# Feds won't charge Lance Armstrong



## DIRT BOY

What a waste of US tax dollars!!

Federal prosecutors close Lance Armstrong doping case, won't press charges - ESPN


----------



## robdamanii

Yep. I wonder how much was spent on this mess?


----------



## Fogdweller

Not to worry. The large "donation" made by former Tailwind executives was probably enough to cover the tab.


----------



## Fignon's Barber

Awesome. I know it may not be the fashionable opinion, but I am happy for him. Now the feds should use the resources to prosecute Obama for stealing $500 million of our money to pay off his personal sylendra debt.


----------



## rcordray

Fignon's Barber said:


> Awesome. I know it may not be the fashionable opinion, but I am happy for him. Now the feds should use the resources to prosecute Obama for stealing $500 million of our money to pay off his personal sylendra debt.


When you're slamming someone, it always makes you look a tiny bit smarter when you get the spelling right...

Solyndra


----------



## godot

Fignon's Barber said:


> Awesome. I know it may not be the fashionable opinion, but I am happy for him. Now the feds should use the resources to prosecute Obama for stealing $500 million of our money to pay off his personal sylendra debt.


Perhaps you could split your post. Put the 1st part in this forum and last sentence in PO where it belongs.


----------



## Urb

happy for lance.


----------



## mohair_chair

I'd love to dig up all the posts made by certain people here who were "in the know" and were absolutely certain he would do jail time. But I've actually got a life, so I have better things to do with my time. They know who they are.

What a huge waste of time and money. Novitzky sure is good at spending lots of it and getting nothing in return. A little oversight would be nice.


----------



## robdamanii

mohair_chair said:


> I'd love to dig up all the posts made by certain people here who were "in the know" and were absolutely certain he would do jail time. But I've actually got a life, so I have better things to do with my time. They know who they are.
> 
> What a huge waste of time and money. Novitzky sure is good at spending lots of it and getting nothing in return. A little oversight would be nice.


This. 

I guess "in the know" really isn't. Big surprise, huh?


----------



## cheddarlove

mohair_chair said:


> I'd love to dig up all the posts made by certain people here who were "in the know" and were absolutely certain he would do jail time. But I've actually got a life, so I have better things to do with my time. They know who they are.
> 
> What a huge waste of time and money. Novitzky sure is good at spending lots of it and getting nothing in return. A little oversight would be nice.


I agree. The smug and condescending haters will surely find a way to justify this though! 
I am totally stoked personally! What a riot!
Do I think he was guilty? Yes
Am I still a fan? Yes
Was this a total waste of dollars? Yes
Do I think Lance is the Don of the cycling mafia? Yes 
Finally, one for the fanboys!


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

Well Played by Armstrong. Very smart move to hire Fabini and his partner Chris Lehane. Always important to have connections. 

Qui Tam, USADA, Ferrari. Far from over


----------



## JohnHemlock

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Well Played by Armstrong. Very smart move to hire Fabini and his partner Chris Lehane. Always important to have connections.
> 
> Qui Tam, USADA, Ferrari. Far from over


Give it a rest, Henny Penny. Sheesh.


----------



## cyclesport45

Yawn. Where's the doping dirt on (current) cyclists??


----------



## pianopiano

*oh those crazy witches!*

Being well connected and wealthy probably has a lot to do with it. I wonder how much it cost him (or his supporters)? Now would be a good time for him to run for public office.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

USADA is not giving up




> However US Anti Doping Agency CEO Travis T. Tygart has said that the matter isn’t over. “Unlike the U.S. Attorney, USADA’s job is to protect clean sport rather than enforce specific criminal laws,” he indicated in a statement. “Our investigation into doping in the sport of cycling is continuing and we look forward to obtaining the information developed during the federal investigation.”


Hiring Chris Lehane to lobby his old buddy will not work with them


----------



## kbiker3111

I went over to cyclingnews to see the reaction and there are already a dozen pages worth of posts on the subject. Quite a reaction.


----------



## nedbraden

kbiker3111 said:


> I went over to cyclingnews to see the reaction and there are already a dozen pages worth of posts on the subject. Quite a reaction.


With a whole lot of excuses from the usual suspects. That place is such a cesspool.


----------



## Dave IV

I suspect that after all the grand jury testimony and all the investigations Jeff Novitzky and his team determined the allegations were not true or there was not enough evidence to go to trial. I find it highly unlikely that politics, high-level connections, or money played any part. 

I would have to imagine there are more politicians, high-level connections, and money interested and connected to major league baseball than there is to pro cycling in this country. If Jeff Novitzky could get Barry Bonds and Roger Clemons indicted and to trial he could easily have gotten Lance Armstrong indicted, and tried if the evidence was present.


----------



## zedXmick

Fignon's Barber said:


> Awesome. I know it may not be the fashionable opinion, but I am happy for him. Now the feds should use the resources to prosecute Bush for stealing $trillions of our money to pay off his personal unjustified WAR in IRAQ.


Fixed it for you, [email protected]


----------



## covenant

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Well Played by Armstrong. Very smart move to hire Fabini and his partner Chris Lehane. Always important to have connections.
> 
> Qui Tam, USADA, Ferrari. Far from over


----------



## terry b

I'm shocked that Novitsky couldn't turn all the witness intimidation and illegal leaks into a presentable case. Perhaps a time machine and some illegal wiretaps would have done the job.


----------



## Waxbytes

The Fed case was never about doping, it was always about if a Federal crime had been commited. 
That is an offense that was a crime at the time of commission. No ex posto facto allowed.
Further the crime had to have been commited within the statue of limitations for the alleged crime
or it would have had to fit the requirements of RICO to be allowed to ignore statue limitations. 
As well, there needed to be provable jurisdiction (There had to be fed money spent on drugs and not money from another source, for instance, team bike sales). Finally, "beyond a reasonable doubt" is the standard of proof required. 
I'm not surprised they have given up.


----------



## JohnHemlock




----------



## peter584

That's a blow to Landis's 2013 expected income.


----------



## Waxbytes

peter584 said:


> That's a blow to Landis's 2013 expected income.


*snickers*


----------



## Coolhand

*Moderators Note*



zedXmick said:


> Fixed it for you, [email protected]


And that's an infraction for you.


----------



## lastchild

utter and complete vindication!
hahahaha!
all that posturing for nothing. all that 'inside information'.
all the hatred, the bile, the vapid, self-obsessed rancor. 


this is awesome!!!
i can't stop laughing!!!


----------



## lastchild

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Well Played by Armstrong. Very smart move to hire Fabini and his partner Chris Lehane. Always important to have connections.
> 
> Qui Tam, USADA, Ferrari. Far from over


You lose.
Big time.


----------



## lastchild

Coolhand said:


> And that's an infraction for you.


You've been pandering to the naysayers since the beginning.
You owe us all an apology Coolhand.


----------



## lastchild

mohair_chair said:


> I'd love to dig up all the posts made by certain people here who were "in the know" and were absolutely certain he would do jail time. But I've actually got a life, so I have better things to do with my time. They know who they are.
> 
> What a huge waste of time and money. Novitzky sure is good at spending lots of it and getting nothing in return. A little oversight would be nice.


Amen.
And all the 'bans' and 'infractions' imposed by the moderator on those who always believed in the riders...remember those guys? Those of so incensed but the parade of LIES and GARBAGE spewed by certain folks on this forum.

Truly.
We ALL deserve an apology that this drivel was allowed to continue.


----------



## Coolhand

*Moderators Note*



lastchild said:


> You've been pandering to the naysayers since the beginning.
> You owe us all an apology Coolhand.


Yeah, that's it- not the personal attacks you kept making. Seeing you haven't learned from your last posting vacation, let's try again.


----------



## DIRT BOY

Fignon's Barber said:


> Awesome. I know it may not be the fashionable opinion, but I am happy for him. Now the feds should use the resources to prosecute Obama for stealing $500 million of our money to pay off his personal sylendra debt.


Please! Or should be put George W. Bush on trial for lying to the American people about Iraq and try him treason by sending 3k+ soldiers to death?

Please stay on subject now.


----------



## DIRT BOY

What ever you think of Lance, the government did not have enough to go after him, period.

The US government has ZERO business getting to sports issues. Unless your want to prosecute for the actual drugs.

Stop wasting tax dollars because an athlete juiced. Without drugs, sports would not be where it it today, like it or not.


----------



## a_avery007

*better widen your horizon's mate*



Fignon's Barber said:


> Awesome. I know it may not be the fashionable opinion, but I am happy for him. Now the feds should use the resources to prosecute Obama for stealing $500 million of our money to pay off his personal sylendra debt.


check one of the later editions of the new yorker

defense start ups that failed and that took fed money was in the billions.

where was the outcry on those?


waiting........


----------



## a_avery007

yeah coolhand plays fave's..
waits until someone insults your whole family, reads and smirks, and when you retaliate days later he sends one away for a while..

bet, he will stew on this outcome for a while too..

falsetti is his namesake!!


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

a_avery007 said:


> yeah coolhand plays fave's..
> waits until someone insults your whole family, reads and smirks, and when you retaliate days later he sends one away for a while..
> 
> bet, he will stew on this outcome for a while too..
> 
> falsetti is his namesake!!


Yup, me and Coolhand. We are best buds. We go on long rides every Sunday and try to figure out how we can get lance in prison.....but those meddling kids foiled our plan!


----------



## ZoomBoy

For me this quote from the article says it all:

"The hurdle for prosecutors wasn't so much to prove whether any particular cyclist used drugs, but to determine if Armstrong and other team members violated federal conspiracy, fraud or racketeering charges."

Dropping the case does not mean that he was not a doper. I doubt that Tyler Hamilton and any of the others would lie under oath to a grand jury about what they saw if Tyler told them the same things he said he witnessed on 60 Minutes. 

I for one am disappointed. I'm sure that all the Lance fanatics are jumping up and down now saying "We told you so!" It may not be over yet.......We will have to wait and see.


----------



## JohnnyG

The whole Lance doper Strong thing is Far from being Over ... I guess, the whole top Pro P guys were doping & Doper Strong was clean ... LMAO !!! Priceless !!!


----------



## nedbraden

DIRT BOY said:


> Please! Or should be put George W. Bush on trial for lying to the American people about Iraq and try him treason by sending 3k+ soldiers to death?
> 
> Please stay on subject now.


Did you seriously just get in an off topic shot and then ask for someone else to stay on topic?!?!?!:nono:


----------



## Coolhand

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Yup, me and Coolhand. We are best buds. We go on long rides every Sunday and try to figure out how we can get lance in prison.....but those meddling kids foiled our plan!


I have to admit, this did make me chuckle a bit. 

First I am evil incarnate because I banned a few people who happened to think Lance was a doper (the rules violations were mere cover for my plan), and NOW I am Lance-hater evil incarnate because I banned a few posters who didn't like the other posters who thought Lance doped (the rules violations were just mere cover for my plan). If anything it sounds like my evil plans need some _serious_ work. 

Or, maybe, _just maybe_ if everyone knocked off the personal attacks, forum guideline violations, and general trollery- I could stick with oppressing link spammers and a poorly composed scam attempts. 

Nah, me being massively biased, but apparently quite schizophrenic seem to be the clearer conclusion.


----------



## Cpk

rcordray said:


> When you're slamming someone, it always makes you look a tiny bit smarter when you get the spelling right...
> 
> Solyndra



Hehehe


----------



## a_avery007

*let me help you clear this up*



Coolhand said:


> I have to admit, this did make me chuckle a bit.
> 
> First I am evil incarnate because I banned a few people who happened to think Lance was a doper (the rules violations were mere cover for my plan), and NOW I am Lance-hater evil incarnate because I banned a few posters who didn't like the other posters who thought Lance doped (the rules violations were just mere cover for my plan). If anything it sounds like my evil plans need some _serious_ work.
> 
> Or, maybe, _just maybe_ if everyone knocked off the personal attacks, forum guideline violations, and general trollery- I could stick with oppressing link spammers and a poorly composed scam attempts.
> 
> Nah, me being massively biased, but apparently quite schizophrenic seem to be the clearer conclusion.


did not appreciate the delay...you let the other guy slag, let it rest, while you could have stepped up and followed your "rules and guidelines" but you did not.

just calling you on it bro..

as for you two enjoying the deflective humor so be it..


just know that both of you bet on the wrong side, and would not put it past you two juvenilles to go for a sunday ride together and curse the system you know only works for those that have $$..


----------



## zosocane

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Well Played by Armstrong. Very smart move to hire Fabini and his partner Chris Lehane. Always important to have connections.
> 
> Qui Tam, USADA, Ferrari. Far from over


Perhaps. But he won't be a spinning instructor at the Big House. He can deal with the rest.


----------



## DMFT

Coolhand said:


> I have to admit, this did make me chuckle a bit.
> 
> First I am evil incarnate because I banned a few people who happened to think Lance was a doper (the rules violations were mere cover for my plan), and NOW I am Lance-hater evil incarnate because I banned a few posters who didn't like the other posters who thought Lance doped (the rules violations were just mere cover for my plan). If anything it sounds like my evil plans need some _serious_ work.
> 
> Or, maybe, _just maybe_ if everyone knocked off the personal attacks, forum guideline violations, and general trollery- I could stick with oppressing link spammers and a poorly composed scam attempts.
> 
> Nah, me being massively biased, but apparently quite schizophrenic seem to be the clearer conclusion.



- This is FUNNY.


----------



## mohair_chair

Doctor Falsetti said:


> USADA is not giving up
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hiring Chris Lehane to lobby his old buddy will not work with them


Oh, please. Give it a rest. If there is so much to go on, why is USADA holding back? He's already beyond the statute of limitations for everything before 2005, and that runs out this year. Face it, they've got nothing, and they'll do nothing.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

mohair_chair said:


> Oh, please. Give it a rest. If there is so much to go on, why is USADA holding back? He's already beyond the statute of limitations for everything before 2005, and that runs out this year. Face it, they've got nothing, and they'll do nothing.


With their recent SOL win against Eddie Hellebuyck USADA is pretty confident that SOL is not an issue.

http://www.usada.org/default.asp?uid=3788


----------



## davidka

Doctor Falsetti said:


> With their recent SOL win against Eddie Hellebuyck USADA is pretty confident that SOL is not an issue.
> 
> http://www.usada.org/default.asp?uid=3788


" Recent information, including Hellebuyck’s own public admissions,"

Not something USADA can bet on with LA, plus they don't have the budget that the FEDs do. 

What do you make of Tygart's statement about getting the info gathered during the investigation? Can the FEDs share/release that?


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

davidka said:


> " Recent information, including Hellebuyck’s own public admissions,"
> 
> Not something USADA can bet on with LA, plus they don't have the budget that the FEDs do.
> 
> What do you make of Tygart's statement about getting the info gathered during the investigation? Can the FEDs share/release that?


Hincapie did not talk to the GJ, he voluntarily talked with investigators. They can share this with USADA. I assume that Levi, Tyler, Floyd, and many others did the same. That is plenty of direct testimony for a non-analytical positive and would not need a confession. 

A case against Armstrong would be very expensive but it certainly appears USADA is willing to go ahead with it.

It appears the big hurdle for the Feds was not proving Armstrong doped, but that he committed fraud in the jurisdiction the Feds have control over.




> The hurdle for prosecutors wasn't so much to prove whether any particular cyclist used drugs, but to determine if Armstrong and other team members violated federal conspiracy, fraud or racketeering charges.


----------



## JohnHemlock

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Hincapie did not talk to the GJ, he voluntarily talked with investigators. They can share this with USADA. I assume that Levi, Tyler, Floyd, and many others did the same. That is plenty of direct testimony for a non-analytical positive and would not need a confession.
> 
> A case against Armstrong would be very expensive but it certainly appears USADA is willing to go ahead with it.
> 
> It appears the big hurdle was not proving Armstrong doped, but that he committed fraud int he jurisdiction the Feds have control over.


The funny thing is that after today, every one of your posts reads like BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH. Now that your run of pretending you were Jeff Novitsky's racquetball partner is over why don't you just give it a rest and go away for awhile?


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

JohnHemlock said:


> The funny thing is that after today, every one of your posts reads like BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH. Now that your run of pretending you were Jeff Novitsky's racquetball partner is over why don't you just give it a rest and go away for awhile?


I can see that if you only focused on the Lance stuff why you would say that. Yup, I was wrong. Many people who risked it to talk openly with the Feds are feeling shocked and betrayed right now. As I said from the start Jeff has nothing to do with the case, that was proven today

There is still Ferrari, USADA, and the French. Do you think they will fold like the Feds did?


----------



## cda 455

Great news for Lance  !


----------



## davidka

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Hincapie did not talk to the GJ, he voluntarily talked with investigators. They can share this with USADA. I assume that Levi, Tyler, Floyd, and many others did the same. That is plenty of direct testimony for a non-analytical positive and would not need a confession.
> 
> A case against Armstrong would be very expensive but it certainly appears USADA is willing to go ahead with it.
> 
> It appears the big hurdle for the Feds was not proving Armstrong doped, but that he committed fraud in the jurisdiction the Feds have control over.


That's a surprise to me. my understanding was that it was GJ testimony. If it was investigation outside and not GJ, why would that have been locked down before now?

The biggest difference between the case you cited and the ongoing USADA effort against LA is that the case against Hellebuyck concluded and the he was sanctioned.
The SOL element affected his records/results but was not the original sanction. There has been plenty of testimony against LA already. If that's not enough to sanction then nothing but a confession will do at this point.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

davidka said:


> That's a surprise to me. my understanding was that it was GJ testimony. If it was investigation outside and not GJ, why would that have been locked down before now?
> 
> The biggest difference between the case you cited and the ongoing USADA effort against LA is that the case against Hellebuyck concluded and the he was sanctioned.
> The SOL element affected his records/results but was not the original sanction. There has been plenty of testimony against LA already. If that's not enough to sanction then nothing but a confession will do at this point.


The Hellbuck case showed that SOL could be tolled if the target gave false evidence to the governing body. This would reset the SOL to that date. 

There are multiple witnesses that say he lied when he tested positive for Cortisone in 1999. There was an investigation in 2002 when the team was caught dumping syringes and drugs, and another in 2005 when the 1999 samples tested positive. 

While USAC did little in all of these cases it still would be fairly easy to show that Armstrong lied with testimony from Hincapie, Levi, Tyler, Floyd, and others. 

the larger challenge is the UCI. USATF clearly wanted to get Eddie. The UCI wants nothing to do with Armstrong. This limits the possible sanction to anything after Aug 2004.


----------



## walrus

Bike Jesus has risen from the Feds


----------



## Chris-X

JohnHemlock said:


> The funny thing is that after today, every one of your posts reads like BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH. Now that your run of pretending you were Jeff Novitsky's racquetball partner is over why don't you just give it a rest and go away for awhile?


It amazes me how many people praise this disgraceful and cowardly dereliction of duty to be a bottom man to a sociopath.

Congrats!


----------



## Chris-X

terry b said:


> I'm shocked that Novitsky couldn't turn all the witness intimidation and illegal leaks into a presentable case. Perhaps a time machine and some illegal wiretaps would have done the job.


Gutless.


----------



## Alaska Mike

First of all, I gotta say I agree that Coolhand has been hit by both sides. First, he's a fanboy for banning Lance-haters, then he's a Lance-hater for banning fanboys. Being a moderator is a thankless job the vast majority of the time (I moderate another, large forum), and usually he's quite even-handed given the amount of brave keyboard warriors we have around here. I certainly wouldn't want his job of overseeing this cesspool.

From my lofty post as an ignorant outsider, I think the setbacks here are pretty significant for the USADA, and I'm not sure what the great victory would be if they pursued the case any further. Lance's reputation has taken some major hits in the court of public opinion, with every major publication that used to support him running articles about how he doped. The hardcore faithful are still behind him, but even a lot of them admit that he doped. He's not really racing anymore (except for the odd triathlon), and there are obviously a lot of active dopers out there that aren't getting caught. Imagine the testing they could do with the budget of this case at Masters Nationals.


----------



## slegros

mohair_chair said:


> I'd love to dig up all the posts made by certain people here who were "in the know" and were absolutely certain he would do jail time. But I've actually got a life, so I have better things to do with my time. They know who they are.
> 
> What a huge waste of time and money. Novitzky sure is good at spending lots of it and getting nothing in return. A little oversight would be nice.


Unfortunately for some, no matter the official outcome it will never be enough....


----------



## pedalruns

slegros said:


> Unfortunately for some, no matter the official outcome it will never be enough....


It is enough for me...Lots of guilty people walk free.. it is just the way of our world.. money, power and connections means more than truth.. but I'm ok with that.. I can still have my opinion on LA(doped, lied, bullied, ruined lifes and... now got away with it) but it is time to move on.. for me I don't care to much anymore, the history is what it is.. and I even have good memory's of Lance when he first started winning.. going to France and cheering him on. 

One thing... OJ walked away from what most think was obvious guilt and eventually ended up in prision years later.... (but I don't think LA is on the same level as murder!) but you never can predict the future. 

Time for a bike ride!


----------



## MR_GRUMPY

I feel sorry for the Cyclingnews forum. They'll probably have to shut down now.
.
.
.
.


----------



## burgrat

MR_GRUMPY said:


> I feel sorry for the Cyclingnews forum. They'll probably have to shut down now.
> .


Yeah I think The Clinic exploded. God forbid those guys try riding their bikes instead of analyzing and arguing about every minute detail of Armstrong.


----------



## worst_shot_ever

I am convinced that money, connections, and the powers of nepotism had nothing to do with the decision to close the case (other than the derivative benefits that come from having the best lawyers and lots of public goodwill to count on were the case to ever go before a jury, which the gov't must unanimously persuade). The case was closed because of the exceedingly difficult task of shoehorning this conduct into a violation of a specific, codified federal criminal law available for enforcement within the jurisdiction and still ripe under the applicable limitations period. Put simply, prosecuting white collar cases based on ancient evidence is hard. Although it was obviously going to be difficutl from the outset, I think it was appropriate that the federal government looked into it. The deterent effect had their been a viable prosecution would have been significant, and you can't know if there is a viable prosecution until you collect and review the available evidence.

Oh, and to the extent the case relied on witness testimony, the well known problems of witness credibilty probably didn't help. 

My 2c.


----------



## worst_shot_ever

... deleted


----------



## nedbraden

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Hincapie did not talk to the GJ, he voluntarily talked with investigators. They can share this with USADA. I assume that Levi, Tyler, Floyd, and many others did the same. That is plenty of direct testimony for a non-analytical positive and would not need a confession.
> 
> *A case against Armstrong would be very expensive but it certainly appears USADA is willing to go ahead w*ith it.
> 
> It appears the big hurdle for the Feds was not proving Armstrong doped, but that he committed fraud in the jurisdiction the Feds have control over.


Of course they will. That is the M.O. of the USADA. Spend huge money to go after a big fish that will help them bag more federal funding in the future at the expense of letting many smaller fishes go free. In this case the big fish is not even riding. When they pursued Landis they let a number of other athletes get away with doping because they could not afford to pursue the cases after the money they were spending on Landis.


----------



## nedbraden

MR_GRUMPY said:


> I feel sorry for the Cyclingnews forum. They'll probably have to shut down now.
> .
> .
> .
> .


That cesspool is the best example of the mental illness that has become obsessing over hating Armstrong. People are actually posting that there is still "hope" since the USADA is supposed to still be pursuing him. "Hope"...seriously?!?!?!


----------



## Chris-X

*Yeah, OK*



burgrat said:


> Yeah I think The Clinic exploded. God forbid those guys try riding their bikes instead of analyzing and arguing about every minute detail of Armstrong.


It never struck you that the guys who ride the most, compete the most, and are closest to rampant doping at the highest levels, and actually know Armstrong, have been his biggest critics?:idea: 

That Armstrong "fans" are generally not cycling fans?

Don't stop believing baby!

Good ole George was lyin too I suppose?


----------



## ArkRider

zedXmick said:


> Fixed it for you, [email protected]


Don't forget Halliburton, _et al_


----------



## nedbraden

Chris-X said:


> It never struck you that the guys who ride the most, compete the most, and are closest to rampant doping at the highest levels, and actually know Armstrong, have been his biggest critics?:idea:
> 
> That Armstrong "fans" are generally not cycling fans?
> 
> Don't stop believing baby!



What does any of that have to do with the bullies (to use one of their favorite ways to describe Armstrong since he attacks anyone who does not believe what he says and has others help him) over at CyclingNews? 

Absolutely nothing.

Wait a minute you don't really buy into the claims that some of them make about having inside info, do you? The ones that were telling them this investigation was a done deal convicting Armstrong? If so I have some ocean front property in Arizona I want to sell you. I'll give you a great deal.


----------



## Mike Overly

Doctor Falsetti said:


> I can see that if you only focused on the Lance stuff why you would say that. Yup, I was wrong. Many people who risked it to talk openly with the Feds are feeling shocked and betrayed right now. As I said from the start Jeff has nothing to do with the case, that was proven today
> 
> There is still Ferrari, USADA, and the French. Do you think they will fold like the Feds did?


Did you just ask if the _French_ would fold?


----------



## Chris-X

nedbraden said:


> What does any of that have to do with the bullies (to use one of their favorite ways to describe Armstrong since he attacks anyone who does not believe what he says and has others help him) over at CyclingNews?
> 
> Absolutely nothing.
> 
> Wait a minute you don't really buy into the claims that some of them make about having inside info, do you? The ones that were telling them this investigation was a done deal convicting Armstrong? If so I have some ocean front property in Arizona I want to sell you. I'll give you a great deal.




There are many cycling industry professionals on the CN forums. JV was over there and got hammered and shamed because he knew everything they were saying is true.

There are a lot of Armstrong "fans" here. I don't understand grown men being "fans" but, there you have it..

Do you think Georgie Porgie is lying btw?


----------



## MR_GRUMPY

I read an interesting article by an attorney, explaining this outcome.

Although U.S. Attorney André Birotte Jr. gave no reason for the close of the investigation and the decision to drop all issues related to Lance, you have got to think that the recent high profile failures involving Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens have figured somewhat in the decision. In Bonds’ case, the outcome was a frustrated prosecution with the majority of charges being dismissed and Bonds receiving probation on the remainder.

For Clemens, his first trial ended in a mistrial after serious mistakes and a mea culpa moment by the U.S. Attorney’s office in D.C.. Clemens’ next trial is set for April 17th. Neither of these prosecutions has provided the attack on performance enhancing drugs that the investigations suggested, and both have had the impact of a whimper.

If the government has failed to convince twelve jurors or the public of the failings of these nihilistic MLB ballplayers, what do you think their chances really are to take on Lance, Livestrong, and the worldwide support of Armstrong’s cancer efforts?

Unlike Clemens, Lance was smart enough not to voluntarily perjure himself before Congress. Nor was he hauled before a grand jury to offer meandering testimony like Bonds. In truth, all the government had was suspicion generated by a handful of rivals. Lance was armed with more than a decade of clean drug tests and the goodwill of millions. There are, of course, many Lance detractors. Weekend cyclists have had their romantic dream of a live-clean-Lance popped by the revelations of Lance’s former teammates, and editors of Outside magazine have recently excoriated Lance’s cancer foundation. But the hard truth remains that there is no credible evidence of a federal crime, and that is why U.S. Attorney Birotte has dropped this investigation.


My favorite part...........
There are, of course, many Lance detractors. Weekend cyclists have had their romantic dream of a live-clean-Lance popped by the revelations of Lance’s former teammates, and editors of Outside magazine have recently excoriated Lance’s cancer foundation.
.
.
It's a wrap folks.


----------



## Chainstay

*The end of an era*

20,000 posts for Mr_Grumpy and I agree wholeheartedly with one of them, possibly more.

The important point here is that none of us were on the grand jury, we didn't hear the evidence and we don't know what the possibility of a conviction would be were they to pursue a criminal prosecution.

This is good for our sport and I'm happy for the Live Strong foundation and Lance personally. Even if he was a doper, that's history. We have lots of great athletes who compete cleanly. Let's move on


----------



## Chris-X

nedbraden said:


> What does any of that have to do with the bullies (to use one of their favorite ways to describe Armstrong since he attacks anyone who does not believe what he says and has others help him) over at CyclingNews?
> 
> Absolutely nothing.
> 
> Wait a minute you don't really buy into the claims that some of them make about having inside info, do you? The ones that were telling them this investigation was a done deal convicting Armstrong? If so I have some ocean front property in Arizona I want to sell you. I'll give you a great deal.


Way to evade the fact that George Hincapie wasn't lying when he implicated armstrong.


----------



## davidka

Chris-X said:


> Good ole George was lyin too I suppose?


Can you provide a link to any place where what George said can be read? I have never seen anything that states what George said to the GJ.


----------



## nedbraden

Chris-X said:


> There are many cycling industry professionals on the CN forums. JV was over there and got hammered and shamed because he knew everything they were saying is true.
> 
> There are a lot of Armstrong "fans" here. I don't understand grown men being "fans" but, there you have it..
> 
> Do you think Georgie Porgie is lying btw?


Yes there are industry people on CN...but none of them post in The Clinic and none of them are stupid enough to post like some of the main anti-Armstrong people post.

I am starting to think that you post over there.



Chris-X said:


> Way to evade the fact that George Hincapie wasn't lying when he implicated armstrong.


Once again you move into the realm of posting something that has nothing to do with the post you are responding too.

I am sure you are one of the obsessive loons who post over at CN in The Clinic.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

nedbraden said:


> Yes there are industry people on CN...but none of them post in The Clinic and none of them are stupid enough to post like some of the main anti-Armstrong people post.
> 
> I am starting to think that you post over there.
> 
> 
> 
> Once again you move into the realm of posting something that has nothing to do with the post you are responding too.
> 
> I am sure you are one of the obsessive loons who post over at CN in The Clinic.


So much anger Ned, you should go ride your bike


----------



## DMFT

Doctor Falsetti said:


> So much anger Ned, you should go ride your bike


- People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones....


----------



## gobes

nedbraden... continuing to give a bad name to one of the best movies ever.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

DMFT said:


> - People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones....


I agree. Ned has been pretty active tossing stones at anyone he disagrees with. It would be better around here if the insults were toned down.


----------



## nedbraden

Doctor Falsetti said:


> So much anger Ned, you should go ride your bike



Post, not poster. Mr. Hypocrite.

Wait a minute, I thought you had me on ignore.


----------



## robdamanii

nedbraden said:


> The bad Doc does it all the time. The best part is that he cries about others making comments about him and that he claims he has me on ignore.


The bottom line remains that our "insider" and all his awesome "inside information" about how Lance was "going to jail for a long time" was all proven to be nothing more than internet garbage.

And still, he persists in pretending that he's an insider to the peloton, yet is too scared to reveal his identity...I wonder why?

I wouldn't be surprised to find out that he was actually Tyler or Floyd; such is the depth of his hate and obsession with everything Lance.


----------



## atpjunkie

*they can get into baseball*



DIRT BOY said:


> What ever you think of Lance, the government did not have enough to go after him, period.
> 
> The US government has ZERO business getting to sports issues. Unless your want to prosecute for the actual drugs.
> 
> Stop wasting tax dollars because an athlete juiced. Without drugs, sports would not be where it it today, like it or not.


because of the special rules set for baseball by the Gov


----------



## Chris-X

davidka said:


> Can you provide a link to any place where what George said can be read? I have never seen anything that states what George said to the GJ.


George didn't speak to the Grand Jury, please keep up...


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

robdamanii said:


> The bottom line remains that our "insider" and all his awesome "inside information" about how Lance was "going to jail for a long time" was all proven to be nothing more than internet garbage.
> 
> And still, he persists in pretending that he's an insider to the peloton, yet is too scared to reveal his identity...I wonder why?
> 
> I wouldn't be surprised to find out that he was actually Tyler or Floyd; such is the depth of his hate and obsession with everything Lance.


While I can understand your glee in me being wrong I am hardly the only person this comes as a shock to. 

Investigators found out 30 minutes before the press release went out. They had more witness scheduled for next week and the Grand Jury was dismissed without being allowed to give their input.

Lance Armstrong can claim victory in battle waged by federal prosecutors, but cyclist still in fight for his legacy  - NY Daily News

End of Lance Armstrong federal investigation raises questions - ESPN

The vast majority of my posts here have links, facts, and information. Please show me this hate and obsession? I certainly see it directed at me for posting what people do not want to hear. 

I am not Floyd or Tyler or anyone you have heard of. Just been around the sport for a long time and know many people who were caught up in this mess.


----------



## Chris-X

Alaska Mike said:


> First of all, I gotta say I agree that Coolhand has been hit by both sides. First, he's a fanboy for banning Lance-haters, then he's a Lance-hater for banning fanboys. Being a moderator is a thankless job the vast majority of the time (I moderate another, large forum), and usually he's quite even-handed given the amount of brave keyboard warriors we have around here. I certainly wouldn't want his job of overseeing this cesspool.
> 
> From my lofty post as an ignorant outsider, I think the setbacks here are pretty significant for the USADA, and I'm not sure what the great victory would be if they pursued the case any further. Lance's reputation has taken some major hits in the court of public opinion, with every major publication that used to support him running articles about how he doped. The hardcore faithful are still behind him, but even a lot of them admit that he doped. He's not really racing anymore (except for the odd triathlon), and there are obviously a lot of active dopers out there that aren't getting caught. Imagine the testing they could do with the budget of this case at Masters Nationals.


There was so much going on, on RBR when Pharmstrong was still racing in 2004-05 that you're apparently unaware of....

The moderation of RBR has changed significantly since the investigation had started. Reality could not be held back when all kinds of media outlets started disseminating the truth and it was safe for RBR to allow dissent from the people who knew what Pharmstrong had been up to for almost two decades.

Just sayin.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

davidka said:


> Can you provide a link to any place where what George said can be read? I have never seen anything that states what George said to the GJ.


Report: George Hincapie tells feds he saw Lance Armstrong use performance-enhancing substances - ESPN

this is a good review of Hincapie's testimony. There is more on the 60 minutes site. George did not talk to the Grand Jury but volunteered to speak to investigators. This is a key point as this means that more then likely his testimony will be shared with USADA, if it has not already.


----------



## Chris-X

*Now we understand completely!*



cheddarlove said:


> I agree. The smug and condescending haters will surely find a way to justify this though!
> I am totally stoked personally! What a riot!
> *Do I think he was guilty? Yes*
> *Am I still a fan? Yes*
> Was this a total waste of dollars? Yes
> *Do I think Lance is the Don of the cycling mafia? Yes *
> *Finally, one for the fanboys!*




Thanks for exposing the logic underlying Pharmstrong support...


----------



## Coolhand

Chris-X said:


> There was so much going on, on RBR when Pharmstrong was still racing in 2004-05 that you're apparently unaware of....
> 
> The moderation of RBR has changed significantly since the investigation had started. Reality could not be held back when all kinds of media outlets started disseminating the truth and it was safe for RBR to allow dissent from the people who knew what Pharmstrong had been up to for almost two decades.
> 
> Just sayin.


Except none of that is remotely true. Then and now you are free to have whatever opinion you desire. Every time a pro-Armstrong poster gets banned the Moderation is unfair and biased in favor of posters like the Doctor (whom I am in league with, apparently), and every time a anti-Armstrong poster gets banned its because the Moderation is unfair and biased (because I am in league with Lance or his team, or maybe I AM Lance). Alas, the story is sadly more boring. Trolls and zealots never think the rules apply to them, their opinion is gospel, and they get banned from forum to forum until they find a hive mind that will tolerate them. 

Posting here is easy: Don't troll Procycling, don't engage in blatant personal attacks, and don't melt down if you get caught doing the first two. Oh yeah, sock puppets get you banned every time.


----------



## a_avery007

*but,*



Coolhand said:


> Except none of that is remotely true. Then and now you are free to have whatever opinion you desire. Every time a pro-Armstrong poster gets banned the Moderation is unfair and biased in favor of posters like the Doctor (whom I am in league with, apparently), and every time a anti-Armstrong poster gets banned its because the Moderation is unfair and biased (because I am in league with Lance or his team, or maybe I AM Lance). Alas, the story is sadly more boring. Trolls and zealots never think the rules apply to them, their opinion is gospel, and they get banned from forum to forum until they find a hive mind that will tolerate them.
> 
> Posting here is easy: Don't troll Procycling, don't engage in blatant personal attacks, and don't melt down if you get caught doing the first two. Oh yeah, sock puppets get you banned every time.


the funny thing is I don't qualify for any camp. (not a troll, zealot or....) read closely what I have said in the past, look at Bonds thread and others, and it is clear that I stated LA would walk with no time served, never have I said he did not use pda's nor that he was clean..

only that $$$ in this country will get you all the best orator's, soothsayer's and shylocks to argue whatever you wish them to argue; of course you will be billed to the second, and that most likely you will get golf course house arrest!


----------



## Chris-X

Coolhand said:


> Except none of that is remotely true. Then and now you are free to have whatever opinion you desire. Every time a pro-Armstrong poster gets banned the Moderation is unfair and biased in favor of posters like the Doctor (whom I am in league with, apparently), and every time a anti-Armstrong poster gets banned its because the Moderation is unfair and biased (because I am in league with Lance or his team, or maybe I AM Lance). Alas, the story is sadly more boring. Trolls and zealots never think the rules apply to them, their opinion is gospel, and they get banned from forum to forum until they find a hive mind that will tolerate them.
> 
> Posting here is easy: Don't troll Procycling, don't engage in blatant personal attacks, and don't melt down if you get caught doing the first two. Oh yeah, sock puppets get you banned every time.


Nah, Doc would have been gone if he was here back in 2004 IMHO, YMMV. :wink:


----------



## davidka

Chris-X said:


> George didn't speak to the Grand Jury, please keep up...


Why does ESPN say this?: 

"Hincapie is among a number of former Armstrong teammates and employees who have appeared before a federal grand jury in Los Angeles investigating doping in cycling. Hamilton said he testified for six hours before the panel."

Thanks for the link Dr. F.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

davidka said:


> Why does ESPN say this?:
> 
> "Hincapie is among a number of former Armstrong teammates and employees who have appeared before a federal grand jury in Los Angeles investigating doping in cycling. Hamilton said he testified for six hours before the panel."
> 
> Thanks for the link Dr. F.


They were wrong, He did not. Nor did many of the other riders. Hamilton has done both the GJ and talked directly to the investigators, although his initial testimony was so emotional that it may be of little value. Stephanie and Kevin both talked to the GJ as did Jeff Spencer. I doubt that any of the Grand Jury info will see the light of day, but the rest should be shared. 

This will be a key issue with the USADA case. There is already precedent regarding sharing of evidence as the Feds and WADA shared a lot during the BALCO case.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

I would encourage all of you to get in as many shots at me as possible quickly. The story is about to change


----------



## worst_shot_ever

Frankly, Dr. F, I appreciate your insight, and have found your command of the known facts quite impressive and credible. The fact that the USAO may have decided not to pursue the allegations further is hardly something anyone can know until the USAO decided that question for themselves.

You're right about information sharing: there is no provision of the federal rules permitting disclosure of grand jury information by the prosecution that would apply here; if Congress takes up Lance's case (fat chance), then there is a provision that allows the grand jury information to go there (after obtaining a court order authorizing the disclosure). That said, you're also right that the interview reports and other materials obtained outside the grand jury process may be provided so long as any grand jury information contained in the reports is scrubbed.


----------



## nedbraden

Doctor Falsetti said:


> I would encourage all of you to get in as many shots at me as possible quickly. The story is about to change


I seem to recall you making a similar proclamation a year or so ago...and you were wrong.

It's too bad you have me on ignore so you can't read this post.


----------



## Veloflash

Just a couple of clarifications

USADA commenced its investigation into Armstrong in parallel with the Feds in 2010. UCI rules determine the statute of limitations (8 years) to commence on the date an investigation starts. The investigation has had traction with Travis Tygart accompanying the Federal investigators overseas and exchanging information

2002 then is your 8 year count back date subject to extending back to, say, 1999 if Armstrong has been untruthful in any other investigation under a recent USADA precedent.

A doping violation can be obtained from a non analytical positive if direct (witness) and circumstantial evidence exist that Armstrong doped. That appears to be in abundance.

USADA has been deliberately set up in 2001 so there is no opportunity for external interference or influence and any decision is internationally referable for an appeal. Armstrong cannot work any political influence to have USADA back off as happened with the Feds.

It has been noted there has been a lack of the characteristic gloating tweets and media reports from Armstrong. That is because there are about 4 further areas of unfinished business outside of his sphere of influence that could be damaging to Armstrong..


----------



## cda 455

Veloflash said:


> Just a couple of clarifications
> 
> USADA commenced its investigation into Armstrong in parallel with the Feds in 2010. UCI rules determine the statute of limitations (8 years) to commence on the date an investigation starts. The investigation has had traction with Travis Tygart accompanying the Federal investigators overseas and exchanging information
> 
> 2002 then is your 8 year count back date subject to extending back to, say, 1999 if Armstrong has been untruthful in any other investigation under a recent USADA precedent.
> 
> A doping violation can be obtained from a non analytical positive if direct (witness) and circumstantial evidence exist that Armstrong doped. That appears to be in abundance.
> 
> USADA has been deliberately set up in 2001 so there is no opportunity for external interference or influence and any decision is internationally referable for an appeal. Armstrong cannot work any political influence to have USADA back off as happened with the Feds.
> 
> _*It has been noted there has been a lack of the characteristic gloating tweets and media reports from Armstrong. That is because there are about 4 further areas of unfinished business outside of his sphere of influence that could be damaging to Armstrong..*_



Care to expand on this point?


----------



## Veloflash

cda 455 said:


> Care to expand on this point?


1. USADA/WADA investigation into Armstrong doping as announced. Has been running parallel with the LA US Attorney's office investigation since May 2010.

2. Italian investigation into Dr. Michele Ferrari in Italy, Switzerland and US that has been on hold during the US Feds investigation. Armstrong's involvement has been identified by Italian investigators.who were co-operating with US investigators.

3. Separate to the dropped Federal investigation by the US Attorney's office in Los Angeles is the qui tam whistle blower's suit filed by Floyd Landis. This is ongoing.

4. The IRS investigation into the Lance Armstrong Foundation (Livestrong). that commenced in late 2009 and was allegedly running through 2011. Not a routine audit as claimed by LAF (no such thing) but IRS acting upon a third party report.

Also believe there is an investigation in France.


----------



## 4slomo

Are all Pros guilty until proven innocent?


----------



## Veloflash

4slomo said:


> Are all Pros guilty until proven innocent?


All pros are suspects. The highly suspicious are those that ride bikes shod with SRLPE Wheels


----------



## orangeclymer

Doctor Falsetti said:


> I would encourage all of you to get in as many shots at me as possible quickly. The story is about to change


no shot as the decision to not charge LA is a loud enough shot to render all your pontificating BS ramblings null and void game over Doc...........


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

orangeclymer said:


> no shot as the decision to not charge LA is a loud enough shot to render all your pontificating BS ramblings null and void game over Doc...........


Come on, you can do better then that. 

Quick, show of hands. Who here thinks this is over? Do anyone really think the case was dropped because of lack of evidence? Really?


----------



## Axe

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Come on, you can do better then that.
> 
> Quick, show of hands. Who here thinks this is over? Do anyone really think the case was dropped because of lack of evidence? Really?


You are a tool.

Its over. Contador is stripped and Armstrong will walk free.


----------



## cda 455

Veloflash said:


> 1. USADA/WADA investigation into Armstrong doping as announced. Has been running parallel with the LA US Attorney's office investigation since May 2010.
> 
> 2. Italian investigation into Dr. Michele Ferrari in Italy, Switzerland and US that has been on hold during the US Feds investigation. Armstrong's involvement has been identified by Italian investigators.who were co-operating with US investigators.
> 
> 3. Separate to the dropped Federal investigation by the US Attorney's office in Los Angeles is the qui tam whistle blower's suit filed by Floyd Landis. This is ongoing.
> 
> 4. The IRS investigation into the Lance Armstrong Foundation (Livestrong). that commenced in late 2009 and was allegedly running through 2011. Not a routine audit as claimed by LAF (no such thing) but IRS acting upon a third party report.
> 
> Also believe there is an investigation in France.



Thanks for the follow up!


Hmm. Very interesting.


----------



## Chris-X

4slomo said:


> Are all Pros guilty until proven innocent?


You didn't read the thread title? The Feds aren't charging Lance Armstrong. That in itself answers all questions like yours.


----------



## Coolhand

*Moderators Note*



Axe said:


> You are a tool.
> 
> Its over. Contador is stripped and Armstrong will walk free.


And that's an infraction for you.


----------



## Veloflash

*CyclingNews*

Livestrong announced this week a $100,000 donation to a charity that is allegedly supported by the US Senator mentor of the US Attorney who made the one man decision and released it on on Friday

Could it be a palace revolution is coming? Internal reversal?

From CyclngNews



> NPR has alleged that sources in the FBI, FDA and US Postal Service were ‘shocked, surprised and angered’ and that federal authorities only had 30 minutes notice before the United States Attorney's Office released a press release to the media on Friday afternoon.
> 
> According the NPR, sources indicated that charges were close to being brought against a number of individuals, which included fraud, witness tampering, mail fraud, and drug distribution. One source, NPR says, said there were ‘no weaknesses in the case’.
> 
> However NPR also adds that a person with knowledge of the decision said that US Attorney didn’t agree that there was sufficient evidence of crimes.
> 
> Cyclingnews spoke to a source who had co-operated with the federal investigation. They indicated that the NPR reports held weight.
> 
> “I talked to someone within the investigation but the reason why the case was shut down was due to a one man decision. The evidence against those involved was absolutely overwhelming. They were going to be charged with a slew of crimes but for reasons unexplained he closed the case saying it wasn't open for discussion,” the source said.


----------



## Chris-X

Coolhand said:


> And that's an infraction for you.


No posting vacation for calling someone a "tool?"


----------



## 4slomo

I always tell my wheels no doping, or I'll tear them apart!



Veloflash said:


> All pros are suspects. The highly suspicious are those that ride bikes shod with SRLPE Wheels


----------



## foofighter

Veloflash said:


> Livestrong announced this week a $100,000 donation to a charity that is allegedly supported by the US Senator mentor of the US Attorney who made the one man decision and released it on on Friday
> 
> Could it be a palace revolution is coming? Internal reversal?
> 
> From CyclngNews


coincidental or not it brings more questions into light about the shadiness of our political system and justice system


----------



## cda 455

Veloflash said:


> Livestrong announced this week a $100,000 donation to a charity that is allegedly supported by the US Senator mentor of the US Attorney who made the one man decision and released it on on Friday
> 
> Could it be a palace revolution is coming? Internal reversal?
> 
> From CyclngNews



I have to admit; knowing someone who knows someone, sources with knowledge, sources say, etc really doesn't put much weight into an article like the Cyclingnews published. 

With all due respect it sounds like a post from The Doping Forum  !


----------



## Veloflash

cda 455 said:


> I have to admit; knowing someone who knows someone, sources with knowledge, sources say, etc really doesn't put much weight into an article like the Cyclingnews published.
> 
> With all due respect it sounds like a post from The Doping Forum  !


Is Velonation acceptable to you?

US Attorney


----------



## cda 455

Veloflash said:


> Is Velonation acceptable to you?
> 
> US Attorney



Wow; Like night and day!

Thanks :thumbsup: !


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

While there seems to have been many within the investigation who felt the case should have gone forward I doubt this will ever be reopened. 

The bigger question is how has this effected the other investigations in Europe? This can't be good news for those looking into Ferrari? Much has been made of the millions of dollars in money transfers, police raids, and impending charges....but supposedly the Italians were waiting for the US to file their charges prior to proceeding against Ferrari. 

This can't help the case against Ferrari or the French investigation into the transfusion equipment.


----------



## Coolhand

I think your right- especially with the Euro zone financial crisis, I wonder if this is something they now push off onto WADA and the national "ADAs". I imagine the budget issue will play a much bigger role in such decisions going forward.


----------



## Samadhi

Chris-X said:


> No posting vacation for calling someone a "tool?"


Hell, someone called me "Flatbar" on the politics board and AFAIK nothing happened. I think it was meant as a perjorative, but that's ok. I learned a long time ago to not take what's posted on a forum like this personally, even if it was meant to be personal. Sticks and Stones .......

The ignore list is a wonderful thing.


----------



## Coolhand

Samadhi said:


> Hell, someone called me "Flatbar" on the politics board and AFAIK nothing happened. I think it was meant as a perjorative, but that's ok. I learned a long time ago to not take what's posted on a forum like this personally, even if it was meant to be personal. Sticks and Stones .......
> 
> The ignore list is a wonderful thing.


I believe that's a long time Lounge joke- that's all. I do agree the ignore list is a wonderful thing. :thumbsup:


----------



## Coolhand

*WADA request for info*

Must Read: WADA urges feds to hand over Lance Armstrong info

Thought a few of you may be interested.


----------



## Big-foot

Coolhand said:


> I think *your* right- especially with the Euro zone financial crisis, I wonder if this is something they now push off onto WADA and the national "ADAs". I imagine the budget issue will play a much bigger role in such decisions going forward.


----------



## Coolhand

Oh crap, its the grammar police!


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

Not over

Lance Armstrong case rolls on, as it should



> "From the information I have, the data and evidence that has been gathered will reveal a lot of information that indicates doping offenses,"


----------



## spade2you

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Not over
> 
> Lance Armstrong case rolls on, as it should


With people like you in the world, it won't be over even after his kids are old and deceased.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

spade2you said:


> With people like you in the world, it won't be over even after his kids are old and deceased.


Thank you for the compliment but I do not work for the Justice Department or USADA. Not my fault Armstrong doped


----------



## Samadhi

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Not over
> 
> Lance Armstrong case rolls on, as it should


You're quite right, doc. It ain't over.

But it'll never be over. Even if they get Armstrong it will change nothing. Even if it serves to curtail doping it won't change anything. What won't change is that people will continue to break whatever rules they think they can get away with in order to get an edge and satisfy their high-rolling sponsors.

Too much money, too much pressure to win at any cost, too much to loose.

If you want to end cheating, stop this pitiful excercise in futility we're witnessing and strike at the root of the problem not at the fruit. Take the money out of it. No more big sponsors. No more big money. Race for the love of it and not for how many millions you can rake in afterwards. That may sound naive, but it's really not. Money is the problem. LA is merely a manifestation of where that invariably leads.


----------



## den bakker

Samadhi said:


> You're quite right, doc. It ain't over.
> 
> But it'll never be over. Even if they get Armstrong it will change nothing. Even if it serves to curtail doping it won't change anything. What won't change is that people will continue to break whatever rules they think they can get away with in order to get an edge and satisfy their high-rolling sponsors.
> 
> Too much money, too much pressure to win at any cost, too much to loose.
> 
> If you want to end cheating, stop this pitiful excercise in futility we're witnessing and strike at the root of the problem not at the fruit. Take the money out of it. No more big sponsors. No more big money. Race for the love of it and not for how many millions you can rake in afterwards. That may sound naive, but it's really not. Money is the problem. LA is merely a manifestation of where that invariably leads.


I see
is that why then there's doping in the amateur ranks, in the masters ranks etc?


----------



## spade2you

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Thank you for the compliment but I do not work for the Justice Department or USADA.


Maybe you should.


----------



## Samadhi

den bakker said:


> I see
> is that why then there's doping in the amateur ranks, in the masters ranks etc?


I would say yes, but indirectly. The money at the top creates a win-at-any-cost mentality that passes into the amateur ranks. 

People aren't content to simply compete. They HAVE to win. No matter what. Nothing else matters. If you don't win, you're a looser and noone likes a looser. The end justifies the means.

Think of all the pro sports figures who have been implicated or busted in juicing or doping scandals in the last 10 years. Even with all that, doping continues. It should be obvious to anyone that busting pro sports figures for doping isn't changing anything. It goes on and will continue until something is done about what's actually driving it in the first place. I would say that's money.

Stomping on cockroaches whon't solve your cockroach problems. To do that you have to remove an environment that allows them to thrive and multiply.


----------



## den bakker

Samadhi said:


> People aren't content to simply compete. They HAVE to win. No matter what. Nothing else matters. If you don't win, you're a looser and noone likes a looser. The end justifies the means.


yes. independently of money, otherwise there would not be much drugs in cycling at all, and they should all have been racing clean in the past where the money was even less that today, especially compared to other sports.


----------



## spade2you

I have an idea. :idea: Let's ban Armstrong for 2 years!


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

While it does look like the Qui Tam case and USADA sanction will move forward I expect that the group who financed and organized doping will escape meaningful punishment. 

Without the Federal case Ferrari will now likely walk. Maybe a big fine but he will not be held accountable for doping dozens of riders for decades.


----------



## Samadhi

den bakker said:


> yes. independently of money, otherwise there would not be much drugs in cycling at all, and they should all have been racing clean in the past where the money was even less that today, especially compared to other sports.


But the pressure to win and win *at any cost* was still there. 

It's the environment these pros are in not the pros themselves. That environment breeds the abuses we see. Not the people. That's why busting LA is so pointless.


----------



## den bakker

Samadhi said:


> But the pressure to win and win *at any cost* was still there.
> 
> It's the environment these pros are in not the pros themselves. That environment breeds the abuses we see. Not the people. That's why busting LA is so pointless.


that comes from society as a whole, not cycling. that does not mean cheating, fraud and lies are ok.


----------



## Samadhi

den bakker said:


> that comes from society as a whole, not cycling. that does not mean cheating, fraud and lies are ok.


yes. Absolutely.

Our culture has this perverse need for winning. Win Win Win Win Win. The only thing that matters.

That doesn't excuse people who cheat or act in a fraudlent manner. It does help to explain it though.


----------



## robdamanii

spade2you said:


> I have an idea. :idea: Let's ban Armstrong for 2 years!


Yes! That will surely help show people that doping is wrong.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

spade2you said:


> I have an idea. :idea: Let's ban Armstrong for 2 years!


How about we dismantle the infrastructure that supported him for 15 years? 

There are plenty of indications that Lance was far from the only target of the Feds and other international agencies. Going after some of the pushers who have enable dozens of riders for years is a good thing. 

Now what happens? Ferrari walks. That sends a great message to the enablers and the potential customers :thumbsup:


----------



## Dan Gerous

Here is an interesting petition to get some answers about Birotte's decision...


----------



## Rokh On

Doctor Falsetti said:


> While it does look like the Qui Tam case and USADA sanction will move forward I expect that the group who financed and organized doping will escape meaningful punishment.
> 
> Without the Federal case Ferrari will now likely walk. Maybe a big fine but he will not be held accountable for doping dozens of riders for decades.


I thought the Italian's were still investigating?


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

Rokh On said:


> I thought the Italian's were still investigating?


It does not look good. The Feds dropping the case damaged multiple cases in Europe.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

Reed Albergotti from the Wall Street Journal says the Prosecutors wanted to indict but were overruled by Andre Birotte

Officials Clashed on Armstrong - YouTube



> "This is not over, it will go on for a long, long time"


----------



## DMFT

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Come on, you can do better then that.
> 
> Quick, show of hands. Who here thinks this is over? Do anyone really think the case was dropped because of lack of evidence? Really?



- Sorry to go back a couple day's there "Dr.", but "if" there was "evidence" and not just "hear-say" does anyone think we'd be having this discussion???


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

DMFT said:


> - Sorry to go back a couple day's there "Dr.", but "if" there was "evidence" and not just "hear-say" does anyone think we'd be having this discussion???


Um, Not exactly. 

In his interview Reed says the prosecutors, who on this case was Doug Miller, wanted to file charges. Multiple investigators from multiple agencies shared his position. One guy overruled investigators and prosecutors. 

It seems clear that USADA will move forward with a sanction.



> "From the information I have, the data and evidence that has been gathered will reveal a lot of information that indicates doping offenses,"


Lance Armstrong case rolls on, as it should


----------



## rydbyk

So....Lance may still git bustid?


----------



## davidka

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Um, Not exactly.
> 
> In his interview Reed says the prosecutors, who on this case was Doug Miller, wanted to file charges. Multiple investigators from multiple agencies shared his position. One guy overruled investigators and prosecutors.
> 
> It seems clear that USADA will move forward with a sanction.
> 
> 
> Lance Armstrong case rolls on, as it should


Still not seeing how you're convinced that one guy shot down this investigation based on an NPR story that wouldn't name sources or even say that their sources requested anonymity. The only name is the guy who issued the press release on behalf of the office.

I have serious doubts that USADA will get their hands on the evidence collected. If there was substance to it and the the prosecutor's office chose not to press charges for other reasons then you can bet that they won't air their dirty laundry by giving the material to another investigation and risk the scrutiny after the fact.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

davidka said:


> Still not seeing how you're convinced that one guy shot down this investigation based on an NPR story that wouldn't name sources or even say that their sources requested anonymity. The only name is the guy who issued the press release on behalf of the office.
> 
> I have serious doubts that USADA will get their hands on the evidence collected. If there was substance to it and the the prosecutor's office chose not to press charges for other reasons then you can bet that they won't air their dirty laundry by giving the material to another investigation and risk the scrutiny after the fact.


NPR, WSJ, Cyclingnews, ESPN, multiple stories, multiple sources. The WSJ video even gives the positions of some of those who objected. 

The sharing of evidence is fairly straight forward. The US Government ratified the UNESCO International Convention against Doping in Sport that has clear rules for the sharing of evidence. WADA and the Feds have already shared evidence in the BALCO case. I expect much of it to be shared. The big hold out would be the Grand Jury testimony, I doubt they would share this. I also doubt it would matter much as most witnesses, like Hincapie, gave evidence directly to investigators outside of the grand jury process. 

If the Feds "Join" the Qui Tam case then much of the evidence gathered would be shared with the civil side of the Feds.


----------



## davidka

None of those outlets named anyone and most seem to be borrowing each other's story (not sure which is the originator). The WSJ video didn't even correctly summarize the investigation's focus ("Lance Armstrong and Pro cyclists", no mention of Tailwind Sports or USPS team). I'm not unwilling to believe it, just not if it isn't substantiated by the outlets.

I still have not seen anything that states that witnesses (other than TH and FL) gave evidenced outside of the GJ process. Most of what I have read claims the opposite.

If the collected evidence is substantial then I still can't see the Feds sharing it and risking embarrassment after not prosecuting with the same material. I'm guessing they already a way out of sharing it.


----------



## samh

Is this is saying they were about to charge him? Surprise decision to drop investigation of Lance Armstrong looks suspicious - ESPN


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

davidka said:


> None of those outlets named anyone and most seem to be borrowing each other's story (not sure which is the originator). The WSJ video didn't even correctly summarize the investigation's focus ("Lance Armstrong and Pro cyclists", no mention of Tailwind Sports or USPS team). I'm not unwilling to believe it, just not if it isn't substantiated by the outlets.
> 
> I still have not seen anything that states that witnesses (other than TH and FL) gave evidenced outside of the GJ process. Most of what I have read claims the opposite.
> 
> If the collected evidence is substantial then I still can't see the Feds sharing it and risking embarrassment after not prosecuting with the same material. I'm guessing they already a way out of sharing it.


The investigation started as an investigation into multiple riders and Rock Racing. Reed has been covering it since the start, he is also a cyclist who has been racing for a while. His description was correct. 

I know 5 people who were questioned, none talked to the Grand Jury. Last week I spoke to someone who knows far more people who talked and none were in front of the Grand Jury. I think the media sometimes just assume that the only way a person can give evidence is in front of the Grand Jury, this is not the case. 

Most of the time they save the Grand Jury for challenging witness. The only people who I know talked to the Grand Jury were Stephanie, Jeff Spencer, and Kevin Livingston.

The rules of evidence sharing are very clear. WADA has indicated they expect a lot, and inferred they will fight for it. Don't forget there is another case, the Qui Tam case. If the Feds "Join" this case then it will be prosecuted by the civil division of the justice department. There is little they can do to stop the transfer of evidence to them.


----------



## 95zpro

In my opinion I think Lance might have won the battle but the jury is still out if he will win the war. I do not think WADA is going to be as light as the Feds were in terms of just dropping the charges, and there has already been mention that they have ways of getting around the statue of limitations. While the original investigation was based on fraud and not doping, WADA will be more interested in the doping offenses that might or might not have been committed. This process still has a long way to go and as someone suggested earlier it will be even more suspicious if the Feds do not share or turn over what they have uncovered on the doping front.


----------



## nedbraden

95zpro said:


> In my opinion I think Lance might have won the battle but the jury is still out if he will win the war. I do not think WADA is going to be as light as the Feds were in terms of just dropping the charges, and there has already been mention that they have ways of getting around the statue of limitations. While the original investigation was based on fraud and not doping, WADA will be more interested in the doping offenses that might or might not have been committed. This process still has a long way to go and as someone suggested earlier it will be even more suspicious if the Feds do not share or turn over what they have uncovered on the doping front.



I think there is something that people are either not understanding or choosing to ignore when it comes to the statue of limitations. The reason why the statue of limitations was not used in the Hellebuyck is because he admitted to doping in 2001. An admission made by the athlete essentially releases the statue of limitations, but their has yet to be an arbitration panel ruling that completely eliminates the statue of limitations without an admission of guilt.


----------



## a_avery007

no it is saying that ESPN is garbage and needed to print something sensationalist to keep people reading...


----------



## Veloflash

nedbraden said:


> I think there is something that people are either not understanding or choosing to ignore when it comes to the statue of limitations. The reason why the statue of limitations was not used in the Hellebuyck is because he admitted to doping in 2001. An admission made by the athlete essentially releases the statue of limitations, but their has yet to be an arbitration panel ruling that completely eliminates the statue of limitations without an admission of guilt.


WADA have stated that :



> Howman said. "The statute of limitations is there, but the interpretation of how it works depends on the facts of each individual case...
> 
> Fahey added: "Circumstances may exist that allow the rule to be set aside.""


Armstrong's case is different because he has been before multiple courts before and after 2002 (the commencement year of the UCI 8 year statute of limitations) wherein he has claimed or allegedly claimed under oath he has never doped.

A non analytical finding that he did not comply with the anti doping rules.from 2002 may conclude that he perjured himself in other courts and tribunals of competent jurisdiction relating to his conduct prior to 2002.

This would pave the way to review the 2001 EPO "suspicious" result and the 1999 corticosteroid positive and prescription backdating. Both test results showed Armstrong was using a banned product which is all that is required to support other evidence for a non analytical positive.


----------



## nedbraden

Your example, just like the two quotes you picked (from people with a vested interest in making it seem like they are not wasting time and money) are both just speculation based on nothing that is fact or precedent. My post, on the other hand is based on an actual case result...and one that has been cited as "proof" that Armstrong will not be safe from charges due to statute of limitations.

One thing I find interesting is why people like you guys and WADA are all about pushing aside the statute of limitations but haven't been screaming for others to be penalized after it expired in their cases.


----------



## Veloflash

nedbraden said:


> Your example, just like the two quotes you picked (from people with a vested interest in making it seem like they are not wasting time and money) are both just speculation based on nothing that is fact or precedent. My post, on the other hand is based on an actual case result...and one that has been cited as "proof" that Armstrong will not be safe from charges due to statute of limitations.
> 
> One thing I find interesting is why people like you guys and WADA are all about pushing aside the statute of limitations but haven't been screaming for others to be penalized after it expired in their cases.


Relating to his doping Armstrong has been before 4 courts and tribunals, involved in a French investigation into US Postal Service (circa 2000), and been involved in support of Ferrari with a stoush against Simeoni. All required oral or written statements under oath.

What is Hellebuyck's comparative litigation track record?

I picked those quotes because they are the only quotes on this SOL position. Please provide opposing quotes I should have provided for balance.

The only difference between being granted by the AAA Tribunal or CAS an extension to the SOL period that USADA, if successful, would strip Armstrong of 7 TdF victories instead of 4 (2002-2005).


----------



## nedbraden

Veloflash said:


> Relating to his doping Armstrong has been before 4 courts and tribunals, involved in a French investigation into US Postal Service (circa 2000), and been involved in support of Ferrari with a stoush against Simeoni. All required oral or written statements under oath.
> 
> What is Hellebuyck's comparative litigation track record?
> 
> I picked those quotes because they are the only quotes on this SOL position. Please provide opposing quotes I should have provided for balance.
> 
> The only difference between being granted by the AAA Tribunal or CAS an extension to the SOL period that USADA, if successful, would strip Armstrong of 7 TdF victories instead of 4 (2002-2005).


How does this change what I have already said? It's still you speculating vs. me using an actual case.

This is why you guys get labeled "haters," because you are blindly flailing away in the dark rather then simply saying something like "that's a good point" and moving on.


----------



## Veloflash

nedbraden said:


> How does this change what I have already said? It's still you speculating vs. me using an actual case.
> 
> This is why you guys get labeled "haters," because you are blindly flailing away in the dark rather then simply saying something like "that's a good point" and moving on.


What do you brand a person with professional experience who objectively looks at the facts, the AAA rules relating to USADA cases, commentary, precedents and forms an opinion?

Seems you have only two camps.for pigeon holing.


----------



## nedbraden

Veloflash said:


> What do you brand a person with professional experience who objectively looks at the facts, the AAA rules relating to USADA cases, commentary, precedents and forms an opinion?
> 
> Seems you have only two camps.for pigeon holing.


Who would that person be?

Of course we are *still* talking about me providing pertinent info from an actual case (one cited by the usual suspects here and other forums as "proof" that the statute of limitations doesn't matter) vs. your speculation using quotes that are all about "may" and "depends?"

You can spin all you want, call me names, whatever, but in the long run that is 100% fact.

When it comes to pigeon holing I made it quite clear that you guys make it quite clear what you are, so there is no need for myself or anyone else to have to pigeon hole. Oh, and you really are the pot calling the kettle black.

My point has been made quite succinctly and you have done nothing but try to spin, so I will move on from you about it.


----------



## Veloflash

nedbraden said:


> Who would that person be?
> 
> Of course we are *still* talking about me providing pertinent info from an actual case (one cited by the usual suspects here and other forums as "proof" that the statute of limitations doesn't matter) vs. your speculation using quotes that are all about "may" and "depends?"
> 
> You can spin all you want, call me names, whatever, but in the long run that is 100% fact.
> 
> When it comes to pigeon holing I made it quite clear that you guys make it quite clear what you are, so there is no need for myself or anyone else to have to pigeon hole. Oh, and you really are the pot calling the kettle black.
> 
> My point has been made quite succinctly and you have done nothing but try to spin, so I will move on from you about it.



"Who would that person be?"

John Fahey from WADA was a practising lawyer then politician.

David Howman from WADA _"came to Canada from Wellington, New Zealand, where he practised as a barrister specializing in Sports Law. He was Chairman of the New Zealand Sports Drug Agency between 2000 and 2003 and, previously, its counsel."_

I won't provide my CV


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

So much hate. 

Hate for Floyd, Hate for Tyler, Hate for Betsy, Hate for Filippo, Hate for Mike, Hate for Dick, Hate for Jeff, Hate for anyone who questions the myth

Pretty clear who the haters are here.


----------



## nedbraden

Doctor Falsetti said:


> So much hate.
> 
> Hate for Floyd, Hate for Tyler, Hate for Betsy, Hate for Filippo, Hate for Mike, Hate for Dick, Hate for Jeff, Hate for anyone who questions the myth
> 
> Pretty clear who the haters are here.


I was wondering how long it would take for the great fraud to show up and take shots at me...even though he claims to have me on ignore.

Why is it that, when you are not perpetrating your great fraud, you spend so much time taking shots at people, or spinning things to fit your agenda (a la Veloflash) instead of trying to have an open minded discussion about what is being posted?

Post not poster. (It's funny how you like to cry about that but never live by it)

P.S.- Don't hate Floyd. I actually know Tyler and think he is pretty great guy. Don't know anything about Filippo except for his "look at poor little me" celebration and that he is a proven doper, don't hate Mike and don't hate Betsy, though personal experience makes me think she has bigger issues then you and your boys. I hate nobody.


----------

