NY Times - Cyclists are said to back claims Armstrong doped
Comments
-
-
Article portraying LA in a more positive light with views by other riders.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/art ... =D9IJ1D9O00 -
I notice some more riders from USPS have come forward saying they didn't see anything. Novitsky should quit0
-
I assume Peter Meinert-Nielsen didn't see anything at TVM and Telekom either
"Although he also adds that if there was any doping then he wouldn't have been privy to it "because I wasn't with him, I didn't share a room with him.""
Journalist interviews cronies and riders with 'superficial' contact, both say they saw nothing - quelle surprise
0 -
-
Dave_1 wrote:I notice some more riders from USPS have come forward saying they didn't see anything. Novitsky should quit
These same riders probably didn't see Landis, Hamilton, Andreau, Heras, etc dope during their time on the team... some are privy to it, some aren't. Novitsky should keep going.0 -
ratsbeyfus wrote:Dave_1 wrote:I notice some more riders from USPS have come forward saying they didn't see anything. Novitsky should quit
These same riders probably didn't see Landis, Hamilton, Andreau, Heras, etc dope during their time on the team... some are privy to it, some aren't. Novitsky should keep going.
I was just thinking about this, and trying to be honest I thought
1. Yes they should, LA should have to answer for his deeds.
2. But if I was an American tax payer I'd think not, I'm pretty sure of that.
It's like the MP expenses stuff. I bet in the long run the investigations and new procedures will cost the tax payer a lot more than was previously pilfered. But I guess doing right has a price 0 -
The thing with the taxpayers argument is that if LA would just 'fess up he'd save the taxman a fortune! If I was an american tax payer that's what would pee me off. 0
-
If the American legal system allows for the confiscation of the proceeds of crime, the taxpayer could be in for quite a windfall.dougzz wrote:It's like the MP expenses stuff. I bet in the long run the investigations and new procedures will cost the tax payer a lot more than was previously pilfered. But I guess doing right has a price 0 -
dougzz wrote:I was just thinking about this, and trying to be honest I thought
1. Yes they should, LA should have to answer for his deeds.
2. But if I was an American tax payer I'd think not, I'm pretty sure of that.
I've never really understood this argument, Novitzky is a federal employee so even if this investigation is halted, the US taxpayer will still be paying his wages.0 -
andyp wrote:I've never really understood this argument, Novitzky is a federal employee so even if this investigation is halted, the US taxpayer will still be paying his wages.
This is rather a tangent, but obviously that's a fixed cost. However the incidental costs the investigation will be incurring will make it have a real cost over and above his salary. If only criminals would stop crime we could save a fortune in legal costs 0 -
0
-
Great opportunity for LA to prove he hasn't taken any transfusions... surely he'll be begging the authorities to retro-actively test his frozen pee to show that there are no plastisizers in there:
http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/5931/Plasticizer-test-could-have-consequences-for-2010-Tour-and-US-Postal-doping-enquiry.aspxFaced with the prospect of the plasticizer test being run on Armstrong’s past samples, his spokesman Mark Fabiani said they were not worried. “We have no concerns at all about it,” he stated.
Oh dear... everyone in the LA fan-van is too tranquilo to notice that they could really get one over Novitsky's lot with these new tests.
Sigh.0 -
dougzz wrote:andyp wrote:I've never really understood this argument, Novitzky is a federal employee so even if this investigation is halted, the US taxpayer will still be paying his wages.
This is rather a tangent, but obviously that's a fixed cost. However the incidental costs the investigation will be incurring will make it have a real cost over and above his salary. If only criminals would stop crime we could save a fortune in legal costs
It could happen that some journalist would look into the expences of all this and find
some really high numbers, publish his results, and possibly the public will be "outraged"
(to quote a way too often used word) at all their money being spent on this. I'm sure this Novitsky is under some pressure, from above, to keep expences down and avoid bad press. Perhaps the LA camp can use this to their advantage. Knowing the American public's dislike for wasteful spending or what they consider wasteful.0 -
dennisn wrote:
It could happen that some journalist would look into the expences of all this and find
some really high numbers, publish his results, and possibly the public will be "outraged"
(to quote a way too often used word) at all their money being spent on this. I'm sure this Novitsky is under some pressure, from above, to keep expences down and avoid bad press. Perhaps the LA camp can use this to their advantage. Knowing the American public's dislike for wasteful spending or what they consider wasteful.
But Dennis, you know what happens. The Journalist sparks an investigation, the government are embarrassed into setting up a body or commission to follow up on it. The report they produce exposes the original cost, but the production of the report costs more than the original investigation ever cost. The circle continues :twisted:
As you've frequently said, lawyers get rich0 -
dougzz wrote:dennisn wrote:
It could happen that some journalist would look into the expences of all this and find
some really high numbers, publish his results, and possibly the public will be "outraged"
(to quote a way too often used word) at all their money being spent on this. I'm sure this Novitsky is under some pressure, from above, to keep expences down and avoid bad press. Perhaps the LA camp can use this to their advantage. Knowing the American public's dislike for wasteful spending or what they consider wasteful.
But Dennis, you know what happens. The Journalist sparks an investigation, the government are embarrassed into setting up a body or commission to follow up on it. The report they produce exposes the original cost, but the production of the report costs more than the original investigation ever cost. The circle continues :twisted:
As you've frequently said, lawyers get rich
Can't argue with that. 100% true.0 -
Time to ressurrect this old-skool doping thread.At twenty past midday on September 3rd 2003, federal agent Jeff Novitzky’s 6’6” silhouette loomed in the doorway of the Bay Area Co-operative Laboratory (BALCO) on the San Francisco peninsula, and with it the shape of a new, altogether more daunting threat than doping athletes cheats had ever faced before.
No, it's not a Mills and Boon intro., but a fluff piece about Novitsky:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/lance-armstrongs-new-nemesis-federal-agent-jeff-novitzky0 -
Big Jeff in Europe.
I wonder who he wants to "speak with" as they say in the US.Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0 -
It was early and pre-coffee when I read this bit this morning.ratsbeyfus wrote:Time to ressurrect this old-skool doping thread.At twenty past midday on September 3rd 2003, federal agent Jeff Novitzky’s 6’6” silhouette loomed in the doorway of the Bay Area Co-operative Laboratory (BALCO) on the San Francisco peninsula, and with it the shape of a new, altogether more daunting threat than doping athletes cheats had ever faced before.
No, it's not a Mills and Boon intro., but a fluff piece about Novitsky:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/lance-armstrongs-new-nemesis-federal-agent-jeff-novitzky
Somehow my befuzzled brain read 'silhouette' as 'Stilettos' and a whole different and rather disturbing picture sprang into my mind.Can I upgrade???0 -
meggiedude wrote:It was early and pre-coffee when I read this bit this morning.
Somehow my befuzzled brain read 'silhouette' as 'Stilettos' and a whole different and rather disturbing picture sprang into my mind.
Previously I had the image of Novitsky as some sort of cross between Terminator and Robocop (LA - Ten seconds to comply). Now I have the same image but he's wearing high heels and fishnets. I'm likely to have difficulty sleeping tonight.Warning No formatter is installed for the format0 -
No tA Doctor wrote:Previously I had the image of Novitsky as some sort of cross between Terminator and Robocop (LA - Ten seconds to comply). Now I have the same image but he's wearing high heels and fishnets. I'm likely to have difficulty sleeping tonight.
It's traditional clothing for the Feds. He's just taking after J Edgar Hoover.Twitter: @RichN950 -
RichN95 wrote:No tA Doctor wrote:Previously I had the image of Novitsky as some sort of cross between Terminator and Robocop (LA - Ten seconds to comply). Now I have the same image but he's wearing high heels and fishnets. I'm likely to have difficulty sleeping tonight.
It's traditional clothing for the Feds. He's just taking after J Edgar Hoover.
Men in black....
The word "probe" in connection with the Novitsky investigation now causes me to break out in a cold sweat.Warning No formatter is installed for the format0 -
Fckin' Quintana … that creep can roll, man.0
-
iainf72 wrote:
Be interesting what they get out of Popo. His whole career is tied in with LA and JB so can't see him wanting to bite the hand that feeds it.0 -
Popovych Knows Nothing ?????
What a shocker there eh - I mean he hardly knows fanboystrong.
Is the pope a catholic etc etc0 -
Dumb question, but IF a non-American rider testified to the Grand Jury, told them there are 30 days in February, and then left the USA planning never to return, and they later discovered that there have never been 30 days in February, what jurisdiction does the US of A have over that rider?
id est, could they be dragged by their local constabulary to the local airport and flown to the States against their will?0 -
Tusher wrote:Dumb question, but IF a non-American rider testified to the Grand Jury, told them there are 30 days in February, and then left the USA planning never to return, and they later discovered that there have never been 30 days in February, what jurisdiction does the US of A have over that rider?
id est, could they be dragged by their local constabulary to the local airport and flown to the States against their will?
if in the UK then yesI wear Lycra because I like the way it feels0
