Travis Tygart: Out Of Bounds

Travis Tygart is pounding the drum for Lance Armstrong to come forward, complete with confession in hand, to implicate the duplicitous nefarious scoundrels that comprise the UCI leadership, who allegedly accept bribes in return for favorable suppression of positive dope tests.  Hein Verbruggen allegedly stuffed his pockets on numerous occasions from desperate cyclists who would rather continue to "unduly enrich" themselves rather than face arbitration hearings, suspensions, disgrace, and lack of income.  It has also been alleged that the current president of the UCI Pat McQuaid along with the current UCI executive committee endeavored to cover up this bribery scheme.

Of course, all of these issues were to be rectified by an investigation by an independent committee of highly qualified people who were expected to leave no stone unturned to arrive at the truth.  There was a question as to the true nature of the independence of the committee, however, when it was revealed that some of the committee members had affiliation with the International Olympic Committee that by implication would infer a covert effort to protect the World Anti-Doping Agency from any culpability.  Also one would wonder if the committee composed of such people would have a motive for revenge against the UCI for past skirmishes and lawsuits that were filed between the UCI and WADA during the Hein Verbruggen administration.

Nevertheless, the lack of cooperation of Lance Armstrong to come forward and blow the whistle on the UCI is troublesome considering the fact that the independent committee was disbanded before considering the bribery issue and considering the fact that the UCI executive committee has refused to take any action.  Travis Tygart is convinced that the independent committee was abandoned so that the blinders and handcuffs would remain on in order to leave the truth opaque.  Perhaps Lance Armstrong would be more forthcoming if Travis Tygart would be more diplomatic and compromise by reducing the lifetime ban he imposed with a more reasonable suspension.  However, this is unlikely to happen because then cycling fanatics could accuse USADA of employing the same sort of duplicitous tactics that Hein Verbruggen employed only in a opposite sense, bribery for information, instead of bribery for suppression of information.  This USADA method was quite successful when applied to cyclists who were more than willing to provide affidavits to implicate Lance Armstrong, Johan Bruyneel, Michele Ferrari, et al, during the steroid era of rampant doping that allegedly occurred on the United States Postal Service Professional Cycling Team.  Indeed, USADA was not loath to bribe riders with sweetheart deals to extract "truth."  So why would USADA be reluctant to continue the trend of deals for information with Lance Armstrong, the man who could settle the issue once and for all?  Is it because Lance Armstrong refused to come forward and admit under oath that the entire contents of the Reasoned Decision was truth not statements based upon envious people with an axe to grind or upon imaginary embellishments contrived through an excess of prosecutorial zeal?  Lance Armstrong did admit to using performance enhancing drugs, but he never suggested that the contents of the Reasoned Decision reflected an accurate depiction of events.  Most people came to the conclusion that the contents of the Reasoned Decision reflected truthful accounts of events by default not through an a posteriori examination of the evidence preferably by an independent committee.  It would be reasonable to conclude that USADA had in mind verification of the Reasoned Decision by the chief culprit himself, and it is not unreasonable to suggest that Lance Armstrong would be baited into implicating himself into some sort of criminal case by careful legal maneuvering that would be revenge for the lack of a criminal indictment by the Federal Grand Jury probe.

Nevertheless, Lance Armstrong refused to accept a barren hook devoid of the worm on the advice of his attorney who scented out the trap.  After all,  Lance Armstrong would have to confirm the conclusions of the Reasoned Decision, if he refused to confirm every conclusion, USADA would call him an outright liar, deceiver, and cheat, as they have done with his denials of using performance enhancing drugs after riding with Discovery Channel in 2005.  Lance Armstrong claims to have ridden clean in 2009 and 2010, but USADA claims UCI Biological Passport data that proves doping, even though in the absence of a failed anti-doping test the UCI Biological Passport data is nothing more than a statement of probability.  Perhaps USADA was counting upon Lance Armstrong to confirm under oath that the UCI Biological Passport data that USADA had in their possession was a factual record of doping in spite of his formal denials during the Oprah Winfrey "confession," more  icing on the cake.  For years the UCI Biological Passport has been criticized as an expensive boondoggle that exposes nothing more than wishful thinking, but an admission by Lance Armstrong would be the final coup de grace to all of the critics forevermore who have the audacity to question the UCI Biological Passport and would set in stone another atrocity against the fundamental rights of athletes.

Clearly Travis Tygart should focus on his own concerns and refrain from trying to police the entire cycling community.  We all know that the UCI is a corrupt organization that should be placed under adult supervision and that the elements that promote corruption should be eradicated without constantly being reminded of this fact by USADA.  We realize that the UCI needs immediate reform and replacement of certain undesirable elements and a new refreshing approach, but we are also cynical enough not to expect miracles.  But then again intransigence, obstinacy, and a refusal to make concessions in expectation of future rewards is also the wrong approach to the problem and ensures nothing more than continual failure to achieve stated goals.  But can you reason with grandiose madmen to make them discern reason from folly?  Good luck with that.

Floyd Landis Qui Tam: Jury Award One Dollar

The United States Postal Service has joined Floyd Landis as a party in a qui tam lawsuit against Lance Armstrong and Johan Bruyneel for .   A qui tam action is defined by law.com as:

qui tam action

: (kwee tam) n. from Latin for "who as well," a lawsuit brought by a private citizen (popularly called a "whistle blower") against a person or company who is believed to have violated the law in the performance of a contract with the government or in violation of a government regulation, when there is a statute which provides for a penalty for such violations. Qui tam suits are brought for "the government as well as the plaintiff." In a qui tam action the plaintiff (the person bringing the suit) will be entitled to a percentage of the recovery of the penalty (which may include large amounts for breach of contract) as a reward for exposing the wrongdoing and recovering funds for the government. Sometimes the federal or state government will intervene and become a party to the suit in order to guarantee success and be part of any negotiations and conduct of the case. This type of action is generally based on significant violations which involve fraudulent or criminal acts, and not technical violations and/or errors.

The transcript of the legal filing appears here, if someone is insane enough to wade through all of that crap.  The bottom line of all this rot is the greed of whistle blower Floyd Landis who wants a certain percentage of what could amount to one a hundred and twenty million dollar penalty!  Half of Lance Armstrong's estimated wealth.  Given to a dope addict who was schooled by uber dope doctor Michele Ferrari who trained his disciples on the techniques of how to cheat and never be detected, and who "knowingly" used these methods to "unjustly enrich" themselves not only before riding with the United States Professional Cycling Team but afterwards with varying degrees of sophistication until caught by improved testing methodology.  But, so what, Floyd Landis also defrauded many of his supporters in a bogus attempt to prove his innocence by soliciting money via the Floyd Fairness Fund, a fact that has been forgiven due to the cooperative nature of the deceiver.

What didn't Frankie Andreu and his wife Betsy want any of that action?  Just revenge for calling Betsy an "ugly old cow" by a stupid brute clown tyrant who thought he could dictate terms via threats and intimidation.  There is nothing more vicious than a woman scorned and nothing sweeter than spending a man's money whom you despise.  But nevertheless why rehash old allegations that seemingly have been proven true by an unchallenged prosecution summary of events?  More important than old axes to be ground is establishing in a legal sense the damage done and who suffered from these actions, Floyd Landis or the U.S. Postal Service?  These facts will be stipulated in a jury trial if Lance Armstrong and Johan Bruyneel does not settle the dispute from some settlement; however it has been speculated that the U.S. Postal Service reaped millions of dollars in advertising profits as a direct result of the sponsorship of Lance Armstrong and the uncanny success of the U.S. Postal Service Professional Cycling Team.  And Floyd Landis would have suffered no monetary damage at all if he would have employed his pea size brain after the bonk.  Very difficult to establish harm by any definition and the only true and just result from a jury would be one dollar in compensation in damages as a symbolic gesture, the share awarded to Floyd Landis for his whistle blowing prowess, one thin dime.

The U.S. Postal Service has no excuse, they knew of the doping accusations against Lance Armstrong and the team, yet they continued to sponsor the team until the letter carriers objected because they thought Lance Armstrong was being paid an inordinate salary.  So greed outweighed common sense in the face of accumulating evidence that Lance Armstrong's most strident competitors were testing positive for performance enhancing drugs on and off the bike.  The French government also spent two years conducting an investigation into the U.S. Postal Professional Cycling Team after traces of actovegin was found in some medical waste discarded by a team car and recovered by a French television station.  This investigation was internationally known and commented upon by the press world wide and must have come to the attention of the U.S. Postal Service.  Nevertheless, all of these warning signs were ignored and did not seem to serve as sufficient motivation for the U. S. Postal Service to drop the sponsorship of the team.

 Ad nauseum.  Let this be a lesson to everyone.  Government stay the hell out of cycling.  Government loves to take money from the golden goose for as long as possible but when the goose runs out of golden eggs then it is time to fleece the golden feathers.  Government loves to inflict suffering upon people who no longer produce as a bizarre form of social Darwinism; retirees or ex-cyclists with million dollar bank accounts who were unlucky enough not to be perceptive enough to offshore their money in tax shelters.  A man works his heart out and government is not satisfied with the contribution made, government expects further sacrifices in the name of the unborn.  Government is never satisfied with the pain that it inflicts upon others as a motivating factor; bums must be subjected to hunger and exposure in order to compel them to seek work or become self sufficient,  food stamps must be withheld from needy families as an incentive to seek better jobs or to reproduce less (even though the food stamp program is the best small business subsidy ever invented; the corporate barons don't care where or how you eat as long as you show up ready to work; starving workers like starving students are non-productive and generate revolutions circa 1789) or for other mythological reasons, as long as the tyrants flourish.

Government, stay the hell out of cycling!  To quote the Raven: forevermore!

UCI: Run the Gauntlet

Spring!  Nature's regeneration after the long, abysmal winter, the first flowers of the season are emerging from long hibernation.  It is time for the spring classic races, the era of stagnation is over, the sweetheart suspensions are over, it's time to get back on the bike and do some racing!

However, being the eternal pessimist, being deprived from the endless Lance Armstrong spectacle that was supposed to result in cauterizing the metastasizing cancer that infected cycling, and deprived of the happiness of seeing the UCI publicly humiliated with a total confession of complicity in crime, coverup, and hypocritical dissimilation of self righteous rhetoric that was enough to make you puke; deprived of the extermination of bad influences and a total revamping of the system, well who would not feel disappointed?

A good public whipping or hanging sets a deterrent example for others and these forms of barbarity have been in existence since Cain murdered his brother Able.  Oui?  So what deters the UCI executive committee from using similar methods to purge their ranks of undesirables?  There is no use in pretending that these untoward brigands will ever repent or cease, given the opportunity, to resist temptation.  Graft and corruption is wrong, accepting bribes is wrong, moral turpitude is wrong, and invites bad behavior from others similarly inclined.

So why not force these undesirable scoundrels to run the gauntlet?  We could follow the Russian military example, issue birch switches to the riders, then run the scoundrels through the ranks.  But these tactics though acceptable in an autocratic state are certainly unacceptable in civilized society and would amount to murder, would it not?  But something has to happen because the infection has to be cauterized before the parasite proliferates leaving a wake of corpses.  To do nothing is a positive hazard to public decency.

A good woman who I spoke to was positively offended with the treatment that Lance Armstrong was receiving from USADA and the press.  "They have taken everything from that man already, so why don't they just leave him alone?"  She tried to counter my argument that people love nothing more than a good spectacle of public brutality by an  irrational argument that equated goodness to people.  This is a fallacy, goodness is not an inherent trait in people.  People are inherently evil and they will take advantage of any opportunity of avarice for greed or advancement, even if the collateral damage leaves a wake of corpses.  People are callous and jaded, they do not have empathy or compassion toward the welfare of others, or their families.

That is why USADA could not simply leave Lance Armstrong alone, ambition trumped.  The sadistic nature of our natures demands that ritualistic sacrifice prevail over common sense and good taste. Absolute power without restraint gives reign to undignified barbaric rituals like running men through gauntlets.  There is a public appetite for these spectacles, people derive an internal satisfaction at the misfortunes of others, and of inflicting pain on others, especially when there is no fear of adverse consequences to themselves.

These arguments are self-evident, so in conclusion I ask: When will the UCI inflict a flogging and clean house?