Official Lance Armstrong Thread **READ POST #1 BEFORE POSTING**

[Oldman]

The 2002-2004 contract between Tailwind & USPS is your starting point.

I don't believe Wiesel & Co were instrumental in arranging for the Trek bike sales to launder money to finance the drug program, employed Ferrari as a "consultant", engaged the dubious Spanish doctors, arranged for the bribe to the UCI to make the Swiss positive go away in 2002, were present when the team were administering drugs or infusing RBC rich blood, etc.

You are talking about petty theft and petty cheating. You said:

"It will all be about Armstrong. He is the main target who brought fellow directors/shareholders of Tailwind Sports and CS & E along for the racketeering ride. It all re-focused after the Landis emails."

The model for the corporation, co-opting USA Cycling as a protectionist federation, bribing the UCI, creating a "foundation" to hype a media image, etc: you really think Lance thought that up and brought an IPO magnate along for the ride? Lance was all about small time cheating before he met Wiesel and his staff: Eddie B, Gorski and co.

Whether you choose to believe it or not those dudes had the model up and running while Lance was still trying to be a cyclist. He may be patholgical but someone else laid the path before him.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

And why is that? Hint: Maybe they think LA didn't have an unfair advantage.....

"Why is that?" Hint - because they are as much an Armstrong fan, as an Ullrich fan.

You are talking about petty theft and petty cheating. You said:

"It will all be about Armstrong. He is the main target who brought fellow directors/shareholders of Tailwind Sports and CS & E along for the racketeering ride. It all re-focused after the Landis emails."

The model for the corporation, co-opting USA Cycling as a protectionist federation, bribing the UCI, creating a "foundation" to hype a media image, etc: you really think Lance thought that up and brought an IPO magnate along for the ride? Lance was all about small time cheating before he met Wiesel and his staff: Eddie B, Gorski and co.

Whether you choose to believe it or not those dudes had the model up and running while Lance was still trying to be a cyclist. He may be patholgical but someone else laid the path before him.

I agree - of course this goes beyond Armstrong.
But aphonesis point is that magically people won't care about Armstrong as he will may not be the main target. As we have recently seen with Bonds the media interest will focus on Armstrong.

 

[aphronesis]

"Why is that?" Hint - because they are as much an Armstrong fan, as an Ullrich fan.


I agree - of course this goes beyond Armstrong.
But aphonesis point is that magically people won't care about Armstrong as he will may not be the main target. As we have recently seen with Bonds the media interest will focus on Armstrong.

That's one of several points I suggested. Let's stick to your example though: Bonds was the last man standing and the case went nowhere.

What else were the media going to talk about? The colossal failure of the endeavor? Newspapers don't do that anymore.

If this goes bigger than Balco, Armstrong won't be. If it doesn't, he won't get hit that hard as Oldman suggests.

You can't have it both ways.

 

[thehog]

That's one of several points I suggested. Let's stick to your example though: Bonds was the last man standing and the case went nowhere.

What else were the media going to talk about? The colossal failure of the endeavor? Newspapers don't do that anymore.

If this goes bigger than Balco, Armstrong won't be. If it doesn't, he won't get hit that hard as Oldman suggests.

You can't have it both ways.

I disagree. Regardless of how the trial pans out you’re going to have some fairly salacious material coming out that can easily be juxtaposed against Armstrong’s books and his statements at the time.

The media is going to have a lot of fun in comparing his “I’m clean and after cancer I would never destroy my body with drugs” to the stories and transactions of Armstrong purchasing and traffic some fairly high grade gear. They’re also going to have a lot of fun comparing the hospital room and SCA denials to the pay-offs and pressuring of the Doctors, hospitals and witnesses involved.

Even if Armstrong walks all this will do immense damage to him. There’s not of lot of places he can go after this.

No matter which way you spin it it’s a slow-motion car crash. Its looks terrible. It’s already hit him hard. He can’t talk to any reputable media anymore, can’t give interviews, he can’t make statements based on past performance.

Worst for Armstrong is his legacy is completely shot. At least Ullrich and Pantani have a legacy. We all know they doped but in some way we accept it. I think most will accept Armstrong’s doping but they won’t accept the way in which he attempted to silence people with bullying along with the pay-offs to conceal the doping.

The media love a good story and this is too many good stories in this to ignore.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

That's one of several points I suggested. Let's stick to your example though: Bonds was the last man standing and the case went nowhere.

What else were the media going to talk about? The colossal failure of the endeavor? Newspapers don't do that anymore.

If this goes bigger than Balco, Armstrong won't be. If it doesn't, he won't get hit that hard as Oldman suggests.

You can't have it both ways.

I can't have either of your made up points? Ok, I can live with that.

Bonds was the last man standing? What about Clemens? He is due back again next year.

Also - unlike BALCO which was essentially a PED lab bust - the Armstrong case will focus on the money and fraud of obtaining PEDs.
PEDs that Armstrong claims that he would never use.

 

[aphronesis]

I disagree. Regardless of how the trial pans out you’re going to have some fairly salacious material coming out that can easily be juxtaposed against Armstrong’s books and his statements at the time.

The media is going to have a lot of fun in comparing his “I’m clean and after cancer I would never destroy my body with drugs” to the stories and transactions of Armstrong purchasing and traffic some fairly high grade gear. They’re also going to have a lot of fun comparing the hospital room and SCA denials to the pay-offs and pressuring of the Doctors, hospitals and witnesses involved.

Even if Armstrong walks all this will do immense damage to him. There’s not of lot of places he can go after this.

Sure. But damage relative to what? 2006. The great year of retirement? Fine.

I agree with you generally about the fallout, but that means that a.) what you know has to be released and that b.) what you're seeing in slow motion is from a fairly exclusive perspective. It's not necessarily the case that any media outlets are going to drag it out step by step.


No matter which way you spin it it’s a slow-motion car crash. Its looks terrible. It’s already hit him hard. He can’t talk to any reputable media anymore, can’t give interviews, he can’t make statements based on past performance.

Worst for Armstrong is his legacy is completely shot. At least Ullrich and Pantani have a legacy. We all know they doped but in some way we accept it. I think most will accept Armstrong’s doping but they won’t accept the way in which he attempted to silence people with bullying along with the pay-offs to conceal the doping.

The media love a good story and this is too many good stories in this to ignore.

Sure. But damage relative to what? 2006. The great year of retirement? Fine.

I agree with you generally about the fallout, but that means that a.) what you know has to be released and that b.) what you're seeing in slow motion is from a fairly exclusive perspective. It's not necessarily the case that any media outlets are going to drag it out step by step. It may be an implosion and that's all.

 

[aphronesis]

I can't have either of your made up points? Ok, I can live with that.

Bonds was the last man standing? What about Clemens? He is due back again next year.

Also - unlike BALCO which was essentially a PED lab bust - the Armstrong case will focus on the money and fraud of obtaining PEDs.
PEDs that Armstrong claims that he would never use.

Oooh. You're right Doc. Roger Clemens in 2012. That'll be gangbusters.

Yes, the differences between Balco and Tailwind--whatever are known. Again, the distance between what Armstrong said and did may not be the chasm you like to imagine.

What do you think he was going to do? Wink at reporters while saying it?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Oooh. You're right Doc. Roger Clemens in 2012. That'll be gangbusters.

Yes, the differences between Balco and Tailwind--whatever are known. Again, the distance between what Armstrong said and did may not be the chasm you like to imagine.

What do you think he was going to do? Wink at reporters while saying it?

The quote I provided wasn't at "reporters" - it was under oath.

What madeup "chasm" are you assuming I imagine? He lied and any investigation will expose that, it is what it is.

It certainly doesn't surprise me that he lied and continues to do so - but no-one asked him to write a book and tell us how clean he is, or launch a foundation offering hope when he lies about his own drug usage.

The appeal of Armstrong was built on a foundation of falsehoods and regardless of charges or punishment the myth will be exposed and Armstrong will be viewed as another pathetic figure like Bonds and Clemens.

 

[mikeNphilly]

This post must've really made some people nervous today. Lot's of scurrying around. It'd be shame for this useful link to get buried under 5 pages. But I'm sure that was never the intent.

That's alright. I'll just keep reposting every several pages to assist the curious.

That link also says the U.S. attorney ,who this gave the person the info to write this informative article, thinks there will not be any indictments(or starting to believe there will be none.) Just wanted to point that out for people that might have not have read the whole article.

http://redkiteprayer.com/?p=6973

edit: Just realized that article was posted 10 pages back, so that might have already been discussed, if so sorry.

 

[aphronesis]

The quote I provided wasn't at "reporters" - it was under oath.

What madeup "chasm" are you assuming I imagine? He lied and any investigation will expose that, it is what it is.

It certainly doesn't surprise me that he lied and continues to do so - but no-one asked him to write a book and tell us how clean he is, or launch a foundation offering hope when he lies about his own drug usage.

The appeal of Armstrong was built on a foundation of falsehoods and regardless of charges or punishment the myth will be exposed and Armstrong will be viewed as another pathetic figure like Bonds and Clemens.

You guys covered this ground last year. Sure, any investigation may "uncover" that, but several investigations may well leave it behind en route to other agendas. Yes, he lied, but you refer to truth and lying in this situation as complete absolutes with clearly demarcated consequences for one or the other. Not all the things he lied about will matter in court--or even be presented--and if that is the situation, the things he lied about will not entirely matter to a public.

You assume a one-to-one correlation and direct line between legal consequences, the actual facts of a court proceeding and the media fallout.

Maybe in the world of the Star, Globe, Examiner or wherever else, but not in the real world as my good friend LarryBud would say.

What western medical foundation "offering hope," does not rely on drug usage?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

You guys covered this ground last year. Sure, any investigation may "uncover" that, but several investigations may well leave it behind en route to other agendas.

What other agendas?
Do you think this investigation was started to see if Armstrong had indeed blown some stop signs as Landis claims?

What western medical foundation "offering hope," does not rely on drug usage?

Ok, the "drug usage" is meant to be for the people afflicted, not for the ones running it.

 

[aphronesis]

What other agendas?
Do you think this investigation was started to see if Armstrong had indeed blown some stop signs as Landis claims?


Ok, the "drug usage" is meant to be for the people afflicted, not for the ones running it.

The agendas that go to Federal RICO charges beyond some bike racers doping and transporting drugs in Europe. Don't you keep notes on this? I know you do


Hey, if the afflicted live, I'm sure they'll be forgiving.

As I recall it was started in regard to Rock Racing and Michael Ball and then Novitsky saw some potential for career advancement that was a little more exciting and, salacious, one might say, then the desk work and garbage sniffing he'd been doing up to that point.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

You guys covered this ground last year. Sure, any investigation may "uncover" that, but several investigations may well leave it behind en route to other agendas. Yes, he lied, but you refer to truth and lying in this situation as complete absolutes with clearly demarcated consequences for one or the other. Not all the things he lied about will matter in court--or even be presented--and if that is the situation, the things he lied about will not entirely matter to a public.

You assume a one-to-one correlation and direct line between legal consequences, the actual facts of a court proceeding and the media fallout.

Maybe in the world of the Star, Globe, Examiner or wherever else, but not in the real world as my good friend LarryBud would say.

What western medical foundation "offering hope," does not rely on drug usage?

While I was responding I see you added a further thought - again attributing something that I did not say or do not think.

Just to clear it up and repeat the point - do you think there is "direct line" for Bonds? You think the media interest in his case is because the media are interested in reporting all the perjury cases that happen?

 

[MacRoadie]

As I recall it was started in regard to Rock Racing and Michael Ball and then Novitsky saw some potential for career advancement that was a little more exciting and, salacious, one might say, then the desk work and garbage sniffing he'd been doing up to that point.

Finally, after three days and 30 pages, we get to the real message:

It's a witch hunt, complete with the requisite Novitzsky ad hominem.

 

[aphronesis]

While I was responding I see you added a further thought - again attributing something that I did not say or do not think.

Just to clear it up and repeat the point - do you think there is "direct line" for Bonds? You think the media interest in his case is because the media are interested in reporting all the perjury cases that happen?

I can dig up at least three of your posts from the past few days that collapse the legal and media fallout--the overall social perception, let's say, as being effectively isomorphic. One and the same. You're free to go edit them because I can't be bothered.

No, I don't. But Bonds (like Martha Stewart whom some, not you, invoked as another proximate example) is an individual, stuck with their own actions. Depending on how the case seems likely to move, this case will not be about individuals, but about a corporation and any media attacks on LA indiviudually will not be able to square neatly with the case. And vice versa.

 

[aphronesis]

Finally, after three days and 30 pages, we get to the real message:

It's a witch hunt, complete with the requisite Novitzsky ad hominem.

You guys are like that word processing feature "sounds like," that fills in words for you as you're typing. I turn those off.

No one said it's a witch hunt. Novitsky's job description is its own ad hominem. Doesn't matter who he's tailing.

Are you going to deny that the Armstrong situation is a more professionally compelling case than:

Michael Ball and Rock Racing?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

The agendas that go to Federal RICO charges beyond some bike racers doping and transporting drugs in Europe. Don't you keep notes on this? I know you do

Its beyond?? Really - I think you will find that its central - hey, no busing PEDs no need to set up elaborate financial and transportation systems to hide the fraud.

Hey, if the afflicted live, I'm sure they'll be forgiving.

If they are so forgiving then why does Armstrong continue to lie to them??

As I recall it was started in regard to Rock Racing and Michael Ball and then Novitsky saw some potential for career advancement that was a little more exciting and, salacious, one might say, then the desk work and garbage sniffing he'd been doing up to that point.

That Novitsky - wasn't it amazing luck that a case he just happened to pick for career advancement could expose Armstrongs lies.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I can dig up at least three of your posts from the past few days that collapse the legal and media fallout--the overall social perception, let's say, as being effectively isomorphic. One and the same. You're free to go edit them because I can't be bothered.

No, I don't. But Bonds (like Martha Stewart whom some, not you, invoked as another proximate example) is an individual, stuck with their own actions. Depending on how the case seems likely to move, this case will not be about individuals, but about a corporation and any media attacks on LA indiviudually will not be able to square neatly with the case. And vice versa.

Then dig. ..........

 

[thehog]

You mean statements like:

Oh dear.

He was always good for a “sound bite” but now they’re all going to come back and haunt him. I have to say he never seemed to mind throwing up the wife, the kids or the cancer as a deflection from the doping. Again trial aside this stuff going is going to make a lot of people feel very sick indeed that they placed their trust, their faith and often the hopes of their loved ones in him. Yes it was a great story but he completely hoodwinked everyone in the most disgusting way possible. This won’t be ignored.

 

[Polish]

Even if Armstrong walks all this will do immense damage to him. There’s not of lot of places he can go after this.
.

I see. Moving to your "fallback position". Retreat.
Lance walks - but the smear job did immense damage.

I agree with the Lance "walks", but the smearjob damage will be repairable.
You see, most people do not like smearjobs.
Society does not appreciate smearjobs. Civil Societies.

And this is not Pound/Bordry/WADA/AFLD/Howman/Gendarmes/SSDD.
This is the FEDS.
TopNotch WorldClass Investigation.
No one "walks" from the FEDS unless they are innocent.
The smearjob will be repaired.
Smearers always end up looking worse than the Smearees in the long run BTW

 

[Velodude]

That link also says the U.S. attorney ,who this gave the person the info to write this informative article, thinks there will not be any indictments(or starting to believe there will be none.) Just wanted to point that out for people that might have not have read the whole article.

http://redkiteprayer.com/?p=6973

edit: Just realized that article was posted 10 pages back, so that might have already been discussed, if so sorry.

I am not one of those lawyers who has a lot of experience with federal grand juries — either as an attorney or as a defendant — so I checked in with a friend who works as an assistant U.S. attorney in another district...

My buddy, the aforementioned assistant U.S. attorney, says he’s beginning to believe there won’t be indictments

Have you considered that the "assistant US attorney" who is not on the case ("another district") offering a private opinion and, because of expressing that opinion, cannot be privy to the case could be a Texan and closet contributor to Livestrong?

Only information contained in that article that is new information is:

I’ve recently spoken with two attorneys whose clients have testified to the grand jury within the last 40 days.

 

[mikeNphilly]

Have you considered that the "assistant US attorney" who is not on the case ("another district") offering a private opinion and, because of expressing that opinion, cannot be privy to the case could be a Texan and closet contributor to Livestrong?

Only information contained in that article that is new information is:

So basically you are saying he is pretty much like the other "insiders" on this board...i.e they have no inside info at all, for or against this case, and could have their own agenda...glad you pointed that out for us all.

 

[Velodude]

So basically you are saying he is pretty much like the other "insiders" on this board...i.e they have no inside info at all, for or against this case, and could have their own agenda...glad you pointed that out for us all.

Yep. All the inside information I have received I have kept to my chest to honor it's confidentiality and protect it's source.

 

[aphronesis]

In fairness to you, you did answer it.

But in fairness to me I did point out that your "answer" is quite silly, it doesn't stand up to scrutiny and that your arguments are far from someone who doesn't care but is the usual apologist stuff we see from Armstrong fans.

BTW - I really don't think when you are trying to suggest that people who believed Armstrong's lies and should be responsible for choosing their beliefs, is in a position to use the words "bad faith".

That's because anyone who doesn't agree with the major detractors is automatically in the position of an Armstrong fan in the eyes of the vigilant and vocal majority on this thread. How many posts have I responded to already where one or another member says "Ah ha, it's the ___whatever argument."? Answer that in fairness to me.

All I have said is that it won't play the way the more vocally disaffected would like it to. I haven't said he hasn't done those things, I haven't said he's not been an overbearing f**k to many. I've also specifically said that anyone who markets themselves in the way he did deserves their own fall.

None of that implies, however, that I agree with all of the legal means by which some social retribution might be achieved.

And, by the way, I answered your principal argument above via the Bonds/Stewart rubbish. They are individuals and are tried as such--clear-cut crimes: perjury, insider trading. One person per crime. The same won't happen in the case of Tailwind and it will be a mess to clarify to a public if it proceeds

 

[DirtyWorks]

I don't believe Wiesel & Co were instrumental in arranging for the Trek bike sales to launder money to finance the drug program, employed Ferrari as a "consultant", engaged the dubious Spanish doctors, arranged for the bribe to the UCI to make the Swiss positive go away in 2002, were present when the team were administering drugs or infusing RBC rich blood, etc.

Proof please.

Weisel's in this up to his eyeballs. He ran a fully juiced domestic team and took it to the big league. Alegations have been around for a decade or more that the introduction of PED's to the peloton have something to do with Wiesel as a result of his startup funding. Amgen being just one of the Weisel funded companies.

Whether or not there's a Weisel conviction is another question. He's a bully that knows how and when to break the rules and get away with it.

How is it possible that Wiesel is/was not involved in the many and varied crimes?