Lance Armstrong Doping Investigation On '60 Minutes'
Ubiquitous
admitted to federal authorities that not only did they use banned substances,
but Lance Armstrong did as well.
An investigation by Scott Pelley’s team on “60 Minutes” into Armstrong and the
use of banned substances in pro-cycling aired this Sunday.
The Associated Press reports on former teammate Tyler Hamilton's observations
to "60 Minutes" regarding the U.S. Postal team operation:
-Team leaders, including doctors and managers, encouraged and supervised
doping;
-Doping was going on inside the U.S. Postal team even before Armstrong joined
in 1998;
-Performance-enhancing drugs, including EPO and human growth hormone, were
handed out to cyclists in white lunch bags;
-Team members were met at the airport, driven to hotels, told to lie down and
give blood that could be transfused back into their bodies at a later date.
Armstrong continues to deny doping. Armstrong’s attorney, Mark Fabian, has
released multiple statements against the CBS report, remarking that Lance
Armstrong “has passed nearly 500 tests over twenty years of competition.”
Story continues below
Advertisement
AdvertisementAdvertisementRegarding Hamilton, Fabian writes, “Tyler Hamilton
is a confessed liar in search of a book deal – and he managed to dupe 60
Minutes, the CBS Evening News, and new anchor Scott Pelley. Most people,
though, will see this for exactly what it is: More washed-up cyclists talking
trash for cash.”
Tyler Hamilton has turned in his cycling gold medal to the U.S. Anti-Doping
Agency.
As for George Hincapie, a teammate and close friend who "60 Minutes" reports
testified to the grand jury about Armstrong’s involvement with EPO, Fabian
writes, “In its unpardonable zeal to smear Lance Armstrong, CBS has also
attacked the reputation of George Hincapie. We are confident that the
statements attributed to Hincapie are inaccurate and that the reports of his
testimony are unreliable. George Hincapie and his counsel have publicly said
that they did not reveal any aspects of his testimony.”
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7366948n
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7366946n
---
"If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the 21st
century."
Anton Berlin
> "If Barack Obama isn't careful, he will become the Jimmy Carter of the 21st
> century."
Carter is a god. Best statesman Amerika has ever had.
dave a
Finally, something we agree on!
Mason Barge
>According to a “60 Minutes” report, Lance Armstrong’s former teammates have
>admitted to federal authorities that not only did they use banned substances,
>but Lance Armstrong did as well.
>
>An investigation by Scott Pelley’s team on “60 Minutes” into Armstrong and the
>use of banned substances in pro-cycling aired this Sunday.
it's heartening to see 60 Minutes pulling out of its nosedive. This was a
great show and really took the time to look at a lot of subordinate issues
in depth.
I credit the riddance of Dan Rather as the primary reason for 60 Minutes'
resurgence, and Katie Couric's diminishing influence over CBS News second.
Actually, it's better now than when it started.
It looks like CBS news is actually trying to make a move into balanced
reporting and journalism. It's very heartening, in this day of Fox/MSNBC
etc. being considered "news" shows.
Vagina Gorilla
Lara Logan had her flame snuffed out in Egypt. Doesn't even appear
to be the same person.
trotsky
Like Fox?
Mason Barge
I lean the other way. She's earned some street cred as a journalist
rather than a pretty face. She's distanced herself from the likes of
Katie Couric. I could hardly stand her before. Now, I listen to what she
says.
She was pretty whiny about the sexual assault, and putting herself in that
position might have been 90% stupidity and 10% guts, but still . . . she
wasn't sitting in a studio or claiming 5 years of Capitol Hill reporting
constitutes her "journalistic background".
Dano
news:orlqt65k2kn3n5pum...@4ax.com...
==============================================
How did she "put herself in that position" any more than Daniel Pearl and
countless other journalists who have been killed in pursuit of a story...in
a pursuit of truth being brought to their viewers and/or readers? It's
both a noble AND dangerous profession. They all know the risks regardless
of gender.
Mason Barge
>"Mason Barge" wrote in message
>news:orlqt65k2kn3n5pum...@4ax.com...
>
>On Tue, 24 May 2011 12:33:36 -0700 (PDT), Vagina Gorilla
><vagina...@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]
>>Lara Logan had her flame snuffed out in Egypt. Doesn't even appear
>>to be the same person.
>
>I lean the other way. She's earned some street cred as a journalist
>rather than a pretty face. She's distanced herself from the likes of
>Katie Couric. I could hardly stand her before. Now, I listen to what she
>says.
>
>She was pretty whiny about the sexual assault, and putting herself in that
>position might have been 90% stupidity and 10% guts, but still . . . she
>wasn't sitting in a studio or claiming 5 years of Capitol Hill reporting
>constitutes her "journalistic background".
>
>==============================================
>
>How did she "put herself in that position" any more than Daniel Pearl and
>countless other journalists who have been killed in pursuit of a story...in
>a pursuit of truth being brought to their viewers and/or readers? It's
>both a noble AND dangerous profession. They all know the risks regardless
>of gender.
I agree completely. What I'm bemoaning is that some of the most prominent
"journalists" -- i.e. national anchors -- haven't ever done so.
It used to be that anchors were supposed to be people who had worked their
way up through the ranks, giving good reporting even in the toughest
assignments. Now we have people anchoring news shows (<cough> <Katie
Couric><Brian Williams><cough>) whose big journalistic credentials consist
of talking to important people on Capitol Hill.
Dano
=====================================
I was just responding to the line, "She was pretty whiny about the sexual
assault, and putting herself in that
position might have been 90% stupidity and 10% guts." That's hardly the
first time I've read or heard a similar sentiment and it outrages me.
Mason Barge
Well, for me, putting herself in harm's way is pretty much a badge of a
hardcore professional journalist.
My point about that is that she gets a lot of credit. I mean, her going
out to cover the story wasn't exactly like Andy Rooney climbing on a B-17,
knowing that there was a 20-30% chance he would die. I don't really think
she fully appreciated the danger. But on the other hand, she wasn't
exactly sitting in a comfy hotel room, either.
I do think she scored negative points by going on 60 Minutes and making
quite such a big deal about it, if she wants to build a reputation as a
hardboiled reporter.
Anyway, don't go all outraged on me. The net effect, as far as I'm
concerned, is a solid step in her becoming a journalist I would trust,
rather than a talking head like Couric or Brian Williams.