A place for the discussion of all things not closely related to the sport and its competitive side. (Locked down several times a year during the major championships)
Conor Dary wrote: And Novitsky is going after a cyclist who---at worse--might have been doing the same every other cyclist in the peloton was doing.
Not quite.
Just like with Jones, this is about much more than personal PED use, and as we saw with his new tune regarding his involvement with Tailwind, Armstrong knows it.
"A couple of guys have confirmed components of what [Landis] said, but what Novitzky is really interested in is not whether Lance Armstrong used EPO to win the Tour de France -- that's not his mandate -- but whether there was tax evasion, contract fraud, importing drugs, using money to buy pharmaceuticals," said an individual with knowledge of the investigation. "That's why the investigation has gone global."
Indeed, World Anti-Doping Agency Director General David Howman recently said the international police organization, Interpol, had agreed to assist with the probe. WADA and Interpol signed a joint agreement to fight sports doping last year.
Federal officials have discussed whether any crimes they might uncover would fit within the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), according to several sources. The statute allows prosecutors to effectively sidestep the five-year statute of limitations on federal crimes because it allows illegal activity to be grouped, with the five-year count beginning after the last illegal act, according to G. Robert Blakey, a law professor at Notre Dame who helped draft the RICO legislation.
Conor Dary wrote:For crying out loud, Eliot Ness went after Al Capone and other mobsters. And Novitsky is going after a cyclist who---at worse--might have been doing the same every other cyclist in the peloton was doing.
My sentiments exactly. As I see it, there are two scenarios for Armstrong's historical reputation:
a) he is never found guilty of anything, and was thus clearly TREMENDOUSLY better than all the rest of his (sometimes/often doped) competition
b) he is found guilty of doing what "everyone" else was doing and was thus "only" MUCH better than all the rest of his competition
In terms of his overall athletic achievement, how much difference is there--really--between "a" and "b"?
Actually, at this point, Armstrong is, to some folks, Moby Dick. The pursuit really doesn't make much practical sense, but the mission can't be called off.
guru wrote: "A couple of guys have confirmed components of what [Landis] said, but what Novitzky is really interested in is not whether Lance Armstrong used EPO to win the Tour de France -- that's not his mandate -- but whether there was tax evasion, contract fraud, importing drugs, using money to buy pharmaceuticals," said an individual with knowledge of the investigation. "That's why the investigation has gone global."
Why not add murder, genocide, WMDs...
I suspect the reason they aren't going after whether Armstrong used EPO is because they can't. So they come up with all this other nonsense.
As the story states this latest nonsense only started when one of the biggest dickheads in sport, Landis, was on the outs and broke, and decided to take down anyone he could find with him. Before that, they really had nothing.
Dutra wrote:jazz....do you have a link to Duquette's comments? I'd like to read them if they've been published. I'm not doubting you, I'm just interested.
Conor Dary wrote:For crying out loud, Eliot Ness went after Al Capone and other mobsters. And Novitsky is going after a cyclist who---at worse--might have been doing the same every other cyclist in the peloton was doing.
My sentiments exactly. As I see it, there are two scenarios for Armstrong's historical reputation:
a) he is never found guilty of anything, and was thus clearly TREMENDOUSLY better than all the rest of his (sometimes/often doped) competition
b) he is found guilty of doing what "everyone" else was doing and was thus "only" MUCH better than all the rest of his competition
In terms of his overall athletic achievement, how much difference is there--really--between "a" and "b"?
Actually, at this point, Armstrong is, to some folks, Moby Dick. The pursuit really doesn't make much practical sense, but the mission can't be called off.
I'm not the biggest "drugs are evil" guy nor am I sure Novitsky should be putting the heat on Armstrong but there is an enormous amount of justification in this.
guru wrote: "A couple of guys have confirmed components of what [Landis] said, but what Novitzky is really interested in is not whether Lance Armstrong used EPO to win the Tour de France -- that's not his mandate -- but whether there was tax evasion, contract fraud, importing drugs, using money to buy pharmaceuticals," said an individual with knowledge of the investigation. "That's why the investigation has gone global."
Why not add murder, genocide, WMDs...
I suspect the reason they aren't going after whether Armstrong used EPO is because they can't. So they come up with all this other nonsense.
As the story states this latest nonsense only started when one of the biggest dickheads in sport, Landis, was on the outs and broke, and decided to take down anyone he could find with him. Before that, they really had nothing.
What these witch hunts are usually about is some G-man catching a big fish in order to further his/her career. That's what it was all about with Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens and Martha Stewart. Think about it. In the case of Bonds and Clemens, they've already caught the PED pushers who've done their time in federal prisons. Neither Bonds nor Clemens have been accused of mail fraud, racketeering, check fraud, tax evasion, drug dealing or any other federal crimes. Their only crimes were lying about taking PED's. In Martha Stewart's case, the insider trading charge was so chicken-shit that a federal judge threw it out. So then the G-men got her on another chicken-shit charge of lying to an FBI agent. The bottom line:
Has Lance ever taken illegal PED's? Yes.
Technically speaking, has Lance broken federal laws that were meant to target big time drug dealers and Mafiosos? Probably.
Do the G-men really think that folks like Lance, Bonds, Clemens and Martha are a menace to society? Hell no.
Conor Dary wrote:As the story states this latest nonsense only started when one of the biggest dickheads in sport, Landis, was on the outs and broke, and decided to take down anyone he could find with him. Before that, they really had nothing.
So by that line of reasoning I suppose we should have given Marion Jones a pass too?
I don't care if it's Sammy The Bull "taking him down". If he broke federal laws related to drug trafficking, illegal use of sponsor funds, and tax evasion he needs to face the repercussions.
guru wrote: I don't care if it's Sammy The Bull "taking him down". If he broke federal laws related to drug trafficking, illegal use of sponsor funds, and tax evasion he needs to face the repercussions.
Yes, a little Noriega we have here....Illegal use of sponsor funds...Yes, instead of doing what he was suppose to do, ie racing the Tour, he was in Vegas gambling...Tax Evasion! Zowie maybe there is even a Swiss bank account! The Horrors!
And selling their bikes! For drugs! That makes a lot of sense. After what do they need bicycles for in a bike race?
There are lots of people who don't like Armstrong for one reason or another and as Jazz noted going after high profile athletes is an easy way to make a name.
guru wrote: So by that line of reasoning I suppose we should have given Marion Jones a pass too?
The moral to MJ story was not that drugs work, but don't leave a paper trail and watch who you hang out with. And as we also know she wasn't alone in doing PEDs then, but, hey, she was well known and a great target.
guru wrote: I don't care if it's Sammy The Bull "taking him down". If he broke federal laws related to drug trafficking, illegal use of sponsor funds, and tax evasion he needs to face the repercussions.
Yes, a little Noriega we have here....Illegal use of sponsor funds...
It's called contract fraud
And selling their bikes! For drugs! That makes a lot of sense. After what do they need bicycles for in a bike race?
Trek has acknowledged it knows of bikes being sold.
And considering that fact, there's this little nugget.
The Trek story is particularly noteworthy in light of a bitter contract dispute the Minnesota-based company had last year with cycling great Greg LeMond. In court papers, Trek accused LeMond of inappropriately profiting from the company by re-selling high-end bikes it had given LeMond at low cost when Trek still had a distribution agreement with LeMond's signature cycling line.
guru wrote: So by that line of reasoning I suppose we should have given Marion Jones a pass too?
The moral to MJ story was not that drugs work, but don't leave a paper trail and watch who you hang out with. And as we also know she wasn't alone in doing PEDs then, but, hey, she was well known and a great target.
No, the moral to her story is don't launder drug(heroin) money, and don't lie to federal agents about it.
It looks like it's just a matter of time now. I have a feeling Armstrong is going to come "clean" and admit to all the wrong doing. I can't imagine him continuing to deny this all for much longer.
guru wrote:The moral to MJ story was not that drugs work, but don't leave a paper trail and watch who you hang out with. And as we also know she wasn't alone in doing PEDs then, but, hey, she was well known and a great target.
No, the moral to her story is don't launder drug(heroin) money, and don't lie to federal agents about it.
I reckon that Andy Pettitte and Jason Giambi would say that the real lesson of this story is that the truth will set you free.
When someone who says they're above the fray suddenly isn't, it's time to watch closely.
Sorry, but nothing new. LeMond and Armstrong have despised each other for years, and this exchange has been repeated many times. And on LeMond's part I believe it is envy, like some other people I don't have to mention.
Lance Armstrong returned fire at three-time Tour de France champion Greg LeMond, challenging him to "tell the truth" about Mr. LeMond's second Tour victory, in 1989.
When someone who says they're above the fray suddenly isn't, it's time to watch closely.
Sorry, but nothing new. LeMond and Armstrong have despised each other for years, and this exchange has been repeated many times. And on LeMond's part I believe it is envy, like some other people I don't have to mention.
I don't think it's necessarily envy, but I also don't think LeMond is being fair. You see this same attitude with older baseball players who take this holier-than-thou attitude towards the steroid era baseball players. Of course those old timers didn't do steroids and HGH because those drugs weren't around during their era, but they certainly had no qualms about doing greenies which were also an FDA-controlled substance that they obtained illegally. To their credit, Bob Gibson and Mike Schmidt have enough self awareness to admit that probably the only reason they didn't do steroids is because they didn't play in the steroid era. Similarly, the question I would ask LeMond is: "Are you sure you wouldn't have done EPO if you had ridden in the EPO era, when practically everyone in the peleton was doing it?"
Jazz, yes, envy might be too strong a word, but there is some there, along with his annoying holier-than-thou attitude. And this clash with Armstrong has gone on since the 90's. I think it is also interesting that Eddy Merckx and Armstrong are long time great friends, which tells you something right there.
Lance Armstrong returned fire at three-time Tour de France champion Greg LeMond, challenging him to "tell the truth" about Mr. LeMond's second Tour victory, in 1989.
Well, LeMond certainly had some extra weight helping him on the downhills, with all that buckshot riding along inside him.
I agree with guru, though, that this has taken on a new zeal. LeMond smelling blood, perhaps.
Whether right or wrong, LeMond isn't making himself look like a champion on any counts.
It was kind of strange to see Frankie Andreu's wife being interviewed on Nightline at precisely the same time he was conducting interviews and reporting from the Tour de France. IMO, Floyd Landis is a low-life. Is their no honor among thieves? If he felt like he needed to confess his own sins in order to cleanse his soul that's one thing, but ratting out other folks is despicable. When Paul Hornung got caught gambling on NFL football games in the 1960's, he told Pete Rozelle that he would tell him everything he wanted to know about what he did, but don't ask him about what any other players did because he wasn't a rat. Greg LeMond's behavior is unbecoming for a great champion. You don't see Eddy Merckx, Bernard Hinault and Miguel Indurain walking around with LeMond's holier-than-thou attitude, despite the fact that they no doubt have a pretty good idea of the rampant drug use taking place in the peleton from the early 90's to the mid 00's. They take the high road, stay above the fray and conduct themselves as true ambassadors of the sport. Compare LeMond to Hank Aaron, who gave a gracious congratulatory speech to Barry Bonds on the night he hit his 756th home run. You don't see Aaron and Willie Mays ragging on the steroid-era baseball players who have passed or will pass them in the record books.
jazzcyclist wrote:It was kind of strange to see Frankie Andreu's wife being interviewed on Nightline at precisely the same time he was conducting interviews and reporting from the Tour de France. IMO, Floyd Landis is a low-life. Is their no honor among thieves? If he felt like he needed to confess his own sins in order to cleanse his soul that's one thing, but ratting out other folks is despicable. When Paul Hornung got caught gambling on NFL football games in the 1960's, he told Pete Rozelle that he would tell him everything he wanted to know about what he did, but don't ask him about what any other players did because he wasn't a rat. Greg LeMond's behavior is unbecoming for a great champion. You don't see Eddy Merckx, Bernard Hinault and Miguel Indurain walking around with LeMond's holier-than-thou attitude, despite the fact that they no doubt have a pretty good idea of the rampant drug use taking place in the peleton from the early 90's to the mid 00's. They take the high road, stay above the fray and conduct themselves as true ambassadors of the sport. Compare LeMond to Hank Aaron, who gave a gracious congratulatory speech to Barry Bonds on the night he hit his 756th home run. You don't see Aaron and Willie Mays ragging on the steroid-era baseball players who have passed or will pass them in the record books.
I agree once again. No one lower than Landis, but LeMond is definitely doing his best to lower himself into the gutter.
jkjoregon wrote:Hamilton, Leipheimer, Hincapie and Zabriskie are in a tough spot.
-Sing like a sparrow.
-Deny and face likely perjury charges
-Take the 5th.
What would you do?
Perjury would be out of the question for me, and taking the fifth is not an option if you're offered immunity. Hamilton is out of cycling and Leipheimer and Hincappie are in the twilight of their careers. Zabriskie is in a more precarious situation since he has a lot of good years ahead of him. Perhaps he could confess to old sins and get the same UCI amnesty deal that Erik Zabel was given.
Scenario: So you enter the federal prosecutor arena, intent on saying as little as possible except not wanting to obviously perjure yourself. You would not like to break omerta.
But, you have no idea what other riders have told the prosecutors. You are a bicylist- a good one- but used to no more grilling than a 3 minute sycophantic television interview. They are grizzled federal prosecutors that will question and cross question you for two days. They take a dim view of lying, or selective memory, or changing a story in mid stream.
First question: " three of your colleagues present have told us that all the riders- including you- received blood on the bus -- what can you tell us? We would like to remind you that you are under oath."
This morning, ESPN's Mike & Mike both concluded that even if the G-men do get Armstrong, most Americans will give him a pass because he's in a sport that most Americans don't care about. However, if that was true, Marion Jones would have also gotten a pass. If Lance gets a pass, I think it will be partly because of the good will he has built up as the point man in the global fight against cancer and partly because of the good ole fashion Francophobia that many Americans wear as a badge of honor.
jazzcyclist wrote:This morning, ESPN's Mike & Mike both concluded that even if the G-men do get Armstrong, most Americans will give him a pass because he's in a sport that most Americans don't care about. However, if that was true, Marion Jones would have also gotten a pass. If Lance gets a pass, I think it will be partly because of the good will he has built up as the point man in the global fight against cancer and partly because of the good ole fashion Francophobia that many Americans wear as a badge of honor.
I had a conversation with a cyclist who has a cursory interest in distance running...pretty much the exact opposite of me...the other day and he was very very staunch in his defense of Lance. He initially blamed everyone for Lance's potential issues including the French and the other riders but by the time we got to the end of the conversation I had him at least admitting to me that there's a real good chance that Lance used PEDs during his riding career.
However, he then allowed for the fact that Lance has probably done more good than bad for the world even if he did use PEDs.
jazzcyclist wrote:This morning, ESPN's Mike & Mike both concluded that even if the G-men do get Armstrong, most Americans will give him a pass because he's in a sport that most Americans don't care about. However, if that was true, Marion Jones would have also gotten a pass. If Lance gets a pass, I think it will be partly because of the good will he has built up as the point man in the global fight against cancer and partly because of the good ole fashion Francophobia that many Americans wear as a badge of honor.
Remember there was a little more to the Jones case than just drugs.
"Co-conspirators orchestrated a scheme to defraud numerous banks out of millions of dollars through, among other means, the deposit of stolen, altered and counterfeit checks into various bank accounts they controlled. The investigation has resulted in the convictions, in this and related cases, of more than 20 individuals, including Montgomery (with whom Jones-Thompson had a romantic relationship), Riddick (who was Jones-Thompson and Montgomery's former coach) and Charles Wells, the former sports agent for Jones-Thompson and Montgomery."
Personally I don't think the public cares that much about the whole drug thing, whether it is in baseball players, track stars or cyclists. The whole false outrage is driven by radio and tv jocks who just crave controversy.
