Weisel

Novitsky is not interested in Armstrong.

Weisel got USPS to invest in a systematic doping program, managed by
Dr. Ferrari and bankrolled by Thomas Weisel.

Weisel was really the puppet master for the last 20 years, from Subaru-
Montgomery to BMC.
He got his friend Loren Smith involved - Smith owned Threshold
Management, which became Threshold Sports, run by Dave Chauner, which
later partnered with Weisel's Tailwind Sports to form a bunch of scams
to rip off cities that wanted tourists to come to watch cycling -
they still owe San Francisco $350,000 for the SF GP.

Smith was not just the founder of Threshold Sports, he was the
marketing manager at USPS, and he invested WAY more than USPS agreed
to.

Then Smith got fired for sponsoring a weird sport nobody cared about.
He started STAMPS.COM, and Weisel was the underwriter to guarantee the
company was insured. Then Weisel Partners analysts upgraded STAMPS.COM
to "BUY" a week before the IPO and Loren Smith and Thomas Weisel made
millions, and Loren Smith was rewarded for publicly funding a retarded
cycling team that would go on to win 7TdF's thanks to all the money to
buy dope.

The Stamps.com lawsuit is still in the works, Weisel Partners went
broke and was purchased by another company that lost %25 of their
money last quarter.

So Novitsky does not care about Lance doping - he is conducting an IRS
investigation into why Lance spent 30 million dollars - much of it
earned from taxpayers - to buy dope in Italy
from Professor Ferrari.

Armstrong was a doper, we all acknowledge that, and Weisel was a San
Francisco dotcom scammer, but can Novitsky tie the two powerful
empires together - LIVESTRONG and WEISEL PARTNERS?

Honestly I don't care. American taxpayers paid for the extensive and
ridiculous doping program required to turn Lance Armstrong into a TdF
winner.

I'm more concerned with Chauner planning to make the small depressed
ex-steel town of Coatesville Pa (Population 10,468) by a 15 million
dollar "world class" indoor velodrome.

This era of these rich people using cycling to raise money for their
own self-aggrandizement is over.

I'm sure some new rich people will continue to corrupt the sport, but
whatever.

A lot of this stuff of is on: WWW.VELOPORK.COM
but you can also use google yourself.

So Novitsky does not care about Lance doping - he is conducting an IRS
investigation into why Lance spent 30 million dollars - much of it
earned from taxpayers - to buy dope in Italy
from Professor Ferrari.

So if I read all the stuff on velopork.com, I'll find documentation or
at least allegations to support the idea that $30,000,000 was spent
on... doping?

Are you making the claim that most of expense of a successful team from
that era went to doping? It seems an incredible claim, but I'm not in a
position to know.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com


"Mike" wrote in message
...
Novitsky is not interested in Armstrong.

Weisel got USPS to invest in a systematic doping program, managed by
Dr. Ferrari and bankrolled by Thomas Weisel.

Weisel was really the puppet master for the last 20 years, from
Subaru-
Montgomery to BMC.
He got his friend Loren Smith involved - Smith owned Threshold
Management, which became Threshold Sports, run by Dave Chauner, which
later partnered with Weisel's Tailwind Sports to form a bunch of scams
to rip off cities that wanted tourists to come to watch cycling -
they still owe San Francisco $350,000 for the SF GP.

Smith was not just the founder of Threshold Sports, he was the
marketing manager at USPS, and he invested WAY more than USPS agreed
to.

Then Smith got fired for sponsoring a weird sport nobody cared about.
He started STAMPS.COM, and Weisel was the underwriter to guarantee the
company was insured. Then Weisel Partners analysts upgraded STAMPS.COM
to "BUY" a week before the IPO and Loren Smith and Thomas Weisel made
millions, and Loren Smith was rewarded for publicly funding a retarded
cycling team that would go on to win 7TdF's thanks to all the money to
buy dope.

The Stamps.com lawsuit is still in the works, Weisel Partners went
broke and was purchased by another company that lost %25 of their
money last quarter.

So Novitsky does not care about Lance doping - he is conducting an IRS
investigation into why Lance spent 30 million dollars - much of it
earned from taxpayers - to buy dope in Italy
from Professor Ferrari.

Armstrong was a doper, we all acknowledge that, and Weisel was a San
Francisco dotcom scammer, but can Novitsky tie the two powerful
empires together - LIVESTRONG and WEISEL PARTNERS?

Honestly I don't care. American taxpayers paid for the extensive and
ridiculous doping program required to turn Lance Armstrong into a TdF
winner.

I'm more concerned with Chauner planning to make the small depressed
ex-steel town of Coatesville Pa (Population 10,468) by a 15 million
dollar "world class" indoor velodrome.

This era of these rich people using cycling to raise money for their
own self-aggrandizement is over.

I'm sure some new rich people will continue to corrupt the sport, but
whatever.

A lot of this stuff of is on: WWW.VELOPORK.COM
but you can also use google yourself.

On May 12, 12:36*am, "Mike Jacoubowsky"
wrote:
So Novitsky does not care about Lance doping - he is conducting an IRS
investigation into why Lance spent 30 million dollars - much of it
earned from taxpayers - to buy dope in Italy
from Professor Ferrari.

So if I read all the stuff on velopork.com, I'll find documentation or
at least allegations to support the idea that $30,000,000 was spent
on... doping?



Please don't spend more than three minutes reading Velopork.com, I
spent less than 30 minutes creating it.
Novitsky only has to prove that some money was exchanged between
Weisel/Tailwind Sports - USPS/Armstrong/Bruyneel - Ferrari.
Then it's easy pickings.
We all have connections - cycling is a small world, but Weisel and
Loren Smith are involved in an IPO lawsuit, Loren Smith was the
contact at USPS to begin the sponsorship.
Weisel and his rich friends were chamois sniffers - pure and simple.
They aren't gonna hold up under federal interrogation.
Armstrong did way more dope - and spent sponsor money on - more dope
than Barry Bonds could have ever dreamed of.
So - no, they spent roughly 15 million on doping over 7 years. That is
a lot of money.
THEY SOLD OLD TREK BIKES TO BUY DOPE.
I haven't even started on that.

On May 12, 8:27*am, Mike wrote:
Novitsky is not interested in Armstrong.

Weisel got USPS to invest in a systematic doping program, managed by
Dr. Ferrari and bankrolled by Thomas Weisel.

Weisel was really the puppet master for the last 20 years, from Subaru-
Montgomery to BMC.
He got his friend Loren Smith involved - Smith owned Threshold
Management, which became Threshold Sports, run by Dave Chauner, which
later partnered with Weisel's Tailwind Sports to form a bunch of scams
to rip off cities that wanted tourists to come to watch cycling -
they still owe San Francisco $350,000 for the SF GP.

Smith was not just the founder of Threshold Sports, he was the
marketing manager at USPS, and he invested WAY more than USPS agreed
to.

Then Smith got fired for sponsoring a weird sport nobody cared about.
He started STAMPS.COM, and Weisel was the underwriter to guarantee the
company was insured. Then Weisel Partners analysts upgraded STAMPS.COM
to "BUY" a week before the IPO and Loren Smith and Thomas Weisel made
millions, and Loren Smith was rewarded for publicly funding a retarded
cycling team that would go on to win 7TdF's thanks to all the money to
buy dope.

The Stamps.com lawsuit is still in the works, Weisel Partners went
broke and was purchased by another company that lost %25 of their
money last quarter.

So Novitsky does not care about Lance doping - he is conducting an IRS
investigation into why Lance spent 30 million dollars - much of it
earned from taxpayers - to buy dope in Italy
from Professor Ferrari.

Armstrong was a doper, we all acknowledge that, and Weisel was a San
Francisco dotcom scammer, but can Novitsky tie the two powerful
empires together - LIVESTRONG and WEISEL PARTNERS?

Honestly I don't care. American taxpayers paid for the extensive and
ridiculous doping program required to turn Lance Armstrong into a TdF
winner.

I'm more concerned with Chauner planning to make the small depressed
ex-steel town of Coatesville Pa (Population 10,468) by a 15 million
dollar "world class" indoor velodrome.

This era of these rich people using cycling to raise money for their
own self-aggrandizement is over.

I'm sure some new rich people will continue to corrupt the sport, but
whatever.

A lot of this stuff of is on: WWW.VELOPORK.COM
but you can also use google yourself.

I talked to him on a ride, he didn't seem too bad, except I did most
of the talking. His only reaction to my description of the Stanford
cycling team was to want to know more about that tall rider who he
thought would make a good pursuitist: Derek Bouchard-Hall. At least he
had a good eye for talent.

-ilan

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

On May 12, 8:25*am, Fred Flintstein
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

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'?

I've mentioned that before. No one seems to be interested in an honest
answer.

Fred Flintstein
Fred Flintstein

On May 12, 9:55*am, Anton Berlin wrote:

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

Mr. Stoller: Now you know.

R

On May 12, 10:23*am, RicodJour wrote:
On May 12, 9:55*am, Anton Berlin wrote:



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

Mr. Stoller: *Now you know.

R

This Stoller ?

http://stollerexposed.blog.com/

On May 12, 7:34*am, Fred Flintstein
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