US prosecutors drop case against Armstrong/USPS

[MarkvW]

Good points, a question though...
What part did the "jury" play in the Grand Jury?
Just curious of your thoughts.

Maybe the jury was "hung"?
Maybe the jury decided not to indict?
Could the Feds go against the jury's decision?

GJ was never asked to indict by US Attorney. They played a role in the investigation, but they played zero role in charging.

Once the indictment is handed down, only the judge can dismiss. Prosecutors have to give a reason. Usually the dismissal is granted, no problem, but there have been some spectacular exceptions.

 

[DirtyWorks]

He's trapped in a logically untenable position. While the investigation was ongoing, the haters steadfastly (except for Velodude (who didn't make sense)) refused to address the legal sufficiency of the known evidence against Lance. They just relied on the fact of investigation that there must be viable evidence of a viable crime out there somewhere. Now, the investigation has blown up and they still want to make the same argument--without any factual support. Not only that, their argument can only be sustained if Mr. Birotte made a dishonest decision to drop the investigation. There isn't the slightest hint of that.

Two Options:

(1) Forget facts! Have FAITH that there is a strong case against Lance out there somewhere! BELIEVE in the eternal corruption of the Department of Justice. And TRUST that Lance shall be punished!

Or, (2) just realize that the feds took a good hard look at Armstrong/USPS and made an honest decision that the game wasn't worth the candle.

Honestly, which option is more likely?

Most of the post is the definition of a false dilemma.

Everyone knows regardless of their opinions about the myth that there is no comforting logic to myths like this. There is no tidy world where facts are all that's required in the pursuit of scarce resources like wealth and power.

The world just isn't that orderly. No matter how much you insist, it isn't going to get more logical. Maybe it's time to adjust your anxiety meds?

 

[Polish]

GJ was never asked to indict by US Attorney. They played a role in the investigation, but they played zero role in charging.

Once the indictment is handed down, only the judge can dismiss. Prosecutors have to give a reason. Usually the dismissal is granted, no problem, but there have been some spectacular exceptions.

Thanks for your response.

But one more question....now that the investigation is over, are the jurors allowed to speak about what went on? Or are they sworn to secrecy forever.

Would love to see a "tour chat" session with Betsy and the Jurors yikes:0

Oh, and one more question - what are the "spectacular exceptions" you refer too?

 

[MarkvW]

Most of the post is the definition of a false dilemma.

Everyone knows regardless of their opinions about the myth that there is no comforting logic to myths like this. There is no tidy world where facts are all that's required in the pursuit of scarce resources like wealth and power.

The world just isn't that orderly. No matter how much you insist, it isn't going to get more logical. Maybe it's time to adjust your anxiety meds?

Either Birotte made an honest decision or he did not. There is nothing false about that dichotomy! You can't get to "injustice" without going through dishonesty.

 

[Microchip]

"Vinokouroved?"
Armstrong was buying wins back before Vino turned Pro.

http://www.lexpress.fr/actualite/sciences/sante/gagner-a-tout-prix_489315.html

I hope there's an English version to this article! (Besides "Google Translate" )

 

[Anonymous]

He's trapped in a logically untenable position. While the investigation was ongoing, the haters steadfastly (except for Velodude (who didn't make sense)) refused to address the legal sufficiency of the known evidence against Lance. They just relied on the fact of investigation that there must be viable evidence of a viable crime out there somewhere. Now, the investigation has blown up and they still want to make the same argument--without any factual support. Not only that, their argument can only be sustained if Mr. Birotte made a dishonest decision to drop the investigation. There isn't the slightest hint of that.

Two Options:

(1) Forget facts! Have FAITH that there is a strong case against Lance out there somewhere! BELIEVE in the eternal corruption of the Department of Justice. And TRUST that Lance shall be punished!

Or, (2) just realize that the feds took a good hard look at Armstrong/USPS and made an honest decision that the game wasn't worth the candle.

Honestly, which option is more likely?

Hmmm. Given what's known, I don't think it is much of a stretch to suggest that there is something less than perfectly ordinary going on.

Holder is shaky at best. Fast and Furious has demonstrated much with regard to his ethics. There is a connection between Breuer and Holder, between Breuer and Fabiani and Lehane. Birotte works for (ultimately) Holder. Holder is under a tremendous amount of pressure at the moment and I don't think it's to far fetched that there was political pressure brought and may have created a tipping point. Some battles are easier not to fight.

On the other hand there may have been nothing there. I don't believe that scenario. Sorry.

My guess is if the DOJ does not cooperate with USADA/WADA you will know everything you need to. If the DOJ does cooperate then perhaps they had something less than an airtight case.

My guess is most of this stuff will come out.

Oh, and watch where Birotte ends up in the next year or two.

 

[MarkvW]

Thanks for your response.

But one more question....now that the investigation is over, are the jurors allowed to speak about what went on? Or are they sworn to secrecy forever.

Would love to see a "tour chat" session with Betsy and the Jurors yikes:0

Oh, and one more question - what are the "spectacular exceptions" you refer too?

I'm thinking of the SEC prosecutions (civil) in NYC where the judge blew up a negotiated settlement. There are criminal examples in state court. It is very rare. None come right t mind.

I don't know about GJ jurors' ability to talk afterward.

Remember, a prosecutor really can get a GJ to indict a ham sandwich most of the time.

 

[Velodude]

He's trapped in a logically untenable position. While the investigation was ongoing, the haters steadfastly (except for Velodude (who didn't make sense)) refused to address the legal sufficiency of the known evidence against Lance. They just relied on the fact of investigation that there must be viable evidence of a viable crime out there somewhere. Now, the investigation has blown up and they still want to make the same argument--without any factual support. Not only that, their argument can only be sustained if Mr. Birotte made a dishonest decision to drop the investigation. There isn't the slightest hint of that.

Two Options:

(1) Forget facts! Have FAITH that there is a strong case against Lance out there somewhere! BELIEVE in the eternal corruption of the Department of Justice. And TRUST that Lance shall be punished!

Or, (2) just realize that the feds took a good hard look at Armstrong/USPS and made an honest decision that the game wasn't worth the candle.

Honestly, which option is more likely?

Mockery from MarkvW is the highest form of flattery!

Edit:
Congratulations must be in order. You have displayed your extreme euphoria by posting 150 times to this thread to this date. Must be a forum record over such a brief span of time.

 

[Stingray34]

If the investigation was politicised and shut down for these reasons,
how does that sit with Novitzky et al?

Is he just gonna file it all and tell himself, "It's just my job, and I want to keep it, so next case please,"?

Or is he mad as hell, demoralised and disillusioned with the eagle on his badge?

 

[rata de sentina]

Either Birotte made an honest decision or he did not. There is nothing false about that dichotomy! You can't get to "injustice" without going through dishonesty.

disturbing

 

[Adamastor]

I hope there's an English version to this article! (Besides "Google Translate" )

The article is a quote out of David Walsh's first L.A. book (in French):

L.A. Confidential
For an English translation of the book, go here ( I have not checked accuracy of content).

http://www.scribd.com/doc/24714691/L-A-Confidentiel-Part-I-English-Translation

For the Swart testimony, go to page 27 (mid-page about)

For an overview of all parts, check here
http://www.scribd.com/collections/2383358/L-A-Confidential-Lance-Armstrong

 

[ChrisE]

The article is a quote out of David Walsh's first L.A. book (in French):

L.A. Confidential
For an English translation of the book, go here ( I have not checked accuracy of content).

http://www.scribd.com/doc/24714691/L-A-Confidentiel-Part-I-English-Translation

For the Swart testimony, go to page 27 (mid-page about)

For an overview of all parts, check here
http://www.scribd.com/collections/2383358/L-A-Confidential-Lance-Armstrong

Cool, the bible of LA hate conveniently summarized for quick reference. Will it be issued on cd as well so we can listen to it in the car?

 

[BotanyBay]

McIlvane: Probably took the 5th (despite what she said outside the courthouse). Nothing of use came out of her lips.

Landis: A disaster of a witness. Forget his possible motives to lie. All we need to do is think back to that interesting day at Pepperdine University when Greg Lemond got up on the stand. Also, the French convicted him of hacking. Not even a lawyer prosecuting a misdemeanor burglary case would use him as a witness, much less one prosecuting a far-reaching federal felony case.

Hamiltion: Reluctant witness that required GJ subpoena to talk. Goes on 60 Minutes afterwards. Bad move. Jeopardizes case by doing so.

Popovich: Doesn't want to get put over the railing on that windy road in Milan-San Remo. Either won't talk, or won't say much.

Betsy: Even though I love her to death, she's talked a LOT, and that eagerness to talk about these events can be perceived by impartial jurors as a vendetta.

Frankie: Joined at the hip to Betsy

I have more to say on this, stay tuned. gimme 45 mins.

 

[thehog]

The article is a quote out of David Walsh's first L.A. book (in French):

L.A. Confidential
For an English translation of the book, go here ( I have not checked accuracy of content).

http://www.scribd.com/doc/24714691/L-A-Confidentiel-Part-I-English-Translation

For the Swart testimony, go to page 27 (mid-page about)

For an overview of all parts, check here
http://www.scribd.com/collections/2383358/L-A-Confidential-Lance-Armstrong

Oh my god we have come full circle. I am Hog and if we’re still quoting Walsh books we have become desperate.

My suggestion to most is move on for a few weeks. You won’t hear or see much on the matter.

USADA nor WADA will get anything. Both will issue press releases citing their frustration at the lack of evidence forthcoming but it won’t change much.

Next stop will be Tyler’s book coming out towards the end of the year. Probably needs a good re-write now that he can delve into Federal evidence.

Outside of this all you’ll see are articles titled with: “Cancer survivor and Tour de France Champion Lance Armstrong today competed…..”

The only man that can save us now is Floyd.

 

[Benotti69]

Oh my god we have come full circle. I am Hog and if we’re still quoting Walsh books we have become desperate.

My suggestion to most is move on for a few weeks. You won’t hear or see much on the matter.

USADA nor WADA will get anything. Both will issue press releases citing their frustration at the lack of evidence forthcoming but it won’t change much.

Next stop will be Tyler’s book coming out towards the end of the year. Probably needs a good re-write now that he can delve into Federal evidence.

Outside of this all you’ll see are articles titled with: “Cancer survivor and Tour de France Champion Lance Armstrong today competed…..”

The only man that can save us now is Floyd.

Due to the nature of Armstrong's personality and his greed which seems insatiable he will make enemies for the rest of his life so it will always be there waiting to rear its head.

How long before Armstrong turns on Weisel or Stapleton and they decide it is time to throw the man turned psychotic under the bus.

 

[LarryBudMelman]

Oh my god we have come full circle. I am Hog and if we’re still quoting Walsh books we have become desperate.

My suggestion to most is move on for a few weeks. You won’t hear or see much on the matter.

USADA nor WADA will get anything. Both will issue press releases citing their frustration at the lack of evidence forthcoming but it won’t change much.

Next stop will be Tyler’s book coming out towards the end of the year. Probably needs a good re-write now that he can delve into Federal evidence.

Outside of this all you’ll see are articles titled with: “Cancer survivor and Tour de France Champion Lance Armstrong today competed…..”

The only man that can save us now is Floyd.

At first I thought you had a good idea here. But then I thought, if people want to talk and write, let them.

The pro Pharmstrong people are relentless so there's nothing wrong with the pro truth/clean sport people to be on here either.

I read LA Confidentiel years ago and hadn't seen a link in a long time. It's better than FLTL, so go ahead, knock yourself out. Keep stirring up the truth about the fraud.

 

[BillytheKid]

Oh my god we have come full circle. I am Hog and if we’re still quoting Walsh books we have become desperate.

My suggestion to most is move on for a few weeks. You won’t hear or see much on the matter.

USADA nor WADA will get anything. Both will issue press releases citing their frustration at the lack of evidence forthcoming but it won’t change much.

Next stop will be Tyler’s book coming out towards the end of the year. Probably needs a good re-write now that he can delve into Federal evidence.

Outside of this all you’ll see are articles titled with: “Cancer survivor and Tour de France Champion Lance Armstrong today competed…..”

The only man that can save us now is Floyd.

There's hope for you guys after the election in re-election. Maybe they clap him in irons and give 50 lashes. Presidential election years a such fun. You know that Texas is such a big prize and because the electoral college gives the winner all the vote as per State. It would too risky to go ahead with the hangin right about now.

 

[MarkvW]

EHR Update

The Extreme Hater Referendum is at 134 today. Same as yesterday. 24,866 to go! If it's going to succeed, more people are going to need to start drinking the sour grape Kool-Aid!

 

[thehog]

Due to the nature of Armstrong's personality and his greed which seems insatiable he will make enemies for the rest of his life so it will always be there waiting to rear its head.

How long before Armstrong turns on Weisel or Stapleton and they decide it is time to throw the man turned psychotic under the bus.

What do you mean how long? They’ve manage to keep a tight ship for 20+ years. This will only make them stronger.

There will be no buses and no throwing.

I would add that whilst Armstrong does make may enemies he’s extremely loyal. Ferrari for example has been a long time protector as is the real Hog. I would suggest the pay masters fall into the “protector” bucket.

I am on the side of you guys but these events have turned me into a realist.

 

[Race Radio]

http://www.allgov.com/Controversies...Attorney_While_Investigation_Continued_120217

Andre looks worried

 

[Mr.DNA]

The Extreme Hater Referendum is at 134 today. Same as yesterday. 24,866 to go! If it's going to succeed, more people are going to need to start drinking the sour grape Kool-Aid!

You are a broken record and have joined Polish in my plonk file.

 

[Cal_Joe]

http://www.allgov.com/Controversies...Attorney_While_Investigation_Continued_120217

Andre looks worried

Interesting how the article misquotes the articles it references.

One example...

AllGov -

Sources told The Wall Street Journal that the cyclist was facing charges of mail fraud, drug distribution, money laundering and witness tampering

WSJ -

The prosecutors had looked at whether Mr. Armstrong may have committed mail fraud, drug distribution, wire fraud and witness tampering,

 

[Polish]

http://www.allgov.com/Controversies...Attorney_While_Investigation_Continued_120217

Andre looks worried

Andre looks fat.
No Way he will be in shape by the upcoming Judicial Season.
Squirts on the horizon. Nervous tummy squirts.

Race Radio looks desparate

 

[patricknd]

You are a broken record and have joined Polish in my plonk file.

fear truth, eh?

 

[Velodude]

McIlvane: Probably took the 5th (despite what she said outside the courthouse). Nothing of use came out of her lips.

Landis: A disaster of a witness. Forget his possible motives to lie. All we need to do is think back to that interesting day at Pepperdine University when Greg Lemond got up on the stand. Also, the French convicted him of hacking. Not even a lawyer prosecuting a misdemeanor burglary case would use him as a witness, much less one prosecuting a far-reaching federal felony case.

Hamiltion: Reluctant witness that required GJ subpoena to talk. Goes on 60 Minutes afterwards. Bad move. Jeopardizes case by doing so.

Popovich: Doesn't want to get put over the railing on that windy road in Milan-San Remo. Either won't talk, or won't say much.

Betsy: Even though I love her to death, she's talked a LOT, and that eagerness to talk about these events can be perceived by impartial jurors as a vendetta.

Frankie: Joined at the hip to Betsy

The Feds don't put all prospective witnesses up before the Grand Jury.

They put sufficient witnesses up to establish a case and those reluctant witnesses who refused to be interviewed by investigators. As you pointed out McIlvain, Hamilton & Popovich were of that ilk.

George Hincapie and Bestsy Andreu we know were only interviewed by investigators and did not testify before the GJ. The feds must have formed the view that both would be a compliant and truthful witnesses in a trial.

There would be a long list of other compliant witnesses that we have not been privy to that told the truth to investigators and were to be subpoenaed for the trial only.