Lance being Lance

[patricknd]

Polish comes through in the clutch!

If it was LA in the picture i'd say he pulled it out of his wallet

 

[Race Radio]

snip

Didn't take them long to distance themselves from the myth.

Grrr, haters, trolls, babble

 

[MarkvW]

Why verify for me? Wouldn't you like to know yourself? I mean you're the one who made the statement. Does it worry you personally that you have a tendency to make things up?

I'm going give you a pet name now - "huge chunks". Named after this cute little episode where you proudly told the world that "huge chunks of the peloton" wore yellow brackets which sudden became "I don't know.. millions bought them"....

I go on knowing that I don't need to lie or make up stories to impress people.... you my friend... well... we've talked about this before... you need to take a journey..... find out more about you and why you keep doing this.... because from where I'm standing it doesn't look pretty.

You don't need to lie or make up stories? You? theHog? .
Maybe I'll figure it all out on Tuesday! Things will look pretty, then.

 

[Velodude]

You don't need to lie or make up stories? You? theHog? .
Maybe I'll figure it all out on Tuesday! Things will look pretty, then.

There is a distinct difference between Hog speculations of future events and MarkvW's failed attempts at deception of being a person with a past legal professional background.

 

[Martin318is]

I'm just not going to spend my time verifying it for you!

Should be very easy to verify given the strong way you stated it. If you are now saying that you actually don't have the evidence to back that claim up, why not just calmly state that it was a 'guesstimate'? You have plenty of options at this point:

a) If you want to keep arguing the point then go and find the evidence.
b) If you don't want to find the evidence, conceed the point.
c) If you want to argue the point and not bother providing anything to back yourself up then I'm sorry but you look very foolish to anyone reading this thread who daily see plenty of images of cyclists NOT doing what you claim they do.
d) If you want to try to achieve a better outcome for c by attacking theHog, then you look like an utter muppet.

 

[MarkvW]

Should be very easy to verify given the strong way you stated it. If you are now saying that you actually don't have the evidence to back that claim up, why not just calmly state that it was a 'guesstimate'? You have plenty of options at this point:

a) If you want to keep arguing the point then go and find the evidence.
b) If you don't want to find the evidence, conceed the point.
c) If you want to argue the point and not bother providing anything to back yourself up then I'm sorry but you look very foolish to anyone reading this thread who daily see plenty of images of cyclists NOT doing what you claim they do.
d) If you want to try to achieve a better outcome for c by attacking theHog, then you look like an utter muppet.

It was a guesstimate. I've seen a lot of them.

 

[MarkvW]

There is a distinct difference between Hog speculations of future events and MarkvW's failed attempts at deception of being a person with a past legal professional background.

So, I have asserted that I have a "past legal professional background?" Where? It appears that you are lying in an attempt to establish that I am deceptive.

And, even if you could establish that I have ever said that I am a person with a "past legal professional background," how can you justify your statement that I am not? Admit that you're making stuff up!

Why bicker? Who cares? Lance has beaten the rap. No need for either of us to speculate about his "case".

 

[Polish]

Should be very easy to verify given the strong way you stated it. If you are now saying that you actually don't have the evidence to back that claim up, why not just calmly state that it was a 'guesstimate'? You have plenty of options at this point:

a) If you want to keep arguing the point then go and find the evidence.
b) If you don't want to find the evidence, conceed the point.
c) If you want to argue the point and not bother providing anything to back yourself up then I'm sorry but you look very foolish to anyone reading this thread who daily see plenty of images of cyclists NOT doing what you claim they do.
d) If you want to try to achieve a better outcome for c by attacking theHog, then you look like an utter muppet.

Oh please martin, give us a break.

ANYONE who has watched Pro cycling over the many years since the Livestrong Band was first introduced KNOWS that a HUGE amount of Pro Cyclists have worn them. Huge. Lots and lots. More than 7.

And the fact that you take issue with this OBVIOUS FACT and ignore another poster's claim that they are all Sociopathic Tools is telling. Very telling hmmmmm.

But it seems some people want evidence, links to the obvious fact that a HUGE amount of pro cyclists have worn the Livestrong Band. It is time consuming to do this you know, ie having to post the pictures. Botany Bay knows how difficult it is to post pictures. So bear with me as I start posting pictures of the obvious fact. Maybe you guys can prove they are sociopathic tools? Lets start at the top of the UCI Rankings and move down. For current riders. I will do the retired riders after that.

Ok, top of the current ranking...Boonen has worn a Livestrong Bracelet....

 

[MarkvW]

Oh please martin, give us a break.

ANYONE who has watched Pro cycling over the many years since the Livestrong Band was first introduced KNOWS that a HUGE amount of Pro Cyclists have worn them. Huge. Lots and lots. More than 7.

And the fact that you take issue with this OBVIOUS FACT and ignore another poster's claim that they are all Sociopathic Tools is telling. Very telling hmmmmm.

But it seems some people want evidence, links to the obvious fact that a HUGE amount of pro cyclists have worn the Livestrong Band. It is time consuming to do this you know, ie having to post the pictures. Botany Bay knows how difficult it is to post pictures. So bear with me as I start posting pictures of the obvious fact. Maybe you guys can prove they are sociopathic tools? Lets start at the top of the UCI Rankings and move down. For current riders. I will do the retired riders after that.

Ok, top of the current ranking...Boonen has worn a Livestrong Bracelet....

The "tool" point is apparently irrelevant here. And I think it is now crystal clear that an Administrator of this site has invited people to spam pictures of yellow wristband-wearing pro cyclists! He wants the proof!

 

[BotanyBay]

zis thread has become utterly boring and tiresome

 

[thehog]

Appears we've touched a raw nerve.... who said anything about posting pictures? More stories being made up.... oh its so hard to post the pictures.

I thought we said name more than 7. To this date no one has named 8.

A lot of hot air mind you. Not much sticking to the point. But no one could name 8. No one.

Besides that’s not what it’s all about. HUGH CHUNKS in capitals (for emphasis) has been proven beyond doubt not to be true.

The problem with lying is it tends to make everything else you say suspect.

theHog rests his case.

 

[Polish]

Ok, here is a pic of the current UCI leader supporting LiveStrong:

Team Garmin had many riders supporting Livestrong. Maybe JV handed the bracelets out during training camp? Who knows.

And it is a Proven Fact that more World Champs have worn Livestrong Bands than all other charity bands combined. At least 4 World Champs in this post alone. Here is a pic of one World Champ showing off his Livestrong Band to another World Champ:

BTW, I hope this post dispells the notion that all pro cyclist who wear Livestrong bands are sociopathic tools. There is at least one rider in this post who is NOT a sociopathic tool. Livestrong boys, Livestrong

 

[Velodude]

So, I have asserted that I have a "past legal professional background?" Where? It appears that you are lying in an attempt to establish that I am deceptive.

And, even if you could establish that I have ever said that I am a person with a "past legal professional background," how can you justify your statement that I am not? Admit that you're making stuff up!

Why bicker? Who cares? Lance has beaten the rap. No need for either of us to speculate about his "case".

Up until you were challenged then admitted your "legal experience" was limited to having a subscription legal reporting service and "Matlock" TV episodes you were misrepresenting yourself as having legal experience.

Note your comment "My experience is state court". Being a spectator? Following is just a brief example of you attempting to assert your legal experience prowess.

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=449821&postcount=527

Please DON'T give legal strategy lessons!! RICO has a 5 year statute of limitations and you must present evidence of a "predicate act" occurring within the five year period.

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=480681&postcount=306

Nope. My experience is state court, but when I was debating the "feds are out to get" Armstrong guy, I did some research on the federal statutes

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=494396&postcount=508
[In response to another poster asking for “legal types” to respond]

If you answer non-responsively, the judge will (upon request of the attorney examining you) direct you to answer the question. If you persist with the nonresponsive question, you may (and probably will be (if you're not insane or incompetent)) be held in contempt of court.

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=509892&postcount=287

Thanks for the update on Swiss law. I'm totally unfamiliar with even the basic concepts of Swiss jurisdiction.

But totally familiar with US law?

 

[function]

Appears we've touched a raw nerve.... who said anything about posting pictures? More stories being made up.... oh its so hard to post the pictures.

I thought we said name more than 7. To this date no one has named 8.

A lot of hot air mind you. Not much sticking to the point. But no one could name 8. No one.

Besides that’s not what it’s all about. HUGH CHUNKS in capitals (for emphasis) has been proven beyond doubt not to be true.

The problem with lying is it tends to make everything else you say suspect.

theHog rests his case.

brajkovic
valverde
basso
phinney
quinziato
cavendish
hushovd
axel merckx
machado

 

[MarkvW]

Up until you were challenged then admitted your "legal experience" was limited to having a subscription legal reporting service and "Matlock" TV episodes you were misrepresenting yourself as having legal experience.

Note your comment "My experience is state court". Being a spectator? Following is just a brief example of you attempting to assert your legal experience prowess.

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=449821&postcount=527


http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=480681&postcount=306


http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=494396&postcount=508
[In response to another poster asking for “legal types” to respond]


http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=509892&postcount=287

But totally familiar with US law?

Again, where have I said that I am a legal professional? What is your evidence that I am not a legal professional?

 

[Polish]

brajkovic
valverde
basso
phinney
quinziato
cavendish
hushovd
axel merckx
machado

The Hog asked for 8, but you listed 9. Expect Dr Maserati to be along shortly to point out your fail...
"Where did the Hog say 9?"

Anyway, here are a few more....

Simeoni:

This was a great year for RV. The clean years back then. I regained a lot of respect for RV that year. Regained more respect than I had before Festina even.

 

[Velodude]

Again, where have I said that I am a legal professional? What is your evidence that I am not a legal professional? You are just a big fat liar.

You have imputed by saying "my experience is state court" that you must satisfy the requirements of being a qualified legal professional who has been admitted to appear before that state court. What other state court experience can be imputed?

That was one of your early posts. But in many of your subsequent posts you run rampant in providing legal comment, citing claimed authorities, challenging other's legal views and to one of my posts you claim you cannot give a reasonable (legal) opinion until you read the contract.

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=667674&postcount=6240
Apparently you have a knowledge of the terms of the contract between Armstrong and Anderson. Where can those terms be found? Without knowledge of the contract's terms, a reasonable opinion of the scope of that contract cannot be formed.

But when you were challenged and admitted you have only an interest in law and have no professional standing you pulled your horns in.

 

[BroDeal]

You have imputed by saying "my experience is state court" that you must satisfy the requirements of being a qualified legal professional who has been admitted to appear before that state court. What other state court experience can be imputed?

That was one of your early posts. But in many of your subsequent posts you run rampant in providing legal comment, citing claimed authorities, challenging other's legal views and to one of my posts you claim you cannot give a reasonable (legal) opinion until you read the contract.

But when you were challenged and admitted you have only an interest in law and have no professional standing you pulled your horns in.

Degrees from the Walter Mitty School of Law are very popular these days on the Internet. Society can be thankful that he did not attend ol' WM's medical school as well.

 

[MarkvW]

You have imputed by saying "my experience is state court" that you must satisfy the requirements of being a qualified legal professional who has been admitted to appear before that state court. What other state court experience can be imputed?

That was one of your early posts. But in many of your subsequent posts you run rampant in providing legal comment, citing claimed authorities, challenging other's legal views and to one of my posts you claim you cannot give a reasonable (legal) opinion until you read the contract.



But when you were challenged and admitted you have only an interest in law and have no professional standing you pulled your horns in.

Can't back up your lies, I see.

 

[BroDeal]

Can't back up your lies, I see.

Well, that is rich. A guy using his Google law degree to defend a liar like Armstrong accuses other people of lying.

 

[Velodude]

Can't back up your lies, I see.

Inform us of your "experience in state court".

As you have afterwards revealed you possess no legal qualifications were you the janitor, bailiff, court reporter, etc?

 

[Polish]

zis thread has become utterly boring and tiresome

So let me get this straight - after RR gets spanked, you come to his rescue by saying "the best thing is you can spot sociopaths from their yellow bands".
But Mark points out correctly that a HUGH amount of cyclists have worn them.
Hog disagrees and puts out a challenge to name 7.

And after both you and the Hog are proven wrong, spanked, you now feel the thread has become boring and tiresome? Cmon, take your spankings like Betty White please. Show some toughness.

Dish it out and take it too.

 

[BroDeal]

Inform us of your "experience in state court".

As you have afterwards revealed you possess no legal qualifications were you the janitor, bailiff, court reporter, etc?

Judging by his reflexive defense of frauds, I am going to guess defendent.

 

[thehog]

So let me get this straight - after RR gets spanked, you come to his rescue by saying "the best thing is you can spot sociopaths from their yellow bands".
But Mark points out correctly that a HUGH amount of cyclists have worn them.
Hog disagrees and puts out a challenge to name 7.

And after both you and the Hog are proven wrong, spanked, you now feel the thread has become boring and tiresome? Cmon, take your spankings like Betty White please. Show some toughness.

Dish it out and take it too.

I think you missed the point. MarkW stated "HUGH CHUNKS" to which I challenged him to name 7 which he couldn't. All of sudden the interns went scouring the internet and came up with some names (looks more like doping ring connection to me but that’s besides the point) and you came back with 9 - Good. I'm happy for you guys. But as I stated its not "huge chunks of the Pro peloton" as originally stated. 9 is nine but Mark couldn’t name 8, 7 or 9. Huge chunks indeed.

You can spin it anyway you like but the point has been sadly missed and you won’t let it go.

But that’s ok. I know what makes you guys tick. You hang on to this stuff as some form of victory. Like you showed "the truth" .

I hate to say it but theHog can hold his head high – he has nothing to hide. I like his credibility.

 

[Cobblestoned]

You have imputed by saying "my experience is state court" that you must satisfy the requirements of being a qualified legal professional who has been admitted to appear before that state court. What other state court experience can be imputed?

That was one of your early posts. But in many of your subsequent posts you run rampant in providing legal comment, citing claimed authorities, challenging other's legal views and to one of my posts you claim you cannot give a reasonable (legal) opinion until you read the contract.



But when you were challenged and admitted you have only an interest in law and have no professional standing you pulled your horns in.

Uhhhh yes.
To say it with Ullrich, not exactly, but: "Nothing has changed in the clinic."

I know all that audience with loss of memory and those who didn't follow the Lance-threads with full passion, those people may play into your cards and agree. Perhaps you really suffer from total loss of memory and some kind of full level loss of realism or......something, but really.....tuuuude.....you think you are the right person to call him out for that ?

The answer is simple. YOU are NOT and one of the biggest clowns in recent months.
But excused if you really suffer from....whatever. Then I may say sorry in advance. Sorry.

btw, any updates from your friends...I mean your daily real life Lance-talk sessions ?
Any hot updates regarding the indictments ?
Was Lance's passport finally handed out again ?
Does Lance own more than one ?
What are the exact coordinates of USS Armstrong's last known position ?

Questions about questions. Dude has/had/has had all the answers.