Tyler sinks the Lance

disgruntledgoat

lostboysaint wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

MrTapir wrote:

Blazing Saddles wrote:

.
Middle ground might be to look at motivation and timing.

There was something on the CBS website about Hamilton looking for a book deal? But also he's subpoena'd/under oath isn't he?

He told the truth because if he didn't he'd go to jail. The book deal thing is a load of nonsense.

Erm, at which point did he tell the truth and at which point did he just say what the person asking the questions want to hear?

(No Fanboy!).

Probably around the point a nice Federal Prosecutor explained the concept and consequences of perjuring oneself before a Grand Jury.

iainf72

disgruntledgoat wrote:

Probably around the point a nice Federal Prosecutor explained the concept and consequences of perjuring oneself before a Grand Jury.

Also, grand juries cannot discuss what other people have said, which means you have nothing to "go along with"

lostboysaint

disgruntledgoat wrote:

lostboysaint wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

MrTapir wrote:

Blazing Saddles wrote:

.
Middle ground might be to look at motivation and timing.

There was something on the CBS website about Hamilton looking for a book deal? But also he's subpoena'd/under oath isn't he?

He told the truth because if he didn't he'd go to jail. The book deal thing is a load of nonsense.

Erm, at which point did he tell the truth and at which point did he just say what the person asking the questions want to hear?

(No Fanboy!).

Probably around the point a nice Federal Prosecutor explained the concept and consequences of perjuring oneself before a Grand Jury.

But that's bollocks isn't it. What you're confused with is that everyone is now saying what they know that the Federal Prosecutor wants to hear in order to avoid jail REGARDLESS of whether it's the truth.

As I said, I'm no Fanboy but the idea that all this evidence is now out in the open without coercion (the threat of jail etc.) is complete wank. As has been said many times the only way we'll ever know is when LA himself or Hincapie etc. choose to tell us.

disgruntledgoat

Why believe Hincapie over these guys? You've got at least 3 former team mates from those years who've publically admitted to doping, several more who are widely acknowledged to have doped whilst on the team and a boatload who've tested positive since leaving. Why do you need George Hincapie to tell you what was going on?

As to your other point, do you really believe that a federal prosecutor would have a job if all he did was carefully concoct an absolute pack of lies and tell a number of pro cyclists "sign it or you're going to jail"? Why wouldn't they speak out in public against such practices?

jibberjim

disgruntledgoat wrote:

Why believe Hincapie over these guys?

And Hincapie is refusing to even comment on it - hardly someone with unequivocal support.

cornoyemade

When Hincapie comes out, the other shoe will drop.
I Lost all respect for Lance after he buddied up to George W. Bush.
To quote Cavy . . . I hope Lance becomes someone's bitch in prison.

samiam

http://velonews.competitor.com/2011/05/ ... ons_174673

Hincapie - 'no comment'.

He will be forced to come out and testify eventually - that much is undeniable. Eventually something from the Armstrong PR machine will touch his conscience and he will be compelled to tell the truth. It must be difficult to suppress such an epic story when the world is screaming to hear it.

iainf72

samiam wrote:

He will be forced to come out and testify eventually - that much is undeniable. Eventually something from the Armstrong PR machine will touch his conscience and he will be compelled to tell the truth. It must be difficult to suppress such an epic story when the world is screaming to hear it.

He probably already has. I think the rumour says at least 2 people who were team mates and weren't Tyler or Floyd have told the same story. But it's up to them to speak publicly and they have nothing to gain but much to lose in doing it.

andyp

George forgot to say he's a nice guy, he's getting slack.

andyp

As an aside, how ironic is it that since Amgen, manufacturers of EPO, have taken over the sponsorship of the Tour of California, the event has been overshadowed each year by doping allegations?

rdt

lostboysaint wrote:

disgruntledgoat wrote:

lostboysaint wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

MrTapir wrote:

Blazing Saddles wrote:

.
Middle ground might be to look at motivation and timing.

There was something on the CBS website about Hamilton looking for a book deal? But also he's subpoena'd/under oath isn't he?

He told the truth because if he didn't he'd go to jail. The book deal thing is a load of nonsense.

Erm, at which point did he tell the truth and at which point did he just say what the person asking the questions want to hear?

(No Fanboy!).

Probably around the point a nice Federal Prosecutor explained the concept and consequences of perjuring oneself before a Grand Jury.

But that's bollocks isn't it. What you're confused with is that everyone is now saying what they know that the Federal Prosecutor wants to hear in order to avoid jail REGARDLESS of whether it's the truth.

So you're suggesting that those subpoenaed are so scared about doing jail time on a "perjury" charge that, instead of telling the truth, instead they're actually telling the grand jury what they think the Feds want to hear, even if that means them telling the grand jury a load of actual lies. So you're saying thatin order to avoid a perjury charge, they're intentionally perjuring themselves.

Occam's Razor says that you're talking total bollocks.

t4tomo

I like the way that Lance's denials are along the lines of " I've been tested more than anyone else and I've never tested positive" not "I've never doped / taken drugs/ cheated"

MrTapir

lostboysaint wrote:

iainf72 wrote:

MrTapir wrote:

Blazing Saddles wrote:

.
Middle ground might be to look at motivation and timing.

There was something on the CBS website about Hamilton looking for a book deal? But also he's subpoena'd/under oath isn't he?

He told the truth because if he didn't he'd go to jail. The book deal thing is a load of nonsense.

Erm, at which point did he tell the truth and at which point did he just say what the person asking the questions want to hear?

(No Fanboy!).

Probably the point where he was testifying before the grand jury

mididoctors

I would add..................

Kléber

Landis and Hamilton are pretty easy figures to attack. It'll be interesting to see what happens when word of Hincapie's testimony gets out.

What's interesting to note is the "full denial" strategy. Landis and Hamilton did just the same, holding out to the bitter end. In condemning them, it ultimately sets up Armstrong for a bigger fall if he's convicted in court because he's saying anyone who finally owns up is totally lacking in credibility.

mididoctors

he was crazy to make a comeback........

disgruntledgoat

Where's Dennis when you need him?

I agree with Mididoctors here, the comeback was spectacularly ill advised... I was thinking about it on the way in this morning. Hubris always undoes the powerful and successful.

inkyfingers

mididoctors wrote:

he was crazy to make a comeback........

True, if he hadn't this may have been less of a story. His comeback was both a personal and a sporting mistake.

dulldave

So if Hincapie were to confess and say it's all true, wouldn't that put him into the 'lied all along so he lacks credibility' category. I don't get the logic in this Hincapie obsession.

It'll be interesting to see if this Hamilton confession tips the balance for a few others on what they're prepared to say publicly. But it really doesn't matter what they've all said said to the media. It's what they've all said to the Feds that counts.

rick_chasey

Pwnage.

Make enough enemies and eventually it will be a problem when the vested interest is no longer there.

Indurain did it the proper way.

disgruntledgoat

I bet Armstrong is wishing he'd given Landis that job now...

iainf72

He's done a lot of good for a lot of people.

Just like Bernie Madoff.

No_Ta_Doctor

I love the facts4lance website.

{Hamilton is not Credible}
{Andreu is not Credible}

I'm wondering how long that list in the top menu will grow.

RichN95.

They're discussing all this in quite a bit of depth on Radio 5 Live at the moment. I didn't catch exactly who the designated expert is, but I think it's Lionel Bernie.

josame

t4tomo wrote:

I like the way that Lance's denials are along the lines of " I've been tested more than anyone else and I've never tested positive" not "I've never doped / taken drugs/ cheated"

This gets peddled out alot...Not true Lance has often categorically denied ever taking PED's

iainf72

RichN95 wrote:

They're discussing all this in quite a bit of depth on Radio 5 Live at the moment. I didn't catch exactly who the designated expert is, but I think it's Lionel Bernie.

It is Mr Birnie himself.

No_Ta_Doctor

Just reading Hincapie's statements:

“I know you’ve got a job and you’ve got to ask these questions. I’ve got a job too. My job’s here to race my bike, promote the sport that we all love; that I’ve sacrificed my whole life for and I just have no interest in dragging this sport through the mud, so I’m sorry, but I have no comment.

Look at all the fans out here; the race is doing awesome. It has incredible support and incredible sponsors. I believe in cycling. I believe in what cycling has done. I believe cycling has done more than any other sport to make it a clean sport. Why can’t we focus on that?

That's not actually just a non-committal "no comment". There's some serious use of distancing language there.

"I know you’ve got a job and you’ve got to ask these questions"
Underlines the validity of the investigation in general - he doesn't lie the questions but recognises they have to be asked. Removes the blame for it from the media and places it elsewhere (Hamilton/Floyd).

" I just have no interest in dragging this sport through the mud"
He's pissed off and won't be contributing to publicly stabbing Lance in the back.

" I believe cycling has done more than any other sport to make it a clean sport. Why can’t we focus on that?"
It's all in the past, can't we just forget it, things are better now.


If I had to bet one way or the other I'd say he fessed up in front of the grand jury but is too loyal to Lance to go public.

RichN95.

iainf72 wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

They're discussing all this in quite a bit of depth on Radio 5 Live at the moment. I didn't catch exactly who the designated expert is, but I think it's Lionel Bernie.

It is Mr Birnie himself.

They're now talking about superinjunctions. I bet Armstrong wishes they had them in America.

RichN95.

No tA Doctor wrote:

I love the facts4lance website.

{Hamilton is not Credible}
{Andreu is not Credible}

I'm wondering how long that list in the top menu will grow.

Has the Hulk testified? Because he's definitely not credible.

No_Ta_Doctor

RichN95 wrote:

No tA Doctor wrote:

I love the facts4lance website.

{Hamilton is not Credible}
{Andreu is not Credible}

I'm wondering how long that list in the top menu will grow.

Has the Hulk testified? Because he's definitely not credible.

Forgive me, but after a pause of over 10 years in following racing (Festina - Floyd's letter) I'm not up on nicknames. Unless you actually mean The Hulk (Hogan or the green bloke) in which case it just went over my head.