# Lance a doper



## terkonekto (Sep 22, 2005)

Is it really worth the tax payers dollars to investigate Lance and his alleged doping? Test results have shown that Lance is a very unique (I think it was Discovery Channel special) and because of that he one step ahead of other cyclists. If he did dope, he did one hell of a job hiding it.


----------



## godot (Feb 3, 2004)

In before the move


----------



## PlatyPius (Feb 1, 2009)

IBTM

But, yes. He has marketed himself as a Saint. Ergo, he should be investigated more intensely than a normal Joe Schmoe.


----------



## vontress (Jul 19, 2009)

They should monitor going forward and forget the past. His rise to Sainthood has led to a lot of great causes. Too much wasted money the governement doesn't even have. I say, let Lance be a retired Sain and find a cure for cancer.


----------



## nOOky (Mar 20, 2009)

No, I don't feel tax payer dollars should be spent investigating any sports drug use and it really pisses me off.
It may be illegal, but in my mind that money could be better spent on other issues, say illegal immigration for instance. People drive over the speed limit everyday, and it is overlooked. In the grand scheme of things I don't feel it is the governments business or the best use of my tax dollars.
It should be up to the sports governing body to put in place and enforce drug policy. Sports being a form of entertainment, I don't feel it is wise to let the government get it's grubby mits in there. Worse case scenario someone uses drugs, makes money from it and entertains us, and gets away with it.
As for Lance, until I see him fail a drug test I assume he's clean. Those who say otherwise have no evidence to the contrary, only their belief that since he is so good, he must dope. In this country we must be presumed innocent until proven guilty, ideally. Recent accusations made are merely hearsay, and if more rigorous drug testing can be applied to stored blood in the future than that will root it out.


----------



## mmoose (Apr 2, 2004)

IBTM!

I won't even start with the doping yes/no arguement. But I am always surprised by the number of people who are surprised that people will use drugs when there are millions of dollars to be made. 

Tax payer dollars? I'd rather see them catch and jail every NFL, MLB, NBA, PGA etc etc.


----------



## tatullis (Aug 2, 2006)

Totally argree with nOOky, without a positive blood sample from LA you have nothing.


----------



## asciibaron (Aug 11, 2006)

i think he swallowed sinkers. best x-ray him.


----------



## rydbyk (Feb 17, 2010)

Wait...MY poll was supposed to be the "official" one.  Stop stealing my votes...ha.


----------



## terkonekto (Sep 22, 2005)

*sorry*

Sorry rydbyk, did not want to step on anyones toes. This witch hunt drives me crazy. I am not even a LA fan but come on, no positives on doping control and Floyd just wants someone to go down with him. Go pick on some MLB and NFL players.


----------



## rydbyk (Feb 17, 2010)

terkonekto said:


> Sorry rydbyk, did not want to step on anyones toes. This witch hunt drives me crazy. I am not even a LA fan but come on, no positives on doping control and Floyd just wants someone to go down with him. Go pick on some MLB and NFL players.



Was just kidding...your idea of whether or not we should spend tax dollars on this whole train wreck is a new and credible slant....no harm done! LA does not deserve a free pass.....I just hope they spread the wealth here if you know what I am saying....

Lance is the "it" guy. The media had a lot of fun focusing on Tiger Woods during his fall too recently.


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

Given everything that's going on in the United States...it's not worth the money spent investigating L.A. and that money could go to many other places that would do much, much more with that money.

I can think of a large number of Non-Profit organizations that do great work that could use the money, Many school districts could use the money to save teachers jobs, There is a huge national deficit, People are out of work and can't find jobs, The Gulf of Mexico is full of oil and killing the coastal communities, imagration issues are being debated daily....Yet investigating whether Lance used PED's is more important?

In the end they will likely spend more money on this investigation than the USPS team received in funding for the years Lance rode for them. Makes sense to me  

It just continues to show how this countries values are screwed up and it isn't getting any better...if anything it continues to get worse. However it does follow the basic principal that has been developed...if somebody is more successful than you are and you can't beat them...drag them down, smear their name and everything they are associated with so you can feel better about your self.

Gotta love it :thumbsup: 

With that said...Do I think he used PED's? Yes I do, along with the entire pro peloton...and I mean the "Entire" pro peloton, not just a select few riders. I also feel the pro peloton is still using PED's...the "Entire" pro peloton...so such is life.


----------



## mohair_chair (Oct 3, 2002)

Someone help me out. 1) What is the point? and 2) Is this really the role of the US Government?

I'm not sure what the point of this investigation is, other than proving he's a cheat. Assume they prove everything is true, and all is revealed. Now, skip ahead to the end. Worst case, what happens to Armstrong? What's the end game? The US Government can't put him in jail. The US Government can't levy any fines. They can't ban him from racing or owning a team (the USADA has to do that, which would be _another_ investigation). The only thing this investigation can do is embarrass him. And that seems way beyond the role of the government, and a huge waste of taxpayer dollars to me.


----------



## evilduc996 (Jun 17, 2010)

Just another way to waist tax payer’s dollars! I thought that he was pretty well tested, probably more than others from the cycling committee.


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

mohair_chair said:


> Someone help me out. 1) What is the point? and 2) Is this really the role of the US Government?
> 
> I'm not sure what the point of this investigation is, other than proving he's a cheat. Assume they prove everything is true, and all is revealed. Now, skip ahead to the end. Worst case, what happens to Armstrong? What's the end game? The US Government can't put him in jail. The US Government can't levy any fines. They can't ban him from racing or owning a team (the USADA has to do that, which would be _another_ investigation). The only thing this investigation can do is embarrass him. And that seems way beyond the role of the government, and a huge waste of taxpayer dollars to me.


Well, when you have political ambitions....and you look at it from that perspective, it tends to make a bit more sense :mad2: 

In this day and age with politics (and yes, this investigation is nothing but political), it's all about making a name for yourself...regardless of how you do it.

Also look at it from another political perspective. LA is from Texas and it has long been rumored that he may run for political office some day. If he chooses to run under the Democratic Party...this takes away one potentially powerful individual from joining that party and creating waves in Texas and or farther up the government. So it's easier to stop it now, than deal with it later.

In the end...it's politically motivated and a waste of money.

Heck...here in Portland they busted a 7 year old girl for running a Lemonade stand without a permit, which costs $120.00. The resulting backlash is much worse than just letting things go...so sometimes it's better to just let things go...something no politician in the history of time has figured out.


----------



## HikenBike (Apr 3, 2007)

mohair_chair said:


> Someone help me out. 1) What is the point? and 2) Is this really the role of the US Government?
> 
> The point is to investigate the possibility that Team USPS defrauded the US Government. Technically the USPS is not exactly Federal, but close enough to elicit the big guns.


----------



## thesmokingman (Dec 27, 2008)

You know, I wanna change my vote to NO.


----------



## Oxtox (Aug 16, 2006)

PlatyPius said:


> He has marketed himself as a Saint. Ergo, he should be investigated more intensely than a normal Joe Schmoe.


what a load of crap. 

he's not looking for sainthood, just income.

kinda like every other pro athlete.


----------



## Comer (Jan 13, 2009)

So with a democrat led executive and legislative branches of government you are saying the republicans are in charge of this ridiculous investigation to keep LA from running as a liberal democrat (aren't they all) in Texas?! Me thinks this theory is even more dumb than the poll.

I guess it's Bush's fault. 





Wookiebiker said:


> Well, when you have political ambitions....and you look at it from that perspective, it tends to make a bit more sense :mad2:
> 
> In this day and age with politics (and yes, this investigation is nothing but political), it's all about making a name for yourself...regardless of how you do it.
> 
> ...


----------



## mohair_chair (Oct 3, 2002)

HikenBike said:


> The point is to investigate the possibility that Team USPS defrauded the US Government. Technically the USPS is not exactly Federal, but close enough to elicit the big guns.


Okay, so help me understand how the US Government was defrauded. Did the USPS cycling team not fulfill the terms of their arrangement with the US Postal Service? I don't think the Postal Service has a chance in hell of winning a case where they claim they didn't get what they wanted out of the deal. Because they did get exactly what they wanted, and probably a whole lot more. And that's why you've never heard anyone from the Post Office raise a complaint. So who is the victim here?


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

Comer said:


> So with a democrat led executive and legislative branches of government you are saying the republicans are in charge of this ridiculous investigation to keep LA from running as a liberal democrat (aren't they all) in Texas?! Me thinks this theory is even more dumb than the poll.
> 
> I guess it's Bush's fault.


Where did I say what party he would be picking? Nobody that I know of, actually knows his political affiliation and Texas is a largely Republican State. A Texas Democrat is the equivalent to a Oregon Republican.

However, it is an easy way to eliminate a future potential (and possibly powerful) political candidate from running for office...regardless of party affiliation. Never underestimate the part politics play in any investigation of this sort.



> to keep LA from running as a liberal democrat (aren't they all) in Texas?!


As for this statement...well that just confirms I'm replying to somebody who either doesn't have a clue...or just wants to start crap. You pick :thumbsup:


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

mohair_chair said:


> Okay, so help me understand how the US Government was defrauded. Did the USPS cycling team not fulfill the terms of their arrangement with the US Postal Service? I don't think the Postal Service has a chance in hell of winning a case where they claim they didn't get what they wanted out of the deal. Because they did get exactly what they wanted, and probably a whole lot more. And that's why you've never heard anyone from the Post Office raise a complaint. So who is the victim here?


2 ongoing wars, severe employment problems, oil spill cleanup, massive loads of debt accumulated over the last 10 years...

Spending millions on a fishing expedition on athlete activities sounds fiscally reasonable given our economic environment we are in. Isn't it??


----------



## mohair_chair (Oct 3, 2002)

But...but....he cheated in a bike race!


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

mohair_chair said:


> But...but....he cheated in a bike race!


OMG everybody to the choppers, call CNN!


----------



## HikenBike (Apr 3, 2007)

mohair_chair said:


> Okay, so help me understand how the US Government was defrauded. Did the USPS cycling team not fulfill the terms of their arrangement with the US Postal Service? I don't think the Postal Service has a chance in hell of winning a case where they claim they didn't get what they wanted out of the deal. Because they did get exactly what they wanted, and probably a whole lot more. And that's why you've never heard anyone from the Post Office raise a complaint. So who is the victim here?


(1) Misappropriation of funds and (2) breach of contract for starters....

(1) The USPS did not provide sponsorship money to be used for acquiring illegal drugs and doping doctors.
(2) It is safe to assume that the sponsorship contract included non-doping clauses and such


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

HikenBike said:


> (1) Misappropriation of funds and (2) breach of contract for starters....
> 
> (1) The USPS did not provide sponsorship money to be used for acquiring illegal drugs and doping doctors.
> (2) It is safe to assume that the sponsorship contract included non-doping clauses and such


So if the USPS is the wronged party...why aren't they, or why haven't the sued? Why is it left to the Fed to go on a fishing expedition?


----------



## Peanya (Jun 12, 2008)

I'm wondering why this was moved to doping vs. PO.


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

Peanya said:


> I'm wondering why this was moved to doping vs. PO.


Is there really that much of a difference at the end of the day?


----------



## mohair_chair (Oct 3, 2002)

HikenBike said:


> (1) Misappropriation of funds and (2) breach of contract for starters....
> 
> (1) The USPS did not provide sponsorship money to be used for acquiring illegal drugs and doping doctors.
> (2) It is safe to assume that the sponsorship contract included non-doping clauses and such


Misappropriation of funds is going to be extremely difficult to prove, if for no other reason than there is no way to prove that just USPS funds were used. There were plenty of other sponsors involved and plenty of money in the pot, so it would be all but impossible to draw a direct line between USPS and doping. Then add other sources, such as the prize pool, and rider's personal funds (Ferrari was paid by Lance), and there is no way you could untangle the mess. Plus, even with a witness who could detail the payouts (which would be someone at Tailwind, not a rider), you would need documentation to make it stick, and it's highly doubtful that such documentation exists. 

As for breach of contract, that is a civil matter that doesn't warrant a federal investigation. In order to sustain a breach of contract suit long after the contract has ended, USPS would have to prove some kind of harm, and define some kind of remedy. Notice that USPS isn't doing either. And the reason is because it would be absurd. What are they going to say, that we were embarrassed back in 2004 when we discovered SIX YEARS LATER that Lance was a cheat, and now we want our money back? Not going to happen. Because USPS knows that their arrangement with the team was a marketing deal, to build brand awareness and promote the post office, and they got exactly what they wanted out of the deal. For them to go into court and claim otherwise would be laughable. Even in light of any facts revealed in 2010.


----------



## Undecided (Apr 2, 2007)

Wookiebiker said:


> A Texas Democrat is the equivalent to a Oregon Republican.


You mean they're all former professional athletes? http://www.chrisdudley.com/


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

Undecided said:


> You mean they're all former professional athletes? http://www.chrisdudley.com/



Any longer....Pretty much. 

Don't forget Tom Osborne ran for office in Nebraska, Steve Largent in Oklahoma and the ever growing list of former athletes turned politicians.

The reality is there isn't much difference athletes and politicians:

They both are adept at performing
They both are adept at covering things up
They both are adept at telling people what they want to hear
They both are generally overpaid for what they do
They both are adept at telling lies on a regular basis

I'm sure there are many other similarities as well :thumbsup:


----------



## thesmokingman (Dec 27, 2008)

They'll get him on check fraud or something silly.


----------



## pedalruns (Dec 18, 2002)

Fox's Sports take on this: 

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/Lance-Armstrong-worst-cheat-ever-if-doping-claims-are-true-080610

Quote from article: "But I don’t care how long it takes. I don’t care if it’s ancient history. I don’t even give a damn about cycling. I want to know the truth, and so should you.

As it pertains to performance-enhancing drugs, not all lies are created equal. And if the allegations against Armstrong are true — even a little true — he’s the worst cheat of all. Ever."

Well said and IMO very true.. 

And another thing, I'm from TX and I sure want to know the truth, since he has always talked about a possible political career. Oh wait... he would be perfect, someone that 'parades as a saint' to run for office... my bad, give him a free pass... NOT


----------



## rydbyk (Feb 17, 2010)

pedalruns said:


> Fox's Sports take on this:
> 
> http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/Lance-Armstrong-worst-cheat-ever-if-doping-claims-are-true-080610
> 
> ...


From that article:

"Back to Bonds. Most Americans felt a personal stake in the home run record. But Bonds — to his everlasting credit — never pretended to be something he wasn’t. He was a bad guy, and proud of it. But Lance Armstrong? The mere name suggested star-spangled brand of virtue. He wasn’t just out to win bike races. No, he was out to cure cancer."
  

Tons of the RBR members seem to suggest that LA is an arrogant prick...hmm... So which one is it?? This author suggests that Bonds should be credited because he was a jerk...weird. The author admits he doesn't give a rats butt about cycling. He should stick to researching MLB players. He probably has no idea how rampant PEDs have been in the peleton for the last 8 or so decades! He probably thinks this is some new revelation here....Oh golly a cyclist is using now!!

Lets focus on some other frauds TOO....whether it be cycling...NFL...MLB etc etc. The sharks are circling. There is blood in the water


----------



## jorgy (Oct 21, 2005)

mohair_chair said:


> But...but....he cheated in a bike race!


LOL!!


----------



## pedalruns (Dec 18, 2002)

rydbyk said:


> He probably has no idea how rampant PEDs have been in the peleton for the last 8 or so decades! He probably thinks this is some new revelation here....Oh golly a cyclist is using now!!


You don't even get the point of the article... Yes many have cheated across all kinds of sports and many will cheat in the future, but what is suggested of Armstrong is much more than just another cyclist using.... and the author is clear about that. 

Another quote: "Still, none of the cheaters asked the public to become complicit in their glory as Armstrong and his great corporate benefactor, Nike. His wasn’t a cause, so much as an old-fashioned quest. Now Novitzky’s investigation aims to see if Armstrong defrauded his sponsors, including the U.S. Postal Service. But the larger question is whether he defrauded the general public, including everyone who’s ever worn a yellow LIVESTRONG bracelet."


----------



## Coolhand (Jul 28, 2002)

Marc said:


> 2 ongoing wars, severe employment problems, oil spill cleanup, massive loads of debt accumulated over the last 10 years...
> 
> Spending millions on a fishing expedition on athlete activities sounds fiscally reasonable given our economic environment we are in. Isn't it??


This or inspect disgusting factory farms with massive political connections. Easy choice for ole Jeffy.


----------



## Coolhand (Jul 28, 2002)

LOL, someone got PO in my Doping forum!

Its the Reece's Peanut Butter Cup of threads!


----------



## rydbyk (Feb 17, 2010)

pedalruns said:


> You don't even get the point of the article... Yes many have cheated across all kinds of sports and many will cheat in the future, but what is suggested of Armstrong is much more than just another cyclist using.... and the author is clear about that.
> 
> Another quote: "Still, none of the cheaters asked the public to become complicit in their glory as Armstrong and his great corporate benefactor, Nike. His wasn’t a cause, so much as an old-fashioned quest. Now Novitzky’s investigation aims to see if Armstrong defrauded his sponsors, including the U.S. Postal Service. But the larger question is whether he defrauded the general public, including everyone who’s ever worn a yellow LIVESTRONG bracelet."



Does anyone know how much money LA pockets from Livestrong? I get that there is BOTH a .com and .org. I just want to gain some perspective on his "fraud" related to Livestrong.

Had the public educated themselves a bit about the state of pro cycling, I wonder if there would be less love for LA from the naive general public, as they would have been skeptics like most of us have been from day 1.

If so, would Livestrong still have taken flight? I have no idea.


----------



## Cpk (Aug 1, 2009)

IATM

Stupid, only reason it is an issue now is because of an asspuppet who lied through his teeth about doping is now making accusation against the person who has been tested the most, yeah seems like a sensible expenditure


----------



## Dave Hickey (Jan 27, 2002)

As a survivor, I'm a big fan of the Foundation( see my avatar).....however, I would never take a bet that Lance, or any successful pro cyclist, hasn't doped in their career.... I'm not condoning it but it's naive to think that doping isn't prevalent in top levels of cycling


----------



## SilasCL (Jun 14, 2004)

rydbyk said:


> Had the public educated themselves a bit about the state of pro cycling, I wonder if there would be less love for LA from the naive general public, as they would have been skeptics like most of us have been from day 1.


A lot of fans didn't think doping was common in the early 2000s. In the time between Festina and Puerto there were very few big name positives or major police busts. It was easy to believe that Lance, Ullrich, etc. were clean.


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

Coolhand said:


> LOL, someone got PO in my Doping forum!
> 
> Its the Reece's Peanut Butter Cup of threads!


Yebut, Reece's are tasty and delicious. Doping and PO are more similar to turd-mining.


----------



## nOOky (Mar 20, 2009)

I'm not really defending L.A., but condemning the great minds at work here. They are singling certain individuals out and looking for any way to prosecute based on their fame and fortune? Based on the accusations of a guy who admittedly lied under oath when questioned about his own use of banned substances? So any of the poor lesser-named domestiques basically get a pass because they didn't have any influence over public opinion and garner any attention? Gimme a freaking break.
It's not that people don't care if someone cheated, it's just that if a cheater cheats against all the other cheats and wins, odds are he's still the best regardless eh?


----------



## ultimobici (Jul 16, 2005)

rydbyk said:


> Does anyone know how much money LA pockets from Livestrong? I get that there is BOTH a .com and .org. I just want to gain some perspective on his "fraud" related to Livestrong.
> 
> Had the public educated themselves a bit about the state of pro cycling, I wonder if there would be less love for LA from the naive general public, as they would have been skeptics like most of us have been from day 1.
> 
> If so, would Livestrong still have taken flight? I have no idea.


A little light reading!
http://www.livestrong.org/pdfs/LAF_2008_annual_report-pdf
http://aboutus.cancerresearchuk.org/frequently-asked-questions/our-finances/
http://www.intelligentgiving.com/charity/1089464/numbers



> _*The Lance Armstrong Foundation (LAF)*, founded by the champion bicyclist and cancer survivor of the same name, is celebrating its 10-year anniversary this year. Wouldn’t you think a charity that receives massive publicity for having one of the most popular causes and most admired celebrities as the face of the organization would be able to easily raise lots of money? Unfortunately this is not the case. LAF spent as much as $45 to raise each $100, exceeding AIP’s 35% recommended fundraising ceiling by a significant margin. While LAF had difficulty raising contributions efficiently, it did prove to be a savvy merchandise marketer. LAF sold over $24 million in merchandise, including the ubiquitous yellow “LIVESTRONG” wristband, as well as clothing, sports gear and even dog leashes. Yet after spending $10 million in solicitation costs, the group brought in only $22 million in contributions, according to AIP’s analysis of LAF’s 2005 financial statements. _


http://www.charitywatch.org/articles/cancer.html

Have a look at the financial accounts that are on Livestrong's site. Then compare them to another respected cancer charity as well as checking out their rating on one of the several charity monitoring sites, you'll see that while Livestrong raises $40M+, they aren't that highly rated in relation to other charities in the same area.

There also seems to be this perception that Livestrong is engaged in funding research to cure cancer. They aren't. They are interested in cancer awareness & patient support.

LA, in my opinion, would have better served the fight against cancer by not setting up his own charity rather lending his name to the established charities & foundations. Call me a cynic, but things like the .com/.org issue and the fiasco over his $1M start fee in the 2009 TDU only reinforce my view.

The sad thing is that if the Landis allegations are shown to be broadly true wrt LA, Livestrong will be exposed to close scrutiny.


----------



## superg (May 9, 2010)

So let's say they find him guilty of doping (as if), what's next then ? Investigate him if he was really sick with cancer ?
Just another monumental waste of time and taxpayer dollars. I can't say how lucky I feel being Canadian ( as if our politicians are any better). I seriously doubt they will ever look at doping in the NHL up here.


----------



## ultimobici (Jul 16, 2005)

superg said:


> So let's say they find him guilty of doping (as if), what's next then ? Investigate him if he was really sick with cancer ?
> Just another monumental waste of time and taxpayer dollars. I can't say how lucky I feel being Canadian ( as if our politicians are any better). I seriously doubt they will ever look at doping in the NHL up here.


From an American perspective I can see that this affair could be viewed as a waste of money. But from a cycling fan's point of view I can see that there is the possibility that, as a result of LA being exposed, Pat McQuaid, Hein Verbruggen & the UCI will be also exposed as detrimental to Cycling's well-being. That for me is the real prize.


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

ultimobici said:


> But from a cycling fan's point of view I can see that there is the possibility that, as a result of LA being exposed, Pat McQuaid, Hein Verbruggen & the UCI will be also exposed as detrimental to Cycling's well-being. That for me is the real prize.


We need the UCi exposed as detrimental to cycling? Isn't that pretty much an open-book case?


----------



## ultimobici (Jul 16, 2005)

Marc said:


> We need the UCi exposed as detrimental to cycling? Isn't that pretty much an open-book case?


It's one thing to believe that, but quite another to be able to prove it. This may force the UCI into actually reforming.


----------



## CHL (Jun 24, 2005)

I'm certain Lance has commited a "professional foul" at least once in his career. It's not worth spending the tax payer's money to continue Landis' vendetta against Armstrong. 

He's bitter that Lance didn't give him a spot on his team. Let's face it. Landis became an outcast the instant he won the Tour and tested positive. He guaranteed that he would never ride again for a Pro Tour team. 

We have a shortage of police officers, emergency services and well fare funding in every state and yet, we spend money on this crap. 

CHL


----------



## ultimobici (Jul 16, 2005)

CHL said:


> We have a shortage of police officers, emergency services and well fare funding in every state and yet, we spend money on this crap.
> 
> CHL


The amount this is going to cost is a mere drop in the ocean compared to the obscene amount spent on Iraq etc.


----------



## thesmokingman (Dec 27, 2008)

ultimobici said:


> The amount this is going to cost is a mere drop in the ocean compared to the obscene amount spent on Iraq etc.


So you're saying we should go ahead and spend the 5-10 million taxpayer dollars to go fishing? Just because the number for Iraq dwarfs a lot of other costs, it doesn't validate the cost for this expedition when there are many other problems facing our country that have much higher priority.


----------



## ultimobici (Jul 16, 2005)

thesmokingman said:


> So you're saying we should go ahead and spend the 5-10 million taxpayer dollars to go fishing? Just because the number for Iraq dwarfs a lot of other costs, it doesn't validate the cost for this expedition when there are many other problems facing our country that have much higher priority.


I look at this from a totally different perspective to many on this board due to my lack of US tax burden.

As a cycling fan I want McQuaid et al gone. This may precipitate that. 

As far as it being a fishing expedition is concerned, LA's legal teams shift in tactics looks to me like there is a very big shoal of fish to catch.


----------



## thesmokingman (Dec 27, 2008)

ultimobici said:


> I look at this from a totally different perspective to many on this board due to my lack of US tax burden.
> 
> As a cycling fan I want McQuaid et al gone. This may precipitate that.
> 
> As far as it being a fishing expedition is concerned, LA's legal teams shift in tactics looks to me like there is a very big shoal of fish to catch.


Your concerns over the UCI are not a concern of US taxpayers. Cleaning up cycling is not a matter for US taxayers. 

As a home owner and taxpayer, I'm concerned with the impending healthcare disaster, the sludge in Florida, the excesses of Wallstreet and how they killed my mortgage. I could give two shits about catching Armstrong, but apparently I have to now since they are going to spend my money going after him. What happened after BALCO? Nothing. What's going to happen after Armstrong? Judging by BALCO, most likely nothing either.

The return on investment of taxpayer dollars doesn't look great.


----------



## ultimobici (Jul 16, 2005)

thesmokingman said:


> Your concerns over the UCI are not a concern of US taxpayers. Cleaning up cycling is not a matter for US taxayers.


Nor was Bush's crusade in the wake of 9/11 but we were dragged into it by the US and its disregard for UN protocol. That was my UK tax pounds paying for the US Govenment's war.

I realise that this looks like a plain doping in cycling affair, but I think we will see that it involves actions within Team USPS that could be grounds for the Postal Service to sue to reclaim the ill gotten funds.

Plus if he is an inveterate liar do you really want him in political office anywhere?


----------



## SilasCL (Jun 14, 2004)

thesmokingman said:


> Your concerns over the UCI are not a concern of US taxpayers. Cleaning up cycling is not a matter for US taxayers.
> 
> As a home owner and taxpayer, I'm concerned with the impending healthcare disaster, the sludge in Florida, the excesses of Wallstreet and how they killed my mortgage. I could give two shits about catching Armstrong, but apparently I have to now since they are going to spend my money going after him. What happened after BALCO? Nothing. What's going to happen after Armstrong? Judging by BALCO, most likely nothing either.
> 
> The return on investment of taxpayer dollars doesn't look great.


Let's hypothetically assume they are going after Lance or maybe Johan for fraud. If that's not worth the feds investigating, then how is that different from any white collar crime case? Should the government not be involved in investigating any white collar crime?

Also, plenty of people went down on the BALCO investigation.


----------



## ultimobici (Jul 16, 2005)

SilasCL said:


> Let's hypothetically assume they are going after Lance or maybe Johan for fraud. If that's not worth the feds investigating, then how is that different from any white collar crime case? Should the government not be involved in investigating any white collar crime?
> 
> Also, plenty of people went down on the BALCO investigation.


Exactly. Just because it is a "victimless" crime does not preclude it being investigated.


----------



## thesmokingman (Dec 27, 2008)

SilasCL said:


> Let's hypothetically assume they are going after Lance or maybe Johan for fraud. If that's not worth the feds investigating, then how is that different from any white collar crime case? Should the government not be involved in investigating any white collar crime?
> 
> Also, plenty of people went down on the BALCO investigation.


Wow, check fraud, super. All the resources spent to send Jones to jail for writing bad checks was worth it huh?

Yall are reaching to make a case to go after LA. There's no case there and everything is predicated on the word of a known perjurer.

This is not the stuff that concerns the US government at a time when there are real problems facing the country. Seriously, it's comical. It's like Obama's crack team and their denouncement of salt. Close Gutmo like you promised, not this crap.


----------



## SilasCL (Jun 14, 2004)

thesmokingman said:


> Wow, check fraud, super. All the resources spent to send Jones to jail for writing bad checks was worth it huh?
> 
> Yall are reaching to make a case to go after LA. There's no case there and everything is predicated on the word of a known perjurer.
> 
> This is not the stuff that concerns the US government at a time when there are real problems facing the country. Seriously, it's comical. It's like Obama's crack team and their denouncement of salt. Close Gutmo like you promised, not this crap.


Yep, Marion Jones was the only one to go down in BALCO.  Good discussing this with you...


----------



## jsrscbr (Jan 27, 2009)

No one is above the law. Even though Lance was called out by Floyd Sourpuss Landis. Lance has to answer them charges and the Feds or whomever need to do their job and investigate.
As far as federal tax dollars bein wasted? Is their anything they dont waste $ on? 

Wasn't their a committee/s to oversee wasted $ for TARP,Stimulacious, and Health Care. Plus the pay Czar to cut CEO pay for all the bailed out banks. That went well.


----------



## Coolhand (Jul 28, 2002)

jsrscbr said:


> No one is above the law. Even though Lance was called out by Floyd Sourpuss Landis.


Like to see Landis prosecuted for the charity fraud myself. Hamilton too.


----------

