#21
|
|||
|
|||
Weisel
On May 12, 10:04*pm, Fredmaster of Brainerd
wrote: On May 12, 3:18*pm, Fred Flintstein wrote: On 5/12/2011 4:33 PM, Fred Bucephalus Birchmore wrote: On May 12, 4:08 pm, Fred wrote: On 5/12/2011 3:30 PM, Phil H wrote: On May 12, 1:00 pm, Fred wrote: On 5/12/2011 2:14 PM, Phil H wrote: On May 12, 7:34 am, Fred wrote: On 5/12/2011 8:55 AM, Anton Berlin wrote: On May 12, 8:25 am, Fred wrote: On 5/12/2011 1:48 AM, Mike wrote: Novitsky only has to prove that some money was exchanged between Weisel/Tailwind Sports - USPS/Armstrong/Bruyneel *- Ferrari.. Then it's easy pickings. I'm curious about something. Maybe someone could answer this. In the US, is paying someone for a doping program an illegal act? Is it illegal to dope for a sporting event? Just as a hypothetical, let's say that someone from Brainerd that scams his paycheck from the hard working US taxpayer... let's say that guy takes that money and buys a doping program with it. Is that illegal? Fred Flintstein For the most part anytime you lie and make financial gain you've committed fraud. *When you use a phone or fax or internet to do it - it becomes wireline and typically interstate fraud. *When you do it with others it becomes collusion and when you do it repeatedly it becomes racketeering. * *This is my non-legal understanding.. But as an example many EBAY auctions where someone asks some friends to shill bid up an item are committing most of these crimes. In a way it's a wonder there aren't more people in prison *- read this for a while *and you'll see that a lot of 'everyday' activities are crimes. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/71...1_18_10_I.html What if the 'defrauded' party sees a huge gain from the 'fraud'? Is it still 'fraud'? What if a victim wants to be killed, is it still murder? Phil H Murder is defined to be an illegal act. In the US, doping to win a bike race is not an illegal act. So I don't think that's a valid analogy. And I'm becoming a little disquieted by the numbers of people that are confused about this. Fred Flintstein- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - You said fraud......are you as disquieted by your own confusion? Phil H DDDDDDumbass, First tell me who was defrauded. Who is the victim? Fred Flintstein Loss (financial or other) *isn't necessary for fraud. Correct. But that wasn't the question I asked, was it? Novitsky has the same problem, it's going to be a bitch to determine a victim. Fred Flintstein Dumbasses, Novitsky doesn't have a problem. *He will present the prosecutors with a problem, as they have to decide whether to bring an indictment or not. Neither you nor I are lawyers and Lafferty has a conflict of interest, so we can speak in a blissful state of ignorance. *My guess is that they will have a legal theory that the team obtained the contract from USPS under false pretenses. That they assured the USPS (or its negotiators) that there was absolutely no gambling going on there, conspiring to disguise the evidence. *The "victim" is the USPS being hoodwinked into a contract. *Whether this legal theory will fly with a jury with a somewhat popular defendant and completely unknown details of the negotiations is another question (that is, we have no idea to what extent the USPS side of the business insisted on the cleanliness of the team or winked at it, and we may never know) . *How compelling it is to a judge and jury will worry the prosecutors more than it does Novitsky. It is likely that a trial would embarrass LANCE, but it is less likely that it would convict him (and even less likely that it would send him to jail and/or clean up cycling). I think publicly shaming LANCE would gratify Lafferty and the fraudbytes guy and to some extent Novitsky, as it would sort of count as bringing down the target. *But it would not satisfy a prosecutor. *Prosecutors are judged by who they convict, not who they embarrass. A direct conduit between Weisel, Armstrong, and Ferrari doesn't prove jack ****. *Ironically, if Armstrong paid Ferrari Weisel didn't even go to jail for his own company's securities crimes, he isn't going to jail for this one. Fredmaster Ben Ben, Weisel Partners went down the toilet this last financial quarter - the genius of Silicon Valley is no longer large and in charge. He is a liability. Novitsky got all the norcal nerds who were part of the "Champions Club" into a room and actually questioned them - and he connected the dots, and quickly realized that Lance - the cancer wonderboy - was really just a Subaru-Montgomery whipping boy that was manipulated and abused by Weisel. Armstrong has an IQ of 78. Are they gonna put anyone in jail? I doubt it, but yes - like everyone here said, this is going to be impossible to explain away. Weisel really EARNED those yellow jerseys by manipulating the US system, the USPS is a government entity like the IRS, and the IRS s really doing this investigation. They - Weisel, Armstrong, Ferrari - will all be made examples of. Simple as that. They won't cry so hard on their pleasure yachts on the coast of Nice when it's all over, but at least I can say they are all a bunch of crooks. Mike Schatzman |
Ads |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Weisel
On May 13, 2:50*am, Mike wrote:
On May 12, 10:04*pm, Fredmaster of Brainerd wrote: On May 12, 3:18*pm, Fred Flintstein wrote: On 5/12/2011 4:33 PM, Fred Bucephalus Birchmore wrote: On May 12, 4:08 pm, Fred wrote: On 5/12/2011 3:30 PM, Phil H wrote: On May 12, 1:00 pm, Fred wrote: On 5/12/2011 2:14 PM, Phil H wrote: On May 12, 7:34 am, Fred wrote: On 5/12/2011 8:55 AM, Anton Berlin wrote: On May 12, 8:25 am, Fred wrote: On 5/12/2011 1:48 AM, Mike wrote: Novitsky only has to prove that some money was exchanged between Weisel/Tailwind Sports - USPS/Armstrong/Bruyneel *- Ferrari. Then it's easy pickings. I'm curious about something. Maybe someone could answer this.. In the US, is paying someone for a doping program an illegal act? Is it illegal to dope for a sporting event? Just as a hypothetical, let's say that someone from Brainerd that scams his paycheck from the hard working US taxpayer... let's say that guy takes that money and buys a doping program with it. Is that illegal? Fred Flintstein For the most part anytime you lie and make financial gain you've committed fraud. *When you use a phone or fax or internet to do it - it becomes wireline and typically interstate fraud. *When you do it with others it becomes collusion and when you do it repeatedly it becomes racketeering. * *This is my non-legal understanding. But as an example many EBAY auctions where someone asks some friends to shill bid up an item are committing most of these crimes. In a way it's a wonder there aren't more people in prison *- read this for a while *and you'll see that a lot of 'everyday' activities are crimes. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/71...1_18_10_I.html What if the 'defrauded' party sees a huge gain from the 'fraud'? Is it still 'fraud'? What if a victim wants to be killed, is it still murder? Phil H Murder is defined to be an illegal act. In the US, doping to win a bike race is not an illegal act. So I don't think that's a valid analogy. And I'm becoming a little disquieted by the numbers of people that are confused about this. Fred Flintstein- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - You said fraud......are you as disquieted by your own confusion? Phil H DDDDDDumbass, First tell me who was defrauded. Who is the victim? Fred Flintstein Loss (financial or other) *isn't necessary for fraud. Correct. But that wasn't the question I asked, was it? Novitsky has the same problem, it's going to be a bitch to determine a victim. Fred Flintstein Dumbasses, Novitsky doesn't have a problem. *He will present the prosecutors with a problem, as they have to decide whether to bring an indictment or not. Neither you nor I are lawyers and Lafferty has a conflict of interest, so we can speak in a blissful state of ignorance. *My guess is that they will have a legal theory that the team obtained the contract from USPS under false pretenses. That they assured the USPS (or its negotiators) that there was absolutely no gambling going on there, conspiring to disguise the evidence. *The "victim" is the USPS being hoodwinked into a contract. *Whether this legal theory will fly with a jury with a somewhat popular defendant and completely unknown details of the negotiations is another question (that is, we have no idea to what extent the USPS side of the business insisted on the cleanliness of the team or winked at it, and we may never know) . *How compelling it is to a judge and jury will worry the prosecutors more than it does Novitsky. It is likely that a trial would embarrass LANCE, but it is less likely that it would convict him (and even less likely that it would send him to jail and/or clean up cycling). I think publicly shaming LANCE would gratify Lafferty and the fraudbytes guy and to some extent Novitsky, as it would sort of count as bringing down the target. *But it would not satisfy a prosecutor. *Prosecutors are judged by who they convict, not who they embarrass. A direct conduit between Weisel, Armstrong, and Ferrari doesn't prove jack ****. *Ironically, if Armstrong paid Ferrari Weisel didn't even go to jail for his own company's securities crimes, he isn't going to jail for this one. Fredmaster Ben Ben, Weisel Partners went down the toilet this last financial quarter - the genius of Silicon Valley is no longer large and in charge. He is a liability. Novitsky got all the norcal nerds who were part of the "Champions Club" into a room and actually questioned them - and he connected the dots, and quickly realized that Lance - the cancer wonderboy - was really just a Subaru-Montgomery whipping boy that was manipulated and abused by Weisel. Armstrong has an IQ of 78. Are they gonna put anyone in jail? I doubt it, but yes - like everyone here said, this is going to be impossible to explain away. Weisel really EARNED those yellow jerseys by manipulating the US system, the USPS is a government entity like the IRS, and the IRS s really doing this investigation. They - Weisel, Armstrong, Ferrari - will all be made examples of. Simple as that. They won't cry so hard on their pleasure yachts on the coast of Nice when it's all over, but at least I can say they are all a bunch of crooks. Mike Schatzman How does your cheating and doping compare? Everyone is a bit of an egotist/egoist, and their accomplishments and failures loom larger in their minds, and for the most part rightfully so. You, personally, were corrupt, cheated, doped and stole from other individuals. Where do you place yourself in the rankings of corrupt, cheating, doping, thieves that you listed above? I see no difference except that you were a corrupt, cheating, doping, thief that did it for little to no reason - nothing of great importance was at stake. Except your ego. So I guess that makes you a loser as well. Nothing virtual about that. R |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Weisel
On May 12, 9:36*pm, Fred Flintstein
wrote: On 5/12/2011 8:17 PM, Anton Berlin wrote: On May 12, 5:18 pm, Fred wrote: On 5/12/2011 4:33 PM, Fred Bucephalus Birchmore wrote: On May 12, 4:08 pm, Fred wrote: On 5/12/2011 3:30 PM, Phil H wrote: On May 12, 1:00 pm, Fred wrote: On 5/12/2011 2:14 PM, Phil H wrote: On May 12, 7:34 am, Fred wrote: On 5/12/2011 8:55 AM, Anton Berlin wrote: On May 12, 8:25 am, Fred wrote: On 5/12/2011 1:48 AM, Mike wrote: Novitsky only has to prove that some money was exchanged between Weisel/Tailwind Sports - USPS/Armstrong/Bruyneel *- Ferrari.. Then it's easy pickings. I'm curious about something. Maybe someone could answer this. In the US, is paying someone for a doping program an illegal act? Is it illegal to dope for a sporting event? Just as a hypothetical, let's say that someone from Brainerd that scams his paycheck from the hard working US taxpayer... let's say that guy takes that money and buys a doping program with it. Is that illegal? Fred Flintstein For the most part anytime you lie and make financial gain you've committed fraud. *When you use a phone or fax or internet to do it - it becomes wireline and typically interstate fraud. *When you do it with others it becomes collusion and when you do it repeatedly it becomes racketeering. * *This is my non-legal understanding.. But as an example many EBAY auctions where someone asks some friends to shill bid up an item are committing most of these crimes. In a way it's a wonder there aren't more people in prison *- read this for a while *and you'll see that a lot of 'everyday' activities are crimes. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/71...1_18_10_I.html What if the 'defrauded' party sees a huge gain from the 'fraud'? Is it still 'fraud'? What if a victim wants to be killed, is it still murder? Phil H Murder is defined to be an illegal act. In the US, doping to win a bike race is not an illegal act. So I don't think that's a valid analogy. And I'm becoming a little disquieted by the numbers of people that are confused about this. Fred Flintstein- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - You said fraud......are you as disquieted by your own confusion? Phil H DDDDDDumbass, First tell me who was defrauded. Who is the victim? Fred Flintstein Loss (financial or other) *isn't necessary for fraud. Correct. But that wasn't the question I asked, was it? Novitsky has the same problem, it's going to be a bitch to determine a victim. Fred Flintstein Why do you think there needs to be a victim for there to the prosecution of a crime? No one is 'victimized' when someone smokes pot but the govt has no problem pursuing those 'criminals' *and ironically turning them into victims via the process. Dumbass, If there isn't injury or damage, it isn't fraud. In a legal sense. Fred Flintstein ****ing moron - I am arguing with a god damn idiot. You don't know what the **** you're talking about. Intent is enough. Ever read/heard/seen people convicted on "intent to defraud" happens all of the time. Google it moron. You're god damn losing any sense of credibility here. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Weisel
On 5/13/2011 9:11 AM, Anton Berlin wrote:
On May 12, 9:36 pm, Fred wrote: On 5/12/2011 8:17 PM, Anton Berlin wrote: On May 12, 5:18 pm, Fred wrote: On 5/12/2011 4:33 PM, Fred Bucephalus Birchmore wrote: On May 12, 4:08 pm, Fred wrote: On 5/12/2011 3:30 PM, Phil H wrote: On May 12, 1:00 pm, Fred wrote: On 5/12/2011 2:14 PM, Phil H wrote: On May 12, 7:34 am, Fred wrote: On 5/12/2011 8:55 AM, Anton Berlin wrote: On May 12, 8:25 am, Fred wrote: On 5/12/2011 1:48 AM, Mike wrote: Novitsky only has to prove that some money was exchanged between Weisel/Tailwind Sports - USPS/Armstrong/Bruyneel - Ferrari. Then it's easy pickings. I'm curious about something. Maybe someone could answer this. In the US, is paying someone for a doping program an illegal act? Is it illegal to dope for a sporting event? Just as a hypothetical, let's say that someone from Brainerd that scams his paycheck from the hard working US taxpayer... let's say that guy takes that money and buys a doping program with it. Is that illegal? Fred Flintstein For the most part anytime you lie and make financial gain you've committed fraud. When you use a phone or fax or internet to do it - it becomes wireline and typically interstate fraud. When you do it with others it becomes collusion and when you do it repeatedly it becomes racketeering. This is my non-legal understanding. But as an example many EBAY auctions where someone asks some friends to shill bid up an item are committing most of these crimes. In a way it's a wonder there aren't more people in prison - read this for a while and you'll see that a lot of 'everyday' activities are crimes. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/71...1_18_10_I.html What if the 'defrauded' party sees a huge gain from the 'fraud'? Is it still 'fraud'? What if a victim wants to be killed, is it still murder? Phil H Murder is defined to be an illegal act. In the US, doping to win a bike race is not an illegal act. So I don't think that's a valid analogy. And I'm becoming a little disquieted by the numbers of people that are confused about this. Fred Flintstein- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - You said fraud......are you as disquieted by your own confusion? Phil H DDDDDDumbass, First tell me who was defrauded. Who is the victim? Fred Flintstein Loss (financial or other) isn't necessary for fraud. Correct. But that wasn't the question I asked, was it? Novitsky has the same problem, it's going to be a bitch to determine a victim. Fred Flintstein Why do you think there needs to be a victim for there to the prosecution of a crime? No one is 'victimized' when someone smokes pot but the govt has no problem pursuing those 'criminals' and ironically turning them into victims via the process. Dumbass, If there isn't injury or damage, it isn't fraud. In a legal sense. Fred Flintstein ****ing moron - I am arguing with a god damn idiot. You don't know what the **** you're talking about. Intent is enough. Ever read/heard/seen people convicted on "intent to defraud" happens all of the time. Google it moron. You're god damn losing any sense of credibility here. Dumbass, Your trolling style needs work. Fred Flintstein |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Weisel
On 5/12/2011 11:04 PM, Fredmaster of Brainerd wrote:
Neither you nor I are lawyers and Lafferty has a conflict of interest, so we can speak in a blissful state of ignorance. My guess is that they will have a legal theory that the team obtained the contract from USPS under false pretenses. That they assured the USPS (or its negotiators) that there was absolutely no gambling going on there, conspiring to disguise the evidence. The "victim" is the USPS being hoodwinked into a contract. Whether this legal theory will fly with a jury with a somewhat popular defendant and completely unknown details of the negotiations is another question (that is, we have no idea to what extent the USPS side of the business insisted on the cleanliness of the team or winked at it, and we may never know) . How compelling it is to a judge and jury will worry the prosecutors more than it does Novitsky. Again, it is required that there be injury or damage in order for it to be fraud. All cycling sponsorship contracts at that level are structured to eliminate the risk a doping scandal might have on the sponsor. It'll be a tough sell that USPS didn't understand what happens in professional sports. There is no scenario where USPS could have sustained a loss other than the case where a team of squeaky clean riders got results like Kenny Labbe. There is no way this can fly. Even so, Novitsky will attempt to launch it at a time to maximize headlines. And when that happens Laff will link to 649 articles and blog posts, all referencing the same information from the same source. Fred Flintstein |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Weisel
On May 13, 12:49*pm, Fred Flintstein
wrote: There is no way this can fly. Even so, Novitsky will attempt to launch it at a time to maximize headlines. And when that happens Laff will link to 649 articles and blog posts, all referencing the same information from the same source. You should have prefaced this with "Spoiler Alert". R |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Weisel
In article
, Mike wrote: Are they gonna put anyone in jail? I doubt it, but yes - like everyone here said, this is going to be impossible to explain away. Weisel really EARNED those yellow jerseys by manipulating the US system, the USPS is a government entity like the IRS, and the IRS s really doing this investigation. They - Weisel, Armstrong, Ferrari - will all be made examples of. Simple as that. They won't cry so hard on their when it's all over, but at least I can say they are all a bunch of crooks. Well, you can just get on the loud hailer and razz them from your pleasure yacht on the coast of Nice. -- Old Fritz |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Weisel
RicodJour wrote:
You should have prefaced this with "Spoiler Alert". The podium should be in the subject line. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Lance - Thom Weisel Connection deeper than deep throat (but just likeit too! ) | Choppy Warburton | Racing | 3 | August 6th 10 11:00 PM |
Weisel In France--Won't Speak with Press | B. Lafferty[_3_] | Racing | 6 | July 15th 10 04:58 PM |