The Fabiani emails

Master of Disaster speaks

Subject: Re: Interview request

From: Andy Shen 

Date: September 27, 2010 6:46:09 PM EDT

To: Mark Fabiani

Mr. Fabiani

I’m from nyvelocity.com, where we caricatured you thus (I believe Sal Ruibal alerted you to it):

https://nyvelocity.com/content/toto/2010/toto-turns-199

I was wondering if we could send you some questions regarding the matter at hand.

Thanks

Andy Shen

 

From: Sal Ruibal 

Subject: Fabio-ani

Date: September 28, 2010 1:40:57 PM EDT

To: Andy Shen 

The Fab Man emailed me, asking if I could vouch for you guys. I told him you’ll stick a knife in his liver, but he would get style points for having the guts to show up. I think he really liked the Foghorn Leghorn bit.

 

From: Mark Fabiani

Subject: Re: Interview request

Date: September 27, 2010 9:55:33 PM EDT

To: Andy Shen 

sure.  happy to help if I can.  

 

From: Andy Shen 

Subject: Re: Interview request

Date: September 27, 2010 9:59:42 PM EDT

To: Mark Fabiani

Wonderful!

First 2:

What’s your decision making process when you take on a client? Did you vet the Armstrong case first?

What’s the truth behind the ‘hospital room incident’? Were the Andreu’s and McIlvain present when doctors asked Armstrong about his past drug use?

Thanks

 

From: Mark Fabiani 

Subject: Re: Interview request

Date: September 27, 2010 10:02:19 PM EDT

To: Andy Shen 

Thx for sending so quickly.  I will wait until you’ve sent them all to sit down and answer if that’s  ok.  Please let me know your deadline.    

Sent from my iPad

 

Subject: Re: Interview request

From: Andy Shen 

Date: September 27, 2010 10:04:03 PM EDT

To: Mark Fabiani 

No deadline. Would prefer to do this sequentially if that’s ok.

 

From: Mark Fabiani 

Subject: Answers to your questions

Date: September 28, 2010 1:43:05 PM EDT

To: Andy Shen 

Andy, with regard to the alleged hospital room incident, an overwhelming amount of evidence demonstrates that the incident never occurred.   None of the other people who were supposedly in the room at the time remember the alleged incident.   Some of these individuals have testified under oath that the alleged incident did not occur.   Lance Armstrong’s doctor has indicated under oath that the alleged incident did not occur.   And throughout hundreds of pages of medical records, there is not a single mention of the alleged incident — which there surely would have been had such information been provided to doctors.  In short, you have a mountain of evidence that the alleged incident never occurred stacked up against the word of one person who is a self-avowed enemy of Lance Armstrong.

 

Subject: Re: Answers to your questions

From: Andy Shen 

Date: September 28, 2010 2:15:29 PM EDT

To: Mark Fabiani

You’ve previously stated that Ms. Andreu misheard the doctors, that they were talking about Armstrong’s cancer treatment, which consisted of EPO and HGH. If the incident never happened, she obviously couldn’t have mis-heard. Was that a misstatement on your part?

 

From: Mark Fabiani 

Subject: Re: Answers to your questions

Date: September 28, 2010 2:30:10 PM EDT

To: Andy Shen 

Andy, you don’t have that quite right.   What we have said is that, if you are inclined to give Ms. Andreu the benefit of the doubt, you could surmise that at some point during her time visiting the hospital she overheard discussion of Mr. Armstrong’s cancer treatment.  But that is just a guess, and it’s a guess that’s warranted only if you believe she deserves the benefit of the doubt and that this dispute is the result of an honest mistake.  What is absolutely clear is that the hospital incident, as Ms. Andreu now describes it, has been disproved by an overwhelming amount of evidence.   

 

From: Andy Shen 

Subject: Re: Answers to your questions

Date: September 28, 2010 2:43:59 PM EDT

To: Mark Fabiani 

My apologies. I was going from memory, I believe that LATimes article was amended, so the passage I’m thinking of is no longer on line.

Do you have an opinion on what McIlvain was referring to when she said, "I’m not going to lie. You know, I was in that room. I heard it."

 

From: Mark Fabiani

Subject: Re: Answers to your questions

Date: September 28, 2010 2:48:30 PM EDT

To: Andy Shen 

In response to your question, you should look at two primary sources:

(1) McIlvain’s sworn deposition in the SCA case, where she specifically denies under oath that the hospital incident took place.

(2) Her lawyer’s on the record comments to the LA Times last Wednesday night, after she completed her grand jury appearance.   This is the most complete account that I know of of what she told the grand jury.

 

From: Andy Shen 

Subject: Re: Answers to your questions

Date: September 28, 2010 2:56:57 PM EDT

To: Mark Fabiani 

There are two sides in this argument, and obviously they’re either telling the truth or lying. Armstrong supporters in the bike industry generally profit from supporting him, whether they’re telling the truth or lying. His detractors generally have bleaker employment prospects in the bike industry. I can understand it if they’re telling the truth, believing they’re doing the right thing. What I can’t understand is someone lying to their own detriment. Can you comment on what their motivations might be?

  

From: Mark Fabiani 

Subject: Re: Answers to your questions

Date: September 28, 2010 3:01:46 PM EDT

To: Andy Shen 

Andy, I can’t speculate about the motivations of others.   All I can do is refer you to the factual material that exists (sworn statements, sworn depositions, medical records, etc.).

 

From: Andy Shen 

Subject: Re: Answers to your questions

Date: September 28, 2010 3:10:35 PM EDT

To: Mark Fabiani 

Some in the media have described your client’s recent behavior as ‘brazening it out’, i.e., maintaining a steady flow of public appearances to give the illusion of tranquility. Was this a recommendation of yours as his PR person, or is he merely living his life?

  

Subject: Re: Answers to your questions

From: Andy Shen 

Date: September 29, 2010 2:51:46 PM EDT

To: Mark Fabiani 

Mark, have I lost you?

Speaking of statements and depositions, are you aware that the Armstrong and McIlvain testimonies contradict each other? Armstrong says no discussion of his medical treatment took place in front of his visitors on that day, McIlvain corroborates Andreu’s version precisely, including the entry of two men, and differs only on the questioning of drugs.

 

From: Mark Fabiani 

Subject: Re: Answers to your questions

Date: September 29, 2010 3:00:20 PM EDT

To: Andy Shen 

do u have the sworn deposition testimony from 2005 and lawyer’s statement from last week?   if not I need to get you those.  they deal with your question.  I am traveling today but can send tomorrow 

 

From: Andy Shen 

Subject: Re: Answers to your questions

Date: September 29, 2010 3:07:23 PM EDT

To: Mark Fabiani 

I have 2005 testimony. I’m not necessarily taking her lawyer’s statement from last week at face value. It’s not sworn testimony, and there’s always a possibility that it’s a smokescreen, don’t you think? In any case, can you reconcile the differences between Armstrong’s and McIlvain’s 2005 testimonies?

I believe you call yourself the ‘Master of Disaster’. Is there a disaster here?

  

From: Andy Shen 

Subject: hello again

Date: September 30, 2010 10:28:29 AM EDT

To: Mark Fabiani 

Mark

Did I lose you again?

As I was compiling the emails, I noticed that you cited Armstrong’s doctor as one who discredits the hospital room incident. Are you referring to Craig Nichols? If so, do you find him a credible witness, as he a: wasn’t there, b: received a donation from Livestrong soon after, and c: vacations with Armstrong?

I’d like to wrap things up in time for posting tomorrow if that’s ok with you.

Andy

 

From: Mark Fabiani 

Subject: 

Date: September 30, 2010 12:39:23 PM EDT

To: Andy Shen 

Andy, in answer to your questions, please find three documents attached to

this email:

(1) Sworn deposition testimony by McIlvain.  In particular, please see pages 20-21.

(2) Public statement of Carmichael, who says that the hospital room incident never happened.

(3) Sworn affidavit of Dr. Craig Nichols, who at the time was Professor of Medicine and Chief of Hermatology/Oncology at Oregon Health and Sciences University.

Thanks, Mark.

 

From: Andy Shen 

Subject: Re: 

Date: September 30, 2010 1:57:37 PM EDT

To: Mark Fabiani 

To reiterate a couple of older emails, and hopefully wrap things up. Last barrage of questions.

Nichols wasn’t present, has received a donation from Livestrong, and vacations with Armstrong. 

Carmichael is likewise financially tied to Armstrong, and has faced doping accusations of his own.

The McIlvain testimony places the same people in the room as the Andreu’s claim, including two mystery men. Aside from the discussion of drugs you could argue her testimony jibes more with the Andreu’s than Armstrong.

Bill Stapleton and Bart Knaggs are on tape urging Frankie Andreu to have Betsy Andreu go on record and contradict L.A. Confidential, because it could ‘blow the whole sport’. Why were they so concerned about something that never happened? Does the Armstrong camp still feel Betsy has knowledge that could damage your client?

You’re the Master of Disaster. Is there a disaster here? Do innocent people need PR?

Thanks again for your time, I’m mildly disappointed that there were no food metaphors or puns.

Andy

 

From: Mark Fabiani 

Subject: RE:

Date: September 30, 2010 2:01:02 PM EDT

To: Andy Shen 

Andy, I’ve provided you a wide range of sworn testimony on this issue, along with all kinds of other evidence to prove that the hospital incident is mythical.  I can’t do any better for you than sworn testimony.  If you choose to dismiss evidence given under oath, that’s your call.

 

Subject: Re: RE:

From: Andy Shen

Date: September 30, 2010 2:47:55 PM EDT

To: Mark Fabiani 

Unfortunately, we live in a world where people might perjure themselves, so it can be useful to examine their motives. I’m sure you’ll say the same of whatever Landis tells Novitzky.

Once again, thanks for your time, will post tomorrow.

 

 

60 Comments

Tom Brakepad

of this new test are huge – all current and former pro riders samples may now be tested, including our friend LA’s. Take cover, the debris will be flying.

TN

D’oh!

Canndondale System Six stolen this eve. 8:45pm on Columbus Avenue.

Sid’s team bike, orange and black. Shimano Dura Ace, Neuvation wheels.

If you see it advertised online(or ridden) let me know or BUY it and I will pay
you back!

I almost never leave my bike with one eye on it in the City…this happens,
don’t do it. It was locked too.

Ted Neu 212-748-9879
tedneu@aol.com

FFF^2 - Save the date

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/landis-vows-to-repay-floyd-fairness-fund-donors

The Floyd Fairness Fund Squared (FFF^2) is pleased to announce a Town Hall Fundraiser Part Deux with 2006 Tour De France Champion (Emeritus) Floyd Landis, co-hosted by Deno’s WONDER WHEEL Cycling team and emceed by ESPN/ABC cycling commentator John Eustice.

Proceeds will support Floyd in his efforts to attain fair compensation for his supporters who had their money fraudulently and egregiously stolen from them to fight his completely substantiated doping allegations. Additional proceeds will go to Floyd’s work to establish a legacy of advocacy for athlete’s rights, now that he’s been caught and doesn’t have much else to do with his time. Any additional proceeds after that will probably just go to booze.

This event will take place Wednesday, October 20th from 7-10pm @ The Brooklyn Brewery 70 North 11th St., Brooklyn For event details please contact Brooke Emerson (b.emerson@floydfairnessfundpartdeux.org ).

Upton Sinclair

Not sure what the feedlot practices are in Spain, but most beef cattle entering feedlots in the United States are given hormone implants to promote faster growth. There are six anabolic steroids given, estradiol, testosterone, progesterone. There are 3 synthetic hormones which are the estrogen compound zeranol, androgen trenbolone acetate, and progestin melengestrol acetate.

It is a proven fact that measurable levels of all the above growth-promoting hormones are found at slaughter in the muscle, fat, liver, kidneys and other organ meats. The Food and Drug Administration has set “acceptable daily intakes” (ADIs) for these animal drugs.

It will be interesting to see the science behind Berto’s claim. Perhaps both claims are true. Like OJ, he did it and the cops planted evidence.

Bastien Housing

Berto’s explanation is not quite as creative, but still total BS – give me one example (other than “spiked” OTC supplements) where the alleged doper was not actually guilty. A big part of the problem is that the rider(s) don’t actually believe that doping is wrong – just something to conceal so they don’t get caught.

700x25

Loved the upton sinclair reference.

In general, they do not use steriods or other main stream US bulk farming chemical practices. It is one of the reasons why US beef is not imported to Europe and there is a different taste to Euro beef.

Reid Rothschild

Dear Mark,

Dirk is now doing b/b and Lance needs the money. In the very near future, a 1 foot long meat tube is going to dislodge you from Pharmstrong’s rectum, upstream into his colon.

BTW, it’s cool how you can text from Pharmstrong’s cavity.

Best Wishes,

Chest Rockwell

Dorian Locknut

1. A medical doctor who is a cancer specialist may ask about what medications a patient is using, but he would NEVER ask from a cycling perspective ‘did you ever take any performance enhancing drugs’. First that’s a sportive/cycling term (PEDs), a doctor would say ‘what medications have you taken in the past year’, or ‘are you taking any medications. They do NOT CARE if you had enhanced performance. Come on.
2. A medical doctor is constrained by HIPAA to provide patient confidentiality so they would NEVER ask that kind of history question, except in private.

So Betsy’s assertion does not even pass the giggle test.

Do I believe LA used PED methods? Possibly. He may not have used (currently) ILLEGAL methods, though. (training camp use, non-sanctioned designed substances, for example). In addition he may have used the least amount in the peloton – he may be a high responder.

Dorian Locknut

in Jail? He committed perjury. Why not just say “I lied, I’m a scoundrel, I stole people’s money”? Why try to implicate others? Because, as a scoundrel he feels his SIN is less if he can bring down others seen as more saintly than he.

I hope he gets what he deserves.

oldschoolnik

Talk about reiterating the party line! All that money just to repeat what any Fanboy or Public Strategies intern would say on a message board? Where do I sign up for this work?

Can’t believe he is still using “Nichols wasn’t there”. Andy, please correct me if I am wrong but wasn’t LA not even working with Nichols yet?

Dr. Maserati

So, the Fabricator says “I can’t do any better for you than sworn testimony. If you choose to dismiss evidence given under oath, that’s your call”.

Yet that is exactly what he is doing against both the Andreus testimony and indeed James Startts testimony when he asked about McIlvain” In his testimony, James Start said, I asked her did it definitely happen, and she said, yes, it did.”

From this link:
http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=5508863

ERgometor

beating…

Not an LA fan at all but this is getting tired. Biased journalism at the very least. What did you really expect to get from this hired gun?

Farinata Crank

Andy, I dislike Armstrong as much as the next guy and hope he goes down,

BUT GET A FUCKING LIFE DUDE!!!!!!!!

Anthony Drainhole

Andy, this is ridiculous. You are interviewing this guy with you having a pre-determined conclusion in mind: that Lance is guilty.

You are bullying this gentleman into caving in to what you believe. In essence, by discrediting sworn affidavits and testimonials he presents to you, you are discrediting the entire court and legal system just so you can fulfill your hunch that Lance doped.

Your “pre-determined” conclusion of guilt is much akin to a doctoral student finding and manipulating data to support a pre-reached and desired end result.

This is not journalism, but a steadfast and closeminded push to the result you wish to see.

stately, plump buck mulligan

“great piece.” “thanks for the work.”

what work? badgering a PR guy? it’s not work, as this clearly isn’t journalism. it’s obsession, holy-roller righteousness and infatuation with celebrity – just backwards. andy’s accelerating descent into madness (over something that has absolutely nothing to do with him, celebrity rumours and gossip) is fascinating, riveting, beautiful, and sad.

Tig Welded

Why would anyone in their right mind aspire to what passes for journalism anymore?

The general Public Strategies disinformation campaign:

Step 1: The Armstrong Myth is the bedrock of journalism. Lots of facts! Never tested positive, most tested athlete, etc.
Step 2: Personally attack anyone who mentions the obvious problems with the legal material. Shen, you love cancer.

Step 3: Repeat steps 1 and 2.

Lucas Chainsuck

Asking the question repeatedly until you get a desired answer wastes everyones time. The only conclusions which can be gleaned from this exchange is that Andy wants LA to be guilty and thinks that people lie, except those that support his viewpoint.

Matthias Grips

I love it! Everyone’s all up in arms about this not being real journalism!!! oh noooo!!!! Ha, ha , ha!!! Have you spent much time on this site? Guys, you should offer to refund their money for their subscripion to NYVC Journalism Review.

Here’s some advice build your own fack’n site and get people to come to it and do your own fecking storry that pases for real journalism!!!

Baptiste Wave Ring

Farnita,

He has a popular and funny website and you waste your time commenting on this site, on an feature you think is stupid.
Methinks it is you that have no life. And in my experience when people start by saying “I dislike Armstrong as much as the next guy and hope he goes down” – what they really mean is “I am an Armstrong Chamois sniffer of the highest order”

Matthias Grips

Lucas,

No, what’s pointless is how humorless f__cks like you manage to get on in life. What do you think this is Bar Review class you pais $5,000 bucks for? It’s a effing humor piece that makes a point.

Onamission

LA Trolls at work this morning…

Congrats, Andy, for flushing this guy out. When they answer direct questions with indirect answers (‘look at my affidavits’ or better ‘I have never tested positive’), you can bet they’re hiding something.

+-+-+-+

“When they answer direct questions with indirect answers …, you can bet they’re hiding something.”

when anyone with a different viewpoint is an ‘LA troll,’ you can bet that’s written by an anti-LA troll.

“LA Trolls at work this morning…”

that’s funny. because we were here way before the obsession with celebrity cyclists. animal husbandry was our hobby. todd could squat 500lbs wearing only a loin cloth. cat 5 riders hipchecked future teammates into the bushes during sprints. we rocked CP-Roubaix on playstation. we busted our asses doing Maternal Management Intervals ™. the knight riders terrorized CP on tuesdays, until one lone vigilante brought them to heel. the scarlet C was worn with pride (or shame). jk was a, and made a 31/30mph market on the rochester crit, just to get some inventory to retail to dumb aero schmoes in the hinterlands of NJ.

we love this f*ckin place.

when the white whale dissappears from public view, so will the rest of you fanboys / anti-fanboys. and good f*ckin riddance, too. because you all look the same to us.

we will not die. we will not mature. we will not upgrade.

we’ll still be here.

LR

If Mr. Fabiani is not a lawyer, he sure speaks like one. He also thinks like one. At least he was willing to communicate with you, a known LA detractor. That he avoided answering some questions makes you wonder who to believe.

Nice job getting him to communicate with you. When a rep from LA’s camp actually gives you the time of day it means you guys are obviously on his radar.

LR

Some folks here seem to think you are doing something wrong. You have a theory, LA doped. There is some evidence that points to that conclusion, sworn testitmony of folks with nothing to gain. There is evidence he did not, sworn testimony from people who make money off of LA. Now the question is who do you believe?

Nicolas Limit Screw

I like how all Lance supporting Americans don’t count the ’99 samples with EPO in them as real evidence just because it was the French lab that revealed those results. Positive, scientific evidence exists yet this country chooses to ignore or dis-count said evidence.

Schmirnov

So Andy got a PR guy to Relate to the Public (see what I did there?) It’s Fabiani’s job to field inquiries from both those sympathetic to Armstrong and those not. For those telling Andy to “get a life” is certainly hypocritical. And “Obsession”? He writes for a cycling news site that covers the most popular cyclist of all time involved in one of the biggest cycling stories of the past decade (PED’s.) But hey, you guys are apparently welcome to post too. And there’s always the fab 3 part Jack Simes story that won’t hurt the Lance Fanboy’s feelings (well, I guess it could since it doesn’t mention Lance at ALL!)

Race Radio

Good job guys. Funny to read as he gradually disengages as the questions grow harder to spin. At the end he just repeats the mantra…..it is like Dorthy in Oz, “There is no place like home”

Legal system

I think the major problem you have in USA is how these stories are reported on full stop.
Specualtion be in good or bad can influence a jury too much over here, in the uk my editor went to prison because they printed front page that a guy was a pedophile before he had been convicted of being one, your only allowed to comment or report on the facts that are being presented in court. What if the guy was not a pedophile well his life is now ruined because of irresponsible journalism.

This also happened with the Michael Jackson case , they were so star struck that they let him go, not to mention members of the jury were taking money from journalists, one reporter I knew had the verdictbthe day before it was read.

Whether lance doped or not , I think it’s bad journalism to just go and say he doped or to the contrary that he did not, just stick to the facts presented. I’m not seeing a bias in this article as Andy presented every email, if you could see just finished article you may see different, obviously depending on the finished article. Journalists will push a lot harder than this to catch someone out or pick holes in a theory etc.

For a true example of bad irresponsible journalism just go watch Nancy grace or Nancy disgrace as she is to her former collegues.

Lucas Headset

Those so called ’99 epo positives you call evidence are worthless. Why? Because they were not tested properly. It really is that simple. You have the case of a paper that is known to have a grudge against LA paying a lab to do tests. It’s pretty obvious knew who the samples belonged to and that by itself makes the resulsts suspect.

lee3

I’d be more inclined to suspect the 99′ samples as opposed to giving any attention to the B.Andreau situation. Hard, empirical data is the only real way of getting to the bottom of this. Photo’s, corroborating testimony, and lab tests are all grounds for asking tough questions. I think hear-say has much less weight than lab tests. Its in fact worthless unless you have a website looking for hits or a news program looking for ratings.
Just because floyd has nothing to lose doesnt mean he wouldnt strike out in the media against those that he percieves as ‘keeping him from returning to the top of the sport’. I think Lance has a better chance than most of you think of riding this out to its eventual end – just like all of the other times folks tried to nail him.

West Coast Reader

Keep at it!

“badgering a PR guy” is right on! I see it as journalism at its best, you keep asking the question they refuse to ask, he never answered it! The fluff posters want you to ask what his favorite color is or something like that? They must be watching Oprah 24/7.

I’d like to see a Dan interview Andy and vise versa some day, who would badger whom though? What the heck, badger both!

bitch hunted

Mark, you tout the sworn depositions yet refuse to acknowledge the fact that McIlvain testified this hospital incident happened i.e. that a meeting took place with Armstrong, doctors/two men, and friends. Yet Armstrong testifies exactly the opposite. Can you simply explain this contradiction in testimony between McIlvain’s and Armstrong’s depositions? Your answer to go to McIlvain’s testimony makes it all the more confounding since her testimony corroborates Andreus’on these two counts.
Leave it to the Toto guys to ask questions real journalists refuse to ask.

bloodthirsty audience member

i tend to agree with West Coast on this one – the only appropriate way to address a PR guy, aside from just ignoring him, is to badger him.

Chest Rockwell

Dear Mark,

Dirk is now doing b/b and Lance needs the money. In the very near future, a 1 foot long meat tube is going to dislodge you from Pharmstrong’s rectum, upstream into his colon.

BTW, it’s cool how you can text from Pharmstrong’s cavity.

Best Wishes,

Chest Rockwell

Comments are closed.