Consequently, the evidence now indicates only that Defendants engaged in the lawful trading of securities. Because USANA did not meet its burden, the court strikes the second claim for relief under California’s anti-SLAPP statute.

A ruling yesterday in the Usana Health Sciences (NASDAQ:USNA) v. Barry Minkow & Fraud Discovery Institute case in United States Court for the District of Utah is a big blow to Usana.

The judge’s order essentially grants FDI’s anti-SLAPP motion and dismisses all but one of Usana’s claims under state law (the bulk of what Usana was claiming in their complaint).

But here’s the best part: Usana cannot pursue money damages under federal securities law (Rule 10B-5). They could seek “injunctive relief”… but there’s really nothing for Usana to ask for an injunction on anymore. Barry has no current positions in Usana stock, so there’s nothing to claim there. And the First Amendment protects free speech, so Usana really can’t shut Barry up… our laws allow him to criticize Usana if he wants. Theoretically, Usana could still pursue a claim of unlawful stock manipulation, but they really have no case in that regard. (As a friend of mine says: NOPE-SORRY!)

Do you think the taxing authorities already have too much control over your wallet? Do you agree that they dip into your money whenever they please? Well if you’re a Wisconsin homeowner, there’s a good chance it could be worse.

Bill 2007 AB 580 is sitting on Governor Jim Doyle’s desk, and if he signs it, we’re screwed.

Real Debate Wisconsin explains the laws as they currently stand:

It’s official. My book has been printed. I got the first copy in the mail today. The “official” release date isn’t until March 14, but they’re ready to be sold.

This is really exciting. The book looks much better in person than it does in any pictures. But I took a picture for you… just to prove that I really have a copy in my hands.

Yahoo… I’m off to continue writing my next masterpiece…

I am reading Cynthia Cooper’s book, Extraordinary Circumstances, which documents her experiences uncovering the massive fraud at WorldCom. I want to finish reading the book so I can write a proper review here and elsewhere. But I admit I’m having a hard time finishing the book due to all the other demands on my time…

Nonetheless, I wanted to share this passage from the book because it illustrates so perfectly the main reason why audits fail to find fraud: Those committing fraud know how to hide it from the auditors. Because of that active concealment, there is little chance of the auditors finding the fraud.

Wikileaks wasn’t really ever gone, but a very unusual case in which a bank sued the web host of Wikileaks resulted in the U.S. version of the site being pulled offline for a couple of weeks. The controversial site’s domain was wikileaks.org. The site’s purpose is to allow whistleblowers to anonymously post incriminating information and documents that show evidence of wrongdoing.

Someone posted some very incriminating information about Bank Julius Baer on Wikileaks. The documents allegedly prove that the bank helps very rich customers hide assets, launder money, and evade taxes. The bank got upset because the documents were deemed confidential, and they tried to get the site owner to take down the documents.

After being unsucessful, Julius Baer took the unusual step of suing the web host, Dynadot. And instead of fighting the case, Dynadot decided instead to agree to completely shut down the site, make it so the site owners couldn’t transfer the domain name anywhere else, and turn over all data collected by the web host, including IP addresses of users. How outrageous!