A federal judge has approved GOP Congressman Trey Gowdy’s request to exhume the body of Vince Foster to determine if Bill and Hillary Clinton were involved in his death 23 years ago.

Explanation: Judge Orders Vince Foster Exhumed in Clinton Murder Investigation

A federal judge has not ordered that Vince Foster’s remains to help determine if Bill and Clinton were behind his death. Conspiracy theories the Bill and Hillary Clinton had Arkansas attorney and deputy White House counsel Vince Foster murdered in 1993 because he knew explosive information that would jeopardize the political careers of the Clintons and other world leaders. In 1994, Foster’s death was officially ruled a suicide by special counsel Robert Fiske Jr., the Washington Post reported at the time: Special counsel Robert B. Fiske Jr. concluded that Foster’s death in Fort Marcy Park last July was a suicide. The Fiske investigation involved four lawyers, five physicians, seven FBI agents, approximately 125 witnesses; also DNA tests, microscopes and lasers. All that effort resolved many of the lingering mysteries surrounding Foster’s death. But the largest mystery remained: Why did the stings of Washington life, endured by so many, prove fatal for Vincent W. Foster Jr.? Fiske’s report tells the story of a man stretched until he broke. As simple – and as mysterious – as that. In the months since Foster’s body was found resting on a slope beside a Civil War cannon, the airwaves and printing presses have been filled with theories of conspiracy and intrigue. Rumors about his death shook the stock market and dogged the president. Foster came to be seen by many as the key to a vault of dark secrets about some of the most powerful people in the world. Vince Foster, a childhood friend of President Clinton, reportedly suffered from depression and anxiety in his role as deputy White House counsel before his death in 1993. Friske’s report concluded that Foster “blamed himself’ for scrutiny the Clinton transition team faced, including accusations of elitism, corner cutting and incompetent screening. The report said that Foster considered retiring from the position in January 1993 but could not bare to face the embarrassment of returning to Arkansas a “failure.” The FBI vault contains extensive documentation on the investigation into Vince Foster’s suicide. The bureau even appears to address specific questions that have fueled conspiracy theories, like the position of Foster’s body, the location of the gun in his hand, the lack of reports of gunfire, just to name a few. Those details have only seemed to fuel conspiracy theories that the Clintons murdered Vince Foster over the years — culminating in the most recent one that a federal judge has ordered the exhumation of Foster’s body to re-examine his cause and manner of death. That report first appeared at The Last Line of Defense, a website that clearly states “all articles should be considered satirical,” and that it cites facts that “don’t necessarily exist.” The Vince Foster exhumation report, which appeared under the headline. “BREAKING: Trey Gowdy Just Had A Federal Judge Issue An Order To Exhume A Body,” definitely meets that criteria: For the first time in history, a US Congressman has asked that a body be exhumed in connection with an investigation by a House intelligence committee. Judge Harmon Watson agreed to issue the order for a work crew in Fairfax, Virginia to exhume the body of Vince Foster for autopsy. The order came just minutes after evidence turned up in the case of a murdered reporter who had an “if anything ever happens to me” letter delivered to his publication that implicated Hillary Clinton in a 23-year-old crime, which put it right around the time of Foster’s supposed “suicide.” Foster’s body has already been removed from the ground and is currently being transferred to the Naval Hospital in Norfolk to undergo an autopsy to look for a very specific cause of death. That information is being kept a closely guarded secret for now by Gowdy and the other federal prosecutors, since only the killer would know. The false report that Vince Foster’s body has been exhumed was quickly shared on social media more than 20,000 times. Many who read and shared the report didn’t realize that it came from a “satire” website that does not publish factual stories. There are no new developments into Vince Foster’s death — but that likely won’t stop new conspiracy theories.


A photograph shows an eagle catching a drone.

Explanation: In nature, birds of prey often overpower large and dangerous prey. Their talons have scales, which protect them, naturally, from their victims’ bites. The Dutch National Police has asked the Dutch Organization for Applied Scientific Research (TNO) to research the possible impact on the birds’ claws. The results are not yet known. Of course, we are continuously investigating any extra possible protective measures we can take in order to protect our birds.

In February 2019, an image supposedly showing an eagle catching a drone was widely circulated on Facebook along with the caption “The Picture of the Century. Nature defeats Technology”:  This photograph received hundreds of thousands of shares on Facebook, but many viewers weren’t exactly sure what this photograph depicted. Was the image created with digital editing software? Did this really capture an eagle attacking the equipment of an amateur drone photographer? This is in fact a genuine photograph of an eagle catching a drone. It was taken by photographer Koen Van Weel in March 2016 and documents a trained eagle from the “Guard from Above” company wrapping its talons around a drone during a police exercise in the Netherlands. The image is available via Getty Images. where it is presented with the caption “An eagle of the Guard from Above company, grasps a drone during a police exercise in Katwijk, on March 7, 2016. The bird of prey can get drones from the air by catching them with his legs.” A 2016 video report from BBC News showed these eagles, and other birds of prey, in action with drones:   With reports of near-misses with aircraft, invasions of privacy and security breaches, drones are not always welcome flyers. And as the number of drones in the sky increases, the authorities need to be sure there is a way to bring them down without any danger to those on the ground. BBC Click’s Lara Lewington looks at the technology being used to bring troublesome drones down to earth including one very low-tech solution being tried by police in the Netherlands — an eagle that goes after the unmanned vehicles as if they were its prey. While eagles and other birds of prey are certainly capable of taking down a drone, some groups have argued that these animals are being put in danger when tasked with that activity. Here’s an excerpt from a National Geographic article arguing against the use of bald eagles to deter drones:  The biggest problem is the very obvious danger to the eagles. As demonstrated by the Mythbusters crew, who are among the preeminent scientific experimenters of our time, drone blades, especially carbon fiber ones, can cause serious damage to an animal. If an eagle were to misjudge its attack, or if the drone operator were to take evasive or defense maneuvers, a bird could be struck by the blades and seriously injured or killed … Even if birds are well trained and are unexpectedly effective at avoiding rotors, how many eagles are we willing to risk if something goes wrong? Seriously, bald eagles have been through enough. Bald eagles were taken off the Endangered Species List less than ten years ago, which is about 15 minutes in evolutionary time. Humans nearly wiped them out through a combination of pesticides (primarily DDT), habitat destruction, and illegal shooting. In 1963, bald eagles hit a population low in the United States of just 487 pairs. Since then they’ve battled back and are just now repopulating old territories and establishing a stable population Guards from Above wrote on their website that “animal welfare is very important” and noted that they are currently studying the possible impact on the birds’ claws:


Christmas miracle for Florida dog whose heart stopped.

Explanation: A Florida man was hoping for a Christmas miracle when his dog was attacked by another animal, and a team of veterinarians provided it.

Animals, Health, Florida, General News, Gainesville, Veterinary medicine, Dogs

The heart of Gerald Ford’s 1-year-old French bulldog Neo stopped beating following the attack on Christmas Eve. In a rare occurrence, veterinarians at the University of Florida College of Veterinary Medicine were able to revive Neo. Research suggests that animals whose hearts have given out live full, healthy lives only 5% percent of the time. The team of veterinarians who worked on Neo said he will be among them, although he did need a leg to be amputated. “Typically when an animal passes and comes back, they have to be on a mechanical ventilator, a breathing machine,” Dr. Bobbi Conner, a University of Florida professor and vet specializing in emergency medicine  told The Gainesville Sun. Ford had let Neo outside on Christmas Eve to do his business on his 12-acre property in White Springs, Florida, a rural area between Jacksonville and Tallahassee. Ford said he found it odd when Neo didn’t come back, but he left the front door to his home open a crack so Neo could let himself in. In the middle of the night, Ford said he heard a thud on the front porch and opened the door to see Neo covered in bite marks and losing blood. Ford said he wasn’t sure what animal attacked Neo. “I’ll never forget the look on his face,” Ford said. “It was like he was saying, ’Help me.” The veterinarians told Ford Neo would adapt to having three legs, and Ford said he has no doubts. “He’s going to be fine,” Ford said. “I’m the one that’s a wreck.”


Another dolphin dies at Arizona aquatic facility.

Explanation: A fourth dolphin has died at a Phoenix-area aquatic facility.

Arizona, Animals, Phoenix, Health, Dolphins

A statement from Dolphinaris Arizona in Scottsdale says 22-year-old Kai died Thursday after his condition began deteriorating and he had difficulty swimming, eating and breathing. Kai’s death marks the fourth death at the facility since it opened in October 2016, and it comes just a month after Khloe, an 11-year-old Atlantic bottlenose dolphin, died after a chronic illness. Dolphinaris General Manager Christian Schaeffer said Kai had shown signs of declining health two weeks ago and was treated. Schaeffer says the facility “will be taking proactive measures” to ensure its dolphins’ “well-being and high quality of life.” Dolphinaris has hired an external pathologist to conduct a necropsy (animal autopsy) to determine the cause of Kai’s death. Executive Vice President Tracy Reiman of the animal rights group PETA urged Dolphiniaris to close the attraction and send the remaining dolphins to seaside sanctuaries “where they would never again be forced to haul tourists on their backs in the sweltering Arizona desert.” PETA plans a protest outside Dolphinaris Arizona at 11 a.m. Saturday.


What the facts say" is ... "the best scenario for kids is a loving mom and dad.

National, Children, Race and Ethnicity, Reince Priebus,

Republican National Committee chairman Reince Priebus defended the 2016 Republican Party platform ahead of its convention in a July 17 interview with NBC’s Chuck Todd. While the platform isn’t yet in its final form, many observers have said the document so far lands to the right on social issues. Todd asked Priebus about the platform’s position on same-sex marriage. He referenced one draft that says "the data, the facts lead to an inescapable conclusion that every child deserves a married mom and dad" — based on claims that children raised in a traditional household are healthier and less likely to engage in crime and substance abuse. "It’s implying somehow that children of same-sex couples are more likely to be addicts, to engage in crime," Todd said. "Do you mean to have it imply that?" Priebus replied that it’s possible for children of same-sex parents and single parents to have successful lives, but the best scenario is for children to grow up in a traditional opposite-sex household. "The best scenario for kids is a loving mom and dad," Priebus said. "However, it doesn't mean at all that single parents or same-sex parents, that any parent in America can't love a child, can't raise a child, and that child can't be successful and loved. It doesn't mean that. It just means what the facts say." Do "the facts say" that "the best scenario for kids is a loving mom and dad" as opposed to same-sex parents? We’ve rated two similar claims  in the past, and not much has changed since we last looked into it in 2014. If anything, the scholarly consensus that children can fare just as well in same-sex households has strengthened. "The consensus is overwhelming that those children do very well in those (same-sex parent) families, and there’s no harm or bad consequence that occurs because of those parents not being opposite sex," said Ellen Perrin, a professor at the Tufts University School of Medicine who has researched this question. What the research shows Researchers at Columbia Law School reviewed scholarly works about the well-being of children living with gay or lesbian parents spanning the past three decades. The researchers found 78 relevant articles, and of those, 74 concluded that children of same-sex parents fare no worse than children of opposite-sex parents. Six of these articles were published in the last three years. The studies examine topics such as adolescent well-being, child physical and emotional health, family functioning and the effect of homophobic stigmatization. "Taken together, this research forms an overwhelming scholarly consensus, based on over three decades of peer-reviewed research, that having a gay or lesbian parent does not harm children," the Columbia researchers wrote. That leaves four articles that argue children face more risks with opposite-sex parents than they do with same-sex parents. However, the Columbia researchers say these studies are problematic because only a minority of the child subjects grew up with same-sex parents. Most subjects of these four studies grew up with opposite-sex parents but one of the parents eventually came out as gay or lesbian, often causing family breakup or turmoil. Some of this research conflates family composition and structure with family stability and history, said Gary Gates, an expert in LGBT demography at the University of California Los Angeles. Social science research suggests marriage — and not necessarily the gender makeup of that marriage — is associated with stability. "In other words, studies that compare children in long-term intact families with same-sex couple parents show that they generally do as well as kids in long-term intact families with different-sex parents," Gates said. Gates co-authored an overview of contemporary research about LGBT parents. The report found that LGBT parents and their children are doing "quite well," but research into the subject face problems like getting a large and diverse sample size. And there is little research into subcategories, like sibling dynamics among children with same-sex parent families or domestic violence. Perrin added that there is much more research into lesbian female parents than there is into gay male parents, but that imbalance is starting to even out, especially in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling in favor of gay marriage and more male gay couples are having children. In any case, evidence supporting Priebus’s claim is limited and problematic. "There’s no scholarly data that suggests this is a problem," Perrin said. We did not hear back from Priebus. Our ruling Priebus said, "What the facts say" is ... "the best scenario for kids is a loving mom and dad,"  as opposed to having same-sex parents. The limited pieces of research that appear to support Priebus’ claim have been called into question. And overall, scholarly research shows that what matters to children is the quality and stability of the parenting, rather than the parents’ particular sex, gender or sexual orientation.


FDA advisory panel rejects J&J drug for acute coronary syndrome.

Explanation: Johnson & Johnson’s anticoagulant Xarelto should not be approved to prevent further heart problems in patients who have recently suffered a heart attack, an advisory panel to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration concluded on Thursday.

The panel voted 10 to 0, with one abstention, against approval, saying data from a single clinical trial was not strong enough to justify approval, especially since some data from the trial was missing. Xarelto is already used to treat and prevent deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolisms and to reduce the risk of stroke and blood clots in patients with an irregular heart beat that is not caused by heart problems.


Gene-editing Chinese scientist kept much of his work secret.

Explanation: The Chinese scientist who says he helped make the world’s first gene-edited babies veered off a traditional career path, keeping much of his research secret in pursuit of a larger goal — making history.

AP Top News, Health, Genetic Frontiers, Medical ethics, China, Science

He Jiankui’s outsized aspirations began to take shape in 2016, the year after another team of Chinese researchers sparked global debate with the revelation that they had altered the DNA of human embryos in the lab. He soon set his mind on pushing the boundaries of medical ethics even further. The China-born, U.S.-trained scientist once confided to his former Stanford University adviser his interest in gene-edited babies. He told The Associated Press last month that he had been working on the experiment for more than two years — a period in which, by his own account, he concealed information from some medical staff involved in the research, as well as apparently from his own bosses. He took advantage of the loosely worded and irregularly enforced regulations and generous funding available today in China, in some cases skirting even local protocols and possibly laws. “The enormous ambition in China, the desire to be the first, collides with the desire to create and enforce standards,” said Jing-Bao Nie, an expert on Chinese bioethics at the University of Otago in New Zealand. On the eve of an international gene-editing summit in Hong Kong this week, the 34-year-old scientist stunned the world by claiming he had used the powerful CRISPR gene-editing tool to alter the DNA of twin girls born earlier this month. His claim could not be independently confirmed, and it has not been published in a journal, but it drew swift outrage from both researchers and regulators. Mainstream scientists in China and globally said the experiment should never have been tried. “They chose to short-circuit the entire process. They went rogue,” said Dr. Kiran Musunuru, a University of Pennsylvania gene-editing expert. On Monday, China’s National Health Commission ordered local officials in Guangdong province — which includes He’s laboratory in Shenzhen — to investigate his actions. It was not clear if he could face criminal charges. His career trajectory did not follow the expected script. He did not publish most of his earlier research on modifying mice and monkey DNA, as most scientists would have done. And the way he advanced his latest study included questionable decisions on secrecy and medical ethics. “If you’re going to do something this controversial and this early, and you want to be the leader of this movement, you want to do it in an exemplary way,” said Dr. Eric Topol, who heads the Scripps Research Translational Institute in California. He, who says his parents were farmers, was born in 1984 in southern China. At the time, the country was just beginning to emerge from the isolation of the Mao era, and the average annual income was only $300. Telephones were rare. Many villages were not yet connected by paved roads. Initially, He followed a common path for scientists of his generation. After graduating from the University of Science and Technology of China, he moved to the United States for graduate studies. There he earned a Ph.D. in biophysics from Rice University in 2010, then spent a year as a postdoctoral research fellow at Stanford. His Stanford adviser, Stephen Quake, described him as “super bright” and “at the cutting edge of trying to apply new technologies to biology.” In 2012, He returned to China to take up a post at Southern University of Science and Technology — an institution that opened only a year earlier and is partly funded by the government of Shenzhen, a southern Chinese city known for its technology companies. “He was really interested in the notion of human genome editing,” and what situation would be appropriate, said Quake, recalling one of He’s visits. Quake gave feedback, but did not oversee the study. He’s research was funded in part by a program to recruit China-born scientists working abroad to set up labs in their home country. The work could not have been legally conducted in the U.S. or in most of Europe. Last month, He told the AP that he believed gene editing of human embryos resulting in live births was legal in China because the country has no law specifically forbidding it. China has banned human cloning for reproduction. In 2003, the Ministry of Health issued a guideline to in-vitro clinics barring “clinical experiments” that “violate ethical or moral principles.” The young scientist saw this ambiguity as an opportunity. Sometimes researchers — Chinese or foreign — who can’t secure funding or permission for unconventional projects in the U.S. or Europe find financial support and openings in China. Ren Xiaoping, a surgeon who aims to perform the first human head transplant, worked for many years in U.S. hospitals but returned to China because a medical institute in his hometown of Shenyang agreed to support his research. Guoping Feng, a neuroscientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, works with a research facility in Guangdong province where his associates genetically engineer monkeys with brain disorders to study the development of autism-like symptoms. China has fewer restrictions on the use of lab animals. In 2016, He reached out to an AIDS advocacy group in Beijing to help him recruit potential study participants — couples trying to have children where the man was HIV positive. There are already well-tested ways to guard against transmission of the AIDS virus in IVF. Instead, He’s goal was to rewrite DNA before birth to make children less likely to contract HIV after they’re born. Other scientists have tested similar gene-editing techniques on cells in a lab dish to prevent inherited diseases, but not leading to live births. For his CRISPR work, He did not seek prior approval from federal regulators. He listed his study in an online registry of Chinese clinical trials on Nov. 8 — long after it began. His lab skirted norms that many of his Chinese peers uphold. For example, the lab did not inform all the medical staff directly assisting the expectant couples that the study involved gene editing. They believed they were assisting in standard IVF attempts, with an additional step of mapping the genomes, not manipulating the embryo, according to one of the embryologists involved in the research, Qin Jinzhou. Patient consent forms referred to the study imprecisely as an “AIDS vaccine development” program. He also sought consultation from an ethics committee outside the hospitals involved in the research. Lin Zhitong, founder of the Shenzhen Harmonicare Women & Children’s Hospital, told the AP in October that his hospital’s ethics committee advised He, but had no other involvement. Withholding information from medical staff about gene editing was acceptable because some fertility doctors may not agree to help HIV positive couples, said Lin, who also said he has not worked as a doctor or scientist, but comes from a family of hospital property developers. Deceiving or working around any study participants is not standard practice in China, “and it violates the broad spirit of informed consent,” said Nie, the bioethics expert. “In some cases, ethics committees are just rubber stamps.” After He’s claim, Harmonicare released a statement condemning human gene-editing and announced an investigation into any ties with He’s lab. The Shenzhen scientist released some findings in YouTube videos. He announced his feat in English, not Chinese. “He wanted to attract attention in the international community. Now he got what he really wanted,” Nie said. He’s own university was kept in the dark. Southern University of Science and Technology said in a statement that it was not informed about He’s work, and that it “seriously violated academic ethics and standards.” He’s research team included his former Rice adviser, physics professor Michael Deem, who sits on the scientific advisory boards of He’s two genetics companies. Rice said it has launched an investigation into Deem’s involvement. In an interview last month at his Shenzhen lab, He said gene-edited babies were inevitable. He wanted to be first. “There will be someone, somewhere, who is doing this,” he said. “If it’s not me, it’s someone else.” ___ Follow Christina Larson on Twitter at https://twitter.com/larsonchristina . ___ AP Chief Medical Writer Marilynn Marchione in Hong Kong, researcher Fu Ting and video journalist Emily Wang in Beijing contributed to this report. ___ This Associated Press series was produced in partnership with the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content.