McQuaid speaks on USPS investigation

RichN95.

Monty Dog wrote:

If you had suspicious motives, you could conclude that Tailwind were readily aware that by being prepared by Ferrari - and the 4th place result in the preceding Vuelta confirmed it - that they were in for a big pay-day come July and SCA were inadvertantly drawn in to their scam. Tailwinds lawyers must have been laughing all the way to the bank when there was 'no doping' exclusion in the agreement.

The SCA deal was set up in early 2001, so they should have been well aware that further Tour wins were quite likely.

moray_gub

RichN95 wrote:

Monty Dog wrote:

If you had suspicious motives, you could conclude that Tailwind were readily aware that by being prepared by Ferrari - and the 4th place result in the preceding Vuelta confirmed it - that they were in for a big pay-day come July and SCA were inadvertantly drawn in to their scam. Tailwinds lawyers must have been laughing all the way to the bank when there was 'no doping' exclusion in the agreement.

The SCA deal was set up in early 2001, so they should have been well aware that further Tour wins were quite likely.

You are gonna have to stop this Rich this is cruel thats the 2nd time in few days you have blown ol Monty out of the water.

whiteboytrash

Monty Dog wrote:

Quote: If the wins get marked off they can get money back but if a Riis asterisk is used what would they do then ?

But Rijs didn't engineer himself a deal with an unsuspecting third party that he'd get a big pay out ?

If you had suspicious motives, you could conclude that Tailwind were readily aware that by being prepared by Ferrari - and the 4th place result in the preceding Vuelta confirmed it - that they were in for a big pay-day come July and SCA were inadvertantly drawn in to their scam. Tailwinds lawyers must have been laughing all the way to the bank when there was 'no doping' exclusion in the agreement.

You raise a very good point and it’s my understanding is that the Federal investigators have more interest in employment law than they do recovering money for SCA The 5million is lost forever. SCA did not have a “no doping” clause in the contract. However the interest and the fees from that case will probably have to be given back and some. The employment law issue in regards to tailwind is very interesting. I'm waiting for which way that one may turn. Being an owner of Tailwind could cause an issue. We'll have to wait and see how these things were structured in terms of Armstrong ownership. Tax evasion is what will send the man to prison. Not paying tax for 8 years is not a very smart move. It will bring down Hincapie as well. Not a very smart idea avoiding paying tax. What’s worse an investigation which is a waste of tax payers money or chasing someone who doesn’t pay tax?

moray_gub

whiteboytrash wrote:

Not paying tax for 8 years is not a very smart move. It will bring down Hincapie as well. Not a very smart idea avoiding paying tax. What’s worse an investigation which is a waste of tax payers money or chasing someone who doesn’t pay tax?

Do you actually have any evidence to claim they have avoided paying tax for 8 years ?

whiteboytrash

Moray Gub wrote:

whiteboytrash wrote:

Not paying tax for 8 years is not a very smart move. It will bring down Hincapie as well. Not a very smart idea avoiding paying tax. What’s worse an investigation which is a waste of tax payers money or chasing someone who doesn’t pay tax?

Do you actually have any evidence to claim they have avoided paying tax for 8 years ?

I don't no. Why would I have such evidence? But the Federal Investigators do. Thanks to Landis’s testimony and his interview he provided to the WSJ. You can read it for yourself if you like? Go on I dare you.

moray_gub

whiteboytrash wrote:

Moray Gub wrote:

whiteboytrash wrote:

Not paying tax for 8 years is not a very smart move. It will bring down Hincapie as well. Not a very smart idea avoiding paying tax. What’s worse an investigation which is a waste of tax payers money or chasing someone who doesn’t pay tax?

Do you actually have any evidence to claim they have avoided paying tax for 8 years ?

I don't no. Why would I have such evidence? But the Federal Investigators do. Thanks to Landis’s testimony and his interview he provided to the WSJ. You can read it for yourself if you like? Go on I dare you.

So in summary you dont really know if the evidence is there at all , thanks for clearing that up.

whiteboytrash

Moray Gub wrote:

whiteboytrash wrote:

Moray Gub wrote:

whiteboytrash wrote:

Not paying tax for 8 years is not a very smart move. It will bring down Hincapie as well. Not a very smart idea avoiding paying tax. What’s worse an investigation which is a waste of tax payers money or chasing someone who doesn’t pay tax?

Do you actually have any evidence to claim they have avoided paying tax for 8 years ?

I don't no. Why would I have such evidence? But the Federal Investigators do. Thanks to Landis’s testimony and his interview he provided to the WSJ. You can read it for yourself if you like? Go on I dare you.

So in summary you dont really know if the evidence is there at all , thanks for clearing that up.

Cheers thanks for the post. See attached evidence. But of course Landis is making it all up because he wants to go to jail for perjury. Shouldnt be to hard for the Feds and Interpol to connect the dots on this one. Perhaps easier for them as theyre not blinded by an emotional connection as you are.

Please dont respond back because you know Im right and youll just embarrasses yourself further on a public board.

__

Landis responded with a long message to Verbiest in which he copied Armstrong, McQuaid, and several others. He wrote "this is America and people have a right to free speech." Landis then proceeded to describe an episode involving a close Armstrong backer, Jim Ochowicz, a former cycling official who now owns the BMC Racing team. Landis wrote that in 2005 Ochowicz advised him to set up a secret bank account through the Swiss bank UBS to avoid American taxes on his salary.

"While Mr. Ochowitz served as advisor for the Phonak team he introduced me to a financial advisor from UBS while we were in Zurich and the two advised me to and advised me how to deposit my paycheck into the UBS bank in order to avoid ever having to pay federal tax in the United States," Landis wrote Verbiest. "I never took their very poor advice but only bring it to your attention to enlighten you to the good possibility that Mr. Verbugen and Mr. Armstrong could easily have made a financial agreement without any evidence thereof."

Through a spokesperson, Ochowicz declined to comment on the allegation. Ochowicz is currently with his team at the Tour de France. He has denied Landis' earlier claim that he had knowledge of Landis' doping on Phonak, the team Landis competed for in 2005 and 2006.

According to two sources with close knowledge of the investigation, Landis has told Novitzky about that conversation with Ochowicz. Whatever Landis said, he has to be prepared to stand by it; lying to a federal investigator is illegal, as track star Marion Jones learned when she was convicted of lying to Novitzky about her relationship to BALCO and its products.

BikingBernie

whiteboytrash wrote:

...of course Landis is making it all up because he wants to go to jail for perjury. Shouldn't be to hard for the Feds and Interpol to connect the dots on this one.

Good one, I like your logic, which is very relevant to what Landis has said about doping at USP.

moray_gub

BikingBernie wrote:

whiteboytrash wrote:

...of course Landis is making it all up because he wants to go to jail for perjury. Shouldn't be to hard for the Feds and Interpol to connect the dots on this one.

Good one, I like your logic, which is very relevant to what Landis has said about doping at USP.

All this thread needS now is you for you to produce a graph detailing 8 years of tax evasion............go on i am sure you have got one

whiteboytrash

Moray Gub wrote:

BikingBernie wrote:

whiteboytrash wrote:

...of course Landis is making it all up because he wants to go to jail for perjury. Shouldn't be to hard for the Feds and Interpol to connect the dots on this one.

Good one, I like your logic, which is very relevant to what Landis has said about doping at USP.

All this thread needS now is you for you to produce a graph detailing 8 years of tax evasion............go on i am sure you have got one

What I have is a sworn statement, a federal investigation and a full detailed letter on the tax evasion. Which is a very strong argument that it took place. What you have is nothing to prove there wasn't. No denial, no comment and just evasion. I like my position. Its strong. Unless you can show me evidence that this didn't occur then I'll keep safe that it did.

You're not very good at this are you?

moray_gub

whiteboytrash wrote:

Moray Gub wrote:

BikingBernie wrote:

whiteboytrash wrote:

...of course Landis is making it all up because he wants to go to jail for perjury. Shouldn't be to hard for the Feds and Interpol to connect the dots on this one.

Good one, I like your logic, which is very relevant to what Landis has said about doping at USP.

All this thread needS now is you for you to produce a graph detailing 8 years of tax evasion............go on i am sure you have got one

What I have is a sworn statement, a federal investigation and a full detailed letter on the tax evasion. Which is a very strong argument that it took place. What you have is nothing to prove there wasn't. No denial, no comment and just evasion. I like my position. Its strong. Unless you can show me evidence that this didn't occur then I'll keep safe that it did.

You're not very good at this are you?

You have a sworn statement from a discredited witness which does not detail 8 years of tax evasion of LA or GH and a federal investigation the exact details of which are still vague unless you know differently. Now i dont know what from that lot can make you say with some kind of authority that LA and GA are guilty of 8 years of tax evasion. Your position is not strong its just speculation based on a few leaked titbits and discredited witness . As for not being very good i am not the one making claims of 8 years tax evasion based upon little or no evidence.

No_Ta_Doctor

whiteboytrash - as my reputation here is that of a LA hater who wants to see him go down I think I'd better pick you up on the strength of your particular argument re tax-evasion.

What you have is the suggestion from Landis, that LA & Hincapie might have received similar advice re tax avoidance that he did. It's a fairly strong possibility, I can't see why only specific riders would have received such advice. That said, Landis himself didn't take the advice. So IF LA and GH got the same advice there's no reason to suggest they actually followed it, after all, Landis didn't.

Furthermore, while it's certainly worth pursuing to see if there has been tax evasion going on, not all tax avoidance is tax evasion. There tend to be many well known loopholes in the tax system which are regularly exploited by those earning enough money to pay for an accountant that knows them. The legal status of earnings will be particularly complicated when an employee is effectively living and working abroad.

I doubt the prosecution will have any interest in personal tax evasion, as they are looking at misuse of public money.

symo

I am sure that whoever was at USPS in charge of the accounts has a full set of receipts for the bikes sold on eBay.

moray_gub

No tA Doctor wrote:

whiteboytrash - as my reputation here is that of a LA hater who wants to see him go down I think I'd better pick you up on the strength of your particular argument re tax-evasion.

What you have is the suggestion from Landis, that LA & Hincapie might have received similar advice re tax avoidance that he did. It's a fairly strong possibility, I can't see why only specific riders would have received such advice. That said, Landis himself didn't take the advice. So IF LA and GH got the same advice there's no reason to suggest they actually followed it, after all, Landis didn't.

Furthermore, while it's certainly worth pursuing to see if there has been tax evasion going on, not all tax avoidance is tax evasion. There tend to be many well known loopholes in the tax system which are regularly exploited by those earning enough money to pay for an accountant that knows them. The legal status of earnings will be particularly complicated when an employee is effectively living and working abroad.

I doubt the prosecution will have any interest in personal tax evasion, as they are looking at misuse of public money.

You have made the point perfectly well LA and GH may be guilty of many things they may not but as it stands at the moment the evidence in the public domain of of 8 years of tax evasion amounts to the square root of f*ck all.

whiteboytrash

Looks like Armstrong was trying to shut the story down early but threatening Landis. Looking more and more like Armstrong will be taken away in cuffs by years out. Is there no end to his intimidation?

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/more_ ... court.html

afx237vi

whiteboytrash wrote:

Looks like Armstrong was trying to shut the story down early but threatening Landis. Looking more and more like Armstrong will be taken away in cuffs by years out. Is there no end to his intimidation?

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/more_ ... court.html

Fabiani told the Daily News. "The idea that Lance's team wanted to speak with Landis is simply the latest of Landis' Floyd-brications."

Wait... is this the Daily News or the Daily Show?

micron

For Armstrong it's looking more and more like a cluster-floyd - the whole thing is outlandish

Master of Disaster? Height of Shite more like

moray_gub

whiteboytrash wrote:

Looks like Armstrong was trying to shut the story down early but threatening Landis. Looking more and more like Armstrong will be taken away in cuffs by years out. Is there no end to his intimidation?

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/more_ ... court.html

I am getting the feeling with you that you read these articles and just make up what suits your arguement despite their being little evidence to support your claims. Kinda like the 8 years of tax evasion shite you were coming out with a few days ago but has strangely been dropped like the proverbial hot tattie.

symo

You know the USPS doctor who said he never saw anything untoward; how come he never noticed landis's drug taking? Ergo how can his testimony be in any way creditable?

ddraver

“From that point of view, it’s unfortunate that people who could have approached this in a completely different way didn’t do so. They just went public.”

well no Pat, Landis was saying how the UCI were covering up positive tests and hidding the true nature of doping in cycling. Why would he go to the UCI with that info - if he's telling the truth (I said if!!!) they know already and are nt doing anything about it, so he went elsewhere...

...I'm afraid I have to side with andyp's OP here...