fatandfast said:
There are things in your comments that I will assume as facts. So first if during his proceedings a judge came across a 1.5 million dollar donation(bribe by your description) would that not be obvious witness tampering or obstruction of justice? I mean after all the time line and events appear well defined. Why was this disregard for the law discovered by anybody and everybody except the bar association or a higher court?
It is also a misstep to say that personal expenses and professional ones are easy to define. Many of Armstrong's activities do not appear to have any professional merit to the unknowing. How in the world could traveling from country to country giving brief motivational talks, posing for photos and handshakes be a tax deduction? the questioned is asked over and over and is answered in Livestrongs status as a non profit.
When Lance goes on a charity bike ride to most people it is unreasonable to deduct his travel, lodging, transportation,food, dozens of other expenses for something he would be doing anyway, but that is part of the insanity of the US tax code.
Because I don't know anything about the board or general operations of Livestrong it is hard to conclude one way or the other if a rubber stamp is used on all things Armstrong. I just can't imagine that sane people would would put millions of dollars and 100's of jobs at risk for something that as you
have stated is obviously immoral and illegal.
If your time lines are correct the world has fallen off it's access. Frankie testified in @2006, since then Armstrong and everything he has been involved in have grown both in popularity and monetary gain.
If even some of the things you have written are true then we are all hosed. Our courts, lawyers, judges are all corrupt and have given Armstrong special privilege. Our hospitals,doctors, nurses and administrators are evil and ugly for their brilliant coordinated collusion with Lance for 1.5 million in blood money. The IRS has turned a blind eye to a tax deadbeat bike rider and his multitude of tax free foundations. The wheels of justice may need ceramic bearings to catch up on this 5 million SCA injustice. It's a worldwide thing, remember that Lance can walk through airports as far away as Switzerland with bags full of whatever he wants. Everybody is in on coating him with teflon.
The alleged perjury committed by LE Armstrong was during a deposition hearing in the SCA case. I am certain by the tenderness of the cross-examination by SCA's counsel on LA during the deposition hearing they were keeping their powder dry for the real event. That did not occur as the civil litigation was settled (like all LA's civil litigation skirmishes).
I expect if LA appears in the witness box in a criminal trial his SCA responses will be re-visited as a tool for exposing his lack of credibility.
Are there in existence other foundation founders that have at their disposal a corporate jet? I do not know who owns and operates this jet but if it is owned or leased by an entity in which LA has an interest payments to that entity by Livestrong are not in compliance to maintain tax exempt status.
The Tour Down Under paid LA between $2m & $3m for his cancer awareness crusade to Australia (the crusade being the justification for his comeback). Armstrong admitted to pocketing the whole amount even though it was known some parts of the payments related to "Livestrong" brand licensing and re-reimbursement for travel costs (charged in the normal course to Livestrong?). Naughty boy Lance. Did he obtain board approval, ie rubber stamp?
As Livestrong is tax exempt expenses incurred are not "tax deductible". However, the foundation cannot spend recklessly as expenses incurred must be seen as reasonable to raise donations and payments for programs relating to the objects of the foundation. Excessive payments to or on behalf of executives and board members can bring the wrath of the IRS down on Livestrong by withdrawing their tax exempt status and charging penalty taxes to those individuals who prospered.
No tax exempt status would see the demise of Livestrong.
Lance has led a protected life up to now. He was previously only dealing with civil litigation which was optional and could be opted out - which he did on all cases.
The UCI allegedly protected him to their financial benefit from his "donations".
The tide turned when he trod on Floyd's toes. There was sufficient exposure from Floyd of information to lead to an investigation how a corporation deemed to be funded by US taxpayer dollars was in breach of a fundamental condition in the contract and funding that breach activity through alleged criminal conduct. Unless he does a plea deal with prosecutors, which will disclose his admissions of guilt, he cannot opt out of this proceeding.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram