• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Armstrong and Landis and Doping, Oh My!

Page 4 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Jul 14, 2009
2,498
0
0
Visit site
thehog said:
So making a comeback and continuing to dope and being paid large appearances fees under the guise of “cancer awareness” is acceptable? Because one generates 1 million dollars per race appearance the other has to race in a t-shirt at a local crit it makes the million dollar man better? So based on that theory if Landis is telling the truth and sues Armstrong and makes a million he’s now better? And the end of the day the kings and queens and pawns all end up in the same box. I bet I know who will feel better about them selves when that times comes. Your logic is flawed. You're placing value on the person by the money they have not by the truth they’re telling. Think about it.

If anything that you wrote is true then for sure I wouldn't think it's right. Has Lance been tested by loads of cycling feds and the UCI?(500x) Yes. Did he come up positive..yes and he had a Dr's note in 99. Landis had a compelling back story with the Mennonite and replaced hip thing going for him..oh what a difference a note makes. I could care less if Lance has any money..he is not giving me any..The point is Landis would not have said squat if Lance didn't have any cash. That is the flawed logic. If Landis says anything he gets will be donated to charity ( cancer would be the most ironic) I will give him a free pass on his intentions like you have.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Visit site
miloman said:
A lot of great post! But I still can’t understand why so many need/want an FDA investigator to clean house, when it should be the responsibility of the UCI and WADA. What is it about us Americans that leads us to believe that we always know what’s right and in the best interest of others? We are such an ethnocentric lot!

The UCI is based in Europe, its charter – Europe; most of the races it sanctions are held outside of the US. The team in question was headquartered in Europe, Spain I believe, and from all that I read, the drugs were purchased, transfused or injected outside of US jurisdiction. It is clearly someone else’s problem. As far as any paper trail to be followed implicating Tailwind Sports to any dubious activity; don’t you think they had a shredding party months ago. I doubt there is anything left. It’s more or less going to come down to a “he said, she said” fight and the money always wins in those. I am sorry Floyd, I’m not sure if your motives were sincere, I like to think the best of people, so I will assume they were, but I am afraid you are going to get the shaft yet again. I hope I’m wrong, but I don’t think I am.

Again your ignoring basic facts - this team was paid with US money - to US owned companies - of course the FDA should investigate.

Your confusing the roles of UCI & WADA - both organisations implement and write rules but it is the countries of the licence holder that investigates and sanctions athletes - and because of the scale of the doping and it was systematic the USAD called in the FDA.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
fatandfast said:
If anything that you wrote is true then for sure I wouldn't think it's right. Has Lance been tested by loads of cycling feds and the UCI?(500x) Yes. Did he come up positive..yes and he had a Dr's note in 99. Landis had a compelling back story with the Mennonite and replaced hip thing going for him..oh what a difference a note makes. I could care less if Lance has any money..he is not giving me any..The point is Landis would not have said squat if Lance didn't have any cash. That is the flawed logic. If Landis says anything he gets will be donated to charity ( cancer would be the most ironic) I will give him a free pass on his intentions like you have.

your officially on the list with Flicky, uniballPolisher, Chrissie and a few others. Welcome:D
 
Jun 15, 2009
353
0
0
Visit site
miloman said:
A lot of great post! But I still can’t understand why so many need/want an FDA investigator to clean house, when it should be the responsibility of the UCI and WADA. What is it about us Americans that leads us to believe that we always know what’s right and in the best interest of others? We are such an ethnocentric lot!

The UCI is based in Europe, its charter – Europe; most of the races it sanctions are held outside of the US. The team in question was headquartered in Europe, Spain I believe, and from all that I read, the drugs were purchased, transfused or injected outside of US jurisdiction. It is clearly someone else’s problem. As far as any paper trail to be followed implicating Tailwind Sports to any dubious activity; don’t you think they had a shredding party months ago. I doubt there is anything left. It’s more or less going to come down to a “he said, she said” fight and the money always wins in those. I am sorry Floyd, I’m not sure if your motives were sincere, I like to think the best of people, so I will assume they were, but I am afraid you are going to get the shaft yet again. I hope I’m wrong, but I don’t think I am.

I still think you're missing the point of the US investigations as well as the distinction between fact and hope :D

Novitsky/FDA are investigating PED distribution because legal PEDs fall under FDA regulation. The investigation here is not so much about rider or even team doping practices - it's about where did the dope come from? Since there are probably not binders full of invoices for EPO lying around anyway, there's not a lot to shred. But there are a lot of people to ask a lot of questions. That's why there's so much talk of perjury, Novitsky's approach to the BALCO case, etc.

Whistleblower case is based on Postal/Tailwind defrauding the gov't based on what's in the contract. No shredding party is going to magically remove all copies of the contract. All this case needs is substantial evidence that riders doped with team complicity. The team ownership/management had a contractual obligation to prevent doping. If they were complicit, then they owe the other party to that contract a whole lot of money. Again, the only paper in question is the contract.

As far as cleaning up the UCI, you are now squarely in the area of hope for many of us. No US agency has jurisdiction over the UCI in Switzerland. What many of us hopefully believe may happen is that enough evidence will be uncovered that points out UCI corruption that there will be overwhelming pressure on the UCI to fix itself (or better yet, full-on mutiny and the dissolution of the UCI).

Also on the hopeful front, and closer to home, is USAC, which LA to a large extent controls. Like the UCI, it is essentially a club of appointed members that does not have the interests of its broader membership at heart. Again, many of us hope that enough comes out of one or both investigations to demonstrate just how corrupt USAC is. And this is one area where a paper trail could be helpful if it's not shredded.
 
Jun 15, 2009
353
0
0
Visit site
fatandfast said:
If anything that you wrote is true then for sure I wouldn't think it's right. Has Lance been tested by loads of cycling feds and the UCI?(500x) Yes. Did he come up positive..yes and he had a Dr's note in 99. Landis had a compelling back story with the Mennonite and replaced hip thing going for him..oh what a difference a note makes. I could care less if Lance has any money..he is not giving me any..The point is Landis would not have said squat if Lance didn't have any cash. That is the flawed logic. If Landis says anything he gets will be donated to charity ( cancer would be the most ironic) I will give him a free pass on his intentions like you have.

'fraid you did yourself in with the '500 tests and a doctor's note' line. The talking points have long since been updated.

Public Strategies will be docking your pay shortly.
 
Jan 5, 2010
295
0
0
Visit site
I am curious how many people do you think will implicate Armstrong et al? There are so many people who have so much to lose if the “truth” comes out. We have already heard through leaks that there has been at least one ex-rider to corroborate Floyd’s charges, however, we have also heard that there are several other riders and team physicians who have refuted them. I just can’t see there being any real evidence that can be collected to support Floyd’s claim.

These aren’t dumb people! These are the same people that supposedly ran checkpoints at the TDF with refrigerated blood bags hidden inside motorcycle side bags. They would check rooms for listening devices and cameras, cover window and heat registers and then transfuse the blood. Finally, after the transfusion, they sliced the IV bags into little pieces, and easily flushed it down toilets. They know what they are doing!

During the Nixon Watergate trial (no, I’m not that old) there was a convenient oft used response by witnesses being questioned who didn’t want to perjure themselves and also not provide any meaningful testimony. It was, “… to the best of my knowledge, I don’t recall.” I’m sure the FDA has or will hear a lot of that or something quite similar!
 
Jun 19, 2009
5,220
0
0
Visit site
miloman said:
I am curious how many people do you think will implicate Armstrong et al? There are so many people who have so much to lose if the “truth” comes out. We have already heard through leaks that there has been at least one ex-rider to corroborate Floyd’s charges, however, we have also heard that there are several other riders and team physicians who have refuted them. I just can’t see there being any real evidence that can be collected to support Floyd’s claim.

These aren’t dumb people! These are the same people that supposedly ran checkpoints at the TDF with refrigerated blood bags hidden inside motorcycle side bags. They would check rooms for listening devices and cameras, cover window and heat registers and then transfuse the blood. Finally, after the transfusion, they sliced the IV bags into little pieces, and easily flushed it down toilets. They know what they are doing!

During the Nixon Watergate trial (no, I’m not that old) there was a convenient oft used response by witnesses being questioned who didn’t want to perjure themselves and also not provide any meaningful testimony. It was, “… to the best of my knowledge, I don’t recall.” I’m sure the FDA has or will hear a lot of that or something quite similar!

You can't seriously continue to ignore witness testimony. There were many people involved in the USPS/Motorola history and most have a pressure point that will compell testimony.
I was there during the Nixon years and we're talking about his people being hardened politicians that know their silence will be rewarded, rather than punished. There is no such payback for Lance's backwash. Again, the truth you want to ignore: Lance is just a chip in this investigation and a politically visible one at that. He'll be traded for the next bigger target. Don't pretend to be "curious" since you aren't really trying to learn anything. Wait and watch.
 
May 23, 2010
526
0
0
Visit site
miloman said:
I am curious how many people do you think will implicate Armstrong et al? There are so many people who have so much to lose if the “truth” comes out. We have already heard through leaks that there has been at least one ex-rider to corroborate Floyd’s charges, however, we have also heard that there are several other riders and team physicians who have refuted them. I just can’t see there being any real evidence that can be collected to support Floyd’s claim.

These aren’t dumb people! These are the same people that supposedly ran checkpoints at the TDF with refrigerated blood bags hidden inside motorcycle side bags. They would check rooms for listening devices and cameras, cover window and heat registers and then transfuse the blood. Finally, after the transfusion, they sliced the IV bags into little pieces, and easily flushed it down toilets. They know what they are doing!

During the Nixon Watergate trial (no, I’m not that old) there was a convenient oft used response by witnesses being questioned who didn’t want to perjure themselves and also not provide any meaningful testimony. It was, “… to the best of my knowledge, I don’t recall.” I’m sure the FDA has or will hear a lot of that or something quite similar!

I think you know better and are simply trying to muddy the waters. The rider who says he saw nothing did not ride any tours with Lance. The team doc says he saw nothing but will hide behind patient confidentiality or the fact that he's conveniently located in Spain, outside the reach of this investigation. And why would the doc volunteer he did something illegal?

Establishing that Armstrong is a doper won't be difficult. The hospital room incident will be replayed. Betsy and Franie Andreau and Stephanie McIlvaine will testify they heard Armstrong say he's taken PEDs. Armstong won't take the stand. No one will risk perjury to claim otherwise. A defense witness testifying "I can't recall" won't help here.

Proving there was team doping at USPS will likely take a similar track. All it takes it is a few credible witnesses, former team members - and Landis' testimony is not needed. Some corraborating documentary evidence will help seal that deal. There is a paper trail, there always is. And they don't need much.

That is all it takes to try the apparent violation of the federal false claims act. Team principals signed a federal contract extension knowing that they were already in violation of the anti-doping clause. Fraud under that statue.

More interesting is what is Armstrong's defense? That he was never caught in a doping test? "I've never been speeding since I've gotten no tickets"?
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Visit site
miloman said:
I am curious how many people do you think will implicate Armstrong et al? There are so many people who have so much to lose if the “truth” comes out. We have already heard through leaks that there has been at least one ex-rider to corroborate Floyd’s charges, however, we have also heard that there are several other riders and team physicians who have refuted them. I just can’t see there being any real evidence that can be collected to support Floyd’s claim.

These aren’t dumb people! These are the same people that supposedly ran checkpoints at the TDF with refrigerated blood bags hidden inside motorcycle side bags. They would check rooms for listening devices and cameras, cover window and heat registers and then transfuse the blood. Finally, after the transfusion, they sliced the IV bags into little pieces, and easily flushed it down toilets. They know what they are doing!

During the Nixon Watergate trial (no, I’m not that old) there was a convenient oft used response by witnesses being questioned who didn’t want to perjure themselves and also not provide any meaningful testimony. It was, “… to the best of my knowledge, I don’t recall.” I’m sure the FDA has or will hear a lot of that or something quite similar!
And the FDA will see right through it the same way as you are claiming to just play 'devils advocate'.

If you think the FDA are just interested in finding out if riders got a blood transfusion on some Alpine road - then can you explain why Trek & Nike were subpoenaed for documentation?

As for your comparison with Watergate - how did that work out for "I am not a crook" Nixon?
 
Jan 5, 2010
295
0
0
Visit site
I would suspect that the defense would subpoena the transcripts from the case you referenced where an attending physician and an employee of Oakley both stated that they never heard anything like what the Andreaus reported. I guess they could change their story, but what would be the point? Armstrong wasn’t a member of USPS at the time; it will be argued, and probably successfully, that prior behavior doesn’t predict future actions or guilt, so that will probably be inadmissible. Let’s not forget Lance won and collected on his $5 million plus policy.

And as far as Trek and Nike having been subpoenaed, I assume that has to do with equipment sold on the gray market by the team. Where the money went is pure conjecture. It’s not an uncommon practice, most teams do it, and same with the riders. I once had the opportunity to purchase a new Postal Team helmet at a sports consignment store. I was told the Postal rider brought things in every couple of weeks. Should we go after him? I doubt he claimed it on his taxes. The case will need to be built more solidly than this to remove any “plausible deniability” by the perpetrators.
 
Jun 19, 2009
5,220
0
0
Visit site
miloman said:
I would suspect that the defense... The case will need to be built more solidly than this to remove any “plausible deniability” by the perpetrators.


Starting a thread to plead a pre-planned defense that has been repeatedly defeated suggests you've been here before. The arguments you present and the vacuous response to actual legal activities are a pattern others have offerred, although a first timer doesn't usually get to check off each defense as quickly as you have without actually responding to current history. Your predecessors had several months head start and apparent legitimate speculation on their side. Now too much as happened. End.
 

flicker

BANNED
Aug 17, 2009
4,153
0
0
Visit site
Oldman said:
[/B]
You can't seriously continue to ignore witness testimony. There were many people involved in the USPS/Motorola history and most have a pressure point that will compell testimony.
I was there during the Nixon years and we're talking about his people being hardened politicians that know their silence will be rewarded, rather than punished. There is no such payback for Lance's backwash. Again, the truth you want to ignore: Lance is just a chip in this investigation and a politically visible one at that. He'll be traded for the next bigger target. Don't pretend to be "curious" since you aren't really trying to learn anything. Wait and watch.

I hope that you are right. I am afraid that the sports world will see this as an American problem.
 

flicker

BANNED
Aug 17, 2009
4,153
0
0
Visit site
powerste said:
Nothing romantic about it. Just observing FL's words and actions, both of which exhibit considerable relief at the confession.


No. Should I be in order to respond to your posts?


One reason people respond positively to Floyd is our appreciation of the guts it took for him to say that he doped and lied about it. I also applaud his effort to break the omerta. Had he gone "back to work" at RS, neither of those things would have happened. And again, based on observing his own words since speaking out, I think it's safe to say that he's better off the way things turned out.

It did not take guts for Floyd to reveal, he had no choice. As for the Shack, why would the Shack want Floyd. His riding is not up to snuff and he brings the stigma of a------ you fill in the blank to a viable sporting team.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Visit site
miloman said:
I would suspect that the defense would subpoena the transcripts from the case you referenced where an attending physician and an employee of Oakley both stated that they never heard anything like what the Andreaus reported. I guess they could change their story, but what would be the point? Armstrong wasn’t a member of USPS at the time; it will be argued, and probably successfully, that prior behavior doesn’t predict future actions or guilt, so that will probably be inadmissible. Let’s not forget Lance won and collected on his $5 million plus policy.

And as far as Trek and Nike having been subpoenaed, I assume that has to do with equipment sold on the gray market by the team. Where the money went is pure conjecture. It’s not an uncommon practice, most teams do it, and same with the riders. I once had the opportunity to purchase a new Postal Team helmet at a sports consignment store. I was told the Postal rider brought things in every couple of weeks. Should we go after him? I doubt he claimed it on his taxes. The case will need to be built more solidly than this to remove any “plausible deniability” by the perpetrators.

The FDA have already got the full transripts from the SCA case.

Lance 'won' because of Texas contract law - not because he had not used PED's. Do you think Stephanie will risk going to jail for perjury? Can you name the Doctor that was in the room - or are you confusing the Doctor who (correctly) said he was not there? The hospital room incident was in 1996 - the SCA case was in 2005, don't confuse the two.


Yes, it is common practise to sell stock - but it is also common practice of the team to record that - especially when it will run in to millions of dollars.
 
May 23, 2010
526
0
0
Visit site
miloman said:
I would suspect that the defense would subpoena the transcripts from the case you referenced where an attending physician and an employee of Oakley both stated that they never heard anything like what the Andreaus reported. I guess they could change their story, but what would be the point? Armstrong wasn’t a member of USPS at the time; it will be argued, and probably successfully, that prior behavior doesn’t predict future actions or guilt, so that will probably be inadmissible. Let’s not forget Lance won and collected on his $5 million plus policy.

And as far as Trek and Nike having been subpoenaed, I assume that has to do with equipment sold on the gray market by the team. Where the money went is pure conjecture. It’s not an uncommon practice, most teams do it, and same with the riders. I once had the opportunity to purchase a new Postal Team helmet at a sports consignment store. I was told the Postal rider brought things in every couple of weeks. Should we go after him? I doubt he claimed it on his taxes. The case will need to be built more solidly than this to remove any “plausible deniability” by the perpetrators.

According to both Andreau's, the physician who testified in the SCA case was not in the room when Armstrong admitted his PDA use. That fact did not matter as the case was decided that Armstrong's alleged doping use did not matter, unless his TdF victory is nullified. The fact that Lance was not caught positive in a doping test earned him a cool $5M here. Helped pay for a generous contribution to the hospital from LA himself.

The Oakley employee is Stephanie McIlvain. To get you up to speed why she may choose to change her testimony, read this thread:

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=9956

The hospital room incident would be used to establish Armstong is a doper - and will make other doping evidence that's more relevant to the USPS timeline easier for the jurors to believe, such as former teammates testifying that they saw Armstrong take PEDs. You will be dissapointed if you believe this is not relevant to the case and hence not admissible as evidence.

Regarding the sale of Trek & Nike gear, the focus will be on why the equipment was sold and what the monies obtained were used for - and how the accounting was handled. Your hopes may be dashed if your line of thinking here is what you truly believe. Shall we pick up this conversation in a month or two and compare notes?
 
Jun 15, 2009
353
0
0
Visit site
Tubeless said:
Regarding the sale of Trek & Nike gear, the focus will be on why the equipment was sold and what the monies obtained were used for - and how the accounting was handled. Your hopes may be dashed if your line of thinking here is what you truly believe. Shall we pick up this conversation in a month or two and compare notes?

Also WHEN it was sold . . .

If it was sold off at the end of the season and accounted for properly, then there's no problem. But we've heard equipment was sold mid-season, leaving at least one rider without a TT bike for training.

Also to the OP: as was pointed out WRT/ McIlvain, this has also been discussed at length:
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=8985

Granted, it's not on the front page. But search and ye shall find . . . context for some of the current threads.
 
Jan 5, 2010
295
0
0
Visit site
I followed the link and heard the tape. Even though I was familiar with the content from other sources, it was the first time I had heard it for myself. Fascinating stuff! Unfortunately, from what I know of the law, it is totally inadmissible. Do you really think that a current employee and wife of a high-ranking executive with Oakley is going to recant her testimony? She has already gone on record as saying something contrary to what she said on LeMond’s tape. To recant her testimony now will open herself up to perjury charges. Ouch!

I’m not sure who to feel sorry for. They all behaved poorly. I guess in the end as Captain Jack Sparrow said, “they done right by them and you can’t expect anything more than that!”
 
Feb 14, 2010
2,202
0
0
Visit site
I just had a thought, and since that's a rarity these days, I thought I'd share. Here's a quote from Armstrong's spokesman in response to news that Landis had filed a whistleblower lawsuit for the government.

"This news that Floyd Landis is in this for the money re-confirms everything we all knew about Landis," Fabiani wrote.

He went on to talk trash, so I stopped. But his contention that Landis is in it for the money implies that there's money to be gained. The only way Floyd can get money is by winning a lawsuit that Armstrong and the others defrauded the government. The only way that is possible is if they can prove that Armstrong doped.

So the lawyer/spokesman pretty much unknowingly implied that Lance did dope, and so committed fraud against the government, which means there's money that could be won in a lawsuit.

A guy making that kind of money as a paid spokesperson for just this kind of situation, with the experience of working for Bill Clinton, should have said that Landis is wasting his time, because nothing wrong happened, so there's no money to be gained.

The same goes for Lance's "now it all makes sense" around the time defendants were being notified. If he hasn't done anything wrong, and is innocent as he claims, there's zero chance that Landis will win a lawsuit, so his even trying would not make sense.
 
May 23, 2010
526
0
0
Visit site
miloman said:
I followed the link and heard the tape. Even though I was familiar with the content from other sources, it was the first time I had heard it for myself. Fascinating stuff! Unfortunately, from what I know of the law, it is totally inadmissible. Do you really think that a current employee and wife of a high-ranking executive with Oakley is going to recant her testimony? She has already gone on record as saying something contrary to what she said on LeMond’s tape. To recant her testimony now will open herself up to perjury charges. Ouch!

I’m not sure who to feel sorry for. They all behaved poorly. I guess in the end as Captain Jack Sparrow said, “they done right by them and you can’t expect anything more than that!”

The tape is irrelevant as evidence - its existence simply brought out doubt about the truthfulness of her testimony in the SCA case.

Which is why Mrs McIlvaine has been served a subpoena to appear before the grand jury. Lying to a federal grand jury has serious consequences and there's no logical reason why she would not tell the truth. Then the remaining question is which version of her two stories is the correct one? She will know that both Frankie and Besty Andreau will have given their testimony. Her lawyer may be able to negotiate an agreement that in exchange for her cooperation, the feds agree not to pursue any charges for her possible perjury in the civil case.

She may face potential perjury charges is she sticks with her civil deposition. Put yourself in her shoes. What would you do?
 
Jan 5, 2010
295
0
0
Visit site
That’s tough; I don’t know what I would do. I certainly wouldn’t have gotten myself in this mess in the first place. Here’s a sick, sad thought, with all the pressure and the stakes being so high . . . well, I just hope somebody doesn’t do something drastic and all too permanent. I still miss Marco Pantani.

This is such an ugly mess! I really do feel for these people, but they did it to themselves. Why they couldn’t see the road they were on and apply the brakes, is anyone’s guess. Off the top of my head, I would have to say it was probably one of the 7 deadly sins, greed! But anyone who has read Lance’s books knows he is an agnostic and doesn’t believe in sin.
 
May 25, 2009
332
0
0
Visit site
Fail: NY Times already reported two

miloman said:
I am curious how many people do you think will implicate Armstrong et al? There are so many people who have so much to lose if the “truth” comes out. We have already heard through leaks that there has been at least one ex-rider to corroborate Floyd’s charges, however, we have also heard that there are several other riders and team physicians who have refuted them. I just can’t see there being any real evidence that can be collected to support Floyd’s claim.

These aren’t dumb people! These are the same people that supposedly ran checkpoints at the TDF with refrigerated blood bags hidden inside motorcycle side bags. They would check rooms for listening devices and cameras, cover window and heat registers and then transfuse the blood. Finally, after the transfusion, they sliced the IV bags into little pieces, and easily flushed it down toilets. They know what they are doing!

During the Nixon Watergate trial (no, I’m not that old) there was a convenient oft used response by witnesses being questioned who didn’t want to perjure themselves and also not provide any meaningful testimony. It was, “… to the best of my knowledge, I don’t recall.” I’m sure the FDA has or will hear a lot of that or something quite similar!

Dude please: The NY TImes already reported at least one additional Postal Rider who corroborated Floyd's accounts:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/05/sports/cycling/05armstrong.html

And The Journal who broke the floyd story is reported to have required two additional sources to corroborate Floyd's accounts.
 
May 23, 2010
526
0
0
Visit site
miloman said:
That’s tough; I don’t know what I would do. I certainly wouldn’t have gotten myself in this mess in the first place. Here’s a sick, sad thought, with all the pressure and the stakes being so high . . . well, I just hope somebody doesn’t do something drastic and all too permanent. I still miss Marco Pantani.

This is such an ugly mess! I really do feel for these people, but they did it to themselves. Why they couldn’t see the road they were on and apply the brakes, is anyone’s guess. Off the top of my head, I would have to say it was probably one of the 7 deadly sins, greed! But anyone who has read Lance’s books knows he is an agnostic and doesn’t believe in sin.

There are lots of people who feel very good about this investigation. Finally, the truth will come out, an ugly past will be untangled, intimidation and corruption will stop. Omerta will suffer a big blow. Sorry to hear you're not one of those who are relieved by the course of the recent events.
 
Jun 19, 2009
5,220
0
0
Visit site
Tubeless said:
There are lots of people who feel very good about this investigation. Finally, the truth will come out, an ugly past will be untangled, intimidation and corruption will stop. Omerta will suffer a big blow. Sorry to hear you're not one of those who are relieved by the course of the recent events.

Milo started this thread to float the same tired arguments; almost following each scripted rebuttal we've seen before by the numbers. I don't think he posted at all before this and don't care to research. Between this parade of "first time posters" that seem to possess all the same specific knowledge but generally "confused" about the investigations realities we could "deduce" they are the same person or sharing the same low rent cubicle. We're wasting our time responding.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.