Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Professional Cycling For the Fans Follow the Tour de France,the Giro de Italia, the Spring Classics, or other professional cycling races? Here's your home...

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 06-29-12, 06:49 PM   #1
CaDan
Lanterne Rouge
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: St. Paul, MN
Bikes: 2004 Giant Cypress
Posts: 47
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
How incompetent is the USADA?

This is not good.

One of the arbitrators is Clark Griffith. Mr. Griffith recently pled guilty (an Alford plea where he admits the state has sufficient evidence to convict him) to a charge of public nudity while trying to "pick up" one of his students. Salacious details here: http://www.twincities.com/localnews/...twincities.com

Now, this just makes him look bad. However, Mr Griffith was also quoted as expressing at least some opinion of the case, "He's really scrambling .... I can't wait to hear what the arbitration panel thinks of the evidence." http://www.startribune.com/sports/160869725.html

Mr. Griffith, if not biased, is at least an embarrassing choice by the USADA as an arbitrator.

This is a separate issue from whether Mr. Armstrong did or did not use PEDs. The issue is, when the USADA is putting together what may be its most important case, it chose an arbitrator who is an embarrassment and who cannot maintain a judicial demeanor when he is supposed to be fairly arbitrating a case.
CaDan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-12, 04:00 PM   #2
fly:yes/land:no
abandoning
 
fly:yes/land:no's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 2,068
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaDan View Post
This is not good.

One of the arbitrators is Clark Griffith. Mr. Griffith recently pled guilty (an Alford plea where he admits the state has sufficient evidence to convict him) to a charge of public nudity while trying to "pick up" one of his students. Salacious details here: http://www.twincities.com/localnews/...twincities.com

Now, this just makes him look bad. However, Mr Griffith was also quoted as expressing at least some opinion of the case, "He's really scrambling .... I can't wait to hear what the arbitration panel thinks of the evidence." http://www.startribune.com/sports/160869725.html

Mr. Griffith, if not biased, is at least an embarrassing choice by the USADA as an arbitrator.

This is a separate issue from whether Mr. Armstrong did or did not use PEDs. The issue is, when the USADA is putting together what may be its most important case, it chose an arbitrator who is an embarrassment and who cannot maintain a judicial demeanor when he is supposed to be fairly arbitrating a case.
another july only poster...
fly:yes/land:no is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-12, 04:11 PM   #3
CaDan
Lanterne Rouge
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: St. Paul, MN
Bikes: 2004 Giant Cypress
Posts: 47
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
You have, perhaps, a substantive comment?
CaDan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-12, 04:30 PM   #4
Rotten Bastard
Senior Member
 
Rotten Bastard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 270
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaDan View Post
I can't wait to hear what the arbitration panel thinks of the evidence
Sounds very impartial, doesn't he?
Rotten Bastard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-12, 06:20 PM   #5
side_FX
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Bikes:
Posts: 521
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by fly:yes/land:no View Post
another july only poster...
Still June
side_FX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-12, 06:59 PM   #6
eja_ bottecchia
Senior Member
 
eja_ bottecchia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Bikes:
Posts: 3,520
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
In The jurisdiction where I practice law we would not allow an Alford plea, or its equivalent, in a sex-related case. Either plea straight up or set it for trial.

I don't get the comments to the OP's post.
eja_ bottecchia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-12, 08:30 PM   #7
Surfer34
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Bikes:
Posts: 236
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I dont think comitting a crime makes you a more or less impartial juror unless your crime was similiar to the one you are judging.
Surfer34 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-12, 05:51 AM   #8
guadzilla
Dropped again
 
guadzilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: A small tropical island
Bikes: Damocles, Shiv, Lynskey, X-Fire, LHT, +
Posts: 3,456
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I wonder if cancer ate away the part of Dopestrong's brain that controls class?

His ability to play the victim while simultaneously indulging in a smear campaign is amazing. Matched only the ability of the Lance Zombie Fanbois to drink whatever Koolaid he serves up.

Ask Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens and Marion Jones how incompetent the USADA is. They go after the dopers and they do a damn good job. OP and his ilk ought to be ashamed for piling on to USADA for just doing its job.
guadzilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-12, 06:12 AM   #9
slcbob
bored of "Senior Member"
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: MD / metro DC
Bikes: Cross-Check/Nexus commuter. Several others for various forms of play.
Posts: 1,101
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Speaking of opinions about what people think of the evidence....

(legal-ish question here, not baiting the pro/con Armstrong crowd, I hope)

The bits I've been seeing in the media have USADA referring to evidence to follow, and Armstrong's camp referring to the absence of evidence (as opposed to inferences and conclusion) that has been put forward. One the one hand, I understand the complaint that you can only respond to specific evidence not broad allegations. OTOH, I would not expect all of that to be in the media and there is probably a time-phasing of disclosure that may be correct even if subject to a PR spin.

Do any of you in-the-know re these types of proceedings have a sense of whether the USADA is being competent in that regard, i.e. is the substantive disclosure of real evidence following established norms for the process (if not the media)?
slcbob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-12, 04:21 PM   #10
Hezz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Bikes:
Posts: 1,649
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by slcbob View Post
Speaking of opinions about what people think of the evidence....

(legal-ish question here, not baiting the pro/con Armstrong crowd, I hope)

The bits I've been seeing in the media have USADA referring to evidence to follow, and Armstrong's camp referring to the absence of evidence (as opposed to inferences and conclusion) that has been put forward. One the one hand, I understand the complaint that you can only respond to specific evidence not broad allegations. OTOH, I would not expect all of that to be in the media and there is probably a time-phasing of disclosure that may be correct even if subject to a PR spin.

Do any of you in-the-know re these types of proceedings have a sense of whether the USADA is being competent in that regard, i.e. is the substantive disclosure of real evidence following established norms for the process (if not the media)?
No one can really know the complete bottom line but I can tell you several facts that are based on general concensus or testimony.

1. Lance has had three positive tests over the years. One was buried. One was covered with a back dated doctors prescription and one was tested years later and was beyond the statute of limitations. So he's lying about the never tested positive in 500 test's.

2. USADA has if anything been known to not speculate on evidence that was not very convincing and sound. Making them perhaps a little more lenient than some other countries equivalent agencies. This would seem to indicate that the evidence against Lance is pretty convincing.

3. The USADA is an administrative body or court and does not follow the same legal procedures that a civil or criminal court does. Lance is trying to spin the media in a way that makes it look like they are incompetent or not following procedure. The proceeding does not work in the same way as a court proceeding and most athletes that have been sanctioned have probably had a lot less non-analytical findings against them than Lance has. The USADA can not take away Lance's freedom or put him in jail. They can only sanction him from sports or take away placings in races.

4. The panel member fiasco is regretable but we do not know all of the facts about the case. There are sexual perverts everywhere. USADA may not have known about this affair. The issue is if the person can be objective. Probably not completely in the area of sex but since this is not that kind of thing it seems less important. ALso, the panel was unanimous which leads one to believe that the evidence against Lance is no small matter.

5. The fact the Lance attacks a panel member instead of being able to strongly refute any of the facts show that he is playing dirty because it's all that he has. This implies that he is both guilty and a person with little character. Which further supports the idea that he may have been involved with more than just personal PED use himself.

6. You have to understand that the amount of evidence against Lance is many times more than most athletes who have been sanctioned in the past when you look at the whole picture. The problem is that most people believe what they are lead to believe from the mass media when most of it is spin and misrepresentation. You combine that with hero worship and you have a situation were common fans are not able to be objective.

Last edited by Hezz; 07-01-12 at 04:27 PM.
Hezz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-12, 05:14 PM   #11
Picchio Special
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lancaster County, PA
Bikes: '39 Hobbs, '58 Marastoni, '73 Italian custom, '75 Wizard, '76 Wilier, '78 Tom Kellogg, '79 Colnago Super, '79 Sachs, '81 Masi Prestige, '82 Cuevas, '83 Picchio Special, '84 Murray-Serotta, '85 Trek 170, '89 Bianchi, '90 Bill Holland, '94 Grandis
Posts: 5,063
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hezz View Post
No one can really know the complete bottom line but I can tell you several facts that are based on general concensus or testimony.

1. Lance has had three positive tests over the years. One was buried. One was covered with a back dated doctors prescription and one was tested years later and was beyond the statute of limitations. So he's lying about the never tested positive in 500 test's.

2. USADA has if anything been known to not speculate on evidence that was not very convincing and sound. Making them perhaps a little more lenient than some other countries equivalent agencies. This would seem to indicate that the evidence against Lance is pretty convincing.

3. The USADA is an administrative body or court and does not follow the same legal procedures that a civil or criminal court does. Lance is trying to spin the media in a way that makes it look like they are incompetent or not following procedure. The proceeding does not work in the same way as a court proceeding and most athletes that have been sanctioned have probably had a lot less non-analytical findings against them than Lance has. The USADA can not take away Lance's freedom or put him in jail. They can only sanction him from sports or take away placings in races.

4. The panel member fiasco is regretable but we do not know all of the facts about the case. There are sexual perverts everywhere. USADA may not have known about this affair. The issue is if the person can be objective. Probably not completely in the area of sex but since this is not that kind of thing it seems less important. ALso, the panel was unanimous which leads one to believe that the evidence against Lance is no small matter.

5. The fact the Lance attacks a panel member instead of being able to strongly refute any of the facts show that he is playing dirty because it's all that he has. This implies that he is both guilty and a person with little character. Which further supports the idea that he may have been involved with more than just personal PED use himself.

6. You have to understand that the amount of evidence against Lance is many times more than most athletes who have been sanctioned in the past when you look at the whole picture. The problem is that most people believe what they are lead to believe from the mass media when most of it is spin and misrepresentation. You combine that with hero worship and you have a situation were common fans are not able to be objective.
Well said. It's a little like saying that the Supreme Court is wrong on a 9-0 ruling because one justice had a parking ticket. Smacks of desperation.

And it should be noted that the OP posted with a "how often do you beat your wife" type of subject line. Smacks of the very game Lance has been playing - a game which is at long last very nearly played out.
Picchio Special is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-12, 08:04 PM   #12
Surfer34
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Bikes:
Posts: 236
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by guadzilla View Post

Ask Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens and Marion Jones how incompetent the USADA is. They go after the dopers and they do a damn good job.
Bonds, Clemens and Jones were never prosecuted or found guilty of anything by the USADA as far as I know.

I havent seen the failed test results yet from Armstrong. Can you post them here since you already have them, thank you.
Surfer34 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-12, 08:31 PM   #13
StanSeven
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Delaware shore
Bikes: Cervelo C3, Guru Photon, Waterford, Specialized CX
Posts: 11,920
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 105 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by guadzilla View Post
Ask Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens and Marion Jones how incompetent the USADA is. They go after the dopers and they do a damn good job. OP and his ilk ought to be ashamed for piling on to USADA for just doing its job.
You have to be joking. I think Surfer34 is correct about USADA having nothing to do with Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens, but I'm not sure about Marion Jones. In any event Lance Armstrong has been investigated and nobody found proof of wrongdoing. Yet our taxpayer dollars are wasted investigating him further even though he's not racing (ecept for tris and mt bike). The government spent huge amounts of money on Roger Clemens. NBC claims $10,548,772 and it was nothing. The government even had two trials.

I don't know about you but I would like to see the government take dangerous criminals off the street. I constantly see criminals walk away because the US Attroneys don't have the resources to prosecute.

The people in USADA and those that went after Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens want the publicity and attention and don't care how much taxpaper money they spend or how much time they waste.
StanSeven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-12, 08:35 PM   #14
StanSeven
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Delaware shore
Bikes: Cervelo C3, Guru Photon, Waterford, Specialized CX
Posts: 11,920
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 105 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hezz View Post
No one can really know the complete bottom line but I can tell you several facts that are based on general concensus or testimony.

1. Lance has had three positive tests over the years. One was buried. One was covered with a back dated doctors prescription and one was tested years later and was beyond the statute of limitations. So he's lying about the never tested positive in 500 test's.
I'm calling you to just prove one of your statements. Since you say Lance is lying and there's general consensus and testimony, prove it. What testimony? Since you are postitive, just cite the case or provide a link. That shouldn't be hard to do. Your claim is so precise, how about telling us?
StanSeven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-12, 04:42 AM   #15
Picchio Special
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lancaster County, PA
Bikes: '39 Hobbs, '58 Marastoni, '73 Italian custom, '75 Wizard, '76 Wilier, '78 Tom Kellogg, '79 Colnago Super, '79 Sachs, '81 Masi Prestige, '82 Cuevas, '83 Picchio Special, '84 Murray-Serotta, '85 Trek 170, '89 Bianchi, '90 Bill Holland, '94 Grandis
Posts: 5,063
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by StanSeven View Post
In any event Lance Armstrong has been investigated and nobody found proof of wrongdoing.
All depends on how you define "wrongdoing," doesn't it? There wasn't proof enough to convict him of criminal wrongdoing, perhaps (and even that is apparently a matter of some contention, since a number of people involved in the case seem to believe there was a strong enough case to get a conviction). But there may well be enough evidence to prove he doped and sanction him as an athlete. And saying he's not racing "except for tris" is a bit of a contradiction, since the Ironman in Hawaii is a pretty big event with plenty of publicity potential for the winner.

Quote:
Originally Posted by StanSeven View Post
The people in USADA and those that went after Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens want the publicity and attention and don't care how much taxpaper money they spend or how much time they waste.
Since you are so certain of other people's motives and that those people "don't care" how much money they spend or time they "waste," please post some proof here. Surely, you can provide some evidence, since you are certain enough to make such a dismissive blanket statement. Perhaps furthering their careers is indeed part of their motivation, but using that as a reason to completely dismiss their efforts is something of a poor rhetorical trick, given that advancing one's career forms at least a small part of just about everyone's motive on any given workday in America. I'm sure the prosecutors going after the "dangerous criminals" have their eye on elected office, or career advancement much of the time, and that this forms part of their motivation. Doesn't make them wrong, or bad people, or render their efforts null.
Personally, I want to take "dangerous criminals" off the streets, too. It's a darn shame that so many murders have gone unpunished as a result of the public funds diverted away to prosecute Bonds and Clemens, and that those murderers will remain free to kill because USADA has chosen to go after Lance. But I also think there's real damage to our collective culture that results from choosing to treat cheaters who prosper (and people who lie to Congress, and cheaters who try to destroy the reputations of those who call them out) as not worthy of correction or sanction. i want my 7-year-old to believe she's on a somewhat level playing field, regardless of what field of endeavor she chooses - whether sports or business or something else. I find the idea that cheating to succeed is not a big deal because it isn't murder pretty troubling.

Last edited by Picchio Special; 07-02-12 at 05:02 AM.
Picchio Special is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-12, 11:21 AM   #16
richard_dupp
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 149
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Personally, I am just tired of my tax dollars going to fund this circus. Considering the economy, the national debt, balance of payments deficit, Obamacare, etc, I don't really give rip about what may or may not have done by the USPS team ten years ago. Give it a rest and concentrate on more pressing issues.
richard_dupp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-12, 12:49 PM   #17
colombo357
Senior Member
 
colombo357's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 1,995
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by richard_dupp View Post
Personally, I am just tired of my tax dollars going to fund this circus. Considering the economy, the national debt, balance of payments deficit, Obamacare, etc, I don't really give rip about what may or may not have done by the USPS team ten years ago. Give it a rest and concentrate on more pressing issues.
It is a pressing issue, but the USADA has no hard evidence, and that is why the investigation is a waste of time.

No positive test results, no paper trail. That is the problem.
colombo357 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-12, 01:51 PM   #18
Picchio Special
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lancaster County, PA
Bikes: '39 Hobbs, '58 Marastoni, '73 Italian custom, '75 Wizard, '76 Wilier, '78 Tom Kellogg, '79 Colnago Super, '79 Sachs, '81 Masi Prestige, '82 Cuevas, '83 Picchio Special, '84 Murray-Serotta, '85 Trek 170, '89 Bianchi, '90 Bill Holland, '94 Grandis
Posts: 5,063
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by colombo357 View Post
It is a pressing issue, but the USADA has no hard evidence, and that is why the investigation is a waste of time.

No positive test results, no paper trail. That is the problem.
Blood passport values. Watch and learn.
Picchio Special is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-12, 02:37 PM   #19
sleepy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Williamsburg, Tennesse.
Bikes: All have flats.
Posts: 980
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by richard_dupp View Post
Personally, I am just tired of my tax dollars going to fund this circus. Considering the economy, the national debt, balance of payments deficit, Obamacare, etc, I don't really give rip about what may or may not have done by the USPS team ten years ago. Give it a rest and concentrate on more pressing issues.
Personally, I'm very excited to see this taking place. An Agency doing the job it was tasked to do.
Obamacare? Really?
Lulz on da twit.
sleepy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-12, 02:56 PM   #20
StanSeven
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Delaware shore
Bikes: Cervelo C3, Guru Photon, Waterford, Specialized CX
Posts: 11,920
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 105 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Picchio Special View Post
Since you are so certain of other people's motives and that those people "don't care" how much money they spend or time they "waste," please post some proof here. Surely, you can provide some evidence, since you are certain enough to make such a dismissive blanket statement.
You want proof? The government spent $10.5 million, took years, had two trials, and the jury decision was open and shut.

Quote:
A jury unanimously found Clemens not guilty of the six charges against him after a day and a half of deliberations. It was a result of a two-month trial and five-year investigation that cost the federal government $10,548,772, according to CNBC reporter Darren Rovell, yet netted a disappointing result.
It doesn't take rocket science to conclude tghe government had no/very week case and should not have even started it. But they did and I will leave it up to you to guess why.

In the case of Lance, you may think he's innocent or guilty but USADA should just have said thats enough. He's been proven not guilty from over 500 drug tests. Let's just leave it alone. Instead they are spending taxpayer money for no good reason. I would like this money to go towards better purposes.
StanSeven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-12, 03:47 PM   #21
Picchio Special
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lancaster County, PA
Bikes: '39 Hobbs, '58 Marastoni, '73 Italian custom, '75 Wizard, '76 Wilier, '78 Tom Kellogg, '79 Colnago Super, '79 Sachs, '81 Masi Prestige, '82 Cuevas, '83 Picchio Special, '84 Murray-Serotta, '85 Trek 170, '89 Bianchi, '90 Bill Holland, '94 Grandis
Posts: 5,063
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by StanSeven View Post
You want proof? The government spent $10.5 million, took years, had two trials, and the jury decision was open and shut.
Well, if that's the case, it doesn't say much about the desire to boost their reputations of the people who mounted the prosecution, does it? They set themselves up to fail in order to look good? Really? But more importantly, the facts you state don't do anything to prove that the people involved "don't care." And your facts say less than nothing about the motives of the USADA, since they had zip to do with Bonds or Clemens. So no proof for you. And by the way, the fact that Clemens wasn't convicted doesn't mean he didn't lie to Congress. I guess you think that's OK or not a big deal. Forgive those of us who do.
The missing link in this whole deal is the biological passport data. Watch for that aspect of the case to emerge. You have much to learn. Your lesson will come soon. Of course, Lance will spin his guilty verdict and put up a smoke screen. He always does. And guys like you will continue to eat it up.
Picchio Special is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-12, 04:00 PM   #22
fly:yes/land:no
abandoning
 
fly:yes/land:no's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 2,068
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by StanSeven View Post
You want proof? The government spent $10.5 million, took years, had two trials, and the jury decision was open and shut.



It doesn't take rocket science to conclude tghe government had no/very week case and should not have even started it. But they did and I will leave it up to you to guess why.

In the case of Lance, you may think he's innocent or guilty but USADA should just have said thats enough. He's been proven not guilty from over 500 drug tests. Let's just leave it alone. Instead they are spending taxpayer money for no good reason. I would like this money to go towards better purposes.
you ride a madone, don't you?

you should know that clemens and bonds were both cases initiated by the doj, not usada, for perjury and obstruction of justice. i know, that disrupts your 'usada is a waste' narrative, but how would you feel if others started making similar guilty by association arguments?

p.s. the doj did have several successful perjury prosecutions stemming from balco including bonds on obstruction of justice, marion jones, trevor graham, and tammy thomas.
fly:yes/land:no is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-12, 04:06 PM   #23
fly:yes/land:no
abandoning
 
fly:yes/land:no's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 2,068
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Picchio Special View Post
Well, if that's the case, it doesn't say much about the desire to boost their reputations of the people who mounted the prosecution, does it? They set themselves up to fail in order to look good? Really? But more importantly, the facts you state don't do anything to prove that the people involved "don't care." And your facts say less than nothing about the motives of the USADA, since they had zip to do with Bonds or Clemens. So no proof for you. And by the way, the fact that Clemens wasn't convicted doesn't mean he didn't lie to Congress. I guess you think that's OK or not a big deal. Forgive those of us who do.
The missing link in this whole deal is the biological passport data. Watch for that aspect of the case to emerge. You have much to learn. Your lesson will come soon. Of course, Lance will spin his guilty verdict and put up a smoke screen. He always does. And guys like you will continue to eat it up.
i know that the biological passport is the cover story on the usada letter, but the doj investigation, while not yielding a trial, did produce sworn testimony regarding lance and doping. perhaps usada has some very credible witness testimony that they never had before. this is speculative, but i find it interesting that those guys rumored to have testified all asked usac to not include them on the olympic roster.
fly:yes/land:no is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-12, 04:28 PM   #24
Picchio Special
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lancaster County, PA
Bikes: '39 Hobbs, '58 Marastoni, '73 Italian custom, '75 Wizard, '76 Wilier, '78 Tom Kellogg, '79 Colnago Super, '79 Sachs, '81 Masi Prestige, '82 Cuevas, '83 Picchio Special, '84 Murray-Serotta, '85 Trek 170, '89 Bianchi, '90 Bill Holland, '94 Grandis
Posts: 5,063
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by StanSeven View Post

In the case of Lance, you may think he's innocent or guilty but USADA should just have said thats enough. He's been proven not guilty from over 500 drug tests. Let's just leave it alone. Instead they are spending taxpayer money for no good reason. I would like this money to go towards better purposes.
I would have some sympathy for this argument if you were on every board on the internet decrying the misspending of taxpayer dollars. But I'd bet my retirement fund (what's left of it) that you're not. You're here, because it's really about Lance, and not really about "taxpayer money." "Taxpayer money" goes every day for pork barrel projects that don't do squat to solve social problems, but I don't see photos of you protesting that fact in front of the Capitol Building in Washington. But maybe you are, in which case it should be easy to provide proof: please provide a photo or a link that shows that you're really genuinely, deeply concerned about the misuse of taxpayer money in a wide range of instances, and that's really why you're here.
And by the way, the "500 drug tests" mantra you feel compelled to repeat is the weakest link in the Armstrong defense. Beating drug tests is not that hard. Pantani beat all the tests. Marion Jones beat all the tests. Now if you really want to make the case that they were both clean, well, then I'm all ears.

Last edited by Picchio Special; 07-02-12 at 04:33 PM.
Picchio Special is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-12, 04:29 PM   #25
Picchio Special
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Lancaster County, PA
Bikes: '39 Hobbs, '58 Marastoni, '73 Italian custom, '75 Wizard, '76 Wilier, '78 Tom Kellogg, '79 Colnago Super, '79 Sachs, '81 Masi Prestige, '82 Cuevas, '83 Picchio Special, '84 Murray-Serotta, '85 Trek 170, '89 Bianchi, '90 Bill Holland, '94 Grandis
Posts: 5,063
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by fly:yes/land:no View Post
i know that the biological passport is the cover story on the usada letter, but the doj investigation, while not yielding a trial, did produce sworn testimony regarding lance and doping. perhaps usada has some very credible witness testimony that they never had before. this is speculative, but i find it interesting that those guys rumored to have testified all asked usac to not include them on the olympic roster.
I agree. But I also think the passport data is what will ultimately prove the tipping point for CAS. In that respect, I think it's critical.
Picchio Special is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:01 PM.