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

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

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.

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

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

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

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

RicodJour wrote:
You should have prefaced this with "Spoiler Alert".

The podium should be in the subject line.