USADA - Armstrong

[Benotti69]

I think Johan gave him a copy of the collected works.

I think Johan gave him the chapters on a regular basis over the 7 years 99-05.

 

[Berzin]

Well, it's finally Friday, August 10th.

I hope Judge Sparks had a good night's sleep.

What time is this verdict (or whatever it's called) supposed to be made public?

 

[clipperton]

A couple of the juicier extracts of Wada's reponse to McQuaids letters...


The UCI, an entity which knows nothing about what Mr. Landis or any of USADA’s many witnesses observed, an entity which never met with any witness and never conducted any investigation, is claiming to have “discovered the violation” and yet at the same time the UCI is, as you said in your July 13, letter, unable to determine “whether or not an anti-doping violation has occurred.” So, in your own words UCI claims both to have “discovered” a violation and to not know whether a violation occurred. This is exactly the sort of “Never, Never Land” created by the UCI’s nonsensical discovery rule and it well illustrates why that rule cannot possibly be enforceable under the Code,

first of all, just gotta thank everybody for an utter stonker of a thread, i can't tell you just how immensely i'm enjoying the work in here.

secondly, i've been following the thread and the above always seemed to be a very salient point, and i'm taking utterly enormous pleasure in the fact that it is only on this evening, when i am somewhere a little past half cut, that i can actually comprehend what is going on within said point, as it makes me understand exactly the state of mind one must be in to go along with the uci's version of logic.

 

[python]

after reading fat’s reply yesterday to both the usada and wada, I reasoned his usada piece was not worth further investment - i agree with those pointing that the rubbish was fat’s personal brain child…it has to be.

but did anyone carefully read his response to wada !? Oh boy, that was something.

it was definitely written by uci lawyers instructed to produce obfuscation wrapped in legal terms.

it is full rhetorical questions (i gave up counting after about 10), snide, sarcasm, misdirection, obvious misrepresentation and even claims that cycling was being insulted by wada..

one example. the uci clearly misrepresented one important wada point.

to quote howman, ‘we do not believe that UCI has accurately INTERPRETED its own rules in this regard..’. in response, uci accused wada of previously finding all uci rules COMPLYING with the Code. it does not take a lawyer to see the crude misdirection - wada was having an objection to uci INTERPRETING a rule, not the rule as written per se.

Iow, this was plain trolling executed by the uci and would be bannable by susan even under the rules of the clinic.

i doubt wada will leave this insult to it's authority and frankly to howman's intelligence, unanswered. A more stern rebuke is coming soon.

i reckon wada is now in consultations with ioc brass as to appropriateness and timing of a formal complaint with regard to wada Code violation.

it may lead either to uci withdrawing from wada agreements or to cycling being threatened with the expulsion from the olympics.

either even shall result in new leadership in the uci. at least i hope so.

 

[Morbius]

After reading the various submisions, I get the feeling that UCI and WADA are treating USADA v Armstrong as a battlefield in a much wider war.

Ignoring for a moment the Armstrong case and allegations of curruption, are there bigger political issues that UCI and Wada are fighting over? What is at stake for these organisations?

 

[python]

forgot to add another point i had after reading fat's documents - the role and stance of the united states olympic committee.

both the usada and wada (and even the uci) mentioned usada jurisdiction under several umbrellas including the usoc.

interestingly the ioc is very quiet.

but if one was interpreting the boldness of usada and wada language and the irritated whining about usoc rules in the armstrong and uci letters, it should be natural to interpret their position as they support usada (perhaps not overtly yet).

this rhymes nicely with my post above about the ioc being dragged into the picture, including also by a direct involvement of the very weighty member nation - the united states.

am i making sense or just dreaming ?

 

[the asian]

Just finished reading McQuaid's responses to WADA and USADA.
I initially thought these were jokes.The letters are utter garbage. Makes no sense at all.
No wonder the UCI's a mess if it's president can't even write a sensible reply.
I agree with the other posters who said that McQuaid must be knowing that his end is nearing.
We can only hope for reformed UCI with a better administration to move the sport forward.

 

[GJB123]

Just finished reading McQuaid's responses to WADA and USADA.
I initially thought these were jokes.The letters are utter garbage. Makes no sense at all.
No wonder the UCI's a mess if it's president can't even write a sensible reply.
I agree with the other posters who said that McQuaid must be knowing that his end is nearing.
We can only hope for reformed UCI with a better administration to move the sport forward.

My sentiments exactly. I started reading and thought it was all a big joke. I am quite used to reading complex legal stuff (being a law man requires me to be) but I couldn't understand one iota of what he is was trying to say or achieve. I t has been a long time ago that I didn't have a clue what is just read after more than 1 page. He managed within half a page. What a moron!

 

[ManInFull]

Well, it's finally Friday, August 10th.

I hope Judge Sparks had a good night's sleep.

What time is this verdict (or whatever it's called) supposed to be made public?

Will the judge actually make a ruling today or will he simply listen to both sides and then tell them that he will make a ruling at a future date?

 

[MarkvW]

after reading fat’s reply yesterday to both the usada and wada, I reasoned his usada piece was not worth further investment - i agree with those pointing that the rubbish was fat’s personal brain child…it has to be.

but did anyone carefully read his response to wada !? Oh boy, that was something.

it was definitely written by uci lawyers instructed to produce obfuscation wrapped in legal terms.

it is full rhetorical questions (i gave up counting after about 10), snide, sarcasm, misdirection, obvious misrepresentation and even claims that cycling was being insulted by wada..

one example. the uci clearly misrepresented one important wada point.

to quote howman, ‘we do not believe that UCI has accurately INTERPRETED its own rules in this regard..’. in response, uci accused wada of previously finding all uci rules COMPLYING with the Code. it does not take a lawyer to see the crude misdirection - wada was having an objection to uci INTERPRETING a rule, not the rule as written per se.

Iow, this was plain trolling executed by the uci and would be bannable by susan even under the rules of the clinic.

i doubt wada will leave this insult to it's authority and frankly to howman's intelligence, unanswered. A more stern rebuke is coming soon.

i reckon wada is now in consultations with ioc brass as to appropriateness and timing of a formal complaint with regard to wada Code violation.

it may lead either to uci withdrawing from wada agreements or to cycling being threatened with the expulsion from the olympics.

either even shall result in new leadership in the uci. at least i hope so.

McQuaid has to do something to derail USADA. Obviously his letters are not working. Now he has to involve a third party that has the power to make USADA leave Armstrong alone. Is that going to be CAS?

 

[Benotti69]

McQuaid has to do something to derail USADA. Obviously his letters are not working. Now he has to involve a third party that has the power to make USADA leave Armstrong alone. Is that going to be CAS?

If CAS let Armstrong off the hook, the floodgates to doping will be flung so far open that they will never close!

 

[D-Queued]

And he knows who a lot of us are...

And he doesn't like any of us.

Dave.

 

[Race Radio]

Well, it's finally Friday, August 10th.

I hope Judge Sparks had a good night's sleep.

What time is this verdict (or whatever it's called) supposed to be made public?

Hearing starts 2:00 Texas time today. There should be a decision but expect some attempt to clog the toilet by Wonderboy

 

[python]

<...> Is that going to be CAS?

i think i mentioned some place above that by my reckoning either side talking about cas (at this stage at least) is to put a pr face over their real tactical moves.

my reading of the legal back and forth (to repeat, i am not a lawyer) is that the sides pursue different goals.

armstrong/uci want to politicize the fight and keep the case revolving around the court system outside wada-code enforceable rules for as long as possible including trying to exhaust all appeal avenues...

whereas usada's goal is to force a north american arbitration hearing as the 1st stage and only then, if the circumstances require, go to cas.

it is obvious, why both have to keep mentioning cas NOW.

 

[python]

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/cycl...a-hearing-jurisdiction-due-process/56930568/1



Will this be the most likely thing that Wonderboy will do? Anything to be put a delay in the process.

i am not accusing usatoday of pro-armstrong bias, but noteworthy are the tiny errors and understatements...i find it is significant lack of professionalism for such a short article.

two examples.

one.
quote, 'USADA officials say they have up to 10 former Armstrong teammates and associates willing to testify against him'.
I thought that in normal english 'up to 10' means the count stops at 10 whereas every clinician knows that usada said MORE than 10.

two,
the article properly mentioned the uci backing armstrong but NOT ONE word about the 600 gorilla wada siding usada...there are other inaccuracies but this should be enough.

 

[Cerberus]

forgot to add another point i had after reading fat's documents - the role and stance of the united states olympic committee.

both the usada and wada (and even the uci) mentioned usada jurisdiction under several umbrellas including the usoc.

interestingly the ioc is very quiet.

but if one was interpreting the boldness of usada and wada language and the irritated whining about usoc rules in the armstrong and uci letters, it should be natural to interpret their position as they support usada (perhaps not overtly yet).

this rhymes nicely with my post above about the ioc being dragged into the picture, including also by a direct involvement of the very weighty member nation - the united states.

am i making sense or just dreaming ?

It's probably to early to draw conclusion for certain, but in relation to Hamilton asking to be removed from the Olympic rankings the IOC chairman writes "I very much appreciate that you have expressed regret for having used performance enhancing drugs and that you hope that, through your example and future efforts, this will discourage others from using performance enhancing drugs." One could speculate on what future efforts the OIC chairman might be referring to.

 

[thehog]

Sadly I've not seen an media reports on McQuaid's drunkin' letters.

 

[Deagol]

He couldn't even be bothered reading THE VERY NEXT POST before indulging in a "clever put down" - not!



I have no doubt whatsoever Lance and his henchmen are feverishly reading the Clinic and other cycling forums, various twitter feeds (@nyvelocity seems to have been hacked with 16000 spurious "followers" this morning) etc. Hell he's even following Anna Zimmerman. There is more analysis going on here and there than in his assassins lair.

I wouldn't be surprised if Judge Sparks intern is also keeping a weather eye on Clinic gossip and RRs twitter

If this is true, then some of the posts here are surely helping them out...

 

[Benotti69]

Sadly I've not seen an media reports on McQuaid's drunkin' letters.

No surprise there from an obedient anglo saxon media?

I would've thought the German media would've made an article out of it or the French and Italians

But the British wont. Not gonna print anything that suggests cycling is still in the gutter are they?

 

[Kennf1]

Hearing starts 2:00 Texas time today. There should be a decision but expect some attempt to clog the toilet by Wonderboy

There will be a detailed written order issued. Unless he's already written it, I doubt we will see anything today. More likely next week. Then, assuming he grants the motion, Armstrong will have 30 days to file a notice of appeal with the 5th Circuit.

 

[thehog]

There will be a detailed written order issued. Unless he's already written it, I doubt we will see anything today. More likely next week. Then, assuming he grants the motion, Armstrong will have 30 days to file a notice of appeal with the 5th Circuit.

Has to rule before the 13th.

 

[sniper]

No surprise there from an obedient anglo saxon media?

I would've thought the German media would've made an article out of it or the French and Italians

But the British wont. Not gonna print anything that suggests cycling is still in the gutter are they?

the story is developing every day, and rapidly, so I'd expect the media (including the more serious, critical outlets) to take a bit of distance until the dust has cleared, rather than to write something today which is incomplete tomorrow.

 

[MarkvW]

i think i mentioned some place above that by my reckoning either side talking about cas (at this stage at least) is to put a pr face over their real tactical moves.

my reading of the legal back and forth (to repeat, i am not a lawyer) is that the sides pursue different goals.

armstrong/uci want to politicize the fight and keep the case revolving around the court system outside wada-code enforceable rules for as long as possible including trying to exhaust all appeal avenues...

whereas usada's goal is to force a north american arbitration hearing as the 1st stage and only then, if the circumstances require, go to cas.

it is obvious, why both have to keep mentioning cas NOW.

It's not both sides, as I see it. It is at least three sides, maybe five: Armstrong, WADA/USADA, McQuaid and maybe USAC or the UCI. And this case should be out of court very soon.

On Monday, Armstrong has to decide whether or not he is going to elect arbitration.

If Armstrong declines arbitration, maybe Pat will just declare UCI's rejection of the results, and that will be that. But the evidence would still be on track for disclosure.

If the evidence is going to be suppressed, McQuaid has to do something more than write letters. Maybe McQuaid is not prepared to go that far down the road with Lance?

 

[Berzin]

There will be a detailed written order issued. Unless he's already written it, I doubt we will see anything today. More likely next week. Then, assuming he grants the motion, Armstrong will have 30 days to file a notice of appeal with the 5th Circuit.

Fanboys rejoice-Armstrong is "fighting" the charges not by moving forward and meeting them head-on, but by pulling every stalling tactic in the book so the process never gets a chance to play itself out.

If all this BS about the filing of another notice of appeal in some district court in another state is even remotely possible, someone do me a favor and wake me up when the case goes to arbitration, if it ever does.

Until then, I'm officially bored of this nonsense.

Good night.

 

[sniper]

Fanboys rejoice-Armstrong is "fighting" the charges not by moving forward and meeting them head-on, but by pulling every stalling tactic in the book so the process never gets a chance to play itself out.

If all this BS about the filing of another notice of appeal in some district court in another state is even remotely possible, someone do me a favor and wake me up when the case goes to arbitration, if it ever does.

Until then, I'm officially bored of this nonsense.

Good night.

this post was on the tip of my tongue.