I'm amazed that people think that trying to influence the court of public opinion might affect the outcome of the growing International investigation.
For those now trying to discredit LeMond, especially the ones saying he would have no knowledge - read the articles a bit closer. The original subpoena was for all of the documents Greg had pertaining to the lawsuit with Trek, which had to do with the way they treated his bike line after he spoke out against Armstrong. That paperwork would have been the result of a lot of research and interviews, plus documentation of agreements and communication. I think it's natural that the Grand Jury might have a few questions regarding those proceedings.
I think that Greg's comparison to the Mafia will prove to be pretty accurate once this all comes to light. There are a lot of people trying to intimidate and bully in Lance's name. I've never met the guy, but I've had threats just for sharing links on twitter. Some tool even said the "curse of juan pelota" was upon me. The New York Times spoke to riders from other teams who heard Armstrong badmouthing Contador at the 2009 team table, while Alberto was sat there.
Those riders wanted to remain anonymous, saying they feared repercussions from Armstrong and the team, for telling the truth about something they observed. If they're afraid to be quoted by name over something so simple, and legal, imagine how much intimidation they've experienced in the past decade. And imagine how freeing it would be to testify under oath, in private, about someone who brought fear to professional athletes at the top of their sport?
People keep talking about Landis. His revelations have already helped cycling, because Ashenden, Catlin and others gained knowledge about current doping practices, and the police, especially the French ones, learned how things get delivered to riders. Hopefully that deterred potential cheaters at the Tour, and the anti-doping doctors have a better idea of what to look for.
Riders are going to talk, under oath. The more investigators know, the more connections can be made, and they will find documents, and they will exert pressure on people who have committed crimes. And publications that don't rely on cycling related income, like WSJ, ESPN, Sports Illustrated, the New York Times, and more and more, can do more with one article stating corroborated facts than a whole army of you can do in all the cycling forums in the world. Yes, you can show up in packs, or with puppets, and make it seem like there's agreement, but in real life, you're not changing a single opinion to your point of view.
Do you actually think Lance gained more fans than he lost during the three weeks of the Tour?