USADA - Armstrong

[BroDeal]

Honestly, I cannot believe that Barack Obama would consider prosecution of Lance Armstrong as a potential political threat. I would even find it hard to believe he was following the case at all.

Again, most likely once the DA found there was enough evidence to bring charges against Armstrong, he did the smart thing: let the USADA do its job first.

Nothing prevents the DA from reopening the case should Armstrong be found guilty of doping by the USADA. In fact, such is a smart, very smart prerequisite, given Clemens' acquittal and the slap on the wrist to Bonds, both far less popular athletes than Armstrong.

This is the same DA that let Angelo Mozilo off the hook, and that would have been a popular prosecution.

Maybe he one of those guys who is scared to death of the embarrassment of losing a high profile case. Maybe he is just plain corrupt.

I think this stuff about a plan to let the USADA sanction Armstrong so the case can be reopened sounds like fantasy. Proving Armstrong doped would not have been a problem. Proving that he personally is guilty of fraud is the big issue. The statute of limitation problems the feds dealt with initially become an even bigger problem. Then there is the issue of empaneling a new grand jury that would have to hear months of evidence that was heard by the first grand jury. Any new prosecution of Armstrong will come from something that comes out of the qui tam suit or the feds pursuing a civil remedy, not from what comes out of the USADA proceedings.

 

[Cal_Joe]

You know Joe, you seem to be a pretty intelligent guy. Why not stop doing drive-by personal attacks and maybe contribute something substantive. I for one would appreciate knowing what you think of what is happening now that we do know about. This is a sincere request, so if you feel the need to flame, know that I am not trying to be snarky in any way.

The primary purpose of my posts this evening revolved around the chance for social media to make a change in cycling. I do not think anyone will disagree with me that The Clinic is an important voice towards effecting changes.

Many times visiting the threads here, when I see a post by a familiar poster, I already know, with some exceptions, (without reading the post) what the poster's attitude will be.

One of the major exceptions on this thread (and many in the clinic) are the posts by Mercx Index. His posts eschew the rabidness I see here and he evaluates the known facts. Sometimes his posts are not well received, but he never seems to have an agenda or preconceived biases. I realize that in any internet forum not everyone will be as astute as MI, and that many post here for emotional reasons.

My question? Will The Clinic continue to be perceived as "12 posters perpetuating an echo chamber" (In deference to some, I will not use the term "Handbag Ladies") or will The Clinic be recognized as a social group that can shed the acrimony and have intelligent discussions based on things other than rumors or myths?

And as far as your insult goes, I refused to be labeled "a pretty intelligent guy." As far as the drive by goes, if that is in reference to my irregular posting, my work takes me to places where I do not have communications with the interwebs for weeks at a time.

 

[Cal_Joe]

I would bet real money he is not up to it.

You lose. You buy the Irish.

 

[TubularBills]

...when I see a post by a familiar poster, I already know, with some exceptions, (without reading the post) what the poster's attitude will be.

In character, how about some vintage hypocrisy:

http://onlineathens.com/stories/070701/spo_0707010006.shtml

Facts are sometimes so convenient.

 

[BroDeal]

The primary purpose of my posts this evening revolved around the chance for social media to make a change in cycling. I do not think anyone will disagree with me that The Clinic is an important voice towards effecting changes.

Many times visiting the threads here, when I see a post by a familiar poster, I already know, with some exceptions, (without reading the post) what the poster's attitude will be.

One of the major exceptions on this thread (and many in the clinic) are the posts by Mercx Index. His posts eschew the rabidness I see here and he evaluates the known facts. Sometimes his posts are not well received, but he never seems to have an agenda or preconceived biases. I realize that in any internet forum not everyone will be as astute as MI, and that many post here for emotional reasons.

My question? Will The Clinic continue to be perceived as "12 posters perpetuating an echo chamber" (In deference to some, I will not use the term "Handbag Ladies") or will The Clinic be recognized as a social group that can shed the acrimony and have intelligent discussions based on things other than rumors or myths?

"Oh, woe is me. If only The Clinic would stop harassing Armstrong then it could be a force of change. Why, oh, why, are you extremists still picking on Armstrong."

Gee, thanks, Cal. If you and your handbag ladies had not spent years defending that scumbag then maybe the sport could have moved on and by now would be concentrating on improving the future rather than protecting its fraudulent past.

 

[ultimobici]

Can someone explain why if Armstrong loses his case before Judge Sparks in Texas he can start the process again in Louisiana? Surely Federal Court is the same in all states?

 

[Hugh Januss]

You lose. You buy the Irish.

OK then, how about "a nearly intelligent guy"? Trey is not usually overly complementary but I guess he is not always right (somewhere between 50% and 75% I'd say, and at this point I think smart money is on 51%).
Tell the truth, mostly you just want to be annoying.

 

[Cal_Joe]

Gee, thanks, Cal. If you and your handbag ladies had not spent years defending that scumbag then maybe the sport could have moved on and by now would be concentrating on improving the future rather than protecting its fraudulent past.

Never happened. I would expect others to make things up, but not you.

This is the major problem with The Clinic - if anyone questions a post on factual grounds, they are labeled a defender.

It does not appear that you actually read or understood my post. PM me if you would like to take this to an actual discussion sans the insults.

 

[Cal_Joe]

OK then, how about "a nearly intelligent guy"? Trey is not usually overly complementary but I guess he is not always right (somewhere between 50% and 75% I'd say, and at this point I think smart money is on 51%).
Tell the truth, mostly you just want to be annoying.

I never strive to be annoying, so your premise is incorrect. Others may find me annoying, but that attribution probably applies to over 78.32% of the posters on the CN forums, so get over it.

By the way, did you have anything to add regarding social media?

 

[BroDeal]

I never strive to be annoying, so your premise is incorrect. Others may find me annoying, but that attribution probably applies to over 78.32% of the posters on the CN forums, so get over it.

By the way, did you have anything to add regarding social media?

This thread is not about social media. Maybe you could start a new thread. Be sure to include your usual sanctimonious condemnation of The Clinic and its posters.

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

Everyone want to stop insulting one another now, or do you want enforced time-outs via suspensions?

Your choice.

Susan

 

[Hugh Januss]

I never strive to be annoying, so your premise is incorrect. Others may find me annoying, but that attribution probably applies to over 78.32% of the posters on the CN forums, so get over it.

By the way, did you have anything to add regarding social media?

Sorry I was wrong, you just can't help being annoying, doesn't matter what your intent was.



I'd like to point out that I posted this at the same time that Susan was doing her regular drive by threat/mod visit.

 

[Rainfox]

Great posts, Cal Joe.

I am all for bringing about the truth, the facts and having the past cleaned up. That includes Lance Armstrong.

But your points are spot on. An echo chamber, conspiracy theory and spin central command vs. what is actually happening and what we know so far...

 

[Hugh Januss]

Great posts, Cal Joe.

I am all for bringing about the truth, the facts and having the past cleaned up. That includes Lance Armstrong.

But your points are spot on. An echo chamber, conspiracy theory and spin central command vs. what is actually happening and what we know so far...

Thanks for that super informative................whatever it was.
I know you are not a Lance fan, you just think that this witch hunt is a waste (or as you guys like to say, a waist) of tax payer's money.

 

[TubularBills]

I do not think anyone will disagree with me that The Clinic is an important voice towards effecting changes.

"Half the lies they tell about me aren't true."

Sir Yogi Berra

 

[BroDeal]

"Half the lies they tell about me aren't true."

Sir Yogi Berra

"I always tell the truth, even when I lie."

Tony Montana

 

[TubularBills]

"It is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma; but perhaps there is a key."

Sir Winston Churchill (October 1939)

 

[sniper]

does anybody know: are there any motorola witnesses in the usada vs. la case, or just usps?
well of course andreu. but riders who just rode with la on motorola, not afterwards?
is usada principally interested in evidence from the motorola period, e.g. simply to prove la was doping already in that period?
can we expect a guy like raul alcalá to come clean in his late 40s?

doping evidence from the pre-cancer period would be particularly damning to liestrong, me thinks.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

BBC Radio 5
A former Chief Doping Inspector at the Tour de France, Martin Bruin, talks to Shelagh as seven-time champion Lance Armstrong comes under suspicion once again.

Here

 

[GJB123]

BBC Radio 5
A former Chief Doping Inspector at the Tour de France, Martin Bruin, talks to Shelagh as seven-time champion Lance Armstrong comes under suspicion once again.

Here

What a complete d!ckhead. And to think he is one of the guys responsible for anti-doping at the TdF. Or was he maybe in on it and as corrupt as hell and is basically now sh!tting himself?

Regards
GJ

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

What a complete d!ckhead. And to think he is one of the guys responsible for anti-doping at the TdF. Or was he maybe in on it and as corrupt as hell and is basically now sh!tting himself?

Regards
GJ

As part of anti-doping process I would have thought he would back an anti doping agency regardless. I do get the impression he is trying to cover his back.

 

[Fortyninefourteen]

BBC Radio 5
A former Chief Doping Inspector at the Tour de France, Martin Bruin, talks to Shelagh as seven-time champion Lance Armstrong comes under suspicion once again.

Here

The sound of a guy who knows what happened and was part of it.

 

[gthx_gthx_]

BBC Radio 5
A former Chief Doping Inspector at the Tour de France, Martin Bruin, talks to Shelagh as seven-time champion Lance Armstrong comes under suspicion once again.

Here

Oh Dear Lord this guy sounds like one of Armstrong's lawyer.

 

[sniper]

BBC Radio 5
A former Chief Doping Inspector at the Tour de France, Martin Bruin, talks to Shelagh as seven-time champion Lance Armstrong comes under suspicion once again.

Here

This is clearly an empty head (just listen to his english, and he's Dutch ffs!)
The truly worrying part is that the guy is former "Chief Doping Inspector at the Tour de France". WTF? So they hire downright eggheads with an IQ well below average to run doping procedures at the TdF?
And how can a Chief Doping Inspector at the TdF have such a pro-Lance bias in the first place.

QS: who employed this guy? ASO? UCI?

 

[Mongol_Waaijer]

I am happy that this idiot is a FORMER doping control official.

Maybe this guy was one of the hapless muppets treated to coffee by Bruyneel while they waited in the hotel lobby for His Sociopathic Majesty to present himself for a pre arranged test.

I suppose part of the training to get a job with UCI / ASO is the "Lance never ever doped" module.