AP Breaking News: Prosecutors close Armstrong inquiry, no charges

On Feb 4, 8:19*am, BLafferty wrote:
On Feb 3, 10:11*pm, tritonrider wrote: On Feb 3, 9:40*pm, Jimmy July wrote:

On 2/3/2012 6:17 PM, William R. Mattil wrote:

Hope LAFF doesn't go off the deep end with this announcement.......

When has Laff ever been out of the deep end?

Believe it or not Brian is one of the most rational, objective, and
reasonable people I know with the exception of one or two minor issues
related to *doping in sports.
*Good friend, great guy
*Bill C

Thanks, Bill. It will be interesting to see if the DoJ says more about
why the Central CA US Attorney closed the investigation without
indicting. IMO, it lilely has to do with fallout from the Bonds
case,the PR campaign of the cancer fighter and perceived statute of
limitations issues. That said, it is pretty clear that Armstong's
clean athlete reputation is in the landfill.

Can't say that seems clear at all. Most people who aren't into cycling
like we are will take this non-action by the feds as saying Lance is
clean. They won't look further, and as a result, he will retain most
if not all of his reputation. Now that he's doing Xterra and other
events, he's going to rebuild his athlete rep, which will sell his
brand and make him more money.

Face it, he beat the system and he beat the Feds. Hate him all you
want, but you can't deny he's proven you wrong, with regard to your
decade-long certainty that he was going down. It would redeem your
credibility to admit this.

On Feb 4, 8:44*am, Zeno wrote:
On Feb 4, 8:19*am, BLafferty wrote:









On Feb 3, 10:11*pm, tritonrider wrote: On Feb 3, 9:40*pm, Jimmy July wrote:

On 2/3/2012 6:17 PM, William R. Mattil wrote:

Hope LAFF doesn't go off the deep end with this announcement........

Thanks, Bill. It will be interesting to see if the DoJ says more about
why the Central CA US Attorney closed the investigation without
indicting. IMO, it lilely has to do with fallout from the Bonds
case,the PR campaign of the cancer fighter and perceived statute of
limitations issues. That said, it is pretty clear that Armstong's
clean athlete reputation is in the landfill. The downside of non-
accountability, if USADA and WADA don't act, is the the sport's
credibility is in the toilet whirlpool. I look for Contador to be let
off. RIP competitive cycling. I won't be following it at all

Because he didn't get his man, Brian would like us to believe that
nothing has changed for the better in pro cycling since the good old
days of shooting heroin, washing down handfuls of amphetamines with
cheap wine & 60 percenters climbing like they're in elevators. "Après
moi, le deluge."

With the threat of prosecution removed and the grand jury testimony
sealed, the chances of WADA, et al, pinning anything on LA are as
likely as Brian winning the Tour clean. Not to mention that LA will
probably be more likely to pursue libel actions now that the Feds are
no longer a stalking him.

It's sad Brian will no longer be following any more competitive
cycling, and presumably no longer posting here. (What would be the
point?)

And since he's not a hypocrite, I assume he has written off viewing
all other pro sports too, most of which are not nearly as rigorous in
dope testing as cycling. Have fun watching those reruns of Bewitched!

Zeno

Bewitched? Are you kidding? Everybody knows Darren was doped to the
gills. Look at this image and see how the excessive use of HGH and
other drugs to try to stay competitive has completely changed his
features. http://brandaffinity.files.wordpress..._bewitched.jpg
Any day now an indictment will be coming down from the grand jury.
I'm right. I just know it. I know it. It has to be true. Am I the
only one who can see the fraud? Clearly history's greatest monster.
I can't wait for Tuesday. Any day now. You'll see. You won't be
LAFFing at me when Darren gets perp-walked across the evening news.
Any...day...now....

In article ,
Fred Flintstein wrote:

On 2/3/2012 6:18 PM, Jimmy July wrote:
Nuh-uh! Novitsky's a bulldog who will bring LA to Justice! He's got all
that ebay evidence, and Tyler's word, and the Landis testimony, and once
Lance threatened a witness, remember? That alone is worth charges.
They've got Lance nailed, this all a ruse to lull Fabio and Lance into a
false sense of security.

Tuesday, just you wait, you'll see next Tuesday!

Dumbass,

You forgot about Och and Wiesel. The forensic accountants were
going to string them all up.

PS Who was it that was going off about how doping for a bike
race wasn't a criminal offense. Anyone remember who that was?

I remember. (and agree) Those that had their
palms over their earholes at the time are not
even around to not hear you gloat.

None of this means a dedicated prosecutor
could not have found a way to bring LANCE
to justice. He got away with it---for now.

--
Old Fritz

On Feb 3, 8:11*pm, tritonrider wrote:
On Feb 3, 9:40*pm, Jimmy July wrote:

On 2/3/2012 6:17 PM, William R. Mattil wrote:

Hope LAFF doesn't go off the deep end with this announcement.......

When has Laff ever been out of the deep end?

Believe it or not Brian is one of the most rational, objective, and
reasonable people I know with the exception of one or two minor issues
related to *doping in sports.
*Good friend, great guy
*Bill C

How very odd, what you describe is the antithesis of the BL in rbr.

Phil H

On Feb 4, 8:59*pm, Phil H wrote:
On Feb 3, 8:11*pm, tritonrider wrote:

On Feb 3, 9:40*pm, Jimmy July wrote:

On 2/3/2012 6:17 PM, William R. Mattil wrote:

Hope LAFF doesn't go off the deep end with this announcement.......

When has Laff ever been out of the deep end?

Believe it or not Brian is one of the most rational, objective, and
reasonable people I know with the exception of one or two minor issues
related to *doping in sports.
*Good friend, great guy
*Bill C

How very odd, *what you describe is the antithesis of the BL in rbr.

Phil H

Rbr is a sideshow and Brian understands that pretty well. He's also a
lawyer and they like to argue and win, at least in general. He may
also be half as hard headed as I am, and that's saying something. I'm
not telling anyone anything new when I point out that Brian is (My
word here) fanatically dedicated to a fair and level playing field for
everyone. People will use that kind of dedication to yank your chain,
anything is grounds for chain yanking around here anyway. It gets
messier from there and what you see now here is what you get from
years and years of back and forth in rbr.
I respect where He's coming from and his dedication, and amazingly
enough if He's treated with basic respect he returns it even when you
disagree, and, lord knows, Brian and I don't agree on a whole lot but
I can't think of a single angry word between us.
He does understand "Reasonable people can have reasonable
differences" and that we don't all place the same value, or priority,
on the same things in life and is incredibly good at respecting others
positions if they respect his.
Bill C

On Feb 3, 11:44*pm, "A. Dumas" wrote:
On 03/02/2012 23:35, Ken Prager wrote:

Federal prosecutors dropped their investigation of Lance Armstrong on Friday,
ending a nearly two-year effort aimed at determining whether the seven-time
Tour de France winner and his teammates participated in a doping program.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/C/CYC_DOPING_ARMSTRONG?SITE=OHCI...

http://www.usada.org/media/statement232012:
"Unlike the U.S. Attorney, USADA's job is to protect clean sport rather
than enforce specific criminal laws. Our investigation into doping in
the sport of cycling is continuing and we look forward to obtaining the
information developed during the federal investigation."

It seems clear to me that the data from the federal investigation
should not be passed on to WADA. The reason is that it contains
information that could only be discovered using the powers of a
federal investigator and a grand jury. For example, if part of the
information contains conversations for a wire-tapped phone
conversation, where the wiretap was ordered by a judge, then WADA,
which cannot order wire-taps, can't have access to this information
since they don't have the power to order a wire-tap. Maybe
Armstrong's lawyers will be able to use this argument or some other
argument to block the transfer.

-ilan

On Feb 4, 9:16*pm, tritonrider wrote:
On Feb 4, 8:59*pm, Phil H wrote:









On Feb 3, 8:11*pm, tritonrider wrote:

On Feb 3, 9:40*pm, Jimmy July wrote:

On 2/3/2012 6:17 PM, William R. Mattil wrote:

Hope LAFF doesn't go off the deep end with this announcement........

When has Laff ever been out of the deep end?

Believe it or not Brian is one of the most rational, objective, and
reasonable people I know with the exception of one or two minor issues
related to *doping in sports.
*Good friend, great guy
*Bill C

How very odd, *what you describe is the antithesis of the BL in rbr.

Phil H

*Rbr is a sideshow and Brian understands that pretty well. He's also a
lawyer and they like to argue and win, at least in general. He may
also be half as hard headed as I am, and that's saying something. I'm
not telling anyone anything new when I point out that Brian is (My
word here) fanatically dedicated to a fair and level playing field for
everyone. People will use that kind of dedication to yank your chain,
anything is grounds for chain yanking around here anyway. It gets
messier from there and what you see now here is what you get from
years and years of back and forth in rbr.
*I respect where He's coming from and his dedication, and amazingly
enough if He's treated with basic respect he returns it even when you
disagree, and, lord knows, Brian and I don't agree on a whole lot but
I can't think of a single angry word between us.
*He does understand "Reasonable people can have reasonable
differences" and that we don't all place the same value, or priority,
on the same things in life and is incredibly good at respecting others
positions if they respect his.

I've sparred with him and I may (well) have done some chain-yanking,
and recently, but I have to say I can believe what you've said IRT BL
in this thread.
He did admit, in a direct reply to me, what he didn't/doesn't like
about Lance Armstrong and I can also understand a desire to see a
malefactor (as he considers LA to be) "get his".
I sure don't agree with his various positions regarding doping, as far
as I understand them.
To repeat, I agree with one thing Brian has expressed in this thread:
"this isn't over". As to "what any of it means", including past and
future, relating to personal credibility, personal and professional
reputations, "credibility of sport", that's a different kettle of
fish.
Yup, it's all been hashed out over and over and there have been some
big messes. I don't think anyone much escapes from responsibility for
the "state of what is" around here. "Including me", if I need to spell
that out.

A year or two ago, Chann McRae gave a talk at a meeting of my club
regarding training and "other". The discussion naturally turned to
"doping". I don't remember the exact words, but Chann basically said
"That was then, this is now. Things have changed and we're going
forward with the way things are now". I thought that was a good
answer.
Not exactly up there with "Let he who is without sin cast the first
stone", but pretty good nonetheless.
--D-y

On Feb 4, 10:16*pm, tritonrider wrote:
On Feb 4, 8:59*pm, Phil H wrote:





On Feb 3, 8:11*pm, tritonrider wrote:

On Feb 3, 9:40*pm, Jimmy July wrote:

On 2/3/2012 6:17 PM, William R. Mattil wrote:

Hope LAFF doesn't go off the deep end with this announcement........

When has Laff ever been out of the deep end?

Believe it or not Brian is one of the most rational, objective, and
reasonable people I know with the exception of one or two minor issues
related to *doping in sports.
*Good friend, great guy
*Bill C

How very odd, *what you describe is the antithesis of the BL in rbr.

Phil H

*Rbr is a sideshow and Brian understands that pretty well. He's also a
lawyer and they like to argue and win, at least in general. He may
also be half as hard headed as I am, and that's saying something. I'm
not telling anyone anything new when I point out that Brian is (My
word here) fanatically dedicated to a fair and level playing field for
everyone. People will use that kind of dedication to yank your chain,
anything is grounds for chain yanking around here anyway. It gets
messier from there and what you see now here is what you get from
years and years of back and forth in rbr.
*I respect where He's coming from and his dedication, and amazingly
enough if He's treated with basic respect he returns it even when you
disagree, and, lord knows, Brian and I don't agree on a whole lot but
I can't think of a single angry word between us.
*He does understand "Reasonable people can have reasonable
differences" and that we don't all place the same value, or priority,
on the same things in life and is incredibly good at respecting others
positions if they respect his.
*Bill C
Thanks again,Bill. There are several people who have become friends
over the years here at rbr; you, Richard Rosenthal, Bruce Hildenbran
Les Ernst and Davey. Usent is dying for a number of reasons. It's
decline is sad, but the electronic world has changed a lot since 1993
when I first posted to rbr. It is what it is today. Rather mean
spirited and ad homenium. Ride on.......

On 2/3/2012 8:15 PM, Fred Flintstein wrote:
On 2/3/2012 6:18 PM, Jimmy July wrote:
Nuh-uh! Novitsky's a bulldog who will bring LA to Justice! He's got all
that ebay evidence, and Tyler's word, and the Landis testimony, and once
Lance threatened a witness, remember? That alone is worth charges.
They've got Lance nailed, this all a ruse to lull Fabio and Lance into a
false sense of security.

Tuesday, just you wait, you'll see next Tuesday!

Dumbass,

You forgot about Och and Wiesel. The forensic accountants were
going to string them all up.

F

PS Who was it that was going off about how doping for a bike
race wasn't a criminal offense. Anyone remember who that was?

As for Lance, the Schwartz was with him.

Fred Flintstein wrote:
PS Who was it that was going off about how doping for a bike
race wasn't a criminal offense. Anyone remember who that was?

Jimmy July wrote:
As for Lance, the Schwartz was with him.

The dark side.