Could Novitzky be under fire?

Cranberry,

There were quotes by Michael Rains in the Washington Post on Saturday and again in the Chronicle today referencing some information that he has provided to the government over the last two months. I'm simply providing a heads up regarding the content of the information he may have shared. Did you also note that Kevin Ryan recently stated that the end of the probe may be near. Ya think there might be a connection? Ya think there may be people who know about the information that Rains has been making referernce to in his recent public statements? It seems that Rains is certainly attempting to provide a hint.

 

Asking you this because I respect your opinion: Do you really think this is a dead horse?

Not directed at Dooley, but a year ago everyone is crying that the media turned its acne'd back on this story. Now it's a dead issue? No interest? I get that creamora only posts on this subject, so what? He obviously has extensive knowledge of it.

Seems to me this whole story is so far from dead...in a way we've barely scratched the surface.

 

What I mean: No one is changing anybody's mind about Bonds at this point, so people are glossing over Bonds coverage and the media is barely covering the home run chase. It's been settled that Aaron won't be there and Selig won't do the honors even if he's there. People are just burned out on all things Bonds.

And I think that's carrying over to the peripheral issues: Giambi, Balco, the batboy, the Mitchell probe. Granted, a lot of the reason why there aren't giant hedlines all over the place about this is that there's a lot of incremental process and redacted names at the moment. If the redactations get lifted, then interest could pick up again. Could

I think that people are tired of talking about the "steroid era" and will yawn when Bonds breaks the mark, then move on with life.

 

Novitzky may have some skeletons in his closet that at some point may become public knowledge. He and a couple of other IRS agents may be subjects of an internal investigation involving investigative misconduct. A part of it may involve some evidence which disappeared. There may be documents from this internal investigation in the possession of a few lawyers. These documents may not be under seal. here may be a lot more to this intriguing story.

The Big Ragu may possibly be able to provide more on this story. It seems as though he knows almost everything.

 

Yep.

As Irvin once said, "Don't lose the intensity" when the story goes where you don't want it to go. If Novitsky is guilty of misconduct, I hope he gets nailed to the wall. That would be some irony. The guy obsessed with Bonds ends up legally tripping himself and only serves to show that their is no legal case against Bonds.

We'll have to wait and see how the next chapter unfolds.

 

Ragu,

There are documents that prove that what I have posted here about an investigation of Novitzky is true. I can tell you this much. You will certainly not be the person who dictates when and where these documents are presented publically.

 

Once again, I am rewarded for not being one of the 17.

Excellent work.

 

Ragu,

Where's the indictment if they have such slam dunk evidence like you repeatedly suggest? What are you going to say after there is no indictment? Will you then burn your autographed copy of the Game of Shadows?

 

That's a lot of maybes, Creamora, although none of it would be terribly surprising. There's always been something creepy about the guy's obsession with Bonds (which the Playboy article captured at the very beginning). I'll never understand why the Chronicle has chosen to portray him as some type of hero.