The argument that contracts in cycling are short-lived so you'd be unwise to bully is not very convincing. You could just as well argue the other way around: it's a dog eat dog world so you care less about your teammates and don't mind bullying as much, since next year you'll be on a different team anyway.
It's clear where you stand on the issue... I find this automatic tendency by you and most of this forum to side with the bully, and try to discredit the bullied, quite fascinating. There is even an element of victim blaming: he shouldn't have been such an annoying little tw.t and just shut his mouth.
None of us know if there was actual bullying going on, it's of course also open to interpretation and a little hard to prove. But the defense from Bora's side now seems to be: he's very demanding, very difficult to work with, we put a lot of effort in but he was never satisfied and he kept complaining. How does that disprove bullying? If anything it seems to be an excuse for why bullying may have taken place.
It's a dog eat dog world and it is also a quite a small and open one (in terms of communication). Their are plenty of companies in the real world that employ more people than all 18 WT teams put together so there is little space to hide any personal faults.
Why would any person would want to have a reputation of being difficult to work with in such environment is beyond me, but probably seems reasonable to you somehow?
And no, I am not siding with the bully, I just think that the implication that your side is making about Bora is extremely serious and needs far more conclusive evidence than what has been presented so far.
But of course if what's been alleged so far is enough for your to presume and keep on presuming/digging in with your presumption that Bora employ people of very dubious morals and the management does not care, then I am sorry, but it also says a lot about you that you are prepared to stoop so low merely because the team you support would like to get the rider they want 1 year early.