Lance Armstrong Dolls out $100,000 to Planned Parenthood-
Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007

    Lance Armstrong Dolls out $100,000 to Planned Parenthood

    Wow, what a coincidence! Lance donates $100,000 to Planned Parenthood the Democratic parties sacred cow the same week investigation into his dopping alegations get dropped.

    Lance Armstrong's Livestrong to Donate $100K to Planned Parenthood |

    “The donation is going to the Planned Parenthood Cancer Services Fund. The donation will be restricted to this fund which goes to provide cancer screening services in local communities.”

    Earth calling Lance, Planned Parenthood doesn't provide "Cancer Services" as Live Action busted them for that lie last March. So where is this $100,000 that your benefactors gave the Livestrong Foundation actually going to go? Lance I think you owe it to your fans and supporters to take some accountability here and make sure that every red cent goes to cancer services as promised!

    Planned Parenthood CEO’s False Mammogram Claim Exposed

  2. #2
    AZ is offline
    Reputation: AZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    It has been suggested that some of Lances better connected supporter's (Barbara Boxer) exerted their influence with the Justice Department to have the investigation squashed. More Justice Department improprieties ?

  3. #3
    Hybrid Leftys aren't real Moderator
    Reputation: MendonCycleSmith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    OP: You write well enough that I'll assume you got a free public ( AKA, socialist) 12 year education.

    So I guess you should count yourself lucky that you're also well off enough that your mom, sister or wife, doesn't need to rely on PP's sliding scale pelvic and breast exams. No, they don't DO mammograms, but they do find things that make them recommend that she gets one.

    For those folks not wealthy enough to contribute to a few Super PAC's, access to low cost basic health screening is a really good thing. They may work for the rich, but it doesn't mean they will ever be so themselves. Or are you advocating for all folks making minimum wage to get cancer undetected and die?

    Who would bring you your Latte at Starbucks then?

    Can't remember which Republicrat said it last week, but I thank them for finally saying it in public, "politics has no place in health care", period.
    Cannondale Lefty and HeadShock servicing, wheel building, etc...

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Stugotz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011

    Betsy Andreu weighs in:

    Opinion: Betsy’s word on Lance
    By Anthony Tan

    Following the publication of my February 4 column, ‘Absolution of Alberto a perilous precedent,’ almost immediately, I received an email.

    “I just wanted to correct you on a couple of things,” began the e-mail.

    The author was the wife of a former teammate of Lance Armstrong.

    She claimed there were no leaks from the Los Angeles grand jury proceedings initiated by the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) lead investigator, Jeff Novitzky. I dispute this, since I have seen and read testimony from a number of those who were subpoenaed or disposed. Regardless, she claimed, “Any witness who speaks and/or testifies is free to speak.”

    We both have our take on Novitzky, who, admittedly, I have never met. She has, as she and her husband were asked to provide evidence in the form of a sworn deposition.

    I don’t believe him to be unscrupulous, but reading about his pursuit of BALCO and the extent to which he took the investigation into alleged fraud and malpractice at the United States Postal Service cycling team, one could say Novitzky was a man on a mission. “He is a man of integrity who follows the rules,” she assured me.

    I used the word ‘was’ because as of Friday February 3 the case was unceremoniously, and rather inexplicably, closed.

    A spokesman for Andre Birotte Jr., the US Attorney in Los Angeles, told last Friday “we cannot and will not discuss the internal deliberations” but with more than a hint of bromide said that, “the decision was made with a full and fair consideration of all the relevant evidence and law.”

    “Like Yasser Arafat, Lance yet again dodged another bullet,” she said. “It’s disheartening that all of us who were compelled by law to tell the truth and risked so much in doing so weren’t vindicated in a court of law.”

    While the case has been shelved by the US Attorney’s Office, the US Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) has vowed to continue where the FDA left off. “Unlike the US Attorney, USADA’s job is to protect clean sport rather than enforce specific criminal laws,” Travis Tygart, CEO of USADA, said in a written statement following the announcement that ‘Lance dodged another bullet.’

    Tygart reaffirmed the USADA position: “Our investigation into doping in the sport of cycling is continuing and we look forward to obtaining the information developed during the federal investigation.”

    The lady who wrote to me is, unsurprisingly, Betsy Andreu.

    In 2006, she and her husband Frankie provided sworn testimony that Armstrong told physicians in their presence in 1996 that he has used EPO (erythropoietin), growth hormone, steroids and testosterone.

    Their testimony related to a case involving Armstrong and SCA Promotions, the latter withholding a bonus as a result of Armstrong winning his sixth Tour de France in 2004 and allegations that he used performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs) to do so, as detailed in the 2003 book, ‘L.A. Confidentiel.’ An out-of-court settlement was reached to the value of $7.5 million, covering the $5 million bonus plus interest and lawyers’ fees. The arbitrator decreed the contract had no stipulations about doping per se, rendering most of the testimony moot including the Andreus, and thus ruling in favor of Armstrong and Tailwind Sports, owners of the US Postal Service cycling team.

    We are unlikely to hear any more from Armstrong about this affair until USADA are done with it. In a written statement, he labeled the FDA investigation a “distraction”, saying its closure was “the right decision.” Given that, I asked Ms Andreu for her thoughts on what has transpired so far, and what she expects to happen.

    “I’ll only agree to answer questions if the answers appear in its entirety without being creatively edited,” she responded.

    So, without further ado… You say that leaks were not the result of the shelving of the FDA investigation into Lance Armstrong during his tenure at the US Postal Service cycling team. What do you put it down to, then, and how can you be certain this is indeed the case?

    Betsy Andreu: To even presume there were leaks by the government shows you’ve bought into Lance’s defense attorneys’ tactics. If indeed there were any so-called leaks by anyone in the government, then we must know who leaked what and they should be held accountable. It seems like they used a tactic from the BALCO handbook. The defense attorney in that case leaked the information to the press then screamed and yelled for the judge to dismiss it; a subsequent investigation revealed the defense had been the source of leaks. Let me remind you that a witness is free to speak about his/her involvement in the case; that does NOT constitute a leak!

    As far as why this was closed… Speaking from personal experience, I know Lance’s modus operandi is to cozy up to people who are well connected in politics and the media. He spends a lot of money on politically-connected lawyers such as Fabiani whose partner, Chris Lehane, worked with Lanny Breuer during the Clinton-Gore presidency. Breuer is now the Assistant Attorney General for the criminal division of the Department of Justice. Lance’s attorneys were afforded meetings with the DOJ that average Joes would never get.

    Look at the Penn State scandal – the attorney in charge of that DOJ had grand jury testimony which contained evidence of despicable, illegal and immoral acts. The attorney there dropped the case as well. Was there corruption in protecting the football team and coaches?

    VN: You were subpoenaed to testify before the Federal grand jury. In summary, what did you tell them?

    BA: Again, here is misinformation. Your question is based on presumption which is wrong since we (Frankie and I) didn’t go before the grand jury. Whether testifying before the grand jury or talking to a fed, lying is a crime (think Martha Stewart who was jailed for lying to a federal agent). I can tell you I told the truth about the firsthand knowledge I had about Lance’s PED usage.

    VN: You met the lead FDA investigator, Jeff Novitzky. What were your impressions of the man, and what did he tell you about the veracity and amount of evidence he had gathered over the past 20 months, remembering that in order to convict, he had to prove fraud (and not that Lance or anyone on the team simply doped)?

    BA: I’m astounded at the presumptions being made here – third question in which the presumption is false. When Jeff Novitzky first contacted me, he made clear right off the bat that his interaction with me was a one way street – i.e., he took information and didn’t give it. I believe he is a man of integrity with a strong belief in the American justice system. Lance’s greatest ally is the honor of his foes because they play by the rules.

    With all due respect to Mr. Novitzky and the other agents and AUSAs (assistant US attorneys) involved in this case, they may not care about the lies and misinformation spewed about them and the case but they have their job at the end of the day. Those of us who told the truth about Lance’s doping risked a lot and I speak for a few who say we’re afraid of potential backlash. Already there’s an instance where, privately, we’re cheered on by people who commended our courage standing up to Lance and telling the truth. Soon after charges were dropped, however, the same person(s) were touting their association with Lance. Again, when an agent contacts you or you’re subpoenaed to go before the grand jury it’s not like you choose whether or not to comply.

    VN: The fact that the FDA investigation was closed without a ruling – what are your sentiments?

    BA: I’m astounded, stunned and disappointed because I thought this was would’ve put the truth out there in its entirety, thereby putting to rest any doubt about my knowledge of Lance’s doping as I testified to in the SCA case and of which I spoke truthfully to the Feds. It would’ve showed that I never lied. Ever. I also think it’s a huge blow for clean sport.

    As NPR first reported on February 7, 2012, “The decision to close the case really came out of the blue.” Within the agencies there was “surprise, even shock and anger” at Mr. Birotte’s decision. The agents were informed of this decision only minutes before it was announced. The prosecution recommended criminal charges, hence indictments were expected. It took close to two years for this one man to decide to drop charges when the investigation was presumably nearing its end?

    When Marion Jones was being investigated by the Feds and before she was indicted, she had lobbied high ranking congressman John Conyers of Detroit who stood by her side, calling for an investigation into the Justice Department and criticizing USADA for bringing a case against her when she had never failed a PED test. You have to wonder if Senators and Congressmen were lobbied by Lance et al. as well. The government owes it to the American people to fight corruption at all levels, whether it be people in the private sector or political appointees.

    VN: USADA has formally announced their intentions to continue their investigations into doping. What level of confidence do you have that they can bring about a public hearing and, if found guilty, charge Armstrong with illegal use of PEDs?

    BA: How incredible is it that Contador and Ullrich get nabbed but the man who beat them was lily-white! USADA was formed for a reason and it’s a shame it has to exist. However, as long as the benefits to doping outweigh the consequences of getting caught, people will try to buck the system – especially if you’ve benefited financially and have the money to hire attorneys whose job, should the athlete test positive, is to place doubt with the sanctioning body in order to get him/her off.

    An important point to make is that doping is not a crime in America, like it is in France and Germany. You can dope yourself to the gills and not be criminally charged. The Wall Street Journal reported on February 8, 2012 that the reason for the government’s involvement was to answer the question whether or not the use of PEDs constituted criminal fraud. Were laws broken to get these PEDs? Were sponsors defrauded?

    Christine Brennan of USA Today wrote a report on February 9, 2012 where (WADA Director General) David Howman said: “From the information I have, the data and evidence that has been gathered will reveal a lot of information that indicates doping offenses.”

    Reading the AP on February 9 this year, Lance didn’t say he didn’t dope; he just reiterated he “never tested positive” which isn’t even correct. In 1999 he most certainly tested positive; he had to get a back-dated scrip which the UCI accepted. Had the UCI not accepted it, Lance would’ve been sanctioned for having the banned corticoid triamcinolone in his urine. In 2005, six of his stored samples were tested retroactively and EPO was found (as alleged by a report in the August 23, 2005 edition of L’Equipe – Ed.).

    Since this case has been closed, Mr. Birotte’s office has an obligation to turn over all the evidence that can be legally obtained by USADA for their case. Mr. Birotte’s office said they will turn over all the evidence obtained – with the exception of grand jury evidence – to USADA. USADA can subpoena people, and those who have cooperated with the government are going to have to cooperate with USADA. I’m sure it’ll be very, very interesting.

    If I can add, I know to the majority of VeloNews readers I’m despised. I have said people’s opinions of me only matter because Frankie still works in cycling. I’ve been a very vocal critic not only of Lance but of drugs in sport, and behind the scenes, am doing what I can to help have clean sport in America. People are loyal to their beliefs and for those who hate me and don’t believe me, nothing will change that. Should it ever be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Lance used PEDs and that there was criminal activity, some people will still refuse to believe it. And there’s nothing you can do about that.

    Thanks for asking me to comment and giving me the forum to do so.
    Speed Kills...It kills those that don't have it!
    German Engineering in Da Haus, Ja!

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Stugotz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011

    Anti-Doping Agency Has A Bunch Of Old Tour De France Titles...

    Sports News in Brief
    Anti-Doping Agency Has A Bunch Of Old Tour De France Titles Lying Around If Anybody Wants One

    MONTREAL—Upon releasing documents Monday relating to the verdict against 2010 Tour de France winner Alberto Contador, World Anti-Doping Agency officials mentioned to reporters they have plenty of stripped Tour titles in the office that anybody could drop by and take. "We're not going to being doing anything with all these trophies. Just call us before you come by, and we'll have them put your name down in the record books as the winner," said WADA president John Fahey, who dropped off boxes of tainted yellow jerseys at Goodwill earlier in the day. "They're cycling trophies, so they're not worth anything, but they might work well as a fruit bowl." Fahey said the agency wants to get rid of the titles quickly, as "they will really start cluttering up the place" when Lance Armstrong is finally convicted.

    Funny stuff from the Onion.
    Speed Kills...It kills those that don't have it!
    German Engineering in Da Haus, Ja!

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Stugotz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011

    Is Lance Armstrong's doping investigation really closed?

    Two old cycling rivals were reunited last week -- but in the news, not on the bikes. It's a different decade, but we have the same result: Lance Armstrong wins, Jan Ullrich loses.

    So it would seem on the surface. On Feb. 8, Ullrich was sanctioned by the Court of Arbitration for Sport for his involvement in a blood-doping ring uncovered by Spanish police in 2006. He retired that year, but it took six years for justice to catch up with him.

    Five days before that, U.S. Attorney Andre Birotte Jr. delivered some very welcome news for Armstrong. In an announcement timed to draw as little notice as possible -- Birotte's press release came out late on the Friday preceding the Super Bowl -- his office revealed that it was "closing an investigation into allegations of federal criminal conduct by members and associates of a professional bicycle racing team owned in part by Lance Armstrong."

    The Armstrong investigation began nearly two years ago, spurred in part by allegations from Armstrong's former teammate Floyd Landis that doping was widespread on their U.S. Postal Service squad. A year after Landis made his allegations, Tyler Hamilton went on 60 Minutes, admitting to doping throughout his cycling career. Like Landis, Hamilton was an ex-teammate of Armstrong's. Like Landis, he said he'd seen Armstrong take banned substances with his own eyes. (Armstrong denies ever using performance-enhancing drugs.)

    The use of PEDs is not a crime. A source familiar with the investigation told that authorities were looking into the possibility that Armstrong and U.S. Postal team officials may have committed mail fraud, wire fraud, drug distribution and witness tampering. The source described the evidence against Armstrong as "overwhelming," and said investigators were stunned and blindsided by Birotte's announcement.

    Armstrong celebrated by embracing his girlfriend and children, he told The Associated Press, then cracking open "a cold beer." He also told the wire service that Birotte's decision should begin to put an end to allegations that he doped to win.

    "It's over," he said. "I'm moving on."

    If Armstrong's celebration seemed slightly muted, it could be because people like Travis Tygart, CEO of the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency and David Howman do not share his desire to "move on." Tygart followed Birotte's Super Bowl-Eve announcement with a statement of his own:

    "Unlike the U.S. Attorney, USADA's job is to protect clean sport rather than enforce specific criminal laws. Our investigation into doping in the sport of cycling is continuing and we look forward to obtaining the information developed during the federal investigation."

    The USADA put its Armstrong probe on hold while the feds investigated him. Now that the feds are finished, that inquiry has been resumed; its broad scope includes riders, coaches and team doctors on Armstrong's team, and could have a significant effect on whom USA Cycling invites to participate in the upcoming London Olympics. Several of Armstrong's former teammates still riding in the pro peloton will be following this case with keen interest -- and, if Birotte's office cooperates with USADA -- a sinking feeling. While USADA can't convict anyone of a crime, it does have the power to suspend riders and disqualify results. Armstrong could be stripped of at least some of his seven Tour de France titles. And his reputation would take an incalculable hit.

    If Armstrong were to be found guilty of doping violations, litigants would start taking numbers to sue him, forcing his legal fees, already onerous, to go up. In 2004, SCA Promotions underwrote a $5 million bonus to Armstrong, for winning his fifth straight Tour. When questions arose about whether Armstrong had used PEDs to win, SCA refused to pay. Armstrong sued, and got his bonus. Do you think SCA president Bob Hammond would like to get his money back?

    Grand jury testimony given to the feds will remain confidential. Yet, "there have obviously been many interviews, many statements made and other pieces of evidence that would be pretty helpful," says Howman, CEO of the World Anti-Doping Agency, who is closely monitoring USADA's progress.

    How much of that will the U.S. attorney's office be willing to pass along? Thom Mrozek, a spokesman for Birotte, does not strike an especially encouraging note: "We have received a request for information from USADA," he said. "We are considering that request, in light of our legal obligations, and Department of Justice policy, and we will respond to them in due course. I don't know when that's going to be."

    One gets the distinct impression that Birotte is no rush to work with USADA. That -- like his decision to drop the criminal case -- is strange, because there is a clear precedent for athletes being sanctioned by their governing bodies based on evidence gathered in the course of criminal investigations. "That's the way the federal agencies operated in Balco," says Howman. A number of elite American sprinters and coaches were suspended before the 2004 Athens Olympics, based on evidence gathered in a federal investigation of the Bay Area Laboratory Co-Operative, which supplied them with a previously undetectable steroid. (Remember "The Clear"?)

    That precedent has been, if anything, strengthened since then. In 2008, the U.S. Senate ratified the UNESCO Convention, a treaty created to give governments a legal framework to address doping in sport, mandating that criminal investigators share information with their national anti-doping agencies.

    "There are no legal hurdles" to the U.S. Attorney's office working with USADA, says one international official familiar with this case. "If they don't [hand evidence over], it will be because they're sitting on overwhelming evidence of drug cheating in sport. It will be an international sports doping cover-up of the worst sort."

    There is the example of good old Jan Ullrich. In May 2006, Spanish police discovered some 100 bags of blood, among other doping products, when they raided the apartment of a Spanish doctor. DNA evidence proved that Ullrich's blood was in one of those bags. It took nearly six years, but justice found him last week.

    Likewise, it caught up to Alberto Contador, the three-time Tour de France winner who was transformed into a two-time Tour winner by a CAS decision handed down on Feb. 6. The swashbuckling Spaniard was banned from competition for two years after testing positive for clenbuterol in the 2010 Tour. While he welcomed the victory, said Howman, "We are of course not happy that it took so long."

    "The arc of the moral universe is long," as Martin Luther King Jr. observed, "but it bends toward justice." Years from now, or perhaps sooner, Armstrong may be on the receiving end of a bad-news phone call. He may find himself reaching for another beer, this time for a different reason.

    Read more: The USADA is not finished investigating Lance Armstrong - Austin Murphy -

    Link to the original story.
    Speed Kills...It kills those that don't have it!
    German Engineering in Da Haus, Ja!

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts




© Copyright 2020 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.