Scare Amplifies Fears That Clinton’s Work Has Taken Heavy Toll

Pool photo by Brendan Smialowski

Hillary Rodham Clinton with Field Marshal Mohamed Hussein Tantawi in Cairo in July.

WASHINGTON — When Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton fractured her right elbow after slipping in a State Department garage in June 2009, she returned to work in just a few days. Her arm in a sling, she juggled speeches and a trip to India and Thailand with physical therapy, rebuilding a joint held together with wire and pins.

It was vivid evidence of Mrs. Clinton’s indomitable stamina and work ethic — as a first lady, senator, presidential candidate and, for the past four years, the most widely traveled secretary of state in American history.

But after a fall at home in December that caused a concussion, and a subsequent diagnosis of a blood clot in her head, it has taken much longer for Mrs. Clinton to bounce back. She was released from a hospital in New York on Wednesday, accompanied by her daughter, Chelsea, and her husband, former President Bill Clinton. On Thursday, she told colleagues that she hoped to be in the office next week.

Her health scare, though, has reinforced the concerns of friends and colleagues that the years of punishing work and travel have taken a heavy toll. Even among her peers at the highest levels of government, Mrs. Clinton, 65, is renowned for her grueling schedule. Over the past four years, she was on the road for 401 days and spent the equivalent of 87 full days on a plane, according to the State Department’s Web site.

In one 48-hour marathon in 2009 that her aides still talk about, she traveled from talks with Palestinian leaders in Abu Dhabi to a midnight meeting with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Jerusalem, then boarded a plane for Morocco, staying up all night to work on other issues, before going straight to a meeting of Arab leaders the next morning.

“So many people who know her have urged me to tell her not to work so hard,” said Melanne S. Verveer, who was Mrs. Clinton’s chief of staff when she was first lady and is now the State Department’s ambassador at large for women’s issues. “Well, that’s not easy to do when you’re Hillary Clinton. She doesn’t spare herself.”

It is not just a matter of duty, Ms. Verveer and others said. Mrs. Clinton genuinely relishes the work, pursuing a brand of personal diplomacy that, she argues, requires her to travel to more places than her predecessors.

While there is no medical evidence that Mrs. Clinton’s clot was caused by her herculean work habits, her cascade of recent health problems, beginning with a stomach virus, has prompted those who know her best to say that she desperately needs a long rest. Her first order of business after leaving the State Department in the coming weeks, they say, should be to take care of herself.

Some even wonder whether this setback will — or should — temper the feverish speculation that she will make another run for the White House in 2016.

“I am amazed at the number of women who come up to me and tell me she must run for president,” said Ellen Chesler, a New York author and a friend of Mrs. Clinton’s. “But perhaps this episode will alter things a bit.”

Given Mrs. Clinton’s enduring status as a role model, Ms. Chesler said women would be watching which path she decides to take, as they plan their own transitions out of the working world.

“Do remember that women of our generation are really the first to have worked through the life cycle in large numbers,” she added. “Many seem to be approaching retirement with dread.”

For now, aides say, Mrs. Clinton’s focus is on wrapping up her work at the State Department. She would like to take part in a town hall-style meeting, thank her staff and sit for some interviews. But first she has to get clearance from her doctors, who are watching her to make sure that the blood thinners they have prescribed for her clot are working.

Speaking to a meeting of a foreign policy advisory board from her home in Chappaqua, N.Y., on Thursday, Mrs. Clinton said she was crossing her fingers and encouraging her doctors to let her return next week. “I’m trying to be a compliant patient,” she said, according to a person who was in the room. “But that does require a certain level of patience, which I’ve had to cultivate over the last three and a half weeks.”

While convalescing, Mrs. Clinton has spoken with President Obama and has held a 30-minute call with Senator John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, whom Mr. Obama nominated as her successor.

Read More..

After Fiscal Deal, Tax Code May Be Most Progressive Since 1979

WASHINGTON — With 2013 bringing tax increases on the incomes of a small sliver of the richest Americans, the country’s top earners now face a heavier tax burden than at any time since Jimmy Carter was president.

The last-minute deal struck by the departing 112th Congress raised taxes on a handful of the highest-earning Americans, with about 99.3 percent of households experiencing no change in their income taxes. But the Tax Policy Center estimates that the average family in the top 1 percent will pay a federal tax rate of more than 36 percent this year, up from 28 percent in 2008. That is the highest rate since 1979, at least.

By some measures, the tax code might now be the most progressive in a generation, tax economists said, while noting that every American is paying a lower burden currently than they did then. In fact, the total federal tax rate is still vastly lower for the very rich than it was at any point in the 1940s through 1970s. It has risen from historical lows, but is still closer to those lows than where it was in the postwar decades.

“We made the system more progressive by raising rates at the top and leaving them for everyone else,” said Roberton Williams of the Tax Policy Center, a research group based in Washington. “The offsetting issue is that the rich have gotten a lot richer.”

Indeed, over the last three decades the bulk of pretax income gains have gone to the wealthy — and the higher up on the income scale, the bigger the gains, with billionaires outpacing millionaires who outpaced the merely rich. Economists doubted that the tax increases would do much to reverse that trend.

With the recovery failing to improve incomes for millions of average Americans and the country running trillion-dollar deficits, President Obama made “tax fairness” a centerpiece of his re-election campaign. In the heated negotiations with House Speaker John A. Boehner, that translated into the White House’s insistence on tax increases for the top 2 percent of households and a continuation of tax breaks and cuts for a vast number of taxpayers.

Republicans resisted increasing tax rates and aimed for lower revenue targets, arguing that spending was the budget’s primary problem and that no American should see his or her taxes go up too much in such a sluggish economy. But ultimately they relented, and Congress cut a last-minute deal.

“A central promise of my campaign for president was to change the tax code that was too skewed towards the wealthy at the expense of working middle-class Americans,” Mr. Obama said after Congress reached an agreement.

That deal includes a host of tax increases on the rich. It raises the tax rate to 39.6 percent from 35 percent on income above $400,000 for individuals, and $450,000 for couples. The rate on dividends and capital gains for those same taxpayers was bumped up 5 percentage points, to 20 percent. Congress also reinstated limits on the amount households with more than $300,000 in income can deduct. On top of that, two new surcharges — a 3.8 percent tax on investment income and a 0.9 percent tax on regular income — hit those same wealthy households.

As a result of the taxes added in both the deal and the 2010 health care law, which came into effect this year, taxpayers with $1 million in income and up will pay on average $168,000 more in taxes. Millionaires’ share of the overall federal tax burden will climb to 23 percent from 20 percent.

The result is a tax code that squeezes hundreds of billions of dollars more from the very well off — about $600 billion more over 10 years — while leaving the tax burden on everyone else mostly as it was. And the changes come after 30 years of both Republican and Democratic administrations doing the converse: zeroing out federal income taxes for many poor working families while also reducing the tax burden for households on the higher end of the income scale.

“Back at the end of the Carter and beginning of the Reagan administrations, we had a pretty severe income-tax burden for people at a low level of income. It was actually kind of appalling,” said Alan D. Viard, a tax expert at the American Enterprise Institute, a right-of-center research group in Washington. “Policy makers in both parties realized that was bad policy and started whittling away at it” by expanding credits and tinkering with tax rates.

After those changes and the new law, comparing average tax rates for poor households and wealthy households, 2013 might be the most progressive tax code since 1979. But economists cautioned that measuring progressivity is tricky. “It’s not like there is some scientific measure of progressivity all economists agreed upon,” said Leonard E. Burman, a professor of public affairs at Syracuse University. “People look at different numerical measures and they’ve changed in different ways at different income levels.”

Mr. Viard said that over time the code had become markedly more progressive for the poor compared with the middle class. But it arguably did not become much more progressive for the rich compared with the middle class, or the very rich compared with the rich, in part because of the George W. Bush-era tax cuts on investment income.

An anesthesiologist who earns a $500,000 salary subject to payroll and income taxes might pay a higher tax rate than a hedge fund manager making $1 billion subject mostly to capital-gains taxes, for instance.

Economists are also divided on the ultimate effect of those tax increases on the wealthy to income growth and income inequality in the United States. The recession hit the incomes of the rich hard, but they have snapped back much more strongly than those for middle or low-income workers.

“I’d still rather be really rich, even if I’m getting taxed much more than a low-income person” would be, Mr. Williams of the Tax Policy Center added.

Read More..

Legislators want Army Corps to explain habitat removal decision

Two state senators on Thursday called on the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to explain its decision to plow under 43 acres of lush wildlife habitat at the Sepulveda Basin without prior notice or coordination with community leaders and environmentalists.

Sens. Kevin de Leon (D-Los Angeles) and Fran Pavley (D-Agoura Hills) asked for details about what led to the agency's declaration in August that its "vegetation management plan" for the area did not require an environmental impact report because it would not significantly disturb wildlife and habitat.

On Dec. 10, Army Corps bulldozers, mowers and mulching machines stripped nearly all the greenery from the swath of Los Angeles River flood plain just west of Interstate 405 and north of Burbank Boulevard, wiping out habitat for mammals, reptiles and hundreds of species of birds.

"When a clunky federal bureaucracy doesn't collaborate with state and local officials and community leaders, you create a real mess, which is what we have right now at the Sepulveda Basin," De Leon said in an interview.

He noted that although the corps is not subject to state environmental laws, protections from the federal National Environmental Policy Act may apply.

"If the Army Corps doesn't cooperate, the next step is to engage members of Congress to exercise their powers, or have the state attorney general notify the U.S. district attorney's office," De Leon said.

Pavley, whose district includes the Sepulveda Basin, said she wants to know the extent of damage caused to trails, markers and signs funded with "state and local park monies" and installed and maintained "by thousands of hours of volunteer work."

Army Corps of Engineers District Cmdr. Col. Mark Toy was unavailable for comment. But corps spokesman Jay Field said the agency will cooperate fully with the senators.

The area existed as a wildlife preserve adjacent to the Sepulveda Dam for more than three decades. In 2010, it was reclassified as a corps "vegetation management area" with a new five-year mission of replacing trees and shrubs with native grasses as part of an effort to improve access for corps staffers, increase public safety and discourage crime, lewd activity, drug abuse and homeless camps.

Environmental groups led by the San Fernando Valley Audubon Society interpreted the plan to suggest the agency would avoid removal of native willow and cotton groves, elderberries, coyote brush and mule fat. Much of that vegetation was planted decades ago under a corps program to create the wildlife preserve.

Kris Ohlenkamp, conservation chairman of the San Fernando Valley Audubon Society, said the corps' management plan was vague. "But this much is clear: What the corps actually did to that land is not represented anywhere in the plan."

Army Corps Deputy District Cmdr. Alexander Deraney has said his agency's actions were "more or less in line with the plan." He said the corps wanted to preserve the native vegetation but discovered that "the native brush was so grown into non-native brush that it would be impossible to separate them."

The corps has ceased operations on the property pending consultations and meetings with environmental and community groups.

louis.sahagun@latimes.com

Read More..

Extinction Tourism: Work at a Newspaper While You Still Can

Why on earth would a seasoned, decorated photographer take a job at a local, small-town newspaper in the northern reaches of Norway?

That’s what we asked Jonas Bendiksen after he announced on Magnum’s blog that he’d be working at the Bladet Vesterålen newspaper, with a circulation of only 8,000, in the town of Sortland. In his blog post, Bendiksen writes, “We’ve heard it repeated countless times over the last decade: Newspapers are dying. I don’t know if it’s true or not, but I do know I don’t want to die without ever having worked for one of these fine purveyors of information.”

But it turns out his decision is not simply a bout of extinction tourism brought on by nostalgia – it’s a personal challenge.

“I’ve fantasized for a long time about doing something like this,” says Bendiksen. “In much of my work, I’m often drawn to global, epic-scale issues – things that affect millions of people. I found that I was inspired to spend some time scaling down, and trying to look over time at a really small area, where nothing too obvious or dramatic was going on and to just see daily life in a fairly quiet place, one day at a time.”

So far Bendiksen has photographed everything from a street in Sortland that finally got a new tarmac to town council meetings – from fisheries to immigrants and asylum seekers. Online you can view his images of moose hunting and winter sports.

“I think up some of the stories, and the editor comes up with others,” says Bendiksen. “I want to do everything, to get a sampling of daily life of various people here.”

Bendiksen’s barnstorming career includes being a member of the prestigious Magnum photo agency since 2008, working across the globe, winning plaudits and international solo shows for his long-term documentary projects, contributing regularly to big publications such as National Geographic and securing almost every major award a photographer could hope to rack up before his 35th birthday.

The Places We Live(2005-2008), a project on urban slums worldwide that became both a multimedia installation and a book, is typical of Bendiksen’s broad scope and the type of work he’s stepped away from. He thinks of his work at Bladet Vesterålen as in some way redressing his lack of past work in his native Norway. It’s a leap of faith – he’d never set foot in Vesterålen offices before his first day.

“I went and met the newspaper editor for the first time when I got off the airport bus,” he says.

With a son in Oslo who stays with him half the time, Bendiksen splits his time between the capital and Sortland.

“I run up and down, roughly every other week,” he says.

The change has been a sort of homecoming. After beginning the work he discovered that his great grandfather was born in Myre, the same village where he stays. It’s a big coincidence since the town only has a population of 2,000. His father also grew up just a two-hour drive from Sortland. He says the northern exposure has been illuminating.

“I have a lot of respect for people who work in daily journalism, and local news in particular. These are guys who go out every day and find new stories or angles in the same tiny village for 25 years. That’s not easy,” says Bendiksen. ”This is all very good experience for me to apply to all my photography. Sharpening my eyes a bit for finding images in the everyday. This I’ll definitely take with me.”

All images: Jonas Bendiksen

Read More..

“Django Unchained” on pace to be Tarantino’s biggest box office film ever

LOS ANGELES (TheWrap.com) – After nine days in theaters, “Django Unchained” is on pace to be Quentin Tarantino‘s highest grossing movie ever.

That’s right, if the trend holds, the blood-soaked slave-revenge fable will rack up more at the box office than “Pulp Fiction” ($ 213.9 million worldwide), “Kill Bill Vol. 1″ ($ 180.9 million worldwide), “Kill Bill Vol. 2″ ($ 152.1 million worldwide) and previous record holder, “Inglourious Basterds” ($ 321.4 million worldwide).

Even though “Django Unchained” has only debuted stateside, with $ 82.4 million through January 2, it is outstripping all of the previous Tarantino movie mash-ups. At a similar point in its rollout, “Inglourious Basterds” had netted $ 67.6 million domestically, according to Box Office Mojo.

“It’s the Quentin Tarantino brand,” Phil Contrino, vice president and chief analyst with Boxoffice.com, told TheWrap. “People appreciate what he’s doing. He makes these purely cinematic movies that allow even casual moviegoers to feel like they get to be a film snob and the great cast helps.”

With a Cinemascore rating of A- (something of an imperfect arbiter of quality given that “Parental Guidance” has the same score) and a RottenTomatoes ranking of 89 percent “fresh,” the film has been embraced by both audiences and critics, which bodes well for the proverbial “word of mouth” business.

“The exit polls are fantastic, the results have been outstanding and we’re looking forward to a long run,” Erik Lomis, head of theatrical distribution at The Weinstein Company, told TheWrap.

Not that “Django Unchained” has been immune to criticism. A fierce debate has erupted over Tarantino’s proclivity for using a certain racial epithet that begins with “N,” with directors like Spike Lee boycotting the film and decrying it for making light of slavery.

However, the red-hot controversy does not appear to have singed ticket sales.

And Fandango Chief Correspondent Dave Karger argues that the controversy may be helping the film. He notes that the plethora of opinion pieces on the subject as well as a viral video of star Samuel L. Jackson trying and failing to get an interviewer to use the racist term have kept “Django Unchained” in the public eye.

“This is the kind of movie that, as the best movies do, really inspires conversation and debate afterward and that only helps it,” Karger said. “There are going to be people turned off by the use of the word, but they’re going to just avoid the movie, and clearly it hasn’t been a huge deterrent.”

Indeed, as of 7 a.m. PT, “Django” was the number-one ticket seller on Fandango, ahead of other holiday hits like “Les Misérables” and “The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey.” It currently accounts for 21 percent of the ticketer’s sales and, based on studio tracking, it should add another $ 18.5 million to its haul over the weekend.

That will likely push it over the $ 100 million mark after two weeks in theaters.

In contrast, it took “Inglourious Basterds” 23 days to hit a similar figure domestically. Moreover, by that point in its release schedule, “Inglourious Basterds” was never showing in less than 3,165 theaters whereas “Django Unchained” has never unspooled across more than 3,010 since it debuted, giving the Nazi drama a major per-screen advantage.

Starting on January 16, “Django Unchained” will find out if its film grindhouse humor translates abroad when it opens in France and Belgium and then rolls out across Russia, most of Europe and much of Latin America later that week. Sony will handle the international launch, while The Weinstein Company is overseeing the movie’s domestic release.

Of course, highest grossing doesn’t mean most successful. Adjusted for inflation, “Pulp Fiction,” which amassed its $ 200 million-plus nearly 20 years ago, would be the top earner among the Tarantino oeuvre. Moreover, it still ranks as the director’s most successful film having been produced for a meager $ 8 million.

Operating under the principle you have to spend money to make it, the Weinstein Company shelled out $ 87 million to produce “Django Unchained.” Still if foreign audiences embrace the picture and the film picks up Oscar nominations, the studio will ride out of the holiday season with an awful lot of green-backs in its saddlebags.

Celebrity News Headlines – Yahoo! News

Read More..

Scant Proof Is Found to Back Up Claims by Energy Drinks

Energy drinks are the fastest-growing part of the beverage industry, with sales in the United States reaching more than $10 billion in 2012 — more than Americans spent on iced tea or sports beverages like Gatorade.

Their rising popularity represents a generational shift in what people drink, and reflects a successful campaign to convince consumers, particularly teenagers, that the drinks provide a mental and physical edge.

The drinks are now under scrutiny by the Food and Drug Administration after reports of deaths and serious injuries that may be linked to their high caffeine levels. But however that review ends, one thing is clear, interviews with researchers and a review of scientific studies show: the energy drink industry is based on a brew of ingredients that, apart from caffeine, have little, if any benefit for consumers.

“If you had a cup of coffee you are going to affect metabolism in the same way,” said Dr. Robert W. Pettitt, an associate professor at Minnesota State University in Mankato, who has studied the drinks.

Energy drink companies have promoted their products not as caffeine-fueled concoctions but as specially engineered blends that provide something more. For example, producers claim that “Red Bull gives you wings,” that Rockstar Energy is “scientifically formulated” and Monster Energy is a “killer energy brew.” Representative Edward J. Markey of Massachusetts, a Democrat, has asked the government to investigate the industry’s marketing claims.

Promoting a message beyond caffeine has enabled the beverage makers to charge premium prices. A 16-ounce energy drink that sells for $2.99 a can contains about the same amount of caffeine as a tablet of NoDoz that costs 30 cents. Even Starbucks coffee is cheap by comparison; a 12-ounce cup that costs $1.85 has even more caffeine.

As with earlier elixirs, a dearth of evidence underlies such claims. Only a few human studies of energy drinks or the ingredients in them have been performed and they point to a similar conclusion, researchers say — that the beverages are mainly about caffeine.

Caffeine is called the world’s most widely used drug. A stimulant, it increases alertness, awareness and, if taken at the right time, improves athletic performance, studies show. Energy drink users feel its kick faster because the beverages are typically swallowed quickly or are sold as concentrates.

“These are caffeine delivery systems,” said Dr. Roland Griffiths, a researcher at Johns Hopkins University who has studied energy drinks. “They don’t want to say this is equivalent to a NoDoz because that is not a very sexy sales message.”

A scientist at the University of Wisconsin became puzzled as he researched an ingredient used in energy drinks like Red Bull, 5-Hour Energy and Monster Energy. The researcher, Dr. Craig A. Goodman, could not find any trials in humans of the additive, a substance with the tongue-twisting name of glucuronolactone that is related to glucose, a sugar. But Dr. Goodman, who had studied other energy drink ingredients, eventually found two 40-year-old studies from Japan that had examined it.

In the experiments, scientists injected large doses of the substance into laboratory rats. Afterward, the rats swam better. “I have no idea what it does in energy drinks,” Dr. Goodman said.

Energy drink manufacturers say it is their proprietary formulas, rather than specific ingredients, that provide users with physical and mental benefits. But that has not prevented them from implying otherwise.

Consider the case of taurine, an additive used in most energy products.

On its Web site, the producer of Red Bull, for example, states that “more than 2,500 reports have been published about taurine and its physiological effects,” including acting as a “detoxifying agent.” In addition, that company, Red Bull of Austria, points to a 2009 safety study by a European regulatory group that gave it a clean bill of health.

But Red Bull’s Web site does not mention reports by that same group, the European Food Safety Authority, which concluded that claims about the benefits in energy drinks lacked scientific support. Based on those findings, the European Commission has refused to approve claims that taurine helps maintain mental function and heart health and reduces muscle fatigue.

Taurine, an amino acidlike substance that got its name because it was first found in the bile of bulls, does play a role in bodily functions, and recent research suggests it might help prevent heart attacks in women with high cholesterol. However, most people get more than adequate amounts from foods like meat, experts said. And researchers added that those with heart problems who may need supplements would find far better sources than energy drinks.

Hiroko Tabuchi contributed reporting from Tokyo and Poypiti Amatatham from Bangkok.

Read More..

DealBook: S.E.C. Ends Scrutiny of Former Top Aide to Buffett

The Securities and Exchange Commission has decided not to file insider trading charges against David L. Sokol, a onetime top lieutenant at Berkshire Hathaway, Mr. Sokol’s lawyer said Thursday.

Mr. Sokol came under scrutiny in 2011 after abruptly resigning as chairman of Berkshire’s MidAmerican Energy Holdings, one of the many holdings of the investment conglomerate run by the billionaire Warren E. Buffett. At the time, Berkshire revealed that Mr. Sokol bought shares in Lubrizol, a maker of lubricants that he wanted Mr. Buffett to buy. Mr. Sokol bought the shares about two months before Berkshire announced a $9 billion acquisition of the company. After the deal was announced, the value of his Lubrizol stake rose by $3 million.

But Mr. Sokol’s lawyer, Barry Wm. Levine, said that the S.E.C. informed his client on Thursday that it had completed its inquiry and decided not to pursue a civil enforcement action.

Mr. Levine said he was happy that his client was “exonerated” and that Mr. Sokol never acted improperly in the trades. “He is the paragon of rectitude,” said Mr. Levine, a partner at the law firm Dickstein Shapiro in Washington.

John Nester, a spokesman for the S.E.C., declined to comment on Thursday. The agency typically does not comment when it decides not to pursue action in such cases. The news was first reported online by The Wall Street Journal.

Mr. Sokol’s resignation in 2011 was a rare black eye for Berkshire. A star manager, Mr. Sokol had run several Berkshire subsidiaries, including MidAmerican Energy and NetJets, which sells fractional ownerships of private jets. He was long considered to be a leading candidate to succeed Mr. Buffett, 82.

Mr. Sokol, now 56, had also become a crucial player in the conglomerate’s frequent deal-making, earning the nickname “Mr. Fix-it.” He served as a point man for Mr. Buffett on a number of potential transactions, particularly during the financial crisis.

His sudden resignation caught Berkshire by surprise. Mr. Buffett said he did not ask for Mr. Sokol’s resignation, suggesting at the time that it was a personal decision by Mr. Sokol.

Mr. Buffett initially defended his protégé’s trading. “Neither Dave nor I feel his Lubrizol purchases were in any way unlawful,” Mr. Buffett said at the time.

But additional information surfaced after the Berkshire board investigated Mr. Sokol’s trading record. Berkshire directors ultimately accused Mr. Sokol of misleading the company about his personal stake in Lubrizol.

Mr. Sokol bought $10 million worth of stock in Lubrizol shortly before bringing the company to Mr. Buffett’s attention, according to the board. While Mr. Sokol made a “passing remark” to Mr. Buffett about his trading, the board said that Mr. Sokol did not tell Mr. Buffett that he had bought his stake in Lubrizol after Citigroup bankers had pitched the company as a potential takeover target. He also bought some of the shares, according to the Berkshire directors, after learning that Lubrizol might entertain a takeover offer.

“His misleadingly incomplete disclosures to Berkshire Hathaway senior management concerning those purchases violated the duty of candor he owed the company,” the board’s report in 2011 says. It adds that Mr. Sokol may have failed his fiduciary duty under the law of Delaware, where Berkshire is incorporated.

At the time, Mr. Levine said that Mr. Sokol was considering a personal investment in Lubrizol since summer 2010, before meeting with bankers to discuss the company as a potential takeover target.

Still, Mr. Buffett said the trades violated company trading policy and called Mr. Sokol’s actions “inexplicable and inexcusable.”

He also provided testimony to S.E.C. investigators. Meanwhile, Berkshire continued to pay Mr. Sokol’s legal bills. Last spring, Mr. Buffett claimed those bills reached nearly $200,000 a month.

Mr. Buffett could not be immediately reached for comment on Thursday night.

But later in 2012, S.E.C. lawyers decided that there was insufficient evidence to mount a case against Mr. Sokol. The evidence was circumstantial, S.E.C. officials concluded, and it was unclear whether Mr. Sokol had a true window into the Lubrizol deal-making process. He also had no indication at the time of his stock trades that Mr. Buffett would be interested in acquiring the company.

Since resigning from Berkshire, Mr. Sokol has been managing his own portfolio, Mr. Levine said.

Pradnya Joshi contributed reporting.

---

This post has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: January 4, 2013

A summary with an earlier version of this article misspelled the surname of the billionaire investor. He is Warren E. Buffett, not Bufett.

Read More..

Bieber urges crackdown on paparazzi after photographer's death

Justin Bieber and his collection of exotic cars have been tantalizing targets for celebrity photographers ever since the young singer got his driver's license.

A video captured the paparazzi chasing Bieber through Westside traffic in November. When Bieber's white Ferrari stops at an intersection, the video shows the singer turning to one of the photographers and asking: "How do your parents feel about what you do?"

A few months earlier, he was at the wheel of his Fisker sports car when a California Highway Patrol officer pulled him over for driving at high speeds while trying to outrun a paparazzo.

This pursuit for the perfect shot took a fatal turn Tuesday when a photographer was hit by an SUV on Sepulveda Boulevard after taking photos of Bieber's Ferrari. And the singer now finds himself at the center of the familiar debate about free speech and the aggressive tactics of the paparazzi.

Since Princess Diana's fatal accident in Paris in 1997 while being pursued by photographers, California politicians have tried crafting laws that curb paparazzi behavior. But some of those laws are rarely used, and attorneys have challenged the constitutionality of others.

On Wednesday, Bieber went on the offensive, calling on lawmakers to crack down.

"Hopefully this tragedy will finally inspire meaningful legislation and whatever other necessary steps to protect the lives and safety of celebrities, police officers, innocent public bystanders and the photographers themselves," he said in a statement.

It remained unclear if any legislators would take up his call. But Bieber did get some support from another paparazzi target, singer Miley Cyrus.

She wrote on Twitter that she hoped the accident "brings on some changes in '13 Paparazzi are dangerous!"

Last year, a Los Angeles County Superior Court judge threw out charges related to a first-of-its-kind anti-paparazzi law in a case involving Bieber being chased on the 101 Freeway by photographer Paul Raef. Passed in 2010, the law created punishments for paparazzi who drove dangerously to obtain images.

But the judge said the law violated 1st Amendment protections by overreaching and potentially affecting such people as wedding photographers or photographers speeding to a location where a celebrity was present.

The L.A. city attorney's office is now appealing that decision.

Raef's attorney, Dmitry Gorin, said new anti-paparazzi laws are unnecessary.

"There are plenty of other laws on the books to deal with these issues. There is always a rush to create a new paparazzi law every time something happens," he said. "Any new law on the paparazzi is going to run smack into the 1st Amendment. Truth is, most conduct is covered by existing laws. A lot of this is done for publicity."

Coroner's officials have not identified the photographer because they have not reached the next of kin. However, his girlfriend, Frances Merto, and another photographer identified him as Chris Guerra.

The incident took place on Sepulveda Boulevard near Getty Center Drive shortly before 6 p.m. Tuesday. A friend of Bieber was driving the sports car when it was pulled over on the 405 Freeway by the California Highway Patrol. The photographer arrived near the scene on Sepulveda, left his car and crossed the street to take photos. Sources familiar with the investigation said the CHP told him to leave the area. As he was returning to his vehicle, he was hit by the SUV.

Law enforcement sources said Wednesday that it was unlikely charges would be filed against the driver of the SUV that hit the photographer.

Veteran paparazzo Frank Griffin took issue with the criticism being directed at the photographer as well as other paparazzi.

"What's the difference between our guy who got killed under those circumstances and the war photographer who steps on a land mine in Afghanistan and blows himself to pieces because he wanted the photograph on the other side of road?" said Griffin, who co-owns the photo agency Griffin-Bauer.

"The only difference is the subject matter. One is a celebrity and the other is a battle. Both young men have left behind mothers and fathers grieving and there's no greater sadness in this world than parents who have to bury their children."

Others, however, said the death focuses attention on the safety issues involving paparazzi

"The paparazzi are increasingly reckless and dangerous. The greater the demand, the greater the incentive to do whatever it takes to get the image," said Blair Berk, a Los Angeles attorney who has represented numerous celebrities. "The issue here isn't vanity and nuisance, it's safety."

richard.winton@latimes.com

andrew.blankstein@latimes.com

Read More..

Wild-Animal Photos Capture Calm in Crisis

Annie Marie Musselman claims she’s not one of those “weird, overly spiritual dream-catcher people,” but says her time at the Sarvey Wildlife Care Center has shown her an intimacy with wild animals – an intimacy that’s reflected in her striking photo series, Finding Trust.

In one photo, for example, an injured owl lies on a medical table with its bright yellow eyes looking up with a sense of calm. It’s one of Musselman’s favorites – and one of her first – from the seven years she volunteered at the animal rescue and rehabilitation center.

“I felt a sense of trust and that’s maybe why I got that image,” she says. “I looked into its eyes and it felt like it was releasing itself to us, telling us to do what we needed to do to help it. I remember getting the film back [from the owl shoot] and thinking this is what I want do with my life! It was amazing.”

Musselman stumbled upon Sarvey at a hard time in her life. She grew up with parents who were Christian Scientists, and when her mom was dying of Parkinson’s disease back in 2002, the family didn’t talk about it, which she says is characteristic of the religion. Musselman packed away her anxiety, developing crippling panic attacks, which made her unable to fly or drive. Earning a living as a freelance photographer was difficult.

Then, in the fall of 2002 after her mom passed away, Musselman and her husband stumbled on an injured pigeon outside the Seattle Supersonics stadium late one night. Not knowing what to do with it, she called 911, who connected her to Sarvey, where someone agreed to drive 55 miles to come pick it up. The volunteers’ commitment led her to volunteer herself.

“They were the kind of people who had no problem walking around all day with a baby woodpecker in their shirts to make sure it stayed warm,” she says.” They were hardcore animal lovers who were willing to put everything aside to care for the animals. Sometimes they didn’t eat enough, they chain-smoked, etc.”

The animals provided a needed comfort, and she developed quick and strong relationships with them. She focused on the animals in a kind of meditative way. When helping an injured golden eagle or baby raccoon, all the other more human problems she carried around with her seemed to disappear.

At first she didn’t take photos because she didn’t want the organization thinking she was only there for herself. But over time she gained their trust and eventually brought in several cameras and a lighting setup to make the portraits and moments that fill the edit.

Today, Musselman no longer volunteers at Sarvey — she worked there until she was seven months pregnant with her daughter — but she’s gathered all the photos from her seven years into a book project, which she’s raising funds for on Kickstarter.

Animals continue to be a central theme in her work. She just finished another project at a wolf sanctuary and knows there is ample room to keep exploring.

“Many of us have cats and dogs but there are all these other animals out there in the world that are just as incredible,” she says.

All Photos: Annie Marie Musselman

Read More..

Putin grants Depardieu Russian citizenship

MOSCOW (AP) — Gerard Depardieu, the French actor who has been sparring with his native country over taxes, has been granted Russian citizenship.

A brief announcement on the Kremlin website said President Vladimir Putin signed the citizenship grant on Thursday.

Depardieu is angered by French President Francois Hollande‘s attempt to raise taxes on the mega-rich to 75 percent. Russia has a flat income tax of 13 percent.

A representative for Depardieu declined to say whether he had accepted the offer and refused all comment.

Depardieu has made more than 150 films, among them the 1991 comedy “Green Card” about a man who enters into a marriage of convenience in order to get U.S. residency.

Depardieu said in an open letter published in mid-December that he would turn over his passport and French social security card.

Hollande wants to tax incomes of the ultra-rich at 75 percent to reduce the debt and deficit, and Depardieu’s subsequent decision to move to tax-friendly Belgium was slammed by Hollande’s government.

“I’m a true European, a citizen of the world,” Depardieu wrote in the letter.

The tax on millionaires was struck down by France’s highest court Dec. 29, but the government has promised to resubmit the law in a slightly different form soon.

Depardieu was nominated for an Academy Award for his role as Cyrano de Bergerac in the 1990 film by the same name.

He’s well known in Russia, where he appears in an ad for Sovietsky Bank’s credit card and is prominently featured on the bank’s home page.

France’s Civil Code says one must have another nationality in order to give up French citizenship because it is forbidden to be stateless. Thursday’s decision by the Kremlin appears to fulfill that requirement.

Entertainment News Headlines – Yahoo! News

Title Post: Putin grants Depardieu Russian citizenship
Url Post: http://www.news.fluser.com/putin-grants-depardieu-russian-citizenship/
Link To Post : Putin grants Depardieu Russian citizenship
Rating:
100%

based on 99998 ratings.
5 user reviews.
Author: Fluser SeoLink
Thanks for visiting the blog, If any criticism and suggestions please leave a comment

Read More..