# Armstrong Investigation now being questioned



## slegros (Sep 22, 2009)

Apparently a U.S. congressman is now questioning the Novitzky investigation after the FDA requested a substantial budget increase for 2011. Among the points he raises are: costs, Novitzky's motives, oversight, FDA mandate and priorities.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/m...looking_into_barry_bonds_roger_clemens_a.html

http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatc...nce-armstrong-investigation-at-budget-hearing

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/03/11/AR2011031104741.html


----------



## Snpiperpilot (Feb 13, 2011)

It will be interesting to see if he gets the answers to his questions. He's not the first to ask. The GAO said the criminal division had inadequate oversight in their review last year.

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d10221.pdf


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

My, how the mighty have fallen. Armstrong wants to get somebody to deflect for him and the best he can do is some goofball who does not believe in evolution. Kingston has a long history of sticking up for douchebags, like his good friend and donor Jack Abramhoff. 

Kingston does not even realize that it is not an FDA investigation. It is run by the Federal Prosecutors office. He also does not realize that it has moved far beyond Novitzky. Armstrong is being investigated by the FDA, U.S. Postal Service’s Office of Inspector General, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, both the civil and criminal divisions of the Department of Justice, The IRS, The French, Belgium, and Italian Police.


----------



## Snpiperpilot (Feb 13, 2011)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> My, how the mighty have fallen. Armstrong wants to get somebody to deflect for him and the best he can do is some goofball who does not believe in evolution. Kingston has a long history of sticking up for douchebags, like his good friend and donor Jack Abramhoff.
> *
> Kingston does not even realize that it is not an FDA investigation. It is run by the Federal Prosecutors office.* He also does not realize that it has moved far beyond Novitzky. Armstrong is being investigated by the FDA, U.S. Postal Service’s Office of Inspector General, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, both the civil and criminal divisions of the Department of Justice, The IRS, The French, Belgium, and Italian Police.


If you say that enough, does it become true?


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

Snpiperpilot said:


> If you say that enough, does it become true?


You may want to take up your concerns with the NY Daily News, I am sure they are eager to here your input on how a Federal case is made. 



> Doug Miller, an assistant U.S. Attorney based in Los Angeles, has overseen the grand jury investigation


As well as the multiple lawyers here on the forum who agree with what I have written


----------



## Snpiperpilot (Feb 13, 2011)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> You may want to take up your concerns with the NY Daily News, I am sure they are eager to here your input on how a Federal case is made.
> 
> 
> 
> As well as the multiple lawyers here on the forum who agree with what I have written


He overseas the case for Justice. He still has no control over what the FDA is doing. We've been here before. If you think he runs the FDA, please show me how that works. I suspect the head of the FDA begs to differ. I didn't see any posting from any of the Lawyers here specifically stating that Doug Miller in his role for the justice department has control over other agencies employees.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

Snpiperpilot said:


> He overseas the case for Justice. He still has no control over what the FDA is doing. We've been here before. If you think he runs the FDA, please show me how that works. I suspect the head of the FDA begs to differ. I didn't see any posting from any of the Lawyers here specifically stating that Doug Miller in his role for the justice department has control over other agencies employees.


You have no idea what you are talking about and are inventing things as you go along. 

We have gone down this path before. You were wrong then and you are wrong now. The last time you made this claim Mark S, a licensed attorney who has worked many Federal Cases, had this response 



MarkS said:


> The FBI is part of the Department of Justice. The FBI, FDA and FBI all are Executive branch agencies. So, I don't know where you are getting your separation of powers thing *You also don't have any idea as to how criminal investigations work*. Yes, it is true that there are turf wars among government agencies and sometimes they do not sing from the same song sheet. But, when it somes to a major criminal investigation agencies work together and the US Attorney's Office and/or the Criminal Division of *the Department of Justice ultimately calls the shots*.


----------



## Snpiperpilot (Feb 13, 2011)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> You have no idea what you are talking about and are inventing things as you go along.
> 
> We have gone down this path before. You were wrong then and you are wrong now. The last time you made this claim Mark S, a licensed attorney who has worked many Federal Cases, had this response


Which doesn't say what I said. They don't control the FDA which started this entire thing. I said before that my terminology was wrong. What isn't wrong is that Justice doesn't get to control other agencies. The FBI is part of Justice the others are not. And certainly, in the case of this thread, they have NO control over what Congress wants to know.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

Snpiperpilot said:


> Which doesn't say what I said. They don't control the FDA which started this entire thing. I said before that my terminology was wrong. What isn't wrong is that Justice doesn't get to control other agencies. The FBI is part of Justice the others are not. And certainly, in the case of this thread, they have NO control over what Congress wants to know.


What part of 



> a major criminal investigation agencies work together and the US Attorney's Office and/or the Criminal Division of the *Department of Justice ultimately calls the shots*.


Do you not understand? DOJ call the shots.


----------



## Snpiperpilot (Feb 13, 2011)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> What part of
> 
> 
> 
> Do you not understand? DOJ call the shots.


What part of english is hard for you. Are you flemish?

The FDA does not work for Justice. Never have, never will. If they do, then the head of the FDA needs new business cards.

Last time I checked the Commissioner of the FDA was Martha Hamburg, MD. She works for Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius. I don't see the Atty General in that chain of command, anywhere.


----------



## Mulowe (Jul 17, 2003)

*All I know*

All I know is that the Truth is what you should be in pursuit of.
There are many out there and in here who seem determined to split hairs about the process. But show little real concern that if major crimes have been committed here then they ought to be dealt with. wheres your outrage about what the truth could likely be proven to be?
Innocent till proven guilty does not mean we dont see a real pattern that indicates some level of inapropriate behavior.
I for one only want the truth to be revealed for whatever it is by whatever legal process allows.
Until then I will not be satisfied.
Like the good Dr I know enogh to know this is not NEW news to many inside the industry.
If true, then Lives have been destroyed , hope has been cheated, and a fraud of Epic size has been comitted.


----------



## ArkRider (Jul 27, 2007)

Snpiperpilot said:


> What part of english is hard for you. Are you flemish?
> 
> The FDA does not work for Justice. Never have, never will. If they do, then the head of the FDA needs new business cards.
> 
> Last time I checked the Commissioner of the FDA was Martha Hamburg, MD. She works for Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius. I don't see the Atty General in that chain of command, anywhere.


Without going through all of the posts, I don't recall anyone ever saying that the FDA did work for the DOJ, or was a part of the DOJ. That argument is nothing more than a red herring. Ever hear the term inter-agency cooperation?

Just because they are different agencies, does not mean that the U.S. Attorney is not heading the case. Do you not think that the man who is going to prosecute the case in court is not going to have control over the case? Do you seriously believe the U.S. Attorney is not going to have investigators follow up on evidence that supports his theory of the case?

For someone who claims to be an engineer, you have an incredible lack of attention to detail.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

ArkRider said:


> Without going through all of the posts, I don't recall anyone ever saying that the FDA did work for the DOJ, or was a part of the DOJ. That argument is nothing more than a red herring. Ever hear the term inter-agency cooperation?
> 
> Just because they are different agencies, does not mean that the U.S. Attorney is not heading the case. Do you not think that the man who is going to prosecute the case in court is not going to have control over the case? Do you seriously believe the U.S. Attorney is not going to have investigators follow up on evidence that supports his theory of the case?
> 
> For someone who claims to be an engineer, you have an incredible lack of attention to detail.


:thumbsup:

Miller runs the case, nobody has said he runs the FDA. He is just tossing up strawmen.


----------



## Snpiperpilot (Feb 13, 2011)

ArkRider said:


> *Without going through all of the posts*, I don't recall anyone ever saying that the FDA did work for the DOJ, or was a part of the DOJ. That argument is nothing more than a red herring. Ever hear the term inter-agency cooperation?
> 
> Just because they are different agencies, does not mean that the U.S. Attorney is not heading the case. Do you not think that the man who is going to prosecute the case in court is not going to have control over the case? Do you seriously believe the U.S. Attorney is not going to have investigators follow up on evidence that supports his theory of the case?
> 
> For someone who claims to be an engineer, you have an incredible lack of attention to detail.


That shows an incredible lack of attention to the discussion.

I'm responding to the argument that Miller controls other agencies. He doesn't. Certainly, he has influence but no more. In the instant thread, the topic was the issue that congress ( or at least this congressman ) wants more accountability to what the FDA is doing. That is the topic, not the overall case that Doug Miller is pursuing. Not understanding that also demonstrates a lack of attention.

FWIW. DrF, this is not my strawman, it's yours. You insisted that Miller runs the entire case and all report to him. I'm just saying they don't. A fair counter argument. One you will continue to ignore. 

Still waiting for that info on the Plane, and what the travel and ad money was spent one. But, you'll ignore that too.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

Snpiperpilot said:


> That shows an incredible lack of attention to the discussion.
> 
> I'm responding to the argument that Miller controls other agencies. He doesn't. Certainly, he has influence but no more. In the instant thread, the topic was the issue that congress ( or at least this congressman ) wants more accountability to what the FDA is doing. That is the topic, not the overall case that Doug Miller is pursuing. Not understanding that also demonstrates a lack of attention.
> 
> ...


The first thing you ought to do when you find yourself in a hole is quit digging. . . . Instead you are looking for a bigger shovel


----------



## Snpiperpilot (Feb 13, 2011)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> The first thing you ought to do when you find yourself in a hole is quit digging. . . . Instead you are looking for a bigger shovel


Still waiting for my answer. I won't get it cause you're using a backhoe and all I have is a shovel and pail.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

Snpiperpilot said:


> Still waiting for my answer. I won't get it cause you're using a backhoe and all I have is a shovel and pail.


Have given it multiple times, you chose to ignore it. 

Instead of ruining yet another thread with your silliness perhaps you should just PM me with any questions?


----------



## Snpiperpilot (Feb 13, 2011)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Have given it multiple times, you chose to ignore it.
> 
> Instead of ruining yet another thread with your silliness perhaps you should just PM me with any questions?


I ruined the thread? Amusing. The first two posts of this thread were about congress and the GAO asking questions about the FDA.

In post three you said:



Doctor Falsetti said:


> My, how the mighty have fallen. Armstrong wants to get somebody to deflect for him and the best he can do is some goofball who does not believe in evolution. Kingston has a long history of sticking up for douchebags, like his good friend and donor Jack Abramhoff.
> 
> Kingston does not even realize that it is not an FDA investigation. It is run by the Federal Prosecutors office. He also does not realize that it has moved far beyond Novitzky. Armstrong is being investigated by the FDA, U.S. Postal Service’s Office of Inspector General, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, both the civil and criminal divisions of the Department of Justice, The IRS, The French, Belgium, and Italian Police.


Seems like you sent it down the rat hole. Not me.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

Snpiperpilot said:


> I ruined the thread.


Thank you for proving my point.


----------



## Snpiperpilot (Feb 13, 2011)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Thank you for proving my point.


You're a moth to a flame. I say Armstrong and you jump. What a sad thing. Even when it's shown that you began it, you deny it.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

Snpiperpilot said:


> You're a moth to a flame. I say Armstrong and you jump. What a sad thing. Even when it's shown that you began it, you deny it.


You again confirm your only goal is to derail any real discussion of the topic. 

Anyone that read what I wrote can see that it is clearly linked to the topic. Like you, the congressman was missinformed about many parts of the investigation. Pointing this out and explaining the scope of the investigation is the correct response. 

With every post you prove that your only intent is to disrupt the conversation, not add to it.


----------



## Tight Nipples (Feb 18, 2011)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> You again confirm your only goal is to derail any real discussion of the topic.
> 
> Anyone that read what I wrote can see that it is clearly linked to the topic. Like you, the congressman was missinformed about many parts of the investigation. Pointing this out and explaining the scope of the investigation is the correct response.
> 
> With every post you prove that your only intent is to disrupt the conversation, not add to it.


Geez, how about we give Falsette and Snpiper each a cricket bat, put them in pit and sell tickets. I want the beer concession.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

Tight Nipples said:


> Geez, how about we give Falsette and Snpiper each a cricket bat, put them in pit and sell tickets. I want the beer concession.


:thumbsup:


----------



## ArkRider (Jul 27, 2007)

Snpiperpilot said:


> That shows an incredible lack of attention to the discussion.
> 
> I'm responding to the argument that Miller controls other agencies. He doesn't.


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## Snpiperpilot (Feb 13, 2011)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> You again confirm your only goal is to derail any real discussion of the topic.
> 
> Anyone that read what I wrote can see that it is clearly linked to the topic. Like you, the congressman was missinformed about many parts of the investigation. Pointing this out and explaining the scope of the investigation is the correct response.
> 
> With every post you prove that your only intent is to disrupt the conversation, not add to it.


Oh Please, you're like Pavlov's dog. You can't help yourself. Your post served merely to reveal your prejudice. You instead brought slander and innuendo. You didn't say anything that added to the conversation. You just smeared the congressman with more unsubstantiated lies. How did that do anything? I don't know what he did or did not do for Abramhoff but what does that have to do with his question for the Commissioner? Nothing, as usual. It was a diversion tactic. He and the GAO are both on record as saying the FDA criminal division needs more oversight. In her testimony, the commissioner said she has similar concerns. What does Abramhoff have to do with that?


----------



## Coolhand (Jul 28, 2002)

*Moderators Note*

Its called the ignore feature- its probably best if a few people use it. Other please keep it civil. Thanks in advance.


----------



## Snpiperpilot (Feb 13, 2011)

Coolhand said:


> Its called the ignore feature- its probably best if a few people use it. Other please keep it civil. Thanks in advance.


Got a truth button? Yes, that's a joke.


----------



## Coolhand (Jul 28, 2002)

I do hate Freedom.


----------



## Gatorback (Jul 11, 2009)

I hope people understand the importance of allowing investigative agencies to go about their business without politicians influencing their judgment with the power of the purse. Our justice system is already too skewed in favor of the rich in my opinion. If you start allowing politics to dictate who gets investigated--and who just gets a free pass when criminal or regulatory violations may have been committed--then we've got some serious, serious problems. That whole idea separations of powers was probably a good thing and I'm certainly not in favor of throwing it out the window. 

I could give some tutorials on politics if anyone is interested. It is an ugly, ugly business and it is pretty much guaranteed Rep. Kingston doesn't give a rats ass about Armstrong and most people who the FDA investigates. This could just be a pure political move--pick a popular figure like Armstrong as a way to sway public opinion on a budget cut issue. But I'd also suggest following the money.

What company donated money to Kingston (or to a PAC that supported Kingston in some way) who is not happy with the FDA? 

Find the answer to that question and there is a really, really strong chance you'll learn what Kingston is really after here.


----------



## Tight Nipples (Feb 18, 2011)

Gatorback said:


> What company donated money to Kingston (or to a PAC that supported Kingston in some way) who is not happy with the FDA?
> 
> Find the answer to that question and there is a really, really strong chance you'll learn what Kingston is really after here.


Or maybe give Kingston a cricket bat too. Only a smaller one. And can we have betting?


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

Gatorback said:


> I hope people understand the importance of allowing investigative agencies to go about their business without politicians influencing their judgment with the power of the purse. Our justice system is already too skewed in favor of the rich in my opinion. If you start allowing politics to dictate who gets investigated--and who just gets a free pass when criminal or regulatory violations may have been committed--then we've got some serious, serious problems. That whole idea separations of powers was probably a good thing and I'm certainly not in favor of throwing it out the window.
> 
> I could give some tutorials on politics if anyone is interested. It is an ugly, ugly business and it is pretty much guaranteed Rep. Kingston doesn't give a rats ass about Armstrong and most people who the FDA investigates. This could just be a pure political move--pick a popular figure like Armstrong as a way to sway public opinion on a budget cut issue. But I'd also suggest following the money.
> 
> ...


You are correct, Kingston's primary focus is defunding the Food safety act. Anything he can do to attack and minimize the FDA is good for his goal. It is no surprise that his top 20 campaign contributors include 

American Peanut Shellers Assn
Coca-Cola Co
ConAgra Foods
Cargill Inc
United Egg Assn
Coley Farm Services

Some like to pretend that everything revolves around Armstrong. For the FDA, Congress, or the GAO he is small time.....not so for the DOJ


----------



## slegros (Sep 22, 2009)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> My, how the mighty have fallen. Armstrong wants to get somebody to deflect for him and the best he can do is some goofball who does not believe in evolution. Kingston has a long history of sticking up for douchebags, like his good friend and donor Jack Abramhoff.


So from this am I to understand that L.A. has politicians acting on his behalf to influence the policy of a U.S. government agency? Right........ The concerns raised about budget overruns, lack of oversight, and the point that dozens of deaths due to tainted heparin being more important than singling out a sporting figure had nothing to do with it at all...

Let me guess... Livestrong is actually a front for some diabolical Bond-villain-like operation to take over the world, and that L.A. is the real Dr. Evil.... Wait!! My bad!! Dr. Evil is Ferrari!! See! I'm getting the drift of how this works now..... ;-)

On a separate note, is there a particular brand of tinfoil you would recommend I wrap my head in to protect myself from having my thoughts read by CIA mind control satellites? ;-)


----------



## ArkRider (Jul 27, 2007)

Gatorback said:


> I hope people understand the importance of allowing investigative agencies to go about their business without politicians influencing their judgment with the power of the purse. Our justice system is already too skewed in favor of the rich in my opinion. If you start allowing politics to dictate who gets investigated--and who just gets a free pass when criminal or regulatory violations may have been committed--then we've got some serious, serious problems. That whole idea separations of powers was probably a good thing and I'm certainly not in favor of throwing it out the window.
> 
> I could give some tutorials on politics if anyone is interested. It is an ugly, ugly business and it is pretty much guaranteed Rep. Kingston doesn't give a rats ass about Armstrong and most people who the FDA investigates. This could just be a pure political move--pick a popular figure like Armstrong as a way to sway public opinion on a budget cut issue. But I'd also suggest following the money.
> 
> ...


Could be a reaction, from any number of producers, for recently grumblings that the FDA needs to do more inspections and ramp up enforcement actions. It gets expensive when people insist that you clean the poop off of the food.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

slegros said:


> So from this am I to understand that L.A. has politicians acting on his behalf to influence the policy of a U.S. government agency? Right........ The concerns raised about budget overruns, lack of oversight, and the point that dozens of deaths due to tainted heparin being more important than singling out a sporting figure had nothing to do with it at all...
> 
> Let me guess... Livestrong is actually a front for some diabolical Bond-villain-like operation to take over the world, and that L.A. is the real Dr. Evil.... Wait!! My bad!! Dr. Evil is Ferrari!! See! I'm getting the drift of how this works now..... ;-)
> 
> On a separate note, is there a particular brand of tinfoil you would recommend I wrap my head in to protect myself from having my thoughts read by CIA mind control satellites? ;-)


It appears you missed my last post. 

More likely Kingston is using the Lance case for political gain as the FDA is his primary target, anything negative on them he can dig up he will use. His statements make it clear he has little understanding of the investigation


----------



## Coolhand (Jul 28, 2002)

*Fwiw*

Given the rather major problems with food safety/e-coli ect as of late, I can understand the quite reasonable inquiries as to why the FDA is wasting what few resources they have on this.

Makes sense that another Federal agency (or WADA/USADA) pay for and/or investigate this. I would prefer that the FDA makes sure the food chain is safe, drugs are not counterfeit, organic food is actually organic (and yes that my burgers are poop-free).


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

Coolhand said:


> Given the rather major problems with food safety/e-coli ect as of late, I can understand the quite reasonable inquiries as to why the FDA is wasting what few resources they have on this.
> 
> Makes sense that another Federal agency (or WADA/USADA) pay for and/or investigate this. I would prefer that the FDA makes sure the food chain is safe, drugs are not counterfeit, organic food is actually organic (and yes that my burgers are poop-free).


Congressman Kingston disagrees with you. Says the Food system is 99.9% safe, best in the world. That is why he is trying to defund the food safety law....I do not agree with him.

The FDA is small part of the investigation, but Novitzky has the big name so his role is inflated to the public. USADA is funding some of it and supposedly will make their move soon, if they have not already done so.


----------



## Coolhand (Jul 28, 2002)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Congressman Kingston disagrees with you. Says the Food system is 99.9% safe, best in the world. That is why he is trying to defund the food safety law....I do not agree with him.


Nor do I- we still have some work to do in that area.


----------



## BassNBrew (Aug 4, 2008)

slegros said:


> Apparently a U.S. congressman is now questioning the Novitzky investigation after the FDA requested a substantial budget increase for 2011. Among the points he raises are: costs, Novitzky's motives, oversight, FDA mandate and priorities.
> 
> http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/m...looking_into_barry_bonds_roger_clemens_a.html
> 
> ...


Know Armstrong was innocent all along. Thank goodness someone is questioning this sham of an investigation.


----------



## The Tedinator (Mar 12, 2004)




----------



## covenant (May 21, 2002)

BassNBrew said:


> Know Armstrong was innocent all along. Thank goodness someone is questioning this sham of an investigation.


----------



## johnlh (Sep 12, 2008)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> My, how the mighty have fallen. Armstrong wants to get somebody to deflect for him and the best he can do is some goofball who does not believe in evolution. Kingston has a long history of sticking up for douchebags, like his good friend and donor Jack Abramhoff.
> 
> Kingston does not even realize that it is not an FDA investigation. It is run by the Federal Prosecutors office. He also does not realize that it has moved far beyond Novitzky. Armstrong is being investigated by the FDA, U.S. Postal Service’s Office of Inspector General, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, both the civil and criminal divisions of the Department of Justice, The IRS, The French, Belgium, and Italian Police.


Armstrong will continue to live a life of privilege and wealth. Nothing big will come of this.


----------



## rydbyk (Feb 17, 2010)

Lance is the most highly tested athlete on this planet. He has never failed a single test. He is innocent. Wink.. I like the bobber fishing pic...will have to keep that one.


----------



## Big-foot (Dec 14, 2002)

rydbyk said:


> Lance is the most highly tested athlete on this planet. He has never failed a single test. He is innocent. Wink.. I like the bobber fishing pic...will have to keep that one.


Yes, yes. For several years there was a drug-tester living in a motorhome parked in Lance's driveway----much easier to administer daily tests that way. :yesnod:
Which is what it would take to even get close to the "thousands of tests" that some claim.


----------



## Gee3 (Jan 31, 2006)

Big-foot said:


> Yes, yes. For several years there was a drug-tester living in a motorhome parked in Lance's driveway----much easier to administer daily tests that way. :yesnod:
> Which is what it would take to even get close to the "thousands of tests" that some claim.


Don't forget he's also counting the tests he took in grade school and high school. He took lots of spelling, math, science, history, social studies and basket weaving tests!! But he never failed one! :thumbsup:


----------



## Perico (Mar 15, 2010)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> You again confirm your only goal is to derail any real discussion of the topic. .



Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. 


On to the OP, this is all about trying to get a budget increase. Remember how hard they went after Landis and how much money they spent? Do some research and see how many slam dunk cases they let go because they were focusing on frying the big fish. The big fish brings in the most money. As long as they have to justify their budget agencies will always go after the big fish.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

Perico said:


> Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
> 
> 
> On to the OP, this is all about trying to get a budget increase. Remember how hard they went after Landis and how much money they spent? Do some research and see how many slam dunk cases they let go because they were focusing on frying the big fish. The big fish brings in the most money. As long as they have to justify their budget agencies will always go after the big fish.


The DOJ's budget is 28,200,000,000. Anything they start with Armstrong will be a drop in the bucket. There is a simple solution to any concerns about costs.....Lance should start working on his plea deal instead of his media campaign. The longer he drags this out the more it costs everyone. 

Doug Miller prosecutes plenty of slam dunk cases, his district has the highest conviction rate in the nation.


----------



## lastchild (Jul 4, 2009)

Snpiperpilot said:


> If you say that enough, does it become true?



No, he also needs to click his heels together 3 times and say "there's no place like home..."


----------



## Perico (Mar 15, 2010)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> The DOJ's budget is 28,200,000,000. Anything they start with Armstrong will be a drop in the bucket. There is a simple solution to any concerns about costs.....Lance should start working on his plea deal instead of his media campaign. The longer he drags this out the more it costs everyone.
> 
> Doug Miller prosecutes plenty of slam dunk cases, his district has the highest conviction rate in the nation.


Except they can just spend that whole budget how they want, it is put into specific things. Nailing LA is publicity...period, even a hypocritical LA hater like you has to admit that.


Oh, wait, I forgot you spin, attack and insult rather then admitting anything you are wrong about or that may not fit your agenda.


----------



## Coolhand (Jul 28, 2002)

If the DOJ wants to investigate, that's fine with me. They have the time, money and manpower. The FDA doesn't, and I would prefer them to stick with Food safety first, drug/supplement safety after that.


----------



## DMFT (Feb 3, 2005)

If the FDA runs this like they do "Food Safety" in this country then L.A has nothing to worry about.

From MANY years in the business of food I can tell you that our FDA couldn't hit their a*s with both hands......


----------



## edthehead (Mar 26, 2010)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> The first thing you ought to do when you find yourself in a hole is quit digging. . . . Instead you are looking for a bigger shovel


For a guy that's right you sure display it in a douchey way Dr


----------



## covenant (May 21, 2002)

edthehead said:


> For a guy that's right you sure display it in a douchey way Dr


It's called_ Hubris. _ :thumbsup:


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

covenant said:


> It's called_ Hubris. _ :thumbsup:


When you are right it is called confidence :thumbsup:


----------



## lastchild (Jul 4, 2009)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> When you are right it is called confidence :thumbsup:


or douchebaggery


----------

