USADA: Abuse of Power

The USADA doping review panel has formally charged Lance Armstrong, Johan Bruyneel, Dr. Luis Garcia Del Moral, Dr. Pedro Celaya, and Dr. Michele Ferrari, of the accusations contained in the USADA charging letter. The vote of the three panel anti-doping review board was unanimous.  Unfortunately, a very unsavory incident occurred.  Asked to respond to the anti-doping review board decision Clark Griffith stated in the most flippant, arrogant, and cavalier way, "I can't wait for an arbitrator to see this evidence."  This would have been bad enough, but to add gasoline to the flames, Lance Armstrong tweeted a link to a news article that alleges Clark Griffith plead no contest to a charge of exposing himself to a twenty four year old young lady.  Clark Griffith, declared Lance Armstrong in his tweet, is the sort of garbage that USADA employees to consider relevant evidence pertaining to my case and the arguments outlined in my mandatory response to the USADA charging letter.

It is difficult to maintain that the USADA anti-doping review board took Lance Armstrong's response seriously.  But Robert Luskin outlined practices of USADA that could be construed as violations of Federal Law.  Improper use of secret Federal grand jury testimony. Bribery, threats, and cajolery of witnesses in an attempt to manipulate witness testimony to favor the prosecution.  Threats and coercion of arbitrators. Example: backroom assurances by USADA that if the neutral arbitrator does not agree with the USADA position; termination.  Do you recall Shyman Das?  A refusal on the part of USADA to reveal either UCI or WADA expert witness testimony that the recorded blood values given to Lance Armstrong as evidence reflect a consistent use of recombinant erythropoietin or blood manipulation and not normal blood variations that could be expected in an elite cyclist.  After all, Lance Armstrong posted all of his test results on his website Livestrong and it is almost a certainty that though these test results were scrutinized by millions of Lance haters, but there were no accusations of indications of doping, because if there was even a smidgen of evidence the haters would have declared something untoward, and there would have been an unending series of caricatures and bad Internet lampoons.  Robert Luskin also demanded to know the specific names of the specific witnesses with their contact information, that pertained to the individual charges outlined in the USADA charging letter.  Example: the name of the witnesses who claimed they saw Dr. Del Moral, Dr. Pedro Celaya, and Dr. Ferrari administer rEPO injections, dates, times, persons injected, and any other pertinent relevant information.  There are more issues in the Lance Armstrong response, but you can peruse the letter for yourselves and draw your own conclusions as to the potential legal implications.

Then there is the assertion by USADA that the eight year statute of limitations can be waved because Lance Armstrong, instead of confessing to use and abuse of performance enhancing drugs, lied under oath.  This claims USADA makes the Hellebuyck award applicable to Lance Armstrong.  But as Robert Luskin pointed out in his response, Hellebuyck admitted to perjury and it was understood by both Hellebuyck and USADA that he was an admitted perjurer and doper.  But Lance Armstrong has consistently maintained that he did not and has never doped ever in his career.  Lance Armstrong has never made an admission to doping nor has he confessed to using performance enhancing drugs.  So consequently the Hellebuyck waiver of the eight year statue of limitations does not apply to Lance Armstrong.

.Now that Lance Armstrong has been formally charged of a doping offense it would be expected that the identity of the witnesses who have written or spoken formal denunciations as to a systematic doping conspiracy at U.S. Postal Service, Discovery Channel, Astana, and Radio Shack will be released so that the Lance Armstrong defense will have an opportunity to interview these people, accumulate pertinent historical background information, etc.  The statement by USADA that the anti-doping review board expressed a concern that it was in the best interest of the witnesses to conceal their identities to those witnesses that were currently known to the public domain to prevent intimidation, is nonsensical and absurd.  It has been widely reported in the press that e-mails written by Floyd Landis to USA Cycling CEO Steve Johnson, and the 60 Minutes interview of Tyler Hamilton, are to be used as a bases of evidence to prove the conspiracy theory. There have been no reports of death threats against Floyd Landis or Tyler Hamilton.  There have been no reports of inappropriate contact or of witness intimidation against Floyd Landis or Tyler Hamilton.  So where is the justification of the concern for concealing their identities?

First there is the circus atmosphere then there is the theater of the absurd.  The anti-doping review board are the clowns who stick out their tongues at the defendants, who are so smug after so many of years of success; USADA never loses an arbitration case and when we are sued in Federal court we never lose, so come get us if you dare!  But there is a bridge too far gentlemen, a line one must not cross, USADA is dealing with a very high profile case, with a very popular athlete, and people are paying attention!  The absurd?  Having these mystery witnesses testify with from an distant room with their faces electronically scrambled and their voices electronically masked, to protect their identities!  Lance Armstrong and his defense team along with the spectators can play a game of guess the witness, with prizes for the first successful candidate!  Example: from the vitriolic statements of hate generated by this witness I will guess the bearded lady Betsy Andreu!  Correct!  Five points.  Next contestant.

Last point:  USADA wants to drag the old Tour de Suisse alleged rEPO positive from the grave as an example of a Lance Armstrong positive dope test, based upon the Tyler Hamilton 60 Minutes interview.  Tyler Hamilton claims that Lance Armstrong told him that he tested positive during the 2001 Tour de Suisse and that Lance Armstrong arranged to cover up the test result by offering a bribe in the form of a donation to the UCI and by contributing enough for WADA to buy some laboratory diagnostic equipment.  But the man in charge of the WADA accredited laboratory at Lausanne Dr. Saugy denied any positive test by Lance Armstrong during the 2001 Tour de Suisse, in fact Dr. Saugy insisted that he would never testify in court that the results he measured indicated a positive test.  Hein Verbruggen, former president of the UCI also denied any cover up or acceptance by the UCI of bribes in the form of donations by Lance Armstrong and he is suggesting possible legal action against Tyler Hamilton for making these outrageous statements.  It should be noted as an aside that Hein Verbruggen and Pat McQuaid are suing Floyd Landis in a Swiss court for slander because Floyd Landis accused the UCI of falsifying test results to protect certain high profile cyclists.  Is USADA the next to be sued by the UCI because it accuses the UCI of cover up of a positive test and accepting bribes?  And if the UCI can sue Floyd Landis why not Lance Armstrong to sue USADA, Tyler Hamilton, and Floyd Landis after all of the dust clears?

I wanted to watch the Tour de France without all of these worthless doping distractions.  The timing of the official charges of doping against Lance Armstrong on the day of the Tour de France prologue seems no accident to me.  Now there will be endless discussions of dope, dope, dope!  Foo!  This stupid, idiotic, inquisitorial witch hunt just keeps on giving and stimulating the long dormant brain cells that I hoped would never be revived again.