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

Page 421 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Mar 10, 2009
341
0
0
MarkvW said:
When it comes to what will happen, I'm totally on the fence. I could lay out my thinking, but I don't want to bother for a person who is going to call me a hypocrite over an online Lance Armstrong discussion.

When it comes to what I'd like to happen? I'd like to see Armstrong already stripped of his victories, and all his teams sanctioned and in disgrace. I'd like to see the fallout drastically impact the UCI and force its collapse. After that, I'd like to see a pro cycling circuit run by and for the riders, with profit sharing, with rider control of team management, and some kind of retirement stake. It would still be filthy, probably filthier, but at least the riders wouldn't be exploited so bad. Awwww, cue the music!

Well so far nothing has happened and there is no fall out. Everyone keeps waiting and nothing seems to happen.
 
MarkvW said:
When it comes to what I'd like to happen? I'd like to see Armstrong already stripped of his victories, and all his teams sanctioned and in disgrace. I'd like to see the fallout drastically impact the UCI and force its collapse.
The victories being stripped is up to the ASO. I'd be pleasantly surprised if it happened. But, I don't see how it will. The victory I'd like to see wiped away is the Leadville win.

MarkvW said:
After that, I'd like to see a pro cycling circuit run by and for the riders, with profit sharing, with rider control of team management, and some kind of retirement stake. It would still be filthy, probably filthier, but at least the riders wouldn't be exploited so bad. Awwww, cue the music!

Should it actually happen that the UCI be ejected from the IOC ASO owns most of the premier events. So, ASO and RCS run it themselves for a while. Given the rise of Russian influence in the UCI, maybe they take over and hire Darach as the 'new face' of the UCI. Lots of ways that could break, none of which will happen unless high-level people at the IOC are embarrassed.

Riders won't ever get a fair shake. They are merely actors in the drama.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
DirtyWorks said:
Should it actually happen that the UCI be ejected from the IOC ASO owns most of the premier events. So, ASO and RCS run it themselves for a while. Riders won't ever get a fair shake. They are merely actors in the drama.

The ASO dont play fair, you just have to look at the favourable treatment the french get in the Dakar race :(
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
DirtyWorks said:
The victories being stripped is up to the ASO. I'd be pleasantly surprised if it happened. But, I don't see how it will. The victory I'd like to see wiped away is the Leadville win.
Essentially, it would be USADA who decides what results get stripped, not ASO.
USADA would bring the case against Armstrong - they have been sitting in with the Feds so they probably have an excellent case. (George, Tyler etc)
By then Armstrong would be toxic - both the UCI & ASO would accept any decision.

DirtyWorks said:
Should it actually happen that the UCI be ejected from the IOC ASO owns most of the premier events. So, ASO and RCS run it themselves for a while. Given the rise of Russian influence in the UCI, maybe they take over and hire Darach as the 'new face' of the UCI. Lots of ways that could break, none of which will happen unless high-level people at the IOC are embarrassed.

Riders won't ever get a fair shake. They are merely actors in the drama.
The UCI does not need replacing (and ASO do not want to run cycling), the UCI needs reform, get rid of the old boys network, put in some accountability and let an independent outside agency do the anti-doping.
 
sherer said:
Well so far nothing has happened and there is no fall out. Everyone keeps waiting and nothing seems to happen.

You've got what appear to be multi-faceted investigations happening. It's not controversial to assume Fabiani is trying to influence the Congress critters who fund the agencies examining Wonderboy and Weisel.

These cases have to be solid enough to take to a prosecutor. The prosecutors are calculating the likelihood of a conviction given the targets have a tremendous amount of money to buy their innocence. It's not controversial to assume Fabiani is trying to minimize the prosecutor's budget.

None of which we are allowed to see. (That's good and bad...)
 
DirtyWorks said:
You've got what appear to be multi-faceted investigations happening. It's not controversial to assume Fabiani is trying to influence the Congress critters who fund the agencies examining Wonderboy and Weisel.

These cases have to be solid enoug h to gtake to a prosecutor. The prosecutors are calculating the likelihood of a conviction given the targets have a tremendous amount of money to buy their innocence. It's not controversial to assume Fabiani is trying to minimize the prosecutor's budget.

None of which we are allowed to see.

We've already seen some Congressional speeches (doubtless orchestrated by Lance), but Holder decided to forge on. And those speeches have stopped. It's one thing standing up and defending the clean cancer fighter. Its another defending Tyler's doping teammate. What's the upside for a congressman defending Lance, as opposed to the downside? The upside is a feel-good moment for the Lance fans defending an innocent hero. The downside is potentially coming out publicly on the side of a disgraced criminal defendant. That's a bad bet IMO. The upside doesn't give much of anything and the downside would be ugly for a politician. Congress isn't going to use Lance Armstrong as a tool to hamstring the AG. Not to say, as you suggest, that Fabiani isn't trying.

I strongly agree that the investigations have to be multifaceted when it comes to potential targets. Papp and Ball are at least two facets. If Tyler snitched off Lance, he doubtless snitched off all his dope dealers up to the end of his career--another facet (that could be ongoing). And all the other drug dealers snitched off by the other riders. Then there are the people who facilitated secret money transfers to facilitate drug transactions. Then there's the Postal fraud participants. And then there are all the crimes discovered along the way.

One investigative facet is certain to me: The feds are investigating drug dealers and they are working their way up the distribution chain to try to break up ongoing drug distribution networks. The feds would not walk away from PED distribution networks. That's way less controversial than just targeting Lance! Whatever else the feds are doing with respect to Lance, they've got to be investigating drug dealing.

And to Maserati: Another reason Tyler's testimony probably was immunized is because the feds doubtless asked him about all his drug deals and drug dealers. A dopehead with a lawyer would always want immunity in the face of that kind of an inquiry.
 
Dr. Maserati said:
Essentially, it would be USADA who decides what results get stripped, not ASO.
USADA would bring the case against Armstrong - they have been sitting in with the Feds so they probably have an excellent case. (George, Tyler etc)
By then Armstrong would be toxic - both the UCI & ASO would accept any decision.

I'm fuzzy on this part of the process. Let's say USADA finds against Wonderboy. That all goes back to the federation that Weisel runs. We know that Pat and Hein are still backing Wonderboy's game, so no pressure from the UCI or USAC. Right? It seems to me that leads to a Contador-RFEC outcome and USADA/WADA can only stomp their feet. Exactly how Pat designed it to work.

Dr. Maserati said:
The UCI does not need replacing (and ASO do not want to run cycling), the UCI needs reform, get rid of the old boys network, put in some accountability and let an independent outside agency do the anti-doping.

While I agree with you, your old boy network is the IOC's well-organized federation leading the anti-doping effort. See how easy that is? As long as the IOC isn't embarrassed, Pat and Hein have got it all under control.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
MarkvW said:
We've already seen some Congressional speeches (doubtless orchestrated by Lance), but Holder decided to forge on. And those speeches have stopped. It's one thing standing up and defending the clean cancer fighter. Its another defending Tyler's doping teammate. What's the upside for a congressman defending Lance, as opposed to the downside? The upside is a feel-good moment for the Lance fans defending an innocent hero. The downside is potentially coming out publicly on the side of a disgraced criminal defendant. That's a bad bet IMO. The upside doesn't give much of anything and the downside would be ugly for a politician. Congress isn't going to use Lance Armstrong as a tool to hamstring the AG. Not to say, as you suggest, that Fabiani isn't trying.

I strongly agree that the investigations have to be multifaceted when it comes to potential targets. Papp and Ball are at least two facets. If Tyler snitched off Lance, he doubtless snitched off all his dope dealers up to the end of his career--another facet (that could be ongoing). And all the other drug dealers snitched off by the other riders. Then there are the people who facilitated secret money transfers to facilitate drug transactions. Then there's the Postal fraud participants. And then there are all the crimes discovered along the way.

One investigative facet is certain to me: The feds are investigating drug dealers and they are working their way up the distribution chain to try to break up ongoing drug distribution networks. The feds would not walk away from PED distribution networks. That's way less controversial than just targeting Lance! Whatever else the feds are doing with respect to Lance, they've got to be investigating drug dealing.

And to Maserati: Another reason Tyler's testimony probably was immunized is because the feds doubtless asked him about all his drug deals and drug dealers. A dopehead with a lawyer would always want immunity in the face of that kind of an inquiry.

Tylers drug dealer - oh ya, what was his name again....
“It was an illegal doping product, but he helped out a friend,” said Hamilton, who helped Armstrong win the Tour de France in 1999, 2000 and 2001. “So I want to make it clear that, you know, if the roles were reversed and I had the connection, I would have done the same, same, thing for Lance.”
....
BTW - Tyler was a user, what penalty is there for using?
If he was buying the PEDs he might have some problems, but that goes back to Tailwind and those Treks.
 
Dr. Maserati said:
Tylers drug dealer - oh ya, what was his name again....
....
BTW - Tyler was a user, what penalty is there for using?
If he was buying the PEDs he might have some problems, but that goes back to Tailwind and those Treks.

Didn't Tyler race for Rock Racing and Michael Ball? Wasn't Ball the subject of an investigation?
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
MarkvW said:
Didn't Tyler race for Rock Racing and Michael Ball? Wasn't Ball the subject of an investigation?

Man, I am really tempted to shout "an investigation does not mean an indictment" - but I'll play.
Yes is the answer to all your questions. So?
 
Dr. Maserati said:
Man, I am really tempted to shout "an investigation does not mean an indictment" - but I'll play.
Yes is the answer to all your questions. So?

Just imagine the ejaculatory spasms of joy in the Wonderboy army if he beats the rap. "My innocence in the matter has been proven in court!" It's like "never tested positive"^100. I'm reminded of this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LC3XY7eDMVs ...wait for the reaction.
 
Feb 4, 2010
547
0
0
Looks like you guys have shattered the 1000 page barrier. Awesome work! There are some true endurance freaks at work here. A training bible may be in order. :)
 
Dr. Maserati said:
Man, I am really tempted to shout "an investigation does not mean an indictment" - but I'll play.
Yes is the answer to all your questions. So?

The scenario depends on the assumption that Tyler doped when he was with Rock (or otherwise within the SOL when he was before the GJ). That's a safe assumption.

The Rock Racing drama is recent--within the 5 year SOL for possession. We know the feds care about doping at Rock. They can't get Tyler for use but they can get him for possession if they have sufficient corroborating evidence. It is a safe bet from Tyler's POV that the ONLY way he can be prosecuted is if he admits possession (occurring prior to his own use) or delivery (as an accomplice). He has a lawyer who tells him to avoid risk and remain silent unless he can cut an immunity deal with the feds.

The feds don't care about Tyler and/or they have no case against Tyler,as yet. They want Tyler to sing freely. They immunize him. They ask him about Lance, sure, but they also ask him about all his drug transactions (criminal possession from Tyler's POV) or times when he shared dope with others (criminal delivery from Tyler's POV). Tyler answers freely, grateful for his immunity.

I can't imagine the feds ignoring the chance to discover Tyler's drug connections. They'd investigate them all--even if only because Tyler's post-Lance dope dealers could maybe be connected to Lance's drug dealers. Tyler's lawyer will not want Tyler unnecessarily exposed to even the teeniest, tiniest risk of criminal liability--and he has the Fifth Amendment to bargain with.

The feds definitely prefer non-immunized testimony because it plays so much better in front of the jury, but they'd give immunity to get what they otherwise couldn't get.
 

Polish

BANNED
Mar 11, 2009
3,853
1
0
MarkvW said:
Didn't Tyler race for Rock Racing and Michael Ball? Wasn't Ball the subject of an investigation?

Floyd was also involved with Rock Racing. I think he actually wore a wire for the Feds to get dirt on Ball.

But then came the "Lance e-mails" and all the media attention. Then the Feds took their eye off the Ball as it were.

Mr Ball must have been relieved whew.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
MarkvW said:
The scenario depends on the assumption that Tyler doped when he was with Rock (or otherwise within the SOL when he was before the GJ). That's a safe assumption.
He was there for a year, before he got caught for DHEA.....


MarkvW said:
The Rock Racing drama is recent--within the 5 year SOL for possession. We know the feds care about doping at Rock. They can't get Tyler for use but they can get him for possession if they have sufficient corroborating evidence. It is a safe bet from Tyler's POV that the ONLY way he can be prosecuted is if he admits possession (occurring prior to his own use) or delivery (as an accomplice). He has a lawyer who tells him to avoid risk and remain silent unless he can cut an immunity deal with the feds.

The feds don't care about Tyler and/or they have no case against Tyler,as yet. They want Tyler to sing freely. They immunize him. They ask him about Lance, sure, but they also ask him about all his drug transactions (criminal possession from Tyler's POV) or times when he shared dope with others (criminal delivery from Tyler's POV). Tyler answers freely, grateful for his immunity.

I can't imagine the feds ignoring the chance to discover Tyler's drug connections. They'd investigate them all--even if only because Tyler's post-Lance dope dealers could maybe be connected to Lance's drug dealers. Tyler's lawyer will not want Tyler unnecessarily exposed to even the teeniest, tiniest risk of criminal liability--and he has the Fifth Amendment to bargain with.

The feds definitely prefer non-immunized testimony because it plays so much better in front of the jury, but they'd give immunity to get what they otherwise couldn't get.

Are you expecting the Feds to grant him immunity for a substance you can buy at your local store?
 
Sep 5, 2009
1,239
0
0
MarkvW said:
The scenario depends on the assumption that Tyler doped when he was with Rock (or otherwise within the SOL when he was before the GJ). That's a safe assumption.

The Rock Racing drama is recent--within the 5 year SOL for possession. We know the feds care about doping at Rock. They can't get Tyler for use but they can get him for possession if they have sufficient corroborating evidence. It is a safe bet from Tyler's POV that the ONLY way he can be prosecuted is if he admits possession (occurring prior to his own use) or delivery (as an accomplice). He has a lawyer who tells him to avoid risk and remain silent unless he can cut an immunity deal with the feds.

The feds don't care about Tyler and/or they have no case against Tyler,as yet. They want Tyler to sing freely. They immunize him. They ask him about Lance, sure, but they also ask him about all his drug transactions (criminal possession from Tyler's POV) or times when he shared dope with others (criminal delivery from Tyler's POV). Tyler answers freely, grateful for his immunity.

I can't imagine the feds ignoring the chance to discover Tyler's drug connections. They'd investigate them all--even if only because Tyler's post-Lance dope dealers could maybe be connected to Lance's drug dealers. Tyler's lawyer will not want Tyler unnecessarily exposed to even the teeniest, tiniest risk of criminal liability--and he has the Fifth Amendment to bargain with.

The feds definitely prefer non-immunized testimony because it plays so much better in front of the jury, but they'd give immunity to get what they otherwise couldn't get.

You have not got a clue in trying to bring the crosshairs on Tyler as a deflection away from your (former hero?) Armstrong.

Illegal possession at law means he would have to be caught with the controlled substances on his person or under his control.

Did not happen and will not happen as Tyler has been & will be a witness for the prosecution with a grant of immunity despite your erroneouos claims of recent date that a witness can exercise his Fifth Amendment rights even when granted immunity.

Your presentation of corroboration, immunity, Fifth Amendment is just irrelevant verbiage.
 

Polish

BANNED
Mar 11, 2009
3,853
1
0
Dr. Maserati said:
He was there for a year, before he got caught for DHEA.....

Are you expecting the Feds to grant him immunity for a substance you can buy at your local store?

I don't think the FDA was investigating Rock Racing/Ball for local store stuff.
But who knows. Secret.
 
Aug 4, 2010
198
0
0
I've been away for sometime now, how's the trial going, who's going to win. Will LA beat the wrap ?? I'm sure the "the wait till Tuesday" has produced the indictment we've all been waiting for. Update please.
 
Aug 3, 2010
843
1
0
Polish said:
Floyd was also involved with Rock Racing. I think he actually wore a wire for the Feds to get dirt on Ball.

But then came the "Lance e-mails" and all the media attention. Then the Feds took their eye off the Ball as it were.

Mr Ball must have been relieved whew.

His investors must have thought otherwise.
 
9000ft said:
Looks like you guys have shattered the 1000 page barrier. Awesome work! There are some true endurance freaks at work here. A training bible may be in order. :)

Dr. Maserati said:
He was there for a year, before he got caught for DHEA.....




Are you expecting the Feds to grant him immunity for a substance you can buy at your local store?

Nope. Are you convinced that Tyler never possessed a controlled substance within 5 years of his GJ appearance?
 
Sep 5, 2009
1,239
0
0
uspostal said:
I've been away for sometime now, how's the trial going, who's going to win. Will LA beat the wrap ?? I'm sure the "the wait till Tuesday" has produced the indictment we've all been waiting for. Update please.

The was a moderator's decree at this post

Posters are verboten to make idle reference to the day of the week that falls after Monday. :)
 
Velodude said:
You have not got a clue in trying to bring the crosshairs on Tyler as a deflection away from your (former hero?) Armstrong.

Illegal possession at law means he would have to be caught with the controlled substances on his person or under his control.

Did not happen and will not happen as Tyler has been & will be a witness for the prosecution with a grant of immunity despite your erroneouos claims of recent date that a witness can exercise his Fifth Amendment rights even when granted immunity.

Your presentation of corroboration, immunity, Fifth Amendment is just irrelevant verbiage.

Crosshairs? Deflection? My conspiratorial mission is far more devious (and disjointed). I think the feds are going after dope dealers. They might be going after Lance too (sorry for the word "might," Velodude, I know it hurts you). But Lance can't be the only focus. (Sorry for the implication that the feds are not as obsesssed with Lance as you are).

I'm glad you agree with me that Tyler's gotten immunized.

And your statement that the person has to be caught with the dope could get a dopehead in big trouble with the law. If I admit that I possessed Velodrine (a hallucinatory controlled substance) that I got from Michael Ball's refrigerator, and if the feds soon find Velodrine in Ball's refrigerator, and if Ball tells the feds that he sold me Velodrine, then I'm in big trouble, by golly--
 
Aug 3, 2010
843
1
0
uspostal said:
I've been away for sometime now, how's the trial going, who's going to win. Will LA beat the wrap ?? I'm sure the "the wait till Tuesday" has produced the indictment we've all been waiting for. Update please.


Been busy working on some peloton project awareness raising? I mean fundraising. Headquarters is probably promoting a big push. Travel season is coming up soon.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
MarkvW said:
Nope. Are you convinced that Tyler never possessed a controlled substance within 5 years of his GJ appearance?
Actually I have no idea - but what controlled substances?

You are doing a lot of guessing and speculating. If you remember you made a comment that Bonds & Thomas received immunity - I asked from what and you went silent.
Would that not be a logical first place to see what happened with them as it probably will relate to Tyler?

I do hope Tyler is this central don figure - who can escape sanction from (well, we're not sure) by ratting out his friends and former team mates. How will Lance escape this predicament if the Feds are even going after the riders? Tune in tomorrow for The Days of Our Lance.
 
Sep 5, 2009
1,239
0
0
MarkvW said:
Crosshairs? Deflection? My conspiratorial mission is far more devious (and disjointed). I think the feds are going after dope dealers. They might be going after Lance too (sorry for the word "might," Velodude, I know it hurts you). But Lance can't be the only focus. (Sorry for the implication that the feds are not as obsesssed with Lance as you are).

I'm glad you agree with me that Tyler's gotten immunized.

And your statement that the person has to be caught with the dope could get a dopehead in big trouble with the law. If I admit that I possessed Velodrine (a hallucinatory controlled substance) that I got from Michael Ball's refrigerator, and if the feds soon find Velodrine in Ball's refrigerator, and if Ball tells the feds that he sold me Velodrine, then I'm in big trouble, by golly--

I did not have to agree with you about Tyler's grant of immunity. It was common knowledge after being confirmed by his lawyer after the "60 Minutes" interview.

Tyler had an AAF with Rock Racing after his sample showed the presence of a drug known as DHEA. DHEA is a prohibited anti doping substance but not a controlled substance at law and, as Dr Maserati pointed out over your head, can be purchased over the counter and on the internet without a prescription. It still remains so after some legislative attempts in 2009 to make it a controlled substance.

You are entering into the exclusive domain of conspiracy theorists - wild hypotheticals.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.