USADA - Armstrong

[Maxiton]

Oh. Okay.

Your argument being because Armstrong is so... err.. so unique?

If only Floyd had passed 500 doping tests, he might have had a chance.

Dave.

Yeah, okay, 'cuz you say so? It was stupid when Floyd said it, and he had no case, but Armstrong has a "strong argument" in arguing the same thing because you say so. Question: you are not a Mensa member, no?

Are you guys joined at the hip? First of all, don't direct your hostility for Armstrong toward me. It's uncalled for. Secondly, try reading.

The thing about the Armstrong case vis a vis USADA, and the thing that makes it different from Floyd, is that in Armstrong's case USADA has accompanied and observed and in some sense at least worked with multiple government agencies in their criminal investigations of Armstrong. This and this alone is what gives substance to his claim that in his case USADA has been comporting itself as a state actor. And this is is why Floyd's state actor claim, if he made one, had no merit: because in his case, to my knowledge, USADA was not party to government investigations.

 

[blackcat]

it looks likely that the 30 day period allows Lance to arrange some sort of settlement proposal. He's going down; just how far will USADA drop him is the issue. This could also be his sell-out option for others not named. Somebody masterminded this and Bruyneel will settle for a shortened ban so he can continue his good work as a pro DS in exchange for a mea culpa. It would be interesting to see what sort of communication is going on between Johan and Lance's handlers.
Anyone want to script some dialogue for that?

done so much good for so many

 

[BikeCentric]

Are you guys joined at the hip? First of all, don't direct your hostility for Armstrong toward me. It's uncalled for. Secondly, try reading.

The thing about the Armstrong case vis a vis USADA, and the thing that makes it different from Floyd, is that in Armstrong's case USADA has accompanied and observed and in some sense at least worked with multiple government agencies in their criminal investigations of Armstrong. This and this alone is what gives substance to his claim that in his case USADA has been comporting itself as a state actor. And this is is why Floyd's state actor claim, if he made one, had no merit: because in his case, to my knowledge, USADA was not party to government investigations.

If you can't have a civil discussion with other interested parties in a forum meant for discussion without going psycho, maybe you should take a timeout.

USADA claims they gathered their evidence independantly.

 

[BroDeal]

it looks likely that the 30 day period allows Lance to arrange some sort of settlement proposal. He's going down; just how far will USADA drop him is the issue. This could also be his sell-out option for others not named. Somebody masterminded this and Bruyneel will settle for a shortened ban so he can continue his good work as a pro DS in exchange for a mea culpa. It would be interesting to see what sort of communication is going on between Johan and Lance's handlers.
Anyone want to script some dialogue for that?

A surpising thing that Dim found when he was digging for information about all the connections to Armstrong is that Bruyneel was not involved in any of the businesses. It is classic Armstrong. He does not understand that those bound by omerta need to wet their beaks.

Does Bruyneel have the financial assets to retire? If not then he is in a bad situation.

Current UCI rules would not allow him to work as team staff if he is banned for a year or more. Maybe he could argue that his actions took place before enactment of the policy. He would need a sweetheart deal.

 

[mad black]

Alright peeps, let's fast forward for a sec and assume LA is going to be stripped of all seven TDF titles. Take a look at this chart from Bicycling Australia Magazine:

Are we going to witch hunt every rider on this list to establish whether they were doped at the time? Everyone was doped at the time which is undeniable fact. There's more riders in this chart associated with some form of doping activity than not.

For the good of this sport please let sleeping dogs lie.

 

[Maxiton]

USADA claims they gathered their evidence independantly.

Yes, I'm sure they were careful to do that. It doesn't alter the fact that reportedly USADA personnel have been accompanying DOJ investigators, FBI agents, IRS agents, and who knows who all, all over the country and even to Europe, as they investigated, examined, deposed, etc.

Had the DOJ done its job and prosecuted first, then this would not have been an issue for USADA in its actions. Since they (or someone) decided to have USADA go first, though, it becomes a problem, because very likely it has entitled LA to due process.

 

[BroDeal]

For the good of this sport please let sleeping dogs lie.

For the good of the sport Armstrong must be exposed as the lying fraud that he is.

 

[Weapons of @ss Destruction]

The thing about the Armstrong case vis a vis USADA, and the thing that makes it different from Floyd, is that in Armstrong's case USADA has accompanied and observed and in some sense at least worked with multiple government agencies in their criminal investigations of Armstrong. This and this alone is what gives substance to his claim that in his case USADA has been comporting itself as a state actor. And this is is why Floyd's state actor claim, if he made one, had no merit: because in his case, to my knowledge, USADA was not party to government investigations.

The issue with your supposition, and a primary reason why none of us as outside observers looking in can bring forward any meaningful opinions is that we don't know the specific degree to which Novitsky's field work overlapped with that of USADA personnel. Were they in the same room? Were they not in the same room? How closely were any of the interview and other evidence gathering processes intertwined? I've heard a lot of speculation on this topic based on fuzzy wording in media reports, but nothing really specific or verifiable.

If Tygart and crew were aware of this possible trap in advance, and maintained all necessary "walls" accordingly, then the objections of Armstrong's team are going to get shot down. Armstrong's PR would have us believe that the walls weren't tall enough to keep onside from being considered a state actor, but there's a lot of verifiable history telling us that information propagated to the media through his PR efforts doesn't necessarily reflect the truth. Since Tygart is keeping his cards close, we're not really going to know until the process reaches a later stage, unless it goes the route of arbitration and Armstrong opts out of the public option. In that case, we may never know.

 

[131313]

Are we going to witch hunt every rider on this list to establish whether they were doped at the time? Everyone was doped at the time which is undeniable fact. There's more riders in this chart associated with some form of doping activity than not.

For the good of this sport please let sleeping dogs lie.

1) if they're actually witches, is it a "witch hunt"? that seems like a mockery of the term

2) most of the athletes WERE sanctioned. It's hardly like this is selective enforcement, so I don't understand that claim, either?

3) in case you haven't noticed, the dogs aren't sleeping. Bruyneel is a current DS, and Armstrong is actively involved in a U23 team and competing as a professional athlete.

So, I see 3 arguments that really don't make any sense? If I'm missing something here, please let me know.

 

[rhubroma]

I told you he had political friends high-up that got the Fed case droped for him. But the gall of it! And of course they are republican, while Sensenbrenner, who naturally has fat, bloated fingers and face, is at once the author of that appalling Patriot Act. My God, guys like him are running the country. It's like being governed by the UCI!

Where's Scott SoCal here to defend his party.

 

[Weapons of @ss Destruction]

Alright peeps, let's fast forward for a sec and assume LA is going to be stripped of all seven TDF titles. Take a look at this chart from Bicycling Australia Magazine.

Are we going to witch hunt every rider on this list to establish whether they were doped at the time? Everyone was doped at the time which is undeniable fact. There's more riders in this chart associated with some form of doping activity than not.

Egads, with 5000+ posts in this thread already don't you think we've gone over through this exercise at least a dozen times - some weeks ago - including several postings of that graphic or others similar to it. I can appreciate that people checking in late can't necessarily catch up on 5000 posts, but a reasonable person would guess that such a facile slant on the topic already came up ages ago.

 

[perfessor]

The thing about the Armstrong case vis a vis USADA, and the thing that makes it different from Floyd, is that in Armstrong's case USADA has accompanied and observed and in some sense at least worked with multiple government agencies in their criminal investigations of Armstrong. This and this alone is what gives substance to his claim that in his case USADA has been comporting itself as a state actor. And this is is why Floyd's state actor claim, if he made one, had no merit: because in his case, to my knowledge, USADA was not party to government investigations.

If I do multiple ride-alongs in a police car, even if I'm a student, it doesn't make me a cop. I cannot see how being along for the ride (so to speak) can change Usada's status --it seems to me there would have to be contracts written, and bylaws changed or something. Hanging out with ducks doesn't necessarily make you a duck.

 

[rhubroma]

Yes, I'm sure they were careful to do that. It doesn't alter the fact that reportedly USADA personnel have been accompanying DOJ investigators, FBI agents, IRS agents, and who knows who all, all over the country and even to Europe, as they investigated, examined, deposed, etc.

Had the DOJ done its job and prosecuted first, then this would not have been an issue for USADA in its actions. Since they (or someone) decided to have USADA go first, though, it becomes a problem, because very likely it has entitled LA to due process.

But why didn't DOJ do its job? And can we all make a class action suite against DOJ for not having done it? Only seems fair.

 

[TubularBills]

...treat Lance fairly before they bust his ***.

God bless busting ***!

 

[Cavalier]

Are we going to witch hunt every rider on this list to establish whether they were doped at the time?

If we need to, yes. Why should we not?

 

[Maxiton]

The issue with your supposition, and a primary reason why none of us as outside observers looking in can bring forward any meaningful opinions is that we don't know the specific degree to which Novitsky's field work overlapped with that of USADA personnel. Were they in the same room? Were they not in the same room? How closely were any of the interview and other evidence gathering processes intertwined? I've heard a lot of speculation on this topic based on fuzzy wording in media reports, but nothing really specific or verifiable.

If Tygart and crew were aware of this possible trap in advance, and maintained all necessary "walls" accordingly, then the objections of Armstrong's team are going to get shot down. Armstrong's PR would have us believe that the walls weren't tall enough to keep onside from being considered a state actor, but there's a lot of verifiable history telling us that information propagated to the media through his PR efforts doesn't necessarily reflect the truth. Since Tygart is keeping his cards close, we're not really going to know until the process reaches a later stage, unless it goes the route of arbitration and Armstrong opts out of the public option. In that case, we may never know.

The thing is, all the info I have about USADA and its relationship with the DOJ I got right here in the Clinic. When everyone assumed that DOJ was going to indict, the talk ran freely here of USADA accompanying various government agents around the world (as "interested observers"). It was only after DOJ (or one of its offices) dropped the case that talk turned to USADA arbitration.

Because of the way equal protection, due process, and so on work (until Senator Fatso and his friends finish rescinding the constitution, anyway), as I understand them, is that our right to them is inviolable. If there is the possibility they have been tainted or compromised by, say, a too-cozy relationship between state and private actor, then the benefit of the doubt must go to the claimant. And I wouldn't have it any other way because, in this regard, his rights are my rights.

 

[TubularBills]

it looks likely that the 30 day period allows Lance to arrange some sort of settlement proposal. He's going down; just how far will USADA drop him is the issue. This could also be his sell-out option for others not named. Somebody masterminded this and Bruyneel will settle for a shortened ban so he can continue his good work as a pro DS in exchange for a mea culpa. It would be interesting to see what sort of communication is going on between Johan and Lance's handlers.
Anyone want to script some dialogue for that?

I disagree with respect. On point, JB is/was still active. He is the target of USADA and the reason the SOL is moot.

USADA is cleansing, this must be their stand to deliver the conspiracy reality, he is actively perpetuating the program?

 

[montagna lunga]

I told you he had political friends high-up that got the Fed case droped for him. But the gall of it! And of course they are republican, while Sensenbrenner, who naturally has fat, bloated fingers and face, is at once the author of that appalling Patriot Act. My God, guys like him are running the country. It's like being governed by the UCI!

Where's Scott SoCal here to defend his party.

Clearly, the guy with fat, bloated fingers (or "guys like him") is/are NOT running the country, if USADA has been getting shadow-funded by an arm of the FDA/Dep't of Health & Human Services/Kathleen Sebelius

 

[rhubroma]

Clearly, the guy with fat, bloated fingers (or "guys like him") is/are NOT running the country, if USADA has been getting shadow-funded by an arm of the FDA/Dep't of Health & Human Services/Kathleen Sebelius

http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Sensenbrenner

 

[TubularBills]

I thought the whole point of the state actor argument is that, having gotten it accepted, the case has to move away from arbitration and into open court?

Neophyte and naive question... does 'open court' mean public?

 

[BroDeal]

Neophyte and naive question... does 'open court' mean public?

That is what I don't get. Open court would be a disaster for Armstrong. Does he want all the evidence made public? Or is the idea to prevent a lot of evidence from being presented.

 

[Maxiton]

If I do multiple ride-alongs in a police car, even if I'm a student, it doesn't make me a cop. I cannot see how being along for the ride (so to speak) can change Usada's status --it seems to me there would have to be contracts written, and bylaws changed or something. Hanging out with ducks doesn't necessarily make you a duck.

This question is answered in detail a few posts up

But why didn't DOJ do its job? And can we all make a class action suite against DOJ for not having done it? Only seems fair.

Well, that's the thing. We don't know why they didn't do their job, and neither does Armstrong. The Northern California office dropped the investigation. That's where USADA stepped in. Meanwhile, the Southern California office of DOJ began its investigation of Floyd. Who's to say their investigation of Floyd won't lead, ostensibly, back to Armstrong. In fact, it's almost a foregone conclusion that it would, right?

So that office is compelled to seat a new grand jury and begin a new investigation of LA. Meanwhile, based on evidence that comes to light in the USADA arbitration and the subsequent stripping by USADA of his seven titles, Armstrong is prosecuted in Texas for perjury in the SCA trial. And then the IRS steps in, with a prosecution of its own for back taxes. Etc.

These state criminal prosecutions come about in part because of Armstrong's having been stripped of his titles and winnings. Additionally, the stripping of these titles weakens Armstrong, making matters for the state a great deal easier. The implication here is that the USADA action is part and parcel of a process planned by state agents and state actors. And while no one may be able to prove that such planning and collusion took place, Armstrong must be afforded his due process rights in the USADA matter based on the possibility, and indeed likelihood, that they did.

 

[frenchfry]

I told you he had political friends high-up that got the Fed case droped for him. But the gall of it! And of course they are republican, while Sensenbrenner, who naturally has fat, bloated fingers and face, is at once the author of that appalling Patriot Act. My God, guys like him are running the country. It's like being governed by the UCI!

Where's Scott SoCal here to defend his party.

My guess is that Lancey-poo tried to line up an A-list political ally, but this clown was all he could get.

 

[Maxiton]

Neophyte and naive question... does 'open court' mean public?

Yes.

That is what I don't get. Open court would be a disaster for Armstrong. Does he want all the evidence made public? Or is the idea to prevent a lot of evidence from being presented.

Think O.J. Think Dream Team. If O.J. can get away with double murder, surely Armstrong, 7-time Tour winner and full-time cancer fighter, can get away with a little doping.

Besides, it's either take your chances with a jury, or take your chances with Tygart and no due process. Which would you pick, if you were Armstrong?

 

[simo1733]

Alright peeps, let's fast forward for a sec and assume LA is going to be stripped of all seven TDF titles. Take a look at this chart from Bicycling Australia Magazine:

Are we going to witch hunt every rider on this list to establish whether they were doped at the time? Everyone was doped at the time which is undeniable fact. There's more riders in this chart associated with some form of doping activity than not.

For the good of this sport please let sleeping dogs lie.

Most of them have been sanctioned one way or another.There is no reason why Lance should be given a pass when the majority have been burned.Especially as it is alleged that he has been doping as recently as 2010. At least Basso,Vino,Valverde etc seem to have toned it down a bit.