USADA - Armstrong

[cleanmarine]

Well if that does not tell it all

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

"An individual familiar with the case but unauthorized to speak publicly about the matter said it was noteworthy that Armstrong stopped short in his response of submitting a sworn statement under oath that he has never doped."

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-lance-armstrong-20120623,0,2851391.story

Indeed. Have Lance submit a sworn affidavit, under oath, that he has never taken any banned substances or engaged in any banned practices, such as homologous blood doping.

Sworn affidavit. If he were clean, he would submit this in a heartbeat.

 

[thehog]

"An individual familiar with the case but unauthorized to speak publicly about the matter said it was noteworthy that Armstrong stopped short in his response of submitting a sworn statement under oath that he has never doped."

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-lance-armstrong-20120623,0,2851391.story

When I grow up I want to be "a source familiar with the case". Those guys have a lotta fun.

Yep get this on Twitter straight away and wind that boy up. Will drive the legions mad.

It really is telling.

 

[Anonymous]

You made the "cleared" statement before.
Then you backed down when you were called on it.
Now you make the "cleared" statement again.

That's not a fair way to participate in a discussion.

It's called lying. Polish is a liar and yet it's still here.

Unabated trolling. Sad, but that's how this place continues to operate.

 

[mewmewmew13]

Indeed. Have Lance submit a sworn affidavit, under oath, that he has never taken any banned substances or engaged in any banned practices, such as homologous blood doping.

Sworn affidavit. If he were clean, he would submit this in a heartbeat.

AND he could save a lot of 'taxpayers' money'....
..said a source familiar with the case

 

[MarkvW]

"An individual familiar with the case but unauthorized to speak publicly about the matter said it was noteworthy that Armstrong stopped short in his response of submitting a sworn statement under oath that he has never doped."

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-lance-armstrong-20120623,0,2851391.story

Maybe Lance has already told the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth in another legal proceeding . . .

 

[Anonymous]

Indeed. You see these morons all over over message board, repeating the same story line over and over. Go over to RBR and you see how stupid some of these people really are. Unfortunately, that board has been inundated with the lowest common denominator.

Above it all, you have to appreciate the courage of certain people to stand up to garbage like Lance.

Yep. Betsy is right up there. And Floyd.

 

[MarkvW]

Yep. Betsy is right up there. And Floyd.

Betsy, sure.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

Yep. Betsy is right up there. And Floyd.

Indeed. And Kimmage, and Walsh, and Hamilton, Simeoni, and Manzano, and a lot of other people.

 

[BotanyBay]

If things go right, Lance will have to settle for take-out at Cache Cache.

 

[Anonymous]

Indeed. And Kimmage, and Walsh, and Hamilton, Simeoni, and Manzano, and a lot of other people.

Lemond. TexPat. Yeah, there are more than a few.

 

[MarkvW]

Lemond. TexPat. Yeah, there are more than a few.

LeMond put a lot on the line. Financial, emotional, status in the bike world . . .

 

[BotanyBay]

Indeed. You see these morons all over over message board, repeating the same story line over and over. Go over to RBR and you see how stupid some of these people really are. Unfortunately, that board has been inundated with the lowest common denominator.

Above it all, you have to appreciate the courage of certain people to stand up to garbage like Lance.

I had a situation once where I had a long, drawn-out legal battle with a foe who was very (truly) passive-aggressive. The huge lesson I learned was that no matter what, no matter how awesome the evidence against him was, he would ALWAYS have a "yes, but" to tack-on to anything I said or did (always). Everything I did to try and settle the matter amicably (IE, just to get rid of the MOFO) always resulted in the guy trying to manipulate and "manage" me. I had to teach myself to stop engaging him verbally, as his clinical narcissism physically prevented him from actually behaving rationally. Even in the end, he even tried to manipulate the court-appointed arbitrator when we were settling so that it ended on his terms. He even had to control how long he had to physically sign his name (as he had a deadline imposed on him).

Lance is SO much like this guy. I hope you all never have to encounter anything beyond READING about such people. If you ever have to deal with it in person, just hire an attorney and let that guy do all the talking (in writing). Trust me.

 

[Merckx index]

Indeed. Have Lance submit a sworn affidavit, under oath, that he has never taken any banned substances or engaged in any banned practices, such as homologous blood doping.

Sworn affidavit. If he were clean, he would submit this in a heartbeat.

He already has:

p. 6:

Q. A deposition is an opportunity for participants to a litigation to take sworn testimony from witnesses or parties. Do you understand that?

A. Yes.

Q. I’m going to be asking you a series of questions regarding the facts, the claims, and the allegations in the arbitration to which you are duty bound to provide your bet answer. Do you understand that?

A. Yeah.

Q. You understand that although we’re in the conference room of your lawyers, you are giving testimony as if you are in a court of law. Do you understand that?

A. Correct.

Q. And that penalties of perjury attach to this deposition just like they would to a court of law proceeding.

A. Of course.


p. 30:

Q. Okay. But I just want to make sure. It’s not that you don’t remember whether that—Indiana hospital event ever occurred. It affirmatively did not take place.

A. No, it didn’t. How could it take place when I’ve never taken performance-enhancing drugs.”

Q. I’m just trying to make sure that your testimony is clear.

A. Well, if it can’t be any clearer than I’ve never taken drugs, then incidents like that could never have happened.

p. 31:

Q. You have never taken any performance-enhancing drug in connection with your cycling career.

A. Correct.

Q. And that would include any substance that’s ever been banned. Is that fair to say?

A. Correct.

Q. Okay. Well, why don’t you give me the definition of what you’re using when you say you’ve never taken any performance-enhancing substances. What would that include? Anything banned?

A. That would have—well, it would include anything on the banned list.

Q. Okay. For example, would—would that include that you’ve never used your own blood for doping purposes, for example?

A. Abso—that would be banned.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/31833754/Lance-Armstrong-Testimony

 

[BotanyBay]

Lemond. TexPat. Yeah, there are more than a few.

I think we should organize a big party and gather all of the victims (and supporters) in one place. Invite the press to photo/video it. A big F-U that Lance would have to read about.

Wouldn't that be cool? We wouldn't even have to wait for a USADA outcome. We could just declare the victory and emotionally slay the beast.

I say San Diego. Nice weather, plenty of victims living in the vicinity, plenty to do, etc.

Anyone?

 

[MarkvW]

I think we should organize a big party and gather all of the victims (and supporters) in one place. Invite the press to photo/video it. A big F-U that Lance would have to read about.

Wouldn't that be cool? We wouldn't even have to wait for a USADA outcome. We could just declare the victory and emotionally slay the beast.

I say San Diego. Nice weather, plenty of victims living in the vicinity, plenty to do, etc.

Anyone?

I'm just going to celebrate by having a really high quality Dopestrong bike shirt made.

 

[Anonymous]

I think we should organize a big party and gather all of the victims (and supporters) in one place. Invite the press to photo/video it. A big F-U that Lance would have to read about.

Wouldn't that be cool? We wouldn't even have to wait for a USADA outcome. We could just declare the victory and emotionally slay the beast.

I say San Diego. Nice weather, plenty of victims living in the vicinity, plenty to do, etc.

Anyone?

Hmmm. I'll bring the beer. Shiner Bock?. Dinner at Searsucker, Gaslamp.

I'll give Floyd a ride if he needs one.

 

[joe_papp]

It's happened before though hasn't it?

Indeed it has - see below.

To be fair though, I do remember seeing a photo of Leogrande posing infront of a fridge full of EPO vials and holding one. Obviously you could make the argument (and you'd win) that Lance is not as stupid as Kayle, but still some pictures do exist.

BTW My meager google skills could not turn up a copy of that pic anymore. It is gone much like June 22nd on CN forums.

I took that pic and several others of Kayle posing in front of the refrigerator in his house, holding vials of EPO, in the background you could see boxes of EPO and HGH.

There were also pictures and video from Italy, including of a Vuelta stage winner, G. Simoni's domestique and ex-Lampre's.

 

[joe_papp]

...usada is run by the people who are too smart to fall for the bait armstrong's laweres want them to - that is, transforming a clear-cut doping case into a public relations spectacle... usada will ignore and never comment on the reasons why armstrong wants the hearing closed, which he undoubtedly will. Doing otherwise is to fight the war the way your opponent wants, a big no-no when the stakes are high.

armstrong, as i expect him to, through his invariable arrogance will eventually dig his own grave and i expect the usada not interfering the digging

This is insightful.

Knowing the folks at USADA as well as I do, I'd describe them as ice-cold and fairly unemotional and unflappable. They think several moves ahead even when ordering dinner and early-on in the process I figured the best way to deal with them was not to try to be crafty or clever, b/c they'd eventually walk me into a brick-wall or punji-stick trap of my own making.

For them to even have decided to charge Lance they must be 99% confident/sure of being able to present sufficient evidence to win a conviction. Otherwise they wouldn't risk it. For them to have decided to charge several people along w/ him and bundle the crimes into a single massive conspiracy means the evidence is overwhelming.

I'm proud of my modest role in it all!

 

[Polish]

Indeed. Have Lance submit a sworn affidavit, under oath, that he has never taken any banned substances or engaged in any banned practices, such as homologous blood doping.

Sworn affidavit. If he were clean, he would submit this in a heartbeat.

Moose, has there ever been ANY cyclist that has signed a sworn affadvit, under oath, that they have never doped? I've seen some tatoos, some swearing upon a mother's grave - but no sworn affadavits as far as I can recall...

Not that it matters. No sworn affadavits from cyclists that they've never farted either. Doping is as illegal as farting btw.

 

[thehog]

This is insightful.

Knowing the folks at USADA as well as I do, I'd describe them as ice-cold and fairly unemotional and unflappable. They think several moves ahead even when ordering dinner and early-on in the process I figured the best way to deal with them was not to try to be crafty or clever, b/c they'd eventually walk me into a brick-wall or punji-stick trap of my own making.

For them to even have decided to charge Lance they must be 99% confident/sure of being able to present sufficient evidence to win a conviction. Otherwise they wouldn't risk it. For them to have decided to charge several people along w/ him and bundle the crimes into a single massive conspiracy means the evidence is overwhelming.

I'm proud of my modest role in it all!

I agree with most but I think Big Tex wants to repeat his SCA performance of "I don't recall"... I'd say he makes the hearing public and calls Pat McQuaid to testify. He could argue that the UCI allowed him to dope so it can't be against the rules.

 

[Hugh Januss]

Moose, has there ever been ANY cyclist that has signed a sworn affadvit, under oath, that they have never doped? I've seen some tatoos, some swearing upon a mother's grave - but no sworn affadavits as far as I can recall...

Not that it matters. No sworn affadavits from cyclists that they've never farted either. Doping is as illegal as farting btw.

Talking your usual stupid crap I see. Of course nobody has signed that affidavit (I am taking the liberty of assuming that is what you meant to say) because they have been doping. But Lance has always said he would never dope (the whole surviving cancer thing yada yada) so why wouldn't he sign that thing? Sure would help him out of this hole if it were true.

 

[joe_papp]

I agree with most but I think Big Tex wants to repeat his SCA performance of "I don't recall"... I'd say he makes the hearing public and calls Pat McQuaid to testify. He could argue that the UCI allowed him to dope so it can't be against the rules.

I could see him throwing the Hog under the bus and snacking on bacon while giving testimony. It's one of the few strategies for Comeback 3.0 that might work ("I cheated, but the Hog made me do it!").

USADA must hold fast and not release the witness identities to LA to prevent him from attempting to influence their testimony to orchestrate the Slaughter and Roasting of the Hog.

 

[MarkvW]

I could see him throwing the Hog under the bus and snacking on bacon while giving testimony. It's one of the few strategies for Comeback 3.0 that might work ("I cheated, but the Hog made me do it!").

USADA must hold fast and not release the witness identities to LA to prevent him from attempting to influence their testimony to orchestrate the Slaughter and Roasting of the Hog.

The identity of the witnesses will be disclosed in due time. Otherwise Armstrong wouldn't get a fair hearing.

 

[131313]

Moose, has there ever been ANY cyclist that has signed a sworn affadvit, under oath, that they have never doped? I've seen some tatoos, some swearing upon a mother's grave - but no sworn affadavits as far as I can recall...

Well, one guy comes to mind: Lance Armstrong. He testified, under oath. No affidavit needed...course reporter took it all down.

Not that it matters. No sworn affadavits from cyclists that they've never farted either. Doping is as illegal as farting btw.

Not that it matters, but you may want to check on the statutes regarding controlled substances.