• The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. 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!

Official Lance Armstrong Thread: Part 3 (Post-Confession)

Page 557 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re: Re:

StryderHells said:
yaco said:
There is a difference in being aware of a crime and actually participating in the crime - Little I can do if you can't see the difference.
It doesn't really matter, Landis did wrong and that is not in doubt but he's come forward and you can't honestly be doubting the information he's passed on wasn't the right thing to do.

Yet another missing the point - How can you reward a whistle-blower if they are intimately part of the crime - They are being rewarded twice - Then again this is American justice which has its own issues - What I think of Landis is a separate issue.
 
Re: Re:

DamianoMachiavelli said:
yaco said:
There is a difference in being aware of a crime and actually participating in the crime - Little I can do if you can't see the difference.

This is one of the reasons Floyd does not expect to make much, maybe anything, off of the case. He thinks the DOJ has it in for him and it will use a provision in the law that applies to participants in a fraud to reduce the reward.

That would be an appropriate action for the DOJ - Though i'd be surprised if the DOJ won the case - How a sponsor can say they were 100% naive about doping in cycling is baffling - I am unaware of sponsors of known doping cycling teams suing that team - Yes, they drop the sponsorship but that's about it.
 
Re: Re:

yaco said:
How a sponsor can say they were 100% naive about doping in cycling is baffling
Today? Sure.
In the late 1990s and early 2000s... naivete about doping in cycling was widespread. It was very different then. It wasn't until Armstrong finally confessed that the story changed from "tested clean 500 times" to "everybody was doing it".

When Armstrong first started winning the Tour broad consensus seemed to be that the cheating uncovered by the Festina Affair the previous year was an anomaly, not quintessential to the sport.
 
Re: Re:

DamianoMachiavelli said:
Maybe in between kissing Betsy's feet you can ask her when she plans to apologize for making up and spreading rumors that LA was using a motor.
Given what LA said about, and did to, Betsy and Frankie, any reasonable person would give her a pass to say anything she wanted about him.
 
Re: Re:

yaco said:
StryderHells said:
yaco said:
There is a difference in being aware of a crime and actually participating in the crime - Little I can do if you can't see the difference.
It doesn't really matter, Landis did wrong and that is not in doubt but he's come forward and you can't honestly be doubting the information he's passed on wasn't the right thing to do.

Yet another missing the point - How can you reward a whistle-blower if they are intimately part of the crime - They are being rewarded twice - Then again this is American justice which has its own issues - What I think of Landis is a separate issue.

You often need informers to crack a conspiracy. And what's the harm in paying an informant out of recovered money that wouldn't have been recovered without his information?

Fraud ought to get paid. Maybe just exactly enough to pay back his victims? That would be sweet!
 
Jul 6, 2015
50
0
0
How long are you guys going to fixate on Lance Armstrong? It's entertaining in a reality TV show kind of way but........
 
Re: Re:

MarkvW said:
yaco said:
StryderHells said:
yaco said:
There is a difference in being aware of a crime and actually participating in the crime - Little I can do if you can't see the difference.
It doesn't really matter, Landis did wrong and that is not in doubt but he's come forward and you can't honestly be doubting the information he's passed on wasn't the right thing to do.

Yet another missing the point - How can you reward a whistle-blower if they are intimately part of the crime - They are being rewarded twice - Then again this is American justice which has its own issues - What I think of Landis is a separate issue.

You often need informers to crack a conspiracy. And what's the harm in paying an informant out of recovered money that wouldn't have been recovered without his information?

Fraud ought to get paid. Maybe just exactly enough to pay back his victims? That would be sweet!

This is a case of the DOJ unnecessarily throwing their weight around - It's not like all the sponsors have sued Armstrong.
 
Re: Re:

yaco said:
MarkvW said:
yaco said:
StryderHells said:
yaco said:
There is a difference in being aware of a crime and actually participating in the crime - Little I can do if you can't see the difference.
It doesn't really matter, Landis did wrong and that is not in doubt but he's come forward and you can't honestly be doubting the information he's passed on wasn't the right thing to do.

Yet another missing the point - How can you reward a whistle-blower if they are intimately part of the crime - They are being rewarded twice - Then again this is American justice which has its own issues - What I think of Landis is a separate issue.

You often need informers to crack a conspiracy. And what's the harm in paying an informant out of recovered money that wouldn't have been recovered without his information?

Fraud ought to get paid. Maybe just exactly enough to pay back his victims? That would be sweet!

This is a case of the DOJ unnecessarily throwing their weight around - It's not like all the sponsors have sued Armstrong.

How many million did Lance's insurer recover?
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,770
3
0
Re: Re:

MarkvW said:
mikez said:
How long are you guys going to fixate on Lance Armstrong? It's entertaining in a reality TV show kind of way but........

I am waiting for final judgment in the qui tam.
We know.

Unless someone is personally involved in that then I would think most normal humans have mode on by now.
I mean - it will be a story when the judgment does come out but I don't sit around waiting for it either.

There are doctors for that type of mental issues.
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,770
3
0
Re:

aphronesis said:
Weird that people are still so fixated on LA that it prevents them seeing how Betsy's pathology and access to a fame machine transcended any injury she suffered in this debacle.
Dammmmm man ,,,, i missed this. LOL at your post.
 
Jun 21, 2012
146
0
0
Re: Re:

Semper Fidelis said:
aphronesis said:
Weird that people are still so fixated on LA that it prevents them seeing how Betsy's pathology and access to a fame machine transcended any injury she suffered in this debacle.
Dammmmm man ,,,, i missed this. LOL at your post.

We're in post-truth land now - how convenient for some.
 
Oct 21, 2015
341
0
0
Re: Re:

Ninety5rpm said:
DamianoMachiavelli said:
Maybe in between kissing Betsy's feet you can ask her when she plans to apologize for making up and spreading rumors that LA was using a motor.
Given what LA said about, and did to, Betsy and Frankie, any reasonable person would give her a pass to say anything she wanted about him.

Thanks for that. Above in a nutshell we have Betsy and her bootlickers summed up: It is okay for Betsy to lie, to spread false rumors, to create fake news, and to give weight to alternative facts because she claims someone did that to her years ago. This kicker is that a good portion of what she publicly blamed on Lance was the result of either her own paranoia or a carefully crafted lie to tar Lance. She is still at it.

Betsy's lies about Lance did not start with motor doping. It was her tactic from the beginning.
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,770
3
0
Re: Re:

Brian Butterfield said:
aphronesis said:
You saying Betsy didn't play people like you well after the sell-by date? Ok.

"people like you".

What interesting times we live in.
It is interesting. Especially when for some unknown reason the "flowchart playbook" always has that arrow pointed back to one person Lance. That begins to feel really tired and worn out to most folks who can think for themselves.

Then again the flat earth'''ers believe doping ended when LA was busted and sent to shame land.
 
Oct 4, 2011
905
0
0
Re: Re:

DamianoMachiavelli said:
Ninety5rpm said:
DamianoMachiavelli said:
Maybe in between kissing Betsy's feet you can ask her when she plans to apologize for making up and spreading rumors that LA was using a motor.
Given what LA said about, and did to, Betsy and Frankie, any reasonable person would give her a pass to say anything she wanted about him.

Thanks for that. Above in a nutshell we have Betsy and her bootlickers summed up: It is okay for Betsy to lie, to spread false rumors, to create fake news, and to give weight to alternative facts because she claims someone did that to her years ago. This kicker is that a good portion of what she publicly blamed on Lance was the result of either her own paranoia or a carefully crafted lie to tar Lance. She is still at it.

Betsy's lies about Lance did not start with motor doping. It was her tactic from the beginning.
Interesting- care to point out the carefully crafted lies and paranoia in her public statements on lance . I'm keen to know which parts are lies and how you come to know it was carefully crafted yet also deluded(paranoid).
 
Re: Re:

noddy69 said:
DamianoMachiavelli said:
Ninety5rpm said:
DamianoMachiavelli said:
Maybe in between kissing Betsy's feet you can ask her when she plans to apologize for making up and spreading rumors that LA was using a motor.
Given what LA said about, and did to, Betsy and Frankie, any reasonable person would give her a pass to say anything she wanted about him.

Thanks for that. Above in a nutshell we have Betsy and her bootlickers summed up: It is okay for Betsy to lie, to spread false rumors, to create fake news, and to give weight to alternative facts because she claims someone did that to her years ago. This kicker is that a good portion of what she publicly blamed on Lance was the result of either her own paranoia or a carefully crafted lie to tar Lance. She is still at it.

Betsy's lies about Lance did not start with motor doping. It was her tactic from the beginning.
Interesting- care to point out the carefully crafted lies and paranoia in her public statements on lance . I'm keen to know which parts are lies and how you come to know it was carefully crafted yet also deluded(paranoid).

I am only aware of one false statement. She initially said that Birotte promised to hand over Armstrong investigation to USADA. She promptly retracted that when confronted, though.

The person who claims "carefully crafted lies" were told is not telling the truth. She is a zealot, but not a liar.
 
Re: Re:

Semper Fidelis said:
Brian Butterfield said:
aphronesis said:
You saying Betsy didn't play people like you well after the sell-by date? Ok.

"people like you".

What interesting times we live in.
It is interesting. Especially when for some unknown reason the "flowchart playbook" always has that arrow pointed back to one person Lance. That begins to feel really tired and worn out to most folks who can think for themselves.

Then again the flat earth'''ers believe doping ended when LA was busted and sent to shame land.
in 2006? ;)