Thursday, May 17, 2007

Prank Gone Very Wrong

If we take Lemond's word at face value, what happened on the phone last night a little before 7:00pm?

Lemond, and others, have characterized it as a blackmail attempt of some kind, a threat, or extortion, or witness tampering. Whether it would be any of those legally, I can't say.

From the substance of what Lemond testified to previously, I can't believe it was worth making a threat about -- he had nothing substantive to offer, and it appeared the Landis attorneys were completely prepared to handle what Lemond had said.

So what was it about?


Those who know him are aware that Geoghegan is something of a loose cannon. When we heard the testimony, some of us thought, "that would be a Will thing to do." And I think we imagined him doing it as trash talk or an annoying prank.

Horrifically ill-considered and insane at this stage, if true.

I still don't know what the facts are, exactly. It certainly looks like Geoghegan made a call -- the Velonews report looks reliable.

Whether what was said on the call may be different than what was claimed -- we may never know the truth of the contents of the call, unless the caller confesses.

If Geoghegan had called to say, "Just want you to know we're ready for you tomorrow," it was still seriously, dangerously, ill-considered.

But there really was no value in USADA bringing it up in this hearing the way they did. That was an assassination, and a threat to anyone who attempts to fight back: Give us anything, and we'll drop the bomb on you.

It's payback for Landis' talk of reform, and threats to their existence.

And Will may have given them the bomb, one way or another.


Anonymous said...

ORG here ...

TBV, speculate

As I posted over on DPF, USADA should rest tomorrow. Will the defense call Landis to explain his side. Before this event, I would have said no way he testifies. Now things have changed.

Will USADA still call Will? Should the defense call Will? Don't pretend it did not happen. Get it out their.

Anonymous said...

I doubt Will would testify given the fact that he is now being investigated by police.

I do think Floyd needs to testify.

I also don't think USADA have done enough to rebut even the opening statement by Floyd's lawyers. The testimony by Lemond reeked of desperation and trying to win this on an emotional level when science fails.

Anonymous said...

Did Will really admit and apologize to Lemond as the AP article says????

Anonymous said...

Is this really the way it happened? said...

Pretty much. I'm not professional enough to keep typing, and neither is Bill, so we went for a walk.


Anonymous said...

you guys are doin agreat job---despite the craziness!

Anonymous said...

I don't think this was in any way an attempt to intimidate Lemond into not testifying. It looks like a idiotic, childish, and incredibly ill timed attempt to get under Lemond's skin. More of a case of someone's competitive spirit getting out of hand than a crime.

If Geoghegan did what Lemond says he hurt himself and Landis, but did no real harm to Lemond.

This is not worth ruining someone's life with a felony conviction.

Lemond can take the high road here. Accept Geoghegan's apology and do what he can to call off the authorities. I think that would be the right thing.

I've certainly done some extremely stupid things in my life? You know, those "what the hell was I thinking" moments? Most of us have, but we were lucky our stupidity didn't play out in public like this. We were also lucky if the people we hurt by our actions showed a little forgiveness.

~ Cub

Anonymous said...

Lemond's a pussy cry baby. Just read the first paragraph and anyone would agree. Go home Lemond. You sniveler.

Anonymous said...

This whole debacle looks seriously in need of an investigation by the Department of Justice. Any chance Lance Armstrong could prevail upon President Bush to bring about such an inquiry? I would love to see some of these USADA jokers behind bars. It would be a far better use of our tax dollars.

Anonymous said...

maybe i'm missing something in the testimony, but where did geoghegan say, "if you ABC, i will XYZ, so you'd better watch out?"

"threats" usually include, you know, threats. i guess there could be an implied threat of running into his molestor the next day, but presumably it was fairly obvious that "uncle ron" wasn't really uncle ron.

disgusting? yeah. stupid? yeah. ill advised? yeah. but threatening? i don't see it. just an ass being an ass.

Anonymous said...

Lemond has a pathological compulsion to not do the right thing, so he'll milk this to stay in the headlines and spout his "I'm the best clean US rider ever" garbage.

Anonymous said...

i don't understand something (maybe because i'm coming into this whole thing fairly recently).

landis and lemond talk. in that talk lemond urges landis to "come clean" becuase it will help him emotionally. lemond tells landis that he came clean about his abuse and it helped him.

so why is it a threat to tell other people that lemond was molested? the whole pointof the conversation was that it wasn't a secret anymore.

or am i reading that wrong?

Anonymous said...

I think we can all say we didn't see that one coming. I'm also sad that is what it takes to get the main stream media involved. I realy hope its not true, but I'm not willing to buy into the jacked phone unless its proven. Is LeMond an a$$? yes Did he have any substance to contribute to the case before the "call?" not really. any substance after the call? no, just accusations of a bad call by a friend and an advisor to landis.

Just like the leak of the a sample, it is out there and there is no taking it back and now they have to catch up. If Will did make the call I hope he nuts up, apologizes and explains himself. The truth.

Atown, Tx.

kate said...

Dave, Bill,

Thanks for the work, for being the eyes and ears, and dare I say it, the human shield for the bomb that was dropped today. It was tough to read and hear, but I'm sure the impact of being at ground zero was greater.

You guys are doing a great job, please don't give up.

Thank you!!
Wishing you much Aloha,

[Brother]Mark said...

i don't know what to think... i'm more disillusioned in lemond that i ever could be in landis. floyd can't control what geoghegan does or says, but apparently neither can lemond control himself. he had to know he was fodder, just like the lab techs. if he really wants change in cycling he should be lobbying for change, not crying crocodile tears about how he is the last great clean champion.

i was stupid enough to think this whole thing was about did/didn't, and metabolite[s] et al. it's not even close. it's about f.u. landis- we'll spray you with a stink you'll never wash off, and we'll keep our preferred parking.

every time i think i understand this, it becomes more faustian, and so- i hate to say it- sad. am i so out of touch with the real world?

remember in the movie "breaking away" when dave stoller comes home from riding with the italians and says to his dad "everyone cheats- i just didn't know..." the best his dad can say is "well, now you know." that's how i feel.

Anonymous said...

I find it amazing that following one of the worst 'threats' ('pranks') in the history of sports, that people continue to call out the 'threatened' -- LeMond. 99.5% of the public are going to condemn Floyd Landis. There are the prior threats by Landis against LeMond, and the labeling of LeMond as 'Satan'. That doesn't sound like a man working to better his sport.

Any action in this hearing from here out will look aggressive, vindictive, and mean-spirited.

Birds of a feather flock together. The Landis team committed this injury on a fellow cyclist. The team contains the man (Jacobs) whose riches come from fighting anti-doping authorities trying to clean up sports. There is probably no recovery in the public's eye.

I would advise Landis to hold a press conference. He doesn't have to admit guilt. He does have to admit his role in this circus. He should call off his dogs, and then try to work for the betterment of the sport and a better anti-doping effort.

What is is about the olive branch that people don't understand? That in the end belligerence, while appealing to competitive vindictiveness, never settles anything over time.

Landis has a few hours now to determine his place in history. He may be 'acquitted' or he may be 'convicted' but does that really matter now in this circus? If acquitted he will appear like the OJ Simpson of cycling: acquitted through clever lawyering. If convicted, he will appear to be the dark villain who's team threatened a Tour de France winner of 'outing' child abuse.

Landis could call off the case without guilt or innocence, as too damaging at this point. He might make a deal to save his friend from the possibility of a felony arrest. He could like like he took the high road who said 'look I could press on because I think the lab and WADA sometimes convict innocent athletes, but I am not going to continue. I feel too much damage has been done to the sport. Let's all go home and think about how the future can be made better'.

Or Landis could continue to fight, and look like a bitter man, winner or loser. How many people will rejoice over a winner whose team might have engaged in 'dirty tricks'?

Anonymous said...

This is Floyd's post on DPF which was deleted for obvious reasons. The question about Will Geoghegan's brain snap will be of concern to Floyd considering the threats in this post against GL.

"I did, as I used to do for some people, call GL privately to discuss some comments that he made about me and my situation. I used to believe that a private call was the best way to deal with public slander. I have subsequently learned that the phone call will become public and the contents thereof misconstrued into whatever fits the agenda. What Greg actualy divulged to me is what he does not want to talk about. I did not call for advice, I called to give him a chance to plead his case as to why he was speaking when he had never spoken to me nor met me in the past and in no way could be portrayed as knowing me personally. Unfortunately, the facts that he divulged to me in the hour which he spoke and gave no opportunity for me to do the same, would damage his character severely and I would rather not do what has been done to me. However, if he ever opens his mouth again and the word Floyd comes out, I will tell you all some things that you will wish you didn't know and unfortunately I will have entered the race to the bottom which is now in progress. For the record, I don't know Greg, and have no more respect for Greg than I have for people who go through life blaming others for all of their problems. You are not a victim of others Greg, you are a pathetic human who believes that if others didn't cheat (not sure about you) you would be the President and all the peasants would bow to your command. Join reality with the rest of us who win some and lose some and keep on smiling."

Anonymous said...

Reading this site is like entering another world. Landis and his business manager threaten Lemond, but it's a USADA conspiracy to damn Landis in the press?? To assassinate him and deny him jsutice? Landis has spent a lot of time and money impugning the reputation of the lab and the USADA; he should not be too surprised when the other side fights back.

Landis' defense seems to be to make mountains out of mole hills and to win the public's sympathy, to say he was teated unfairly, even if he gets sanctioned. Well, that strategy went out the window with today's events. No matter what happens Landis looks really bad.

A lot of people believed Hamilton initially. The lies and the bogus defense has made Hamilton a bit of joke amongst a lot of fans now, even among fans that believed him at first. Landis has now put himself in the same position. Threatening to reveal someone's sexual abuse as a child to shut him up? Aside from being unbelievably stupid, it's a lowlife, scummy thing to do. There is no excuse for it. The man on the street doesn't know jack about lab protocol and hearing procedures, but they can understand this attack on Lemond.

TBV needs to step back and take a deep breath. What started as a rational site has now become so biased it's not very useful. Try being objective and not looking at everything as part of a grand conspiracy to get Landis.

Anonymous said...

Why admit to something you didn't do? Regardless of what LeMond claims and Geoghan(sp) said, it doesn't reflect the evidence that's coming out.

And remember, Team Landis hasn't even begun their case. They WERE confidently crossing witnesses.

Lemond is a circus sideshow put in by USADA. The testimony today went sideways. Ayotte put it back on track. Now let's see whether the adjudicators have the balls to judge this thing ethically or not, based on EVIDENCE, not DRAMA.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous @ 8:17 - You should educate yourself before you speak. The post was not removed. The post was lost (along with hundreds of others) in a very well-publicised server crash.

That object in your mouth is oyur foot.

Anonymous said...

The unequal relationship between individual athlete and a federally funded agency USADA/WADA is from the outset weighted in favor of the agency. The agency can call witnesses with no significant relevance to arbitration hearings and create a public credibility crisis for the athlete. It doesn’t matter there are no pertinent facts from the testimony. "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." What happened to the scientific evidence this hearing is to explore? In this “Goliath versus David” battle, David is taking some hits.

Glendora, Calif

Anonymous said...

In this “Goliath versus David” battle, David is taking some hits.

He's taking hits from the stones that he himself threw.

Anonymous said...

I am sorry, but isn't the reason Greg Lemond set to testify to tell the jury about the telephone call he had with Floyd, where floyd admitted that he could not tell the truth because it would hurt too many people ?

I agree with the posters who are amazed that people are vilifying Lemond. It is scary to see such people in action.

Anonymous said...

While it looks most likely Georghegan made the call (although what was said is another matter) there is at this time no evidence that Landis himself or his lawyers were involved at all. Perhaps they were, perhaps not.

However, I wonder if it was the matter of abuse that Landis was talking about in the DPF post quoted above. He said whatever it was "would damage his character severely " (refering to Lemond). While being a victim of sexual abuse may be embarassing, in this day and age there are few if any who would find this fact damaging to Lemond's character.

Anonymous said...

You're wrong, this is what Lemond says happened. This is the same guy who cried that Lance "threatened" him. Waaah. He had no business being there, bringing hearsay and an agenda to what should be a scientific inquiry. Heck, for all the proof Lemond has, I could say that I talked to Floyd and he said he was innocent. It would and should carry about the same level of credibility.

Anonymous said...

Of course the fight between the athlete and the quasi-governmental agency is biased. Athletes have not figured this out yet?

If an athlete doesn't want to abide by the bureaucracy of say the Tour de France, then simply don't enter the race. An athlete knows the rules WADA has laid down. No one puts a gun to the head of an athlete and says 'enter that race'.

Sorry Floyd Landis feels robbed. I coached basketball for 10 years and felt robbed alot. The St Louis Cardinals got robbed in the 1985 World Series too. Did they hire a bunch of lawyers to sue the umpire that made a bad call?

Me thinks Landis doth protest too much. If he was so innocent invite WADA to test each and every urine sample he ever gave. An innocent man has nothing to hide. Kinda like Gary Hart invited the press to follow him.

Don't like the race, then form your own race and enter it. Make your own anti-doping rules.

Sure the USADA seems harsh. If other cyclists didn't drug-cheat there would be no USADA monitoring the sport.

People talk about whining? How many whines/excuses have we seen from the Landis camp? Alcohol. The French are biased. The lab sucks. The USADA was after Lance Armstrong. Dick Pound is a jerk (Ok so not all are without foundation). The technicians are idiots. The samples were mislabeled.

This sounds harsh on a man who strikes many as good and decent. After all these shenanigans, the 'good and decent' adjectives are receding.

Anonymous said...

"You're wrong, this is what Lemond says happened. This is the same guy who cried that Lance "threatened" him. Waaah. He had no business being there, bringing hearsay and an agenda to what should be a scientific inquiry. Heck, for all the proof Lemond has, I could say that I talked to Floyd and he said he was innocent. It would and should carry about the same level of credibility."

Are you saying that witnesses in general are not allowed to present their version of the facts, or just Lemond? Maybe Lemond was telling the truth when Armstrong threatened him, and again now. He has more credibility than you or me because of his profile in cycling. He is under oath to tell the truth... Landis's lawyers could cross examine him, and that is their right. I don't think it is irrelevant. I am also not sure if it is not allowed to bring a non scientist into the debate. I would have to defer to a legal specialist.

Jim T said...

"Landis's lawyers could cross examine him, and that is their right."

Well, apparently not. Lemond wouldn't answer questions.

This whole arbitration process is not equipped to handle these types of cases. We need to have a process that allows for pre-trial depositions of witnesses to preclude this sort of nonsense.

Anonymous said...

Maybe Lemond was telling the truth when Armstrong threatened him, and again now.

You are dealing with true believers here. It's not like Armstrong has not threatened others, but anyone who says anything bad about Armstrong is a liar. Anyone who is accused of doping is innocent. It's all a French conspiracy. Never mind that Lemond's assertions of rampant dope use in cycling have proven to be true.

Anonymous said...

Well, apparently not. Lemond wouldn't answer questions.

He would not answer questions about Armstrong, which is irrelevant to the case anyway. Are you saying that Landis' lawyers could not ask questions about Landis' admission and Landis' and Will's threats?

Anonymous said...

maybe you are right that the system is not set up to handle cases like this.

As for your comment on the cross examination, I think that Jacobs was allowed to question him, but not about the Armstrong affair. They could, however, have questioned Lemond on the phone call, the conversation he had in August 2006 etc... those facts pertaining to the Landis case....

Jacobs could not ask those questions he wanted (refering to the Armstrong episode) so he opted to stop questioning and try to get the wttness testimony thrown out. That did not work.

Anonymous said...

"Well, apparently not. Lemond wouldn't answer questions."

And that is the crux of the matter. Lemond, who said he had nothing to hide, came in with his accusations and then hid behind his lawyer. His testimony is worth zero (nada) unless he opens himself up to cross examination. Cross examination includes questions related to and building a case for possible motive for lying. These questions were allowed by the arbitration panel, but he refused to answer. I would never trust anyone who comes into a court, makes accusations and then refuses to be questioned. Also, unless witch hunts are in vogue, I suggest waiting until Landis has a chance to respond -- in other words, the novel idea of hearing both sides of the story before burning someone at the stake.

Anonymous said...

Are you suggesting that the fact that Lemond bad mouth other American Tour champions, and has accused other American Tour Champios of intimadation right before testifying in arbriation is not relvent?

As amzaing as Lemond's tale was today (An American Tour Champion admited doping to him and threatened him to keep his mouth shut), THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME THIS HAS HAPPENED!!

What are the odds of this?

Anonymous said...

"As amzaing as Lemond's tale was today (An American Tour Champion admited doping to him and threatened him to keep his mouth shut), THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME THIS HAS HAPPENED!"

Wow what are the odds that really high profle cyclists like Armstrong and Landis would feel like Lemond is a threat and might want to silence him. I would have expected that of Armstrong, less so of Landis, but it is clearly written up in DP forums... makes Lanids look like a really angry man ready to take action if he was crossed... I suggest you read that.

But to be fair we should see how this trial pans out and give Landis the benefit of the doubt until he has his time to prove his side of things...that is if he want to talk about it.

Anonymous said...

Landis is a scumbag cheater!

Theresa said...

I'm getting a headache. I could care less about the way LeMond lives his life, if he'd quit attacking US cyclists, that win "his race". I'm not taking away his accomplishments as a cyclist
, but he's become bitter about the top stars in cycling. Floyd called LeMond, because he was talking to the press about him, and saying things with no basis. We do not know what was said; but whatever it was Floyd was angry. Should he have expressed his frustration and anger at the situation on the DPF, maybe not, but he was blowing off steam. And I have been to DPF and there is a LOT of blowing and going on that forum when people get worked up.

The phone call was STUPID. Will, tried to apologize to Greg, and Greg brushed him off, saying that the police would handle it fair enough. Floyd has another mess to deal with, only this time, a friend caused it.
LeMond is being the victim, he took the situation and ran with it; straight to the USADA. I'm sorry for what happened to him, but He's the one telling the whole world about it, not Floyd.

Anonymous said...

If pro cyclists would quit doping then Lemond would not have anything to criticize.

Landis' threats on DPF were almost as stupid as Geoghegan's phone call. Together they paint a very bad picture of Landis and his defense.

Anonymous said...

This day didn't help Landis one bit. I guess I have mixed feelings about Lemond's testimony because we will never know what was really said between Lemond and Landis. Two people can have a phone conversation and when asked about its contents can tell completely different stories, and they like each other! After all the bad blood between Lemond and Armstrong I don't think its plausable that Floyd would "come clean" to Lemond. I just think its really really shitty for Lemond to try and convict Landis over a phone conversation where "he" determined guilt. Floyd never told him he's dirty.

Having said that, Floyd's manager is an a** hole and deserves to be fired. What a moronic move.

The reason Lemond isn't going to say anything about Armstrong is because of his business relationship with Trek. Pure and simple. Trek could back out of its licensing agreement with Lemond and he would be out a lot of money.

Plus, and I'll shut up, athletes stick together. Maybe Lemond never dopped. We'll never know. But he knows fully well that cycling has a long history of doping, from speed to EPO. Probably 80% of the pro's he raced against took something. Everyone is alwyas looking for an edge, always has been, and always will. Why he chooses to target American "champions" is a punk move. You know, enjoy your retirement, sell your bikes, make your "holier than thou" comments, but don't try and convict other athletes from a freaking phone call.

Anonymous said...

Why shouldn't Lemond speak out against doping. The sport is in the process of self destructing because of widescale doping. There are a hundred pros involved in Operation Puerto. Television ratings have dropped into the toilet, and sponsors are being scared off. Perhaps if more ex-pros would have spoken out about the situation then things would not have gotten so far.

Instead everyone bonded together, enforced omerta, and kept quiet until the whole thing exploded.

Anonymous said...

I am not a blind Landis supporter but there are some curious (read, “fishy”) things going on here:

1) G. Lemond meets Landis one time, and then on their second ever conversation (not even in person) he divulges to a near stranger that he was sexually abused? This is really odd.

2) Would someone really be that stupid to call a witness the night before their testimony with threats/disgusting prank from their own cell which everyone knows the number will show up on the caller ID? If you wanted to threaten/be really vile, why wouldn’t you use a pay phone or something. Is Will really that stupid?

3) There is a jump to conclude that Landis’ threat to Lemond in the DPF post was in regard to the admission of abuse. Landis’ parenthetical statement further down the post “…who believes that if others didn't cheat (not sure about you)…” shows that what Landis had on Lemond most likely had something to do with the latter’s involvement in PED and not the sexual abuse. It seems like Landis’ threat was not to divulge the personal tragedy of Lemond’s abuse, but rather that perhaps the self proclaimed champion of clean cycling isn’t (or at least hasn’t been) so clean after all.

Aside: It was a mistake for Jacobs to play the Lance card with Lemond. He should have crossed Lemond on some of the improbabilities noted above rather than try to show a grudge against the Lance-centric cycling world. Thus, Landis’ attorneys have now committed two major gaffs. Firstly, Suh was wrong to stop down his cross on Monongu for that document, and Jacobs was wrong to get the Lance issue involved. These will be two costly mistakes in the long run.

swimyouidiot said...

TbV, you may have a problem with "re-writing" your own work (sort of a "I said it, I should live with it" thing), but "prank" is inaccurate and demeaning to LeMond. We don't know much really about the phone call, but when kids make stupid calls for fun, it's a prank. This was not for fun. In any reasonable scenario, it was personally vicious, even if not a threat.

Anonymous said...


I find it very disturbing that somehow you (TBV) are spinning this as a "prank" and USADA's actions as "a threat to anyone who attempts to fight back: Give us anything, and we'll drop the bomb on you." Will called Greg!

Anonymous said...

Anon @11:32PM said, "If pro cyclists would quit doping then Lemond would not have anything to criticize."

I don't think so. Lemond would find something to criticize since there seem to be so many gullible idiots eager for his drivel. The fault is entirely Lance Armstrong's. He should have left well enough alone after nearly dying of cancer. But, no. He had to go back to France and win Lemond's race. Incredibly, only Lemond is entitled to win the TDF following recovery from near death.

More incredible is that for so many, allegation seems to equate to guilt. We are all such good discerners of other people's intentions and actions!

There has not been a shred of verifiable proof that Landis used illegal performance enhancing substances. THERE ARE ONLY ALLEGATIONS THAT HE DID. Ostensibly, the purpose of this present hearing is to determine if the evidence of the allegations is sufficient on its own merits to support a conclusion of doping. But that clearly does not seem to be the aim of the USADA. Otherwise, why the whole Lemond melee?

I am so sick of hearing the "innocent have nothing to hide." That is implacably naive. History is replete with innocent people being trampled over when they were in the way of someone's usually corrupt agenda. And to suggest that the innocent an athlete should be subject to more scrutiny just to affirm his or her innocence is ludicrous. The cost, particularly in terms of time and stress, would be too great and would diminish the innocent's performance no doubt.

And what should we make of Oscar Pereio's comments that if he must submit DNA to clear himself of the Operation Puerto, he will quit from professional cycling? For some, this would be tantamount to admitting guilt. But it could mean that the costs and sacrifices necessary to continue competing are no longer worth it to him.

Seems to me that the tact of WADA/USADA is to bring allegations against the top cyclists (Armstrong, Ullrich, Basso, Landis) to force capitulation with the goal being to compel all cyclist to refrain from doping because the costs will be too high, not if caught, but merely if one is accused. This is all very Machiavellian. These tactis work. Baseball out to try it. But it probably wouldn't work, because Americans still suffer from this latent antiquated notion that one is innocent until proven guilty. And we all know that innocence can be bought. And since innocene can be bought, the truly innocent must pay an enormous price to establish and defend themselves.

Was Armstrong clean? None of us knows for sure. Is Landis clean? How much weight should be given to insinuation, appearance, and unsubstantiated allegations? And if an athlete must abide by rules and regulation, shouldn't the WADA and its certified labs abide by its own rules?

If the lab indeed so screwed things up that there is no longer incontrovertible and unbiased evidence supporting an alleged doping violation, should a guilty sentence be promulgated and sustained because someone's agenda demands it?

The whole affair is appalling. But should really be no surprise now that we all inhabit the same global gulag.

Salem, Oregon

Anonymous said...

Still catching up and chasing this. What strikes me as strange is that USADA/WADA used Lemond in their opening case. His basic contention had nothing to do with the science and base for the presumption from the positve A and B's.

It was a walk over to the "non-analytical positive" approach that Pound likes. It may have been used here because they needed to draw attention away from points that Landis had made. I don't have the stream, so I can't tell. Will handed them a gift and they used it. I warned folks that this was going to be a knife fight, that the gloves would be off and each side would use whatever they had to advance their position.

It just seems to me that USADA/WADA could have gotten a much bigger bang for their buck by holding Lemond until their rebuttal - unless they are afraid that they are going to run out of time.

Landis should not fall on his blade over this. What he should do is admit that he erred in reposing trust in Will. End of attention to it.

Anonymous said...

Uh hello??? Do you think it's wise to post Will's cell phone number on the internet for any wacko to see? At least give the guy some privacy and blur out the number for goodness sake!

Anonymous said...

TBV staff...isn't it time to just throw up the white flag and surrender to the fact that Floyd is a scumbag of the highest order? He threatens Lemond on the Daily Peleton and his Manager does it again the night before Lemond testifies. It's over...he did it. Character IS Character.