2nd Former Nike Oregon Project Massage Therapist Comes Forward And Admits He Had Grave Concerns - Went To USADA In 2012

tutalige wrote:

Fact-Checker Jackson wrote:

This post is astonishingly bad. Basically, every statement you made is wrong.

Just a couple of things that don't require much tedious writing to refute:

"The basis of democracy is the belief that there must be hard evidence".

No it isn't.

"Hearsay did not bring down Lance, a failed test did".

Wrong.

Seriously? He failed 4 tests in 1999 that were covered up with false/back dated TUE's. The lack of B samples to test made it impossible to charge him.

Not that I feel like this matters with NOP but if you plan on calling someone out at least have the facts.

Are you paying attention to what you're saying? Yes, Armstrong tested positive for cortisone in 1999. It was excused at the time, and he ended up being busted 14 years later. So, it wasn't what brought him down. Cortisone was nothing compared to the other stuff he was taking, anyway. What brought him down was the USADA report explaining US Postal's systematic doping program, which was corroborated by the testimony of numerous other riders on the team. Sure, there were reports of covered-up positive tests, but they were never proven definitively one way or the other. They didn't need to be, because he was already busted.

So, in summary: yes, it's true Armstrong tested positive on at least one occasion, and probably had numerous positive tests covered up. His 1999 samples were later found (thanks to a French reporter) to be positive for EPO. However, those tests were not what did him in. That evidence was around for many years, and Armstrong was getting off scot-free. The USADA report is what did him in, and positive drug tests were pretty much irrelevant to the USADA report.

JAKIR wrote:

Makhdaddy Fan wrote:

Wait, you mean you weren't real?

Ha as if. I'm gonna retire him because there were too many impostors messing up the threads and then they would delete the threads. I'm actually pretty proud that he became so popular. I put a lot of work into him.

No! We've come to depend on you as the inauthentic voice of the Maghreb.

JAKIR FAN CLUB wrote:

JAKIR wrote:

Ha as if. I'm gonna retire him because there were too many impostors messing up the threads and then they would delete the threads. I'm actually pretty proud that he became so popular. I put a lot of work into him.

No! We've come to depend on you as the inauthentic voice of the Maghreb.

+1

Fact-Checker Jackson wrote:

Are you paying attention to what you're saying? Yes, Armstrong tested positive for cortisone in 1999. It was excused at the time, and he ended up being busted 14 years later. So, it wasn't what brought him down.... What brought him down was the USADA report explaining US Postal's systematic doping program, which was corroborated by the testimony of numerous other riders on the team.....

So, in summary: yes, it's true Armstrong tested positive on at least one occasion, and probably had numerous positive tests covered up. His 1999 samples were later found (thanks to a French reporter) to be positive for EPO. However, those tests were not what did him in. That evidence was around for many years, and Armstrong was getting off scot-free. The USADA report is what did him in, and positive drug tests were pretty much irrelevant to the USADA report.

It seems unlikely that the USADA is going to be as successful against NOP. The USADA report on Armstrong was made possible by the collaboration of the FDA investigatory team, led by Jeff Novitzky. The FDA investigators let USADA officials see evidence that the FDA collected using its federal powers to compel and threaten witnesses. On its own, the USADA would not have been able to get much, if any, of that evidence.

Novitzky shared what he found with USADA because his investigation of Armstrong, like his results were so legally weak that federal prosecutors declined to file charges against Armstrong. (In BALCO, most of the charges were eventually dismissed; Novitzky was so sloppy that he was eventually sanctioned by the 9th Circuit for ignoring the terms of a search warrant.)

Since USADA is not a government agency, giving it access to the results of federal investigation is sketchy to say the least. But hey, it got results. Since nobody from the FDA or USADA was charged with a crime, what they did must have been legal, right?

In other words, in the federal steroid investigations, Novitzky and the government had the same attitude towards the law as Salazar and NOP have towards the doping rules: As long as you win and don't get caught, it's all good.

Full disclosure:

Earlier in this post there was a post by Rojo saying, "Stiner told me that he normally got the night off before the meets and Alberto did the massages."

John Stiner has texted to say he never said that to Rojo and Rojo said he was just going off his memory not any notes so we have removed it and replies that referenced it. Our apologies. A bit sloppy but I am disclosing it so people don't think there is any conspiracy. We get stuff wrong too.

wejo wrote:

Full disclosure:

Earlier in this post there was a post by Rojo saying, "Stiner told me that he normally got the night off before the meets and Alberto did the massages."

John Stiner has texted to say he never said that to Rojo and Rojo said he was just going off his memory not any notes so we have removed it and replies that referenced it. Our apologies. A bit sloppy but I am disclosing it so people don't think there is any conspiracy. We get stuff wrong too.

Wow.

wejo wrote:

We get stuff wrong too.

Wait for it...

runDirtyrun wrote:

So, Ms. Fleshman's specific statement that Al Sal wanted her to take a medication to her physical limit, not the prescribed dose, because Al Sal is seeking an androgenic effect isn't asking Ms. Fleshman to dope?

Really?

Lauren said doing so was legal. If that is correct, then Salazar did not encourage her to cheat.

Also, saying "to her physical limit" is a lie. Please keep things honest.

So again, which of the 17 NOPers is saying they saw cheating or were encouraged to cheat?

I don't disagree that there are questions that need answering, but there is a surprising lack of evidence or testimony about doping.

jewbacca wrote:

wejo wrote:

Full disclosure:

Earlier in this post there was a post by Rojo saying, "Stiner told me that he normally got the night off before the meets and Alberto did the massages."

John Stiner has texted to say he never said that to Rojo and Rojo said he was just going off his memory not any notes so we have removed it and replies that referenced it. Our apologies. A bit sloppy but I am disclosing it so people don't think there is any conspiracy. We get stuff wrong too.

Wow.

I believe this is called libel, wejo.

E

jewbacca wrote:

runDirtyrun wrote:

So, Ms. Fleshman's specific statement that Al Sal wanted her to take a medication to her physical limit, not the prescribed dose, because Al Sal is seeking an androgenic effect isn't asking Ms. Fleshman to dope?

Really?

Lauren said doing so was legal. If that is correct, then Salazar did not encourage her to cheat.

Also, saying "to her physical limit" is a lie. Please keep things honest.

So again, which of the 17 NOPers is saying they saw cheating or were encouraged to cheat?

I don't disagree that there are questions that need answering, but there is a surprising lack of evidence or testimony about doping.

USing a TUE is not cheating. Abusing TUEs and obtaining them under false pretenses is CHEATING

jewbacca wrote:

jewbacca wrote:

Wow.

I believe this is called libel, wejo.

Yes, and much of what the BroJos "report" is what they say others have said or what they recall just like the oops above. It's so f'ing casual. This site is a blog. They don't know what good journalism is.

For example, the home page is currently littered with stories by the UK's version of the National Enquirer, The Daily Mail ( see

). The BroJos are treating TDM's regurgitation of what's (mainly already) been reported as news.

Trust me, I'm Jimmy Saville wrote:

This site is a blog.

regurgitation of what's (mainly already) been reported as news.

Err, yes - "We don’t try and re-invent the wheel at LetsRun.com".

I wonder if there was a happy ending.

I love it when sprinters/non-distance runners try to come on and throw around the statement, "nobody cares about distance running thing." Well actually over 19 million people in America alone finished a distance running event in 2013. That is a fairly large number of people. Here is the link my friend:

http://www.runningusa.org/statistics

To all of those who couldn't make it in football, basketball or baseball and therefore sprint, good job.

Yes, I did not mention soccer, because we suck at it and have 318 million people in our country. Take a look at the countries who have won. That is why I say to all of those parents who put your kids in soccer, because they suck at the major sports, nice job.

Additionally, we are winning medals, so that old argument can die.

This looks like revisionist history. One of Tygart's complaints was that the federal investigation was completely uncooperative -- he had to "redo" all the evidence gathering on his own. At best, the USADA investigation benefited indirectly, as once the other riders told the truth to federal investigators, they were finally prepared to confess to USADA. Without the federal investigations, (and the fear of being sent to jail like Marion Jones), USADA might not have been able to build any case. But I think there was no sharing of evidence from the federal investigation.

Wejo, isn't this a bit disingenuous? Your site posts obvious lies to garner interest and hits (that's right, you cheat in order to make money). One "cheater" creating a stir to call another a cheater is interesting indeed. Some might call this psychopathic behavior. Libel? Don't bet against Nike's lawyers including Rojo/Wejo in such a legal action down the road. Yes, it's going to get interesting for those who are "cheater" enough to justify this kind of libel to make a buck. You can't reset the "toll", Wejo...you've done it too many times.

jewbacca wrote:

jewbacca wrote:

Wow.

I believe this is called libel, wejo.

For it to be libel, Salazar, a public figure, would have to prove that rojo knew it was false at the time yet reported it anyway out of malicious intent.

That's nearly impossible.

Trust me, I'm Jimmy Saville wrote:

Yes, and much of what the BroJos "report" is what they say others have said or what they recall just like the oops above. It's so f'ing casual. This site is a blog. They don't know what good journalism is.

For example, the home page is currently littered with stories by the UK's version of the National Enquirer, The Daily Mail ( see

http://tktk.gawker.com/my-year-ripping-off-the-web-with-the-daily-mail-online-1689453286

). The BroJos are treating TDM's regurgitation of what's (mainly already) been reported as news.

They break new information as "#th athlete comes forward against NOP" when the real news is someone badgered for a statement, which ProPublica quoted in their blog/newssite.

jewbacca wrote:

jewbacca wrote:

Wow.

I believe this is called libel, wejo.

That doesn't come any way near the threshold for libel.