The fun begins - SCA now asking for money back...

[MarkvW]

Sorry for the double post, but can I ask a question?

Why would you even ask a question about such an obviously important fact?

Why would you even ask such a question when you have been posting for months about how you understand the intimacies of the SCA legal position?

Similarly, why didn't you know that it was Tailwind and Lance that had brought suit against SCA in the first place?

You may be a lawyer, but you appear to have a hopeless grasp of the facts while presenting seemingly endless opinion. That you are pursuing this practice, when you are an attorney, is more than surprising.

Why is that?

Dave.

I have never stated that I am a lawyer in this forum. You and others have labeled me a "Google Lawyer," and I am content with that. Take whatever opinions that I have for the value that you paid for them.

I asked because I wanted to know the answer. Thank you for answering.

I don't know it all. I don't pretend to know it all. I like to voice my opinion. It's your problem if you don't like it.

 

[northstar]

I love this Anthony Cunningham (not outing anyone, the name is right there in his post) fellow impersonating RR. He even mentions me in his post, and refers to The Clinic 12! No press is bad press, right!

I don’t think Fake RR is Anthony Cunningham, he is just replying to Cunningham’s post.

You might like the recognition , but Benson and Westemeyer might not agree with no press is bad press.

 

[D-Queued]

I have never stated that I am a lawyer in this forum. You and others have labeled me a "Google Lawyer," and I am content with that. Take whatever opinions that I have for the value that you paid for them.

I asked because I wanted to know the answer. Thank you for answering.

I don't know it all. I don't pretend to know it all. I like to voice my opinion. It's your problem if you don't like it.

You can read my post more than one way.

It was just a simple question.

In this case, I am going to focus only on the highlighted parts of the above.

Fair?

Now, I do recall you claiming to be an attorney. That may have been a sarcastic reference to an ongoing dialog. I don't know. I just remember your claim, and have to read it literally.

Fair?

Dave.

 

[MarkvW]

You can read my post more than one way.

It was just a simple question.

In this case, I am going to focus only on the highlighted parts of the above.

Fair?

Now, I do recall you claiming to be an attorney. That may have been a sarcastic reference to an ongoing dialog. I don't know. I just remember your claim, and have to read it literally.

Fair?

Dave.

I have never claimed to be an attorney on this forum. Sorry to go all (deleted) on you, but . . . . show me the post where I claimed to be an attorney. I haven't had any of my embarrassing posts deleted (unlike others). They're there for all to see.

Fair?

 

[ChewbaccaD]

I have never claimed to be an attorney on this forum. Sorry to go all Maserati on you, but . . . . show me the post where I claimed to be an attorney. I haven't had any of my embarrassing posts deleted (unlike others). They're there for all to see.

Fair?

I wouldn't claim it if I were you either, but that doesn't change the fact that you are.

EDIT: The bad news is that Birotte can probably see through your intertubes personality with his X-ray specs, so he knows how poor you are at this law thing too...good choice not suggesting that he might have had some political motivation in dropping the Armstrong investigation, that would have been two strikes. I'm pretty sure he is plotting to ruin my future career for the suggestion I made, but such is the life as a member of the Clinic 12, right?

 

[ChewbaccaD]

I don’t think Fake RR is Anthony Cunningham, he is just replying to Cunningham’s post.

You might like the recognition , but Benson and Westemeyer might not agree with no press is bad press.

Right you are. I apologize to Anthony Cunningham for the insinuation.

 

[BroDeal]

Now, I do recall you claiming to be an attorney. That may have been a sarcastic reference to an ongoing dialog. I don't know. I just remember your claim, and have to read it literally.

Fair?

He's a jumped up paralegal. It's like Hombre leading people to believe he is doctor.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I have never claimed to be an attorney on this forum. Sorry to go all Maserati on you, but . . . . show me the post where I claimed to be an attorney. I haven't had any of my embarrassing posts deleted (unlike others). They're there for all to see.

Fair?

Hi Mark,
Good of you to bring my name up and accepting what I do, I guess you won't be able to call it a vortex anymore.

However - the attorney issue is one that you deliberatley confused - as i remember asking you directly if you were a lawyer and you deflected it, when I assumed you were not a lawyer you wrote:

I never said I made it up, so I can't tell you where I said I made it up. Please tell me where "finally admit I'm not a lawyer." I must have missed that episode.

 

[MarkvW]

Hi Mark,
Good of you to bring my name up and accepting what I do, I guess you won't be able to call it a vortex anymore.

However - the attorney issue is one that you deliberatley confused - as i remember asking you directly if you were a lawyer and you deflected it, when I assumed you were not a lawyer you wrote:

The only "ISSUE" is in your own mind. What I do, or don't do, is really none of your business, and is not relevant to this thread or this forum.

Why would I discuss what I do with a bunch of online ***holes? Just leave me alone on this one.

 

[Netserk]

 

[Dr. Maserati]

The only "ISSUE" is in your own mind. What I do, or don't do, is really none of your business, and is not relevant to this thread or this forum.

While thats true, it becomes relevant when people pretend or insinuate that they have some relevant experience.
Some people might actually believe you know what you are talking about.

Which is why I had asked you to clear up what your legal experience was/is.

Why would I discuss what I do with a bunch of online ***holes? Just leave me alone on this one.

Let us know what the answer is Mark - because you did in fact eventually explain your experience:

I've read lots of legal stuff. Those cases that I listed at the beginning of this discussion? I read them! They taught me stuff about the FCPA that I shared with you. I've also talked about legal stuff with other people (some of whom are learned in the law)! That's the relevant experience, I guess.

But hey! You could just buy Python's reasoning and blithely assume that the feds have no SOL problems in charging the old stuff.

Please forgive me for not submitting to your obsessive inquiry, but once when I tried to explain to you that an incriminating document found in a garbage dump has less evidentiary value than the same document found in Lance's house, you argued that it did not--that "evidence is evidence." I've just given you some evidence of my legal experience. Why should I have to give more? After all, evidence is evidence, isn't it?

 

[MarkvW]

While thats true, it becomes relevant when people pretend or insinuate that they have some relevant experience.
Some people might actually believe you know what you are talking about.

Which is why I had asked you to clear up what your legal experience was/is.



Let us know what the answer is Mark - because you did in fact eventually explain your experience:

That second post was a good one, wasn't it?

 

[thehog]

While thats true, it becomes relevant when people pretend or insinuate that they have some relevant experience.
Some people might actually believe you know what you are talking about.

Which is why I had asked you to clear up what your legal experience was/is.



Let us know what the answer is Mark - because you did in fact eventually explain your experience:

Give it a rest.

You a far from perfect.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

That is the single awesomest post in forum history. Cyclingnews.com has been won. Our base are belong to you.

 

[Netserk]

That is the single awesomest post in forum history. Cyclingnews.com has been won. Our base are belong to you.

Can't take credit for the meme. Saw it on cyclocosm, and finally found a time it was appropriate to post

 

[D-Queued]

Can't take credit for the meme. Saw it on cyclocosm, and finally found a time it was appropriate to post

Cracked me up as well!

Thanks.

Dave.

 

[blackcat]

He's a jumped up paralegal. It's like Hombre leading people to believe he is doctor.

of chiropractic

 

[Race Radio]

He's a jumped up paralegal. It's like Hombre leading people to believe he is doctor.

Surgeon. World renowned surgeon......and House's primary job was cutting up orange slices for the soccer team

 

[Merckx index]

How many lawsuits is LA facing?

1) London Times ($1.6 million)
2) SCA ($12.5 million)
3) Qui Tam (up to $90 million)
4) Acceptance ($3 million)
5) class action suit claiming false advertising by FRS sponsor (?)
6) It’s Not about the Bike – suit claiming the book made false claims (?)

 

[MarkvW]

How many lawsuits is LA facing?

1) London Times ($1.6 million)
2) SCA ($12.5 million)
3) Qui Tam (up to $90 million)
4) Acceptance ($3 million)
5) class action suit claiming false advertising by FRS sponsor (?)
6) It’s Not about the Bike – suit claiming the book made false claims (?)

I read that Armstrong is not named in #6.

 

[thehog]

How many lawsuits is LA facing?

1) London Times ($1.6 million)
2) SCA ($12.5 million)
3) Qui Tam (up to $90 million)
4) Acceptance ($3 million)
5) class action suit claiming false advertising by FRS sponsor (?)
6) It’s Not about the Bike – suit claiming the book made false claims (?)

7) Clinic 12 v Armstrong - ($1 billion)

 

[Race Radio]

How many lawsuits is LA facing?

1) London Times ($1.6 million)
2) SCA ($12.5 million)
3) Qui Tam (up to $90 million)
4) Acceptance ($3 million)
5) class action suit claiming false advertising by FRS sponsor (?)
6) It’s Not about the Bike – suit claiming the book made false claims (?)

More to come. Sponsors want their money back....

 

[BroDeal]

More to come. Sponsors want their money back....

LOL. This guys is so screwed. The legal fees must be piling up. The best thing is that the thing that p!sses him off the most is probably axe grinders like us laughing about it.

 

[D-Queued]

More to come. Sponsors want their money back....

If Nike launches suit it will more than confirm that they are the worst b*s****s of all.

But, it would hurt their recruitment program and violate who knows how many secret pacts.

Not going to happen.

Dave.

 

[Bosco10]

If Nike launches suit it will more than confirm that they are the worst b*s****s of all.

But, it would hurt their recruitment program and violate who knows how many secret pacts.

Not going to happen.

Dave.

Nike is such a PT Barnum enterprise.... lol