Armstrong Under Criminal Investigation

[Maxiton]

Justice doesn't usually publicly announce its investigations, for so so many reasons. Now suppose the same folks that worked to get political pressure on Birotte to shut the thing down in the first instance, got word to him again they needed the public to know he still wasn't doing any investigating. He does so - and now DOJ has to reveal there in fact is an open investigation. Perhaps Birotte was used to smoke out what was happening deep w/in Justice. This type of strategy IS why people pay the big money to the Fabianis, Luskins, etc.
I'll bet people at DOJ are seriously ****ed about this development. Years of hard work exposed prematurely and all that.

Good point, and a distinct possibility, I'd say.

Agree. The Obama and Clinton camps are not friendly. If Team Obama can wreck Hillary's 2016 prez chances and Bill's influence on the Democratic party -- without leaving fingerprints -- they'll do so.

Now this, to me, is so much wheel spinning. Nothing about Armstrong at this point will have any bearing whatsoever on the political fate of the Clintons or the Democratic party.

The report says that Armstrong is under investigation for obstruction, witness tampering, and intimidation. Those charges MAY just be for Armstrong's messing with the witnesses in his case, but they just might also be about investigating Armstrong for false statements made to federal investigators.

I'm still thinking that it is looking more and more like Armstrong made a full statement to Birotte in the course of Birotte's investigation.

First: We now know that Armstrong is fully capable of snitching off other dopers to get himself a break. Right now, he is sniffing around USADA, trying to cut himself a deal. If he's going to cut a deal now with USADA (which can only keep him from running triathlons and can't chuck him in jail), why wouldn't he cut a deal with the feds earlier in order to avoid a federal felony conviction.

Second: It's a fair assumption that the feds were offering all the Posties immunity in exchange for their dope testimony. Why wouldn't they have given Armstrong a similar deal? Prosecutors don't think like the haters in the Clinic. They want to be fair and appear to be fair.

From what I know of prosecutors, they are generally more concerned with winning than with fairness. It is a rare prosecutor indeed who will defer victory to fairness. In this at least they have as a group something in common with Armstrong.

Third: Obviously, Armstrong wasn't the only target of the USPS/Tailwind/Armstrong investigation. Fraud was a central part (if not the central part) of the investigation and fraud implicates not only Armstrong, but all the other Tailwind principals. Once the feds realized that they had nothing on Armstrong and were going to stop, why wouldn't they offer Armstrong an immunity deal before quitting? That way, they would at least get information against the other principals.

But isn't the whole point, the whole outrage, the result of the very fact that the investigation was terminated arbitrarily, despite their having so much on Armstrong, and right on the eve of charges being brought?

Fourth: Obstructing is what Martha Stewart went down on. You lie to the FBI and you get charged for obstructing . . .. There are other means of committing obstructing, though.

Fifth: It looks like the feds are quite eager to look at Mr. Armstrong and have not been bought off by "influence" or a "conspiracy." Why wouldn't they have tried to get Armstrong's testimony for the measly price of immunity?

Not these feds, anyway, whoever they are, or wherever.

Sixth: If Birotte took Armstrong's immunized statement, there's no way that Birotte or his office would now want to have anything to do with further investigation of Armstrong, because they gave him immunity and they'd have to prove that any new information that they got was in no way tainted by the information that Armstrong provided before they could even try to use it against Armstrong. Better to cut Birotte and his office completely out of the loop in the new investigation. Normally, you'd think that Birotte's office would be in the loop because his prosecutors are fully up to speed with all the USPS Conspiracy evidence.

Maybe they very much are in the loop. I recall reading about how ****ed they were about the investigation being dropped. Do you suppose they'd take no for an answer quietly, if they were so ****ed? Or would they maybe feed info to others in the JD, on the down low?

The feds may very well be investigating Armstrong for messing with Tygart and Hamilton and others, but I think it's still possible that Armstrong has already snitched to the feds (and maybe lied to them) under a grant of immunity.

I'm just saying it's possible. Why terminate an investigation without hearing what Lance has to say?

Well, that is the question, isn't it?

 

[python]

i think the criminal investigation is very new, perhaps opened AFTER armstrong admitted on oprah...

what exactly triggered it, which federal office is running it, how and why birotte was out of the loop are all interesting questions but seem secondary to me.

the key question to me now is whether armstrong was subpoenaed by the feds (or is anticipating the subpoena as inevitable) and if his earlier refusal to talk to usada (and the latest a face about) have anything to do with the presumed subpoena.

the reason i believe it may is b/c it was the federal subpoena from novi that eventually lead many witnesses to talk to usada or give sworn affidavits.

 

[Maxiton]

i think the criminal investigation is very new, perhaps opened AFTER armstrong admitted on oprah...

what exactly triggered it, which federal office is running it, how and why birotte was out of the loop are all interesting questions but seem secondary to me.

the key question to me now is whether armstrong was subpoenaed by the feds (or is anticipating the subpoena as inevitable) and if his earlier refusal to talk to usada (and the latest a face about) have anything to do with the presumed subpoena.

the reason i believe it may is b/c it was the federal subpoena from novi that eventually lead many witnesses to talk to usada or give sworn affidavits.

Armstrong can't talk to USADA because to do so he would have to either perjure himself or risk tolling the SOL.

EDIT: Or both!

 

[python]

Armstrong can't talk to USADA because to do so he would have to either perjure himself or risk tolling the SOL.

EDIT: Or both!

what i am saying is that his change of mind and negotiating an extension with usada smell to me like he is being squeezed by another force - which to me logically is the fed. the extension may be tactical but if he has to talk to the fed, talking to the usada is small potatos.

yet both stories need time to be coordinated me thinks.

 

[Merckx index]

the key question to me now is whether armstrong was subpoenaed by the feds (or is anticipating the subpoena as inevitable) and if his earlier refusal to talk to usada (and the latest a face about) have anything to do with the presumed subpoena.

the reason i believe it may is b/c it was the federal subpoena from novi that eventually lead many witnesses to talk to usada or give sworn affidavits.

It was testifying under penalty of perjury to the feds that compelled riders to testify truthfully to USADA. But their decision whether to testify at all was up to them. Their testimony to the GJ did not in any way compel them to go to USADA.

I think it’s been clear all along LA wants to get his ban reduced, and this is the primary motivating factor for testifying before USADA. However, in line with your hypothesis, it may be that to do this, he has to throw some powerful people under the bus, and that he was reluctant to do this until faced with the prospect that he will have to do it to the feds, anyway.

 

[python]

It was testifying under penalty of perjury to the feds that compelled riders to testify truthfully to USADA. But their decision whether to testify at all was up to them. ......

more than one source indicated that there was a certain employee of the justice ministry sitting on the interviews with usada witnesses...yes i know that usada can not compel riders to talk under the threat of perjury but it was a small step for them to make (that is, to agree to talk to usada) after they were either subpoenaed or volunteered to talk to the gj run by novi/miller. the key in my assumption was that the power of subpoena opened some unwilling mouthes and it flowed down hill to the usada collection vessel from there.


also, i have no idea how and what armstrong's legal team advising him, but if i was in his position, any desire to compete would NOT be my main motivation.

a threat of prison would i'd think motivate any non-mad person

 

[Merckx index]

more than one source indicated that there was a certain employee of the justice ministry sitting on the interviews with usada witnesses...

Of course, this is what I meant when I said that if they testified before USADA, they had to tell the truth. They knew their testimony was being compared to what they told the feds.

the key in my assumption was that the power of subpoena opened some unwilling mouthes and it flowed down hill to the usada collection vessel from there.

No disagreement here. For some of them, for sure. I think Tyler said that he never would have told the truth if he hadn’t been forced to by the GJ, but once he did he felt liberated, so it was no problem going to USADA. So yes, that kind of scenario played out for some of the riders (though others, like DZ, I believe came to USADA before any appearance elsewhere).

My point was just that that was their decision, they weren't compelled to, and by the same token, nothing LA might say before a federal investigation will compel him to testify before USADA. There has to be some independent motivating factor that gets him there. All any federal involvement can do is ensure that if does get there, he will have to tell the truth. I agree with your "small potatoes" comment. If he spills completely to the feds, it won't be a problem at USADA.

also, i have no idea how and what armstrong's legal team advising him, but if i was in his position, any desire to compete would NOT be my main motivation.

a threat of prison would i'd think motivate any non-mad person

Well, we know LA met TT before, to discuss the possibility of testifying. Why did it end acrimoniously? Did TT indicate that LA would have to testify about things that he (LA) knew would create legal problems? Maybe. But a reduced ban is the candle light that is drawing LA irresistibly to its flame, even at the risk of being burned (insert over-the-top metaphor smiley here). At the least, I don't see how testifying before USADA can possibly help him with his legal problems. Again, I think it's just that if he believes those legal issues are inevitable, he will have nothing to lose--and something to gain--by going to USADA.

 

[CivilRightsVelo]

The crime of trying to stop people reporting you is a very common one that prosecutors usually don't prosecute. It's defensive rather than proactive criminality - a side effect of the main matter. Prosecutors have a lot of discretion depending on the circumstances. The wider circumstances in this situation is not only doping in cycling - hardly a priority for law enforcement - but the matter that LA has now confessed to the doping and is going through a process of talking and apologising to people who feel hurt along the way. I think that is a very good reason for the feds to stay out of it. So yeah, Oprah does matter.

What about Floyd fairness fraud - a proactive rather than a defensive crime - did people call for Floyd to go to jail? And didn't even some people claim to have withheld negative information on Jo Papp so as to help ensure he didn't go to jail? Ah? Hypocrisy anyone?

In this case, it's quite likely that many people who have received harsh words from Lance don't want him to go to jail. Why would your opinion matter more than theirs? That is bizarre to me

 

[CivilRightsVelo]

Intersting remarks from Daniel Benson on his meeting with Tyler:

Now based in Montana, Hamilton is as far removed from those Postal days as ever imaginable. He doesn’t appear to cling to the past nor revel in a campaign to see life-time bans for committing the same offences. He has nothing to lose, it’s true, but his calls for truth and reconciliation, rather than the truth and retribution hardliners advocate, appear as heart-felt as the lines from his book.

Don't think Tyler wants anyone to go to jail. Were he to post on this thread, Tyler might even get banned for trolling

 

[personal]

...
I don't get it. I honestly don't. Is it just a game?
...

If you can and do make 100+ millions from it, it is not.
If you can and do destroy peoples lives, businesses, careers and reputations, it is not.

 

[Benotti69]

more than one source indicated that there was a certain employee of the justice ministry sitting on the interviews with usada witnesses...yes i know that usada can not compel riders to talk under the threat of perjury but it was a small step for them to make (that is, to agree to talk to usada) after they were either subpoenaed or volunteered to talk to the gj run by novi/miller. the key in my assumption was that the power of subpoena opened some unwilling mouthes and it flowed down hill to the usada collection vessel from there.


also, i have no idea how and what armstrong's legal team advising him, but if i was in his position, any desire to compete would NOT be my main motivation.

a threat of prison would i'd think motivate any non-mad person

I think Armstrong will do anything to avoid prison. It would be bad for business.

I think he is not fighting to be a competitor again. I think he is fighting to keep his money and avoid prison.

I have said that Armstrong is not a rich as people believe as he had others on a % of his earnings, Stapleton at least and probably Weisel.

 

[gregod]

can you spot the differences?

 

[D-Queued]

can you spot the differences?

Finally, a headline I can appreciate as it tells it like it is.

Dave.

 

[Aleajactaest]

What I think is that this is not going to be a popular first post. If you are stating it innocently, edit and back away, now.

And yes I want to see him prosecuted, to answer your 'real' question. Those are my thoughts.

There is no thought involved. It's reflex.

It's a valid question. What is the value to society of spending money to investigate for a third time the events surrounding Lance?

I can't imagine that Lance was directly involved with anything involving Tygart.

In order to get a prosecution for witness tampering and intimidation, you'd have to prove that he did it for that purpose as opposed it his normal "in your face" demeanor which is hardly a secret in the community. Especially with Tyler since Tyler and Lance met by chance. There is no evidence to date that lance went there with the intent to find and intimidate Tyler. And Tyler is so credible having spent 10 years lying about everything he did as well.

 

[veganrob]

It is not Travis. Or a rider.

Don't worry, it will all come out eventually

Might Weisel be involved?

 

[gillan1969]

There is no thought involved. It's reflex.

It's a valid question. What is the value to society of spending money to investigate for a third time the events surrounding Lance?

I can't imagine that Lance was directly involved with anything involving Tygart.

In order to get a prosecution for witness tampering and intimidation, you'd have to prove that he did it for that purpose as opposed it his normal "in your face" demeanor which is hardly a secret in the community. Especially with Tyler since Tyler and Lance met by chance. There is no evidence to date that lance went there with the intent to find and intimidate Tyler. And Tyler is so credible having spent 10 years lying about everything he did as well.

you won't need to imagine if they investigate...

Armstrong can trump Hamilton's 10 years though...cant he?

 

[ChewbaccaD]

There is no thought involved. It's reflex.

It's a valid question. What is the value to society of spending money to investigate for a third time the events surrounding Lance?

I can't imagine that Lance was directly involved with anything involving Tygart.

In order to get a prosecution for witness tampering and intimidation, you'd have to prove that he did it for that purpose as opposed it his normal "in your face" demeanor which is hardly a secret in the community. Especially with Tyler since Tyler and Lance met by chance. There is no evidence to date that lance went there with the intent to find and intimidate Tyler. And Tyler is so credible having spent 10 years lying about everything he did as well.

This is untrue. There is evidence that the owner called Lance and told him Tyler was there.

But it sounds like this is about more people than Tyler, and Lance's whole persona revolves around trying to intimidate people, so I don't think it will be hard at all to prove his motivations past just being "in your face." Nice spin though...

 

[Aleajactaest]

This is untrue. There is evidence that the owner called Lance and told him Tyler was there.

But it sounds like this is about more people than Tyler, and Lance's whole persona revolves around trying to intimidate people, so I don't think it will be hard at all to prove his motivations past just being "in your face." Nice spin though...

Honestly, I forgot the owner thing. I retract that. It was a while back. Thx

I think the intimidation will be a hard sell. Lance has always been a hardass when you cross him. He wants you to know you're on the outside when that happens. Is that intimidation when no charges were filed? Or just Lance being Lance? (e.g. Lance chasing down Filippo Simeoni)

 

[python]

I think he is not fighting to be a competitor again. I think he is fighting to keep his money and avoid prison.

i am with you 100% here.

his trouble is, if i can interpret the negative impact of his recent actions including the half-ardsed admission as miscalculations, he keeps making more mistakes as if he's surrounded by incompetent advisors.

it truly stunned me that he went through the trouble of meeting Travis and still hoping that he can bargain out something (or impose his conditions on) this single-minded, determined and very shrewd man who outmaneuvered and outsmarted him each and every time !! likewise, it puzzled me he went on oprah not realizing the very nature of the media - that they will slaughter him for any half-ardsed admissions...likewise, misjudging betsy and placing a call to her completely ignoring that she will NEVER compromise with out the admission of the hospital room incident !...

it seems at times that armstrong has lost common sense or any elementary understanding of human nature ...perhaps he NEVER had it in him, unless it was about calculating effects of scaring someone, bullying, intimidating etc.

if so, i am glad the feds got involved in this...

 

[Fortyninefourteen]

Honestly, I forgot the owner thing. I retract that. It was a while back. Thx

I think the intimidation will be a hard sell. Lance has always been a hardass when you cross him. He wants you to know you're on the outside when that happens. Is that intimidation when no charges were filed? Or just Lance being Lance? (e.g. Lance chasing down Filippo Simeoni)

If any one is made to feel 'at risk or in danger' whether it is perceived or real, by a person in a position of influence or power to reward or punish.

There are subtlties that vary fron jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but basically that is the test.

 

[Aleajactaest]

If any one is made to feel 'at risk or in danger' whether it is perceived or real, by a person in a position of influence or power to reward or punish.

There are subtlties that vary fron jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but basically that is the test.

Ok. But in the Tyler case, how can he be intimidated when Lance was not in a position to punish him by then? And, It isn't just based on the perception of threat. There needs to be intent. Otherwise, any casper milktoast could be intimidated.

 

[Fortyninefourteen]

Ok. But in the Tyler case, how can he be intimidated when Lance was not in a position to punish him by then? And, It isn't just based on the perception of threat. There needs to be intent. Otherwise, any casper milktoast could be intimidated.

Are you serious?

If, in your view, "....making your life a living f..ing hell" and " F,,ing tear you apart on the witness stand..." is not intimidation....well ....

 

[Aleajactaest]

Are you serious?

If, in your view, "....making your life a living f..ing hell" and " F,,ing tear you apart on the witness stand..." is not intimidation....well ....

Yes, I was serious. The details can differ but the intent part is important. And, FWIW, the standard of what is a Living F'ing hell is not codified that's why intent becomes important. Yes, it's a subtle difference but it might matter. e.g. Betsy Andreau is ... about Lance. How much of that is him and how much is her. She's making herself miserable long after he stopped doing anything to or about her. Heck, she's ... than Frankie. At some point she needs to move on. I'm not saying that he didn't intend the exact result but there is a contributory aspect to this. e.g. If Frankie hadn't continued to lie about his drug use ( and her knowledge of it) this might have ended long ago.

 

[Oldman]

Yes, I was serious. The details can differ but the intent part is important. And, FWIW, the standard of what is a Living F'ing hell is not codified that's why intent becomes important. Yes, it's a subtle difference but it might matter. e.g. Betsy Andreau is a . . . about Lance. How much of that is him and how much is her. She's making herself miserable long after he stopped doing anything to or about her. Heck, she's madder than Frankie. At some point she needs to move on. I'm not saying that he didn't intend the exact result but there is a contributory aspect to this. e.g. If Frankie hadn't continued to lie about his drug use ( and her knowledge of it) this might have ended long ago.

I like your revisionist view of the history. It makes it very easy to identify your perspective about the law and fair play. She can't be a victim because they did something that they admitted; paid the price. That other pressures and crimes were heaped on them because of their honest admission they should still suffer; that's fair.
At least that's how it works in Lance's mind.

 

[CivilRightsCycling]

The crime of trying to stop people reporting you is a very common one that prosecutors usually don't prosecute. It's defensive rather than proactive criminality - a side effect of the main matter. Prosecutors have a lot of discretion depending on the circumstances. The wider circumstances in this situation is not only doping in cycling - hardly a priority for law enforcement - but the matter that LA has now confessed to the doping and is going through a process of talking and apologising to people who feel hurt along the way. I think that is a very good reason for the feds to stay out of it. So yeah, Oprah does matter. What about Floyd fairness fraud - a proactive rather than a defensive crime - did people call for Floyd to go to jail? And didn't even ths user who opened the thread claim to have withheld negative information on Jo Papp so as to help ensure he didn't go to jail? Ah? Hypocrisy anyone?

In this case, it's quite likely that many people who have received harsh words from Lance don't want him to go to jail. Why would your opinion matter more than theirs? That is bizarre to me.