

U.S. Reviews FDA Scientists’ Complaints

December 13th, 2010

The Wall Street Journal

By: Alicia Mundy

Federal health department inspectors have reopened a review of complaints by Food and Drug Administration scientists who say they were pressured by their managers to approve some high-tech medical devices, overriding their concerns about potential harm to patients.

The allegations raised by a group of whistle-blowers in the FDA’s device division were dismissed in February by the inspector general of the Department of Health and Human Services, who said he found no criminal behavior in FDA managers’ actions.

The office said Wednesday it is now looking into possible violations of administrative regulations, not criminal violations. Gerald Roy, the deputy inspector general for investigations, said the seriousness of the allegations in a critical FDA area prompted his group to take a second look.

“The IG has a responsibility to make sure such FDA divisions are functional,” he said in an interview.

In addition, another division of the inspector general’s office is now conducting two reviews of the FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Mr. Roy said.

One is looking at the FDA’s “simplified” 510 (k) device approval process, which is popular with manufacturers because it does not require the detailed testing necessary for standard FDA approvals. That process has been overused, a government report said in 2009. The second review will look at the way the device division has been resolving internal scientific and administrative disputes, Mr. Roy said.

An FDA spokeswoman didn’t respond to requests for comment.

The whistle-blowers wrote to Congress and to officials of the Obama administration as it was entering office, describing concerns about a series of devices that they rejected but were approved anyway by some division chiefs. The group met several times with the new FDA leadership in 2009.

After the inspector general found no criminal violations, the whistle-blowers objected that their main allegations, which didn’t involve criminal matters, had been ignored. A Washington watchdog group, the Project on Government Oversight , took up the whistle-blowers’ cause, investigated their complaints and met with the inspector general’s office this summer.

In a letter Tuesday to the inspector general, POGO called the department’s earlier investigation “seriously flawed,” adding that the FDA is “hiding behind the seemingly favorable outcome” to avoid taking corrective measures.

Several approvals questioned by the whistle-blowers involved radiological devices such as computed tomography scanners, magnetic resonance imaging machines and mammogram machines. Those devices can detect diseases but also may expose patients to radiation.

“We have been vindicated by the decision to reopen this matter,” said one of the whistle-blowers, Julian Nicholas, who has left the FDA. Dr. Nicholas said that in one instance, he opposed the use of a CT scanner for routine colon cancer screening because of the risk of cancer from radiation.

Another controversial approval involved a knee surgery device that was cleared with the abbreviated 510(k) process by the head of the device division in late 2008, over objections from a half dozen FDA scientists and mangers.

Following a Wall Street Journal article about the knee device, the FDA released a report in August 2009 about the approval that was critical of some top officials. The head of the device division resigned shortly before the report’s release and another division chief left earlier this year.

Click here for the full report from the Wall Street Journal

FDA Is Criticized for Training Deals

December 13th, 2010

The Wall Street Journal

By: Alicia Mundy

The Food and Drug Administration has been paying consultants millions of dollars for management help—including leadership classes held at a Civil War battlefield—amid concerns in Congress that the contracts aren’t helping the agency to clear long backlogs.

International consulting firm McKinsey & Co. has signed contracts for more than $17 million for work at the FDA since 2008 including $10 million in 2010, according to the watchdog group FedSpending.org.

The agency also has entered contracts valued at $7.9 million with Colorado-based Leadership Performance Solutions Inc. over the past several years, government records say.

Both companies have worked with the FDA’s office of generic drugs, which has a backlog of about 2,000 drug applications. The average waiting time for companies seeking permission to sell copycat versions of existing drugs is two years.

Under the contract with Leadership Performance Solutions, managers in the generic-drug division have visited the site of the Battle of Antietam in Maryland for leadership lessons. Dr. Feldman, a psychologist and the company’s president, said Antietam was a good tool for teaching government and business leaders about the perils of backing away from “tough decisions.”

In the 1862 battle, the Union side forced Confederate forces under Robert E. Lee to retreat to Virginia. But the Union’s general, George McClellan, failed to pursue Lee and crush the rebels.

Dr. Feldman declined to discuss details of the FDA contract.

Helen Winkle, whose office oversees the generic-drug division, said the Antietam experience was so useful she had done it twice. The lesson was about “just trying to get people to understand better how to lead their staff here,” she said.

Ms. Winkle’s view of Leadership Performance Solutions’s work wasn’t shared by all of her colleagues in the division. Three employees who requested anonymity said they felt the seminars didn’t contribute to solving specific problems in the division.

The visits to Antietam are part of a larger reliance on outside contractors. On the McKinsey contract, Ms. Winkle said the consultant had found that about half of the 2,000 pending drug applications were still sitting with companies that hadn’t responded to FDA questions, Dr. Winkle said.

Before hiring McKinsey, she said, “we did not know specifically what was in the backlog, or what the reason for it being in the backlog was.”

Janet Woodcock, drug-division chief at the FDA, recently said the agency had hired McKinsey for more work in the generics division.

The contracts have prompted sharp criticism in Congress.

“Why on earth are FDA managers spending money for a consultant to tell them why they have a backlog of generic drug applications?” said Rep. Joe Barton of Texas, the top Republican on the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

An FDA spokeswoman said McKinsey’s work for the generic-drug office was only a small part of the firm’s overall contract with the FDA set up earlier this year.

According to government documents, the goal of the contract is to “ensure that the decisions made by the FDA can be tracked through and supported by clearly communicated and documented processes.”

McKinsey declined to comment, saying it doesn’t discuss clients.

It isn’t the first time an outside contract for FDA management training has raised concerns in Congress. In 2008, the agency held a $1.5 million seminar for 500 senior employees who were shown a slideshow comparing Dr. Woodcock with such leaders as Gandhi and Golda Meir.

Click here for the full report from the Wall Street Journal

Ethics Committee Recommends Censure for Charlie Rangel

December 13th, 2010

Politics Daily

By: Patricia Murphy

Two days after Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.) was found guilty of 11 ethics violations by a House ethics subcommittee, the full ethics committee voted nine to one to recommend that the House of Representatives censure Rangel for his “lack of attention and carelessness” and for bringing “discredit to the House and serving to undermine public trust” of the institution. They also recommended Rangel pay restitution for unpaid taxes related to a home in the Dominican Republic.

In an extraordinary move before the sentence came down, Rangel released a statement apologizing for his conduct. “This has been one of the most difficult days of my life. All of this has been brought upon me as a result of my own actions. In the end, I hope that you would judge me on my entire record as a soldier and a dedicated public servant — not by my mistakes,” he wrote. “To my beloved Colleagues, my constituents and the American people, I am sorry.”

Now that the full ethics committee has agreed to a sentence, that recommendation will be sent to the full House, which will vote on Rangel’s fate. A censure is administered by a formal vote of the two-thirds of the members of the House disapproving of the conduct of a member. After the vote, the member is usually asked to stand in the well of the House while the speaker of the House reads the censure against him.

Although the committee attorney, Blake Chisam, said he felt Rangel’s conduct deserved a punishment somewhere between a reprimand and the harsher censure, Chisam said the fact that Rangel served as the chairman or ranking member of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee when most of the violations occurred merited the harsher sentence.

On Tuesday, the adjudicatory subcommittee convicted Rangel on 11 counts of violating House rules. The infractions involved reporting rental income from his villa in the Dominican Republic, using a rent-controlled apartment in New York for campaign activities, and using congressional stationery to raise funds for a center to be built at New York’s City University in his name.

A forlorn Rangel arrived for the committee’s hearing Thursday, flanked by his friend Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), to make his case for leniency before the 10 committee members. On Tuesday, the congressman walked out of the panel’s trial in protest of its decision not to delay the proceedings after he requested more time to find and fund a new legal team. His original defense team separated from Rangel in September. He said he had paid nearly $2 million in legal fees.

An ominous sign for Rangel came early in the sentencing hearing, when Rep. Jo Bonner (R-Ala.), the top Republican on the ethics committee, delivered a blistering opening statement against the 20-term congressman, saying it pained him to speak out against a colleague he has long admired.

“Sadly, it is my unwavering view that the actions, decision and behavior of our colleague from New York can no longer reflect either honor or integrity,” Bonner said. “Mr. Rangel can no longer blame anyone other than himself for the position he now finds himself in. Mr. Rangel should only look into the mirror if he wants to know who to blame.”

Later, Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Tex.) asked Rangel why his failure to pay taxes for 17 years on his Dominican rental property should not be punished harshly by the committee. “What is that?” McCaul said. “How is that different from Mr. [James] Traficant, who failed to pay taxes for two years and was expelled from this body?”

But Rep. G.K. Butterfield (D-N.C.) strenuously defended Rangel and called censure too extreme for Rangel’s actions. “It should be reserved for intentional conduct where the member has derived a personal financial benefit. That is not this case,” Butterfield said. “The law in this case establishes no corruption and as judges we should be bound by this fact.”

With Lewis by his side, Rangel sat emotionless at the witness table as committee members spoke and as the staff attorney read the lengthy findings against the him. Rangel then rose to defend himself and to take specific issue with Bonner’s words.

“I hope that Mr. Bonner was not suggesting my lack of love for this country or this institution,” Rangel said. “I look at myself every morning, Mr. Bonner, and I have never blamed my staff, my family or anyone as it related to my violations of House rules.”

He also apologized to the committee members for any embarrassment he might have caused them and, holding back tears, appealed for their help in preserving his reputation.

“I recognize that you cannot deal with issues that are not before this committee,” he said. “But what the press has done to me, my community and my family is just totally unfair. Counsel knows it, all of you know it. It’s not your responsibility to correct that but they will continue to call me a crook and charge me with being a crook.”

Although Rangel admitted he was guilty of “faulty behavior” and “wrongdoing,” he said his intent was never to enrich himself or deliberately break House rules.

After Rangel spoke Thursday, Lewis rose to defend him as well. “I’ve known Mr. Rangel for more than 50 years. He is a committed and dedicated, hardworking, patriotic American,” Lewis said, explaining that Rangel had traveled to Selma, Ala. in the 1960s to march with him and Martin Luther King, Jr. “Charlie Rangel is a good and decent man. I know this man. I think I know his heart.”

Bonner spoke once more to say that as a native of Selma, he thanked Rangel for going there “to do what you did.”

The full House can now accept or change the sentence for Rangel. Punishment options include expulsion from the House, but that is considered highly unlikely in this case. The last member of the House to be expelled was Rep. James Traficant (D-Ohio), who later went to federal prison for bribery.

Rangel’s predecessor in the House, Adam Clayton Powell Jr., also found himself embroiled in an ethics scandal at the end of his career. After a Judiciary Committee investigation into his conduct, the House formally excluded Powell from the 90th Congress for several infractions, including misuse of public funds. After being expelled, Powell ran in a special election to succeed himself and won, but lost his next election in 1970 — to Rangel, then a promising 40 year-old former New York prosecutor.

Click here for the full report from Politics Daily

Why Warren Buffett Hates Gold

December 13th, 2010

Investor Place

By: Jeff Reeves

Warren Buffett is an investing icon, and when he talks about the stock market, individual investors and Wall Street insiders alike take notice. But perhaps Buffett’s most controversial investment advice regards gold prices. Gold bullion, gold miners and gold ETFs simply have no place in Warren Buffett’s portfolio. And to hear Buffett tell it, gold should have no place in yours, either.

So why does Warren Buffett hate gold so much? Well, the famous value investor has been pretty clear on this. In a word, gold is useless.

Just look at what Warren has said publicly about gold. As early as 1998, Buffett was criticizing gold bugs. The oracle of Omaha emphasized the non-productive aspect of gold in a speech at Harvard that included this gem:

[Gold] gets dug out of the ground in Africa, or someplace. Then we melt it down, dig another hole, bury it again and pay people to stand around guarding it. It has no utility. Anyone watching from Mars would be scratching their head.

More recently, in 2009, he echoed these thoughts in a CNBC interview. He was asked, “Where do you think gold will be in five years and should that be a part of value investing?”

I have no views as to where it will be, but the one thing I can tell you is it won’t do anything between now and then except look at you. Whereas, you know, Coca-Cola will be making money, and I think Wells Fargo will be making a lot of money and there will be a lot — and it’s a lot — it’s a lot better to have a goose that keeps laying eggs than a goose that just sits there and eats insurance and storage and a few things like that.

In October, Warren Buffett told Ben Stein:

You could take all the gold that’s ever been mined, and it would fill a cube 67 feet in each direction. For what that’s worth at current gold prices, you could buy all — not some — all of the farmland in the United States. Plus, you could buy 10 Exxon Mobils, plus have $1 trillion of walking-around money. Or you could have a big cube of metal. Which would you take? Which is going to produce more value?

He has certainly stayed on message over the years. Key talking points for Buffett appear to be that gold is expensive to store, has no practical use and doesn’t generate and income. Those are all pretty good reasons to hate gold.

However, whatever Warren Buffett’s reasons may be, it’s hard to argue against performance.

In 1998, when Buffett made his remarks at Harvard, gold averaged around $300 an ounce for the year – meaning the precious metal has quadrupled in value! Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE: BRK.A), on the other hand, has tallied gains of only about 150% from its 1998 lows to present day. That’s three times the broader market, but doesn’t come close to gold prices.

In the short term, however, the results are mixed. At the time of the March 9, 2009, CNBC spot, gold closed at about $923 an ounce – meaning the precious metal has gained a bit under 50% since that date. Berkshire Hathaway stock, on the other hand, is up 60% and has outpaced gold. And at the time of the Ben Stein interview on Oct. 19, gold was trading at $1,339 an ounce. That’s essentially flat compared with a small loss for Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway in the same period.

It’s hard to tell what the future holds for gold prices. But one thing is for sure — Buffett will continue to sit out the gold rush. The billionaire investor hasn’t changed his tune on gold just yet, and it’s hard to believe that he will change course anytime soon.

Click here for the full report from Investor Place

HIV-Positive Porn Actor Wants Mandatory Condoms

December 13th, 2010

AOL News

By: Lisa Flam

An HIV-positive porn actor has identified himself, speaking out in favor of mandatory condom use for adult film performers.

Derrick Burts, 24, tested positive in October at a clinic in Sherman Oaks, Calif. He was known publicly as “Patient Zeta” after the diagnosis.

He had worked in gay films under the name Derek Chambers and in straight films as Cameron Reid, the Los Angeles Times reports. In the months before he tested positive, Burts said, he contracted chlamydia, gonorrhea and herpes.

“It’s very dangerous,” he said of acting in adult films. “It should be required that you wear a condom on the set.”

He also said he wished he knew more about the risks of getting a sexually transmitted disease.

“Making $10,000 or $15,000 for porn isn’t worth your life,” he said. “Performers need to be educated.”

Click here for the full report from AOL News

« Previous Page — Next Page »