US prosecutors drop case against Armstrong/USPS

[aphronesis]

Well, as you failed to find anything different it does not appear. Period.

Should it be considered? Sure, why not.
As the investigation went beyond the normal 18 months of a GJ and would have required an extension, one can conclude that those in charge did not feel the need to shut it down on financial grounds.
I am sure Jeff and the others get paid the same regardless who are what the target is.

Add to that, the decision was made by Birotte and appears to have surprised many then it would seem obvious that it was not a financial decision.

Your reasoning is lagging a bit today. I haven't looked, frankly, beyond the obvious outlets. Doesn't mean it's not there to be found. I'm more than a little dismayed that you're offering me the same logic as "Lance didn't dope coz I didn't see it."

Please don't be obtuse. No one is suggesting that Jeff wouldn't get paid. On the other hand, if you're telling me that money was not an issue at any step of the way then you have been paying much attention to affairs here and in CA. Go back upthread three or four pages prior to today's inanity and you'll find a post where I say quite simply that both money and politics are in play in this situation. Not surprisingly you took no issue with that post as it seems not to have breached the conformity of your own personal rules of engagement.

 

[aphronesis]

Why didn't it work?

If it didn't work to its finality it means the jurors no billed all indictment counts put up by the prosecutors. I heard no inkling of such a tale.

The information I had read was that there was a political type intervention to curtail the investigation and thereby ending the GJ hearing of all the witnesses and deliberating on decisions on the indictments.

Have you information to the contrary that the GJ ran its course and, as I have heard many times in this thread, Armstrong was "cleared"?

Facetious Velo. You keep hope alive. All I said was that it didn't work. Have you seen me post that he was "cleared" anywhere?

I am only suggesting that it "didn't work," and that the political intervention did work for both political and economic reasons. And that had it been seen through to a mediocre conclusion, that the economic outlay would not have seemed very attractive.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Your reasoning is lagging a bit today. I haven't looked, frankly, beyond the obvious outlets. Doesn't mean it's not there to be found. I'm stunned, frankly, that you're offering me the same logic as "Lance didn't dope."

Please don't be obtuse. No one is suggesting that Jeff wouldn't get paid. On the other hand, if you're telling me that money was not an issue at any step of the way then you have been paying much attention to affairs here and in CA. Go back upthread three or four pages prior to today's inanity and you'll find a post where I say quite simply that both money and politics are in play in this situation. Not surprisingly you took no issue with that post as it seems not to have breached the conformity of your own personal rules of engagement.

I have no idea what your last line means.

However, I do find it interesting that I gave a quite reasoned summary of my opinion and instead of addressing it you ask me not to be obtuse and respond with nonsense.

If financing was an issue (as opposed to a consideration) then one would expect any investigation to have been completed within the 18 months of the GJ.
There is nothing (indeed you have nothing) to suggest it was based on finances. Given the names and history of Armstrong lawyers the decision appears to have been solely by political interference.

 

[BotanyBay]

Given the names and history of Armstrong lawyers the decision appears to have been solely by political interference.

Doc,

Open yourself to the possibility that a sitting US Attorney might be able to read the political tea leaves of the day, compare those tea leaves to the case itself and decide that the case did not rise to the level required for the DOJ to pursue a very popular public figure during an election year while the president is sitting on very low approval ratings.

Perhaps it took Fabiani's statements in the media to remind Birotte of these issues. Perhaps not a single lunch, phone call or email was required.

Politics always play a part in high-profile cases such as these. But "interference" is a very strong word to introduce. Not even the "squeaky wheels" (in the WSJ or NPR stories) suggested such a word (and they could have done so just as easily).

Acknowledging the issues that might affect cases such as these helps us better understand the world we live in.

I think Armstrong may have certainly "spent" his way out of this case, but I'm not willing to say he "bought" his way out. Not without evidence.

Has anyone considered that the President himself might be a LiveStrong Lemming too? And perhaps Birotte keeps that in mind as he considers the 4.5 years he has left to secure that federal judge position he obviously seeks.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Doc,

Open yourself to the possibility that a sitting US Attorney might be able to read the political tea leaves of the day, compare those tea leaves to the case itself and decide that the case did not rise to the level required for the DOJ to pursue a very popular public figure during an election year while the president is sitting on very low approval ratings.

I have opened up to that possibility and indeed if an articulate argument was provided by others it could alter my view.

If the case was dropped before the original GJ I would be more willing to accept that neither enough evidence was obtained or that it was spiked because of costs.

If you are going to go down the reading the "political tea-leaves" then there is going to be a "political drawdown"...always.

Birotte (or anyone else) ain't going to care about Obama, but they will care about their own careers.

Perhaps it took Fabiani's statements in the media to remind Birotte of these issues. Perhaps not a single lunch, phone call or email was required.

Politics always play a part in high-profile cases such as these. But "interference" is a very strong word to introduce. Not even the "squeaky wheels" (in the WSJ or NPR stories) suggested such a word (and they could have done so just as easily).

Acknowledging the issues that might affect cases such as these helps us better understand the world we live in.

I think Armstrong may have certainly "spent" his way out of this case, but I'm not willing to say he "bought" his way out. Not without evidence.

What 'evidence' do you need?
For me it is as simple as looking at who did he hire to represent him - he hired Daley in May 2010 for the potential charges

But then in early 2011 he also hired Luskin and Kekker - these are well connected people who move in political circles.

 

[BotanyBay]

If the case was dropped before the original GJ I would be more willing to accept that neither enough evidence was obtained or that it was spiked because of costs.

I think it is safe to say that Birotte gave his staff a lot of latitude to spend a lot of money investigating. He could have killed it long before it began.

Birotte (or anyone else) ain't going to care about Obama, but they will care about their own careers.

Right now, Obama is his career. And his future career. You don't take this job unless you want a higher-level political/judicial career. He workds for Holder who works for Obama. He works for Obama. And to be a player at that level (2 degrees away from El Presidente), you have to support the plan. The plan might be to avoid prosecuting popular people unless you can absolutely put them away. And like I said, prosecuting Lance Armstrong is like prosecuting Santa Claus (right or wrong).

For me it is as simple as looking at who did he hire to represent him - he hired Daley in May 2010 for the potential charges
But then in early 2011 he also hired Luskin and Kekker - these are well connected people who move in political circles.

Sometimes life works as simply as hiring the right people. They don't even need to call each other on the phone to solicit any influence. These people are all friends. The "Hahvahd" connection.

Sometimes influence is rented without being bought. Like I said, I think he "spent" his way out of trouble. But I don't think he bought his way out of it.

 

[LarryBudMelman]

I just wonder why these people would speak to the press (at all) and then say only what they said (which isn't much). Everyone on the investigative team would be a suspect anyway.

I'm certain that they could get indictments (ham sandwich metaphors notwithstanding). But can they get convictions with the witness list as it stood?

In an election year, you don't indict Santa Claus unless you can put him away for real.

I think the case was so strong the only way Armstrong was getting off would be jury nullification which would be completely illegitimate in this case.

 

[Wallace]

Doc,

Open yourself to the possibility that a sitting US Attorney might be able to read the political tea leaves of the day, compare those tea leaves to the case itself and decide that the case did not rise to the level required for the DOJ to pursue a very popular public figure during an election year while the president is sitting on very low approval ratings.

Perhaps it took Fabiani's statements in the media to remind Birotte of these issues. Perhaps not a single lunch, phone call or email was required.

Politics always play a part in high-profile cases such as these. But "interference" is a very strong word to introduce. Not even the "squeaky wheels" (in the WSJ or NPR stories) suggested such a word (and they could have done so just as easily).

Acknowledging the issues that might affect cases such as these helps us better understand the world we live in.

I think Armstrong may have certainly "spent" his way out of this case, but I'm not willing to say he "bought" his way out. Not without evidence.

Has anyone considered that the President himself might be a LiveStrong Lemming too? And perhaps Birotte keeps that in mind as he considers the 4.5 years he has left to secure that federal judge position he obviously seeks.

Wow. So, just out of curiosity, when you put on your tin foil hat each morning, do you start with a fresh roll of Reynold's heavy duty, or are you buying the cheap stuff bulk rate, so you can make as many as you want and never have to worry about being without one?

 

[Granville57]

Wow. So, just out of curiosity, when you put on your tin foil hat each morning, do you start with a fresh roll of Reynold's heavy duty, or are you buying the cheap stuff bulk rate, so you can make as many as you want and never have to worry about being without one?

HOLD ON!!!!!

What in the flying f'ck is going on around here?!?!

Did somebody move the fence line?!?!?

Wallace, I'm going to assume that you meant to quote someone else (who, I can't imagine) and quoted BotanyBay by mistake. Isn't his post pretty much the ANTI-tin foil hat perspective?



As for the rest of this thread...
The only way I can even bother to navigate The Clinic any more is with about a dozen people on my ignore list. Fortunately, ChrisE isn't one of them because he's been making the most sense in the past couple of days. And Glen_Wilson offered one of the only few sane supporting posts!

So, again: WTF is going on around here?!?!?!

Up has become Down, Left has become Right, Black has become White, and the whole god damned thing has gotten so wrapped inside itself that pretty soon it's going to look like that python (no relation) that tried to swallow the alligator:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/10/1006_051006_pythoneatsgator.html

I had really planned on not posting ever again but I'll admit to an irresistible moment of weakness with the prospect of asking JV a long-overdue question for tomorrow's scheduled appearance. Based on my own silent protest to what the CN forum, as a whole, has been reduced to, I was tempted to abstain from even supporting that event — and as of yet, I've no idea if my post will even be included — but I don't plan on contributing much else around here.
Tears will flow, no doubt.



As you were...I suppose.

 

[thehog]

Unfortunately Dr. M has fallen for the old trick again.

Yes it's killing thread & that's the objective. It's subtle but it works.

I'm beyond caring as well.

HOLD ON!!!!!

What in the flying f'ck is going on around here?!?!

Did somebody move the fence line?!?!?

Wallace, I'm going to assume that you meant to quote someone else (who, I can't imagine) and quoted BotanyBay by mistake. Isn't his post pretty much the ANTI-tin foil hat perspective?



As for the rest of this thread...
The only way I can even bother to navigate The Clinic any more is with about a dozen people on my ignore list. Fortunately, ChrisE isn't one of them because he's been making the most sense in the past couple of days. And Glen_Wilson offered one of the only few sane supporting posts!

So, again: WTF is going on around here?!?!?!

Up has become Down, Left has become Right, Black has become White, and the whole god damned thing has gotten so wrapped inside itself that pretty soon it's going to look like that python (no relation) that tried to swallow the alligator:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/10/1006_051006_pythoneatsgator.html

I had really planned on not posting ever again but I'll admit to an irresistible moment of weakness with the prospect of asking JV a long-overdue question for tomorrow's scheduled appearance. Based on my own silent protest to what the CN forum, as a whole, has been reduced to, I was tempted to abstain from even supporting that event — and as of yet, I've no idea if my post will even be included — but I don't plan on contributing much else around here.
Tears will flow, no doubt.



As you were...I suppose.

 

[patricknd]

HOLD ON!!!!!

What in the flying f'ck is going on around here?!?!

Did somebody move the fence line?!?!?

Wallace, I'm going to assume that you meant to quote someone else (who, I can't imagine) and quoted BotanyBay by mistake. Isn't his post pretty much the ANTI-tin foil hat perspective?



As for the rest of this thread...
The only way I can even bother to navigate The Clinic any more is with about a dozen people on my ignore list. Fortunately, ChrisE isn't one of them because he's been making the most sense in the past couple of days. And Glen_Wilson offered one of the only few sane supporting posts!

So, again: WTF is going on around here?!?!?!

Up has become Down, Left has become Right, Black has become White, and the whole god damned thing has gotten so wrapped inside itself that pretty soon it's going to look like that python (no relation) that tried to swallow the alligator:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/10/1006_051006_pythoneatsgator.html

I had really planned on not posting ever again but I'll admit to an irresistible moment of weakness with the prospect of asking JV a long-overdue question for tomorrow's scheduled appearance. Based on my own silent protest to what the CN forum, as a whole, has been reduced to, I was tempted to abstain from even supporting that event — and as of yet, I've no idea if my post will even be included — but I don't plan on contributing much else around here.
Tears will flow, no doubt.



As you were...I suppose.

what in the hell kind of crack are you smoking? chris and glenn making sense? that's madness !!!

there are many of us that want, no, demand, our pound of flesh, and we're not going to let reasonable arguments stand in our way.

there are sources mind you that say there was a strong case, and sources can't be wrong, can they?

it's fanboys like you that ruin it for the rest of us.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Unfortunately Dr. M has fallen for the old trick again.

Yes it's killing thread & that's the objective. It's subtle but it works.

I'm beyond caring as well.

My apologies - even though you have more posts on this topic and don't care I somehow managed to kill this thread.

Let me help get it back on topic...
"US prosecutors drop case against Armstrong/USPS"

This did indeed happen back on the 3rd of February 2012.
I have consulted my unnamed sources who have confirmed that it remains dropped. It has not been picked up, I repeat not been picked up.

Do I post a baseball picture or a funny picture?

 

[aphronesis]

I have no idea what your last line means.

However, I do find it interesting that I gave a quite reasoned summary of my opinion and instead of addressing it you ask me not to be obtuse and respond with nonsense.

If financing was an issue (as opposed to a consideration) then one would expect any investigation to have been completed within the 18 months of the GJ.
There is nothing (indeed you have nothing) to suggest it was based on finances. Given the names and history of Armstrong lawyers the decision appears to have been solely by political interference.

Arguing that Jeff got paid so there's no financial angle is obtuse, not reasoned. And that's being polite.

Your reasoned explanation concluded that since the investigation was begun, it must have had funding to continue. Sure, that's true as far as it goes, but if at any point there were any adverse circumstances (or interference), the cost of continuing on and going to trial would come up.

Take this as a hypothetical: for whatever reasons the investigation was quashed if there were a financial consideration, I think you can be relatively certain that no one top to bottom is going to give a comment, that "Oh, yeah, it was also starting to look like a waste of money relative to the potential returns."

No one in govt. says that in real time as a rule of thumb, and certainly not now.

So the fact that you can't find evidence of it doesn't mean a whole lot.

 

[Polish]

Take this as a hypothetical: for whatever reasons the investigation was quashed if there were a financial consideration, I think you can be relatively certain that no one top to bottom is going to give a comment, that "Oh, yeah, it was also starting to look like a waste of money relative to the potential returns."
.

Exactly. They would NOT admit to that.
And they would not admit a screw-up no matter what the reason

Instead they would make a short announcement right before the SuperBowl when people would not be paying attention.

"Insufficient Evidence" was very true. The Feds knew they would get roasted if indictments were handed down. In the court of law and in the court of public opinion. The Feds dodged a bullet. After spending a whole lot on ammunition that turned out to be duds.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Arguing that Jeff got paid so there's no financial angle is obtuse, not reasoned. And that's being polite.

Your reasoned explanation concluded that since the investigation was begun, it must have had funding to continue. Sure, that's true as far as it goes, but if at any point there were any adverse circumstances (or interference), the cost of continuing on and going to trial would come up.

This is simple - I believe the investigation started with Rock Racing, so as soon as it embroiled LA & his mob and Weisel & his crew all those agencies would have known that to continue would have a large financial burden.
Yet they continued.

And if there were concerns again a natural point to call a halt to it all would have been when the 18 months of the GJ was up.

Take this as a hypothetical: for whatever reasons the investigation was quashed if there were a financial consideration, I think you can be relatively certain that no one top to bottom is going to give a comment, that "Oh, yeah, it was also starting to look like a waste of money relative to the potential returns."

No one in govt. says that in real time as a rule of thumb, and certainly not now.

So the fact that you can't find evidence of it doesn't mean a whole lot.

Guess what - no-one is going to admit that it was political interference either - so neither of us have 'evidence'.
Which is why we should look at all options and draw a conclusion.
I have given my opinion and I have not read anything that changes that.


In particular when we know that LA hired Daley and then a year later hires Kekker & Luskin.
Look what the specialize in..... (from their website)

"...Still whether we go to trial, settle, or just make the problem go away, what matters is obtaining the best result for our clients".

How do you make a "a problem" go away??

 

[aphronesis]

This is simple - I believe the investigation started with Rock Racing, so as soon as it embroiled LA & his mob and Weisel & his crew all those agencies would have known that to continue would have a large financial burden.
Yet they continued.

And if there were concerns again a natural point to call a halt to it all would have been when the 18 months of the GJ was up.




Guess what - no-one is going to admit that it was political interference either - so neither of us have 'evidence'.
Which is why we should look at all options and draw a conclusion.
I have given my opinion and I have not read anything that changes that.


In particular when we know that LA hired Daley and then a year later hires Kekker & Luskin.
Look what the specialize in..... (from their website)

"...Still whether we go to trial, settle, or just make the problem go away, what matters is obtaining the best result for our clients".

How do you make a "a problem" go away??

I'm not arguing with you the costs weren't weighed going in. I'm suggesting that things change over time--with and without interference. And yet you seem resistant to that possibility. Everyone who can read a headline and the lead-in knows it started with Rock Racing. What does that have to do with moving forward?

And you've known about the shift in law firms for how long? And what were your arguments before knowing that? Don't bother. I remember.

You prefer a neat, instrumentalized, even literal approach to the problem: "see it's the law firm; that's all it was."

I'm suggesting something a little more differentiated.

So the law firm did it. Cool beans. Case closed. Now what? Back to Betsy and SCA again?

Oh, right, waiting for WADA and the USADA. Should we do a countdown? How about a poll on retroactive sanctions? How about guessing the decade that Floyd finally gets an asterisk next to his name?

 

[Polish]

How do you make a "a problem" go away??

Insufficient Evidence is one sure way duh.

Keker and Co would have LOVED to go to trial.
They are probably as bummed out as larrybud

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I'm not arguing with you the costs weren't weighed going in. I'm suggesting that things change over time--with and without interference. And yet you seem resistant to that possibility. Everyone who can read a headline and the lead-in knows it started with Rock Racing. What does that have to do with moving forward?

Correct - you keep "suggesting", nothing more.
You have not offered a likely explanation, so why would I change my opinion?

And you've known about the shift in law firms for how long? And what were your arguments before knowing that? Don't bother. I remember.

Phew - I am glad you know the answer, because I don't.

I am also impressed that you know about something before you joined here.

You prefer a neat instrumentalized, even literal approach to the problem: "see it's the law firm; that's all it was."

I'm suggesting something a little more differentiated. Let's stick to your law firm explanation: "funding moves in all directions, no?"

So the law firm did it. Cool beans. Case closed. Now what? Back to the Betsy and SCA again?

Actually you have made lots of suggestions - not too long ago it was there are other crimes that could do with this level of scrutiny...
Lots of suggestions - zero content.

 

[aphronesis]

Correct - you keep "suggesting", nothing more.
You have not offered a likely explanation, so why would I change my opinion?



Phew - I am glad you know the answer, because I don't.

I am also impressed that you know about something before you joined here.



Actually you have made lots of suggestions - not too long ago it was there are other crimes that could do with this level of scrutiny...
Lots of suggestions - zero content.

Actually, I said nothing about other crimes that could "do with this level of scrutiny." The reading comprehension seems to be your problem today. To quote you: "this is simple." Definitions of crime change over time as societies, values, economies and ruling systems change. Do a read on say, the transformations of the commons and the attendant criminal statutes. Were they the same crimes as three centuries earlier? No. Are vehicular crimes the same as they were during the middle of the twentieth century? No. Is rape the same crime now that it's been in other places and eras? Definitely not. My suggestion to you was that PED distribution is chump change in the current socio-political climate. Or, if you like, small beer.

Suggesting that I'm trying to distract you with other crimes, or downplay LA's crime (really, I leave the USPS fraud to the moralists), or even suggest that they shouldn't be prosecuted because there are others going on is to miss the point. That's what LBM was trying to impute to me for a while.

The argument rather is that--in case you haven't been paying close attention--the bar on illicit activities has gone way up in recent years and if the Feds are only looking to make some returns on PED distribution that is not going to float well in today's society.

But maybe you're just working with an updated version of the code of Hammurabi and the Ten Commandments when it comes to definitions of crime.

As to the Hog below; I'd say it's your remarks that are a bit sad and over the edge at this point. My understanding--as admonished by mods--was that one was supposed to read through these threads before weighing in. Did I get that wrong? Correct me if I'm also wrong, but wasn't it one of the revised rules that accusations of paid troll were out of bounds? Clever in its own way, but rather meager wouldn't you say.

 

[thehog]

I am also impressed that you know about something before you joined here

Noted the same. I think we have a forum watcher on our hands who is paid by the firm.

Hmmmmm interesting.

Bit sad we have to have paid actors funding the cause for Lance. Says a lot.

 

[Hugh Januss]

Accusations of paid trolls is totally out of bounds. Until it is accurate, then ..............no foul............it's drifting........drifting.........it's in play. Gooooooooaaaaaaaaaaaaaallllllllllllllllll!
You're out.

How many different sport metaphors is that?

I win!!!

 

[Benotti69]

Noted the same. I think we have a forum watcher on our hands who is paid by the firm.

Hmmmmm interesting.

Bit sad we have to have paid actors funding the cause for Lance. Says a lot.

Who says he's paid?

Lots of interns work/slave for free.

All the Armstrong threads on here have failed. They have failed because of no coherent argument or discussion for a consecutive period of time.

If it is Armstrong's agenda to obfuscate threads in the Clinic ( i think it is)in order to hide the truth i would say he is failing miserably, as you just have to read other more coherent doping threads relating to others to see the level of doping that went on in his time and those with minds to think will realise that everyone doped.

Whether Birotte dropped the investigation, well it has been discussed to death and we wont know till other events can point to it.

I believe it was dropped for reasons other than evidence, but i have no proof, just dots to follow and in our sport 99% of the time the dots join up.

As you were.

 

[ChrisE]

Just like clockwork, the fact that aphronesis is making a reasoned argument supporting his opinion he starts getting accused of being a "paid troll/PS".

Surprising it took you smart guys this long to trot this card out. I am sure the mods will clean up these baseless accusations that are being made towards him soon. *crickets*.

Aphronesis - please don't feed the vortex troll.

 

[Benotti69]

Just like clockwork, the fact that aphronesis is making a reasoned argument supporting his opinion he starts getting accused of being a "paid troll/PS".

Surprising it took you smart guys this long to trot this card out. I am sure the mods will clean up these baseless accusations that are being made towards him soon. *crickets*.

Aphronesis - please don't feed the vortex troll.

According to A.Phronesis it was trotted out a while ago. Do keep up

 

[thehog]

According to A.Phronesis it was trotted out a while ago. Do keep up

I don't know if he/she/they are paid or not but something is up.

Referencing Dr Ms post well before the poster joined and the posting style if very different from when they first started posting.

I suggest its not one person but many.

The references to FLoyd and attacking BA is a cliche these days and worn out and the poster only began attacking those yesterday.

If someone had the time to review the posts from start to now you'd see they're not the same person.

Very sad methinks. The lengths the legion will go to.

Long live the forum!!