not looking good for Armstrong
 

who knows. Federal investigations in this politically motivated atmosphere don't lead to truth. They often lead to witch hunts.

The tactic is to scare somebody into admitting something. It doesn't make it true.

Why are we investigating the usage of enhancements? Why would this be a necessary "crime"?

What a waste of time.

Be part of a federal investigation and you'll know it doesn't mean you're getting the truth. People lie to get the investigators off their backs. It's a normal deflective technique.

When you are a lowly domestique, and the feds come calling with subpoenoes and threaten perjury, the incentives suddenly become in favor of telling the truth.

Regarding Lance doping, there has been so much smoke for so long, that only a fool would be surprised to find out he doped. After all, his biggest rivals all doped. And he beat them all.

What I want to know is how he doped.

You're foolish if you believe being scared makes you tell the truth.

Does a man tortured tell the truth? A federal investigation is as close to torture as the average man will encounter. It's not thoughtful, but provocative, with "you give us this guy or you're dead" sort of event.

I'm not saying Lance didn't do it. I am saying, he passed the rules as they were enforced back then, so now it shouldn't matter. If we went back and examined many sports heroes we would be dismayed at their conduct. This witch hunt is of no value.

Whether Lance is a fraud or not is a big deal in the sports world.

His story of triumph over cancer to win a record number of tours.

Maybe he will be credited with legitimizing doping, in the sense that it was merely "the doping era", kind of like A. Rod.

Lance is not a fraud. He won under the rules and enforcement in place.

Is it possible or likely that he doped? Most definitely. But what has happened that the most tested athlete of our time, who never failed a test, isn't entitled to any presumptions regarding his innocence but is tried in the arena of public opinion based upon partial leaks of persons who admit lying and cheating themselves?

Is that the standard by which you wish to operate?

The fact is, he must have limited his doping to extremely regimented training periods in order to ensure he'd pass the testing in place. And others who were determined to defeat him pushed themselves past the limits.

But what if, just for an instance, he was entirely clean? How should we feel regarding his behavior and conduct?

To me, it's a witch hunt which has been going on for a long time, and witch hunts grow stale after a while.

Do we re-open Greg Lemond, who was rumored, at least in Reno, to have doped in the 1989 Tour?

Do we chase down Eddie?

Where do we stop?

If Lance broke laws, then that's the reason for the federal investigation.

It looks like there will be many, many sources pointing to Lance as doping.

Lance the doper and liar. And cancer survivor. It will be interesting how that plays out.

Disagree.

Do you wish to be federally investigated for driving above the speed limit?

Do you wish for your work to be federally audited?

Many persons inadvertently violate some miscellaneous law. And what meaningful law exists against some sort of sports enhancing doping?

You're presuming the admitted liars are now telling the truth. Why?

Because they've been subjected to the equivalence of legal torture?

I am prepared to be disappointed, but hoping he looks good in the end.

This looks more and more like a typical witchhunt, where a conviction will be manufactured, or at least an indictment.

Look at this charge,


[QUOTE]Novitzky, the lead investigator in the Bay Area Laboratory Co-operative steroids case, is trying to determine if Armstrong, his teammates, the owners or managers of his former defraud their sponsors? Huh, winning is what the sponsors wanted.

Stuff like this are reasons to hate prosecutors.

Jones and the track coach got a conviction for lying.

Did Clinton get anything for lying? This investigation is ridiculous.

Oh so suddenly you don't care about Trek. Nice.

Trek has been hurt by all this publicity. Really.

So when did you become a company man?

I want the truth dammit!

I want that cocksucker to go down!!!!

So because there are no good souls, you want everybody to go down. No salvation from the likes of you.

And if by a holy miracle such as the Holy Hand Grenade, he is innocent, you wouldn't want that. Got it.

You and I both know, deep down, that Armstrong doped. And he lied about it.

If he did not dope, good for him. But that's just not realistic.

For heaven's sake, he was known to have used the services of a notorious doping doc in Europe. A fired female aide accused him of doping. Remember the TDF where he wouldn't let a guy get into a breakaway because he had was a doping "snitch"? He is a bully and a liar.

It's time for this grand lie to come crashing down.

No, I am hoping for two things. Do I believe it's strongly probable he did something? Yes.

But I am hoping that somebody out there is good and clean. So the small part of innocence hopes not all are crooked. You want to be proven correct that no good person exists. I want, like Abraham, to find five good persons in Sodom.

And, I like the American presumption of innocent until proven guilty. I realize that's not true in the court of public opinion, but it provides some comfort to me.


Those are my two hopes. Even if Armstrong used enhancers, he did race remarkably against cancer. So if he is proven to have done what his competitors did, you and others like you will only remember the drops of liquid, not the hard work. He is also documented to have a regimented work schedule, to devoting himself solely to the Tour and to restructuring how one trained for the Tour because of his cancer. Those things are what he should be remembered for. In light of that structure would it surprise me if he also added enhancers? No. But the smallest part of innocence hopes he was simply some Those are my two hopes. Even if Armstrong used enhancers, he did race remarkably against cancer. So if he is proven to have done what his competitors did, you and others like you will only remember the drops of liquid, not the hard work. He is also documented to have a regimented work schedule, to devoting himself solely to the Tour and to restructuring how one trained for the Tour because of his cancer. Those things are what he should be remembered for. In light of that structure would it surprise me if he also added enhancers? No. But the smallest part of innocence hopes he was simply some superman.

Those tactics bother me.

Yes, this is the same argument used in support of Barry Bonds.

"He still had to hit the ball, didn't he?"

Those good people you are looking for? You won't find them on the podium. You will find them driven out of the sport for their poor performances. Relative to the cheaters.

Cheat the fans, cheat the sponsors, cheat your colleagues, and ultimately, cheat yourself.

Do you believe Trek feels cheated?

It sounds as if you're more interested in being vindicated in your beliefs than in truth. If the truth were he's completely innocent, how loudly would you sing his praises?

And are you in favor of obtaining the "truth" through whatever illegal or dishonest means are possible?

Through illegal leaks used to disparage his reputation?

Trek benefitted from the scam.

If Lance is innocent, good for him. But ain't gonna happen. They are going to find the money trail that leads to the drugs.

No scam at all.

If enhancers were in place, just part of the training. Cycling requires hard work. The enhancers allow one to recover more quickly or to get better results from training.

When are you going to get on the bandwagon about Lemond's cheating or Hinault's?

1989 would not have happened without Lemond using EPO's of the day. It was common knowledge that Lemond cheated.

You are presenting the exact same argument as the cheaters in baseball. "Helped me recover."

You are the Rafael Palmeiro of Cougarguard.

Baseball is not hard work, it's boring.

Nonetheless, you ignored the stronger aspects of my arguments.

Well, if baseball isn't hard work, that means PEDs matter less.

PEDs in cycling are huge, the difference between being in the peleton or not.

We see guys who make huge waves in the TDF, get busted for PEDs, and then when they come back after suspension, they amount to zero.

The point is the PEDs can literally make your career in cycling. The FRAUD FACTOR is much greater.

Enhancers in baseball revolve around explosion and muscle mass.

Enhancers in cycling revolve around endurance and recovery from workouts. The truth nobody knows to what extent they are involved. All we have is rumor and innuendo. My belief is they make a 1 to 2 percent difference which may make a world of difference in terms of overall results. In baseball, in terms of muscle mass, they make an even greater difference.

Please. Please. PLEASE do not suggest that PEDs are less of a problem in cycling than in baseball.

Because that is ridiculous.

It is a great distinction.

First, you don't need the steroids to play baseball daily.

Second, given the demands placed upon cyclists PEDs are often necessary to survive.

Please. That is ridiculous.

Argument ad hominem.

Here's a new one. You will be proud of this one. "overtrained athlete syndrome." However not as good as my all-time favorite: "vanishing twin syndrome."

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/traini...ory?id=5449113

I wonder what syndrome Lance is going to have.

innocence and egg on your face.

the noose tightens.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...html?eref=sihp

I am impressed by the complete waste of time a federal prosecutor is engaging in. Why the heck is he doing looking at eleven year old B samples on a matter for which Armstrong was cleared.

This really is a witch hunt. You may be impressed, but if dozens of prosecutors are so bored why don't they pursue the banks which helped create our financial crisis. Oh wait, that might be too hard and worthwhile. F.. Novitzsky.

It's not a witch hunt. It's a hunt for the possibly the biggest fraud in American sports history.

Someday they'll make a movie about Armstrong's life, and this prosecutor will be a central character.

Quiz Show comes to mind. Very good movie.

No fraud.

He won seven Tours under the rules in existence.

A federal prosecutor should be prosecuting recent material crimes which affect the commerce of the US or victimize individuals. If he used enhancers, how was the commerce of the US affected or what persons were victimized? What persons were placed in harm's way? None.

This is a path of self-aggrandizement where nothing is gained but the fame of one self-absorbed individual.

It's about protecting the values society holds dear. In other words, it's about honesty. Honesty in sport; and honesty in communication. You act like it's only about "the rules of the game." It's not. It's about Armstrong being a liar. As always, the coverup is worse than the crime.

you should watch the movie "Quiz Show." Same argument made there as well. Who got hurt?

I don't find it analogous at all.

Quiz Show was boring.

In these cases, they usually convict for "perjury".

Did Clinton get convicted for a known perjury? I don't believe in wasting assets to create a perjury case.

It's really just a prosecutor trying to promote himself.

This issue was part of Quiz Show as well.

Great movie. The tormented childhood growing up poor in the burbs with a deadbeat dad. The early success. Then the cancer. Then the miraculous comeback. And the epic battles and wins.

The beautiful All-American wife, and children, followed by the rockstar girlfriend, and philandering and partying. The making and loss of friends. The money, the cancer foundation, the endorsements. All in the setting of European media suspicions and aspersions.

Then the American prosecutor.

We are watching the movie as it is made.

I have the popcorn in the microwave as we speak.

This system is not rigged unlike the Game Show. Cycling is a system of pushing man's limits beyond nature and then trying to cheat nature.

BTW, a client of mine is related to the discoverer of Human Growth Hormone. The client informed me that said discoverer believes anybody taking it is crazy. The discoverer noted it was discovered in a cancer.

what would be the best ending for this hollywood movie?

The first one that comes to mind, is that Lance gets cancer again, but this time it looks terminal. It's unknown whether this cancer is the result of doping, bad luck, or the effects of his prior cancer treatment.

The prosecutor then has to make a choice about how far he pushes this. Which is more important? The truth? Or should he let the man die on his own terms?

I can see the scene where the prosecutor sits by Lance's bedside in the hospital. Withered gaunt dying Lance. Does Lance finally stop fighting the truth? Does the prosecutor drop his pursuit? Is there an understanding between them?

And then the realization that they are much the same man. Each haunted by his demons, from the past. Relentless in their pursuit of a goal, no matter the cost. And now this collision course between the two.

Stay tuned....

I think that a perjury claim against Armstrong is an ancillary issue in this investigation. I think they are after Armstrong and others for fraud for using US funds when he was riding with the posties. Whether or not he is liable for a perjury claim will depend on what he says to the grand jury. But if he doped and they can prove it, they can prove fraud even if he never talks to the grand jury.