> I just wonder why Outside magazine still picks up the phone when Armstrong’s PR agency calls. I mean, is there anyone left that cares? There's a trial set fo

> I just wonder why Outside magazine still picks up the phone when Armstrong’s PR agency calls. I mean, is there anyone left that cares? There's a trial set for November 6, 2017, to decide if he "committed fraud by doping"[1]. Though, there are some bits that give some insight into his (poor) character - mainly, that Armstrong was so angry about the whole situation, that he felt unfairly singled-out as the face of doping in cycling (when everyone was doing it), that he thinks he did an ultimate good fighting cancer, etc, etc. There's clearly still a big part of him that thinks his doping was justifiable. One question related to the trial - the article says, The Postal Service paid Armstrong’s team $32,267,279...and Armstrong ­personally, could be forced to pay back three times that, or $96,801,837...The Postal Service’s own commissioned studies, four of them, showed that its contract with Armstrong’s team was worth close to $140 million in global media exposure, showing, in other words, that the USPS got a good deal" What does this mean for the trial? What does it mean for Armstrong if they find the USPS benefitted from the fraudulent contract? There was also uncertainty about whether "Armstrong’s deceptions and aggressive behavior" would be allowed in testimony. What testimony along those lines would be relevant to the fraud case? 1: https://www.bicycling.com/culture/doping/lance-armstrongs-fraud-trial-is-set-for-november https://www.bicycling.com/culture/doping/lance-armstrongs-fr...