Back in January, following developments in baseball’s doping saga, Dave McKenna asked (what I think is) an interesting question:
Why not go after the Biggest Kahuna of all the alleged drug cheats: Lance Armstrong?
Unlike Tejada, Armstrong has represented America and been named to various White House panels.
By the evidential standard used in the Mitchell Report — where, basically, if one hanger on says you’re guilty, you’re guilty — Armstrong looks a helluva lot guiltier than Clemens.
So let’s really get this show going. Bring in Lance Armstrong and put him under oath.
The comments that followed made for some interesting reading.
And so does this from the NY Times (and yes, I’ve posted this already on DC):
Two of Lance Armstrong’s eight teammates from the 1999 Tour de France have admitted for the first time that they used the banned endurance-boosting drug EPO in preparing for the race that year, when they helped Armstrong capture the first of his record seven titles.
Their disclosures, in interviews with The New York Times, are rare examples of candor in a sport protected by a powerful code of silence.
Omerta is all. But sometimes cracks do shine just a little light through.
Need I mention again the now infamous text of Andreu and Vaughter’s instant messaging from back in 2005? Yeah. Available for your review here: drunkcyclist.com/…implicated-on-the-internet.
A recent interview with Vaughters over at www.timesonline.co.uk
“Did you have any first-hand experience of doping in the States?” I ask.
“No, not in the US,” he replies.
“Not at all?”
“No, racing in the States is much less . . . I mean half the guys you are racing against have full-time jobs. You know? It is much, much less demanding.”
“What about when you joined the US Postal Service team in 1998?”
“In ’98? Why do you need to know that?” he laughs.
“I need to know when you witnessed it first-hand,” I explain. “I’m asking whether it was in ’98 that you witnessed it first-hand.”
“I know,” he laughs. “And I am asking you: Why do you need to know that?”
“I would have thought it was a logical extension of what we have been talking about.”
“Well, no,” he disagrees. “Essentially, you are leading me down a path where I end up having to answer questions that I can’t back out of.”
“I’m not leading you down any path,” I counter. “I’m trying to explain how you founded Team Clean. I am asking you about your experiences of doping in cycling.”
“No, that’s totally understandable,” he concedes.
“I’m not asking you anything I didn’t ask Greg LeMond.”
“No, of course, and I wouldn’t expect that. I guess I would just say that my time at US Postal Service was . . . I kind of almost have to leave that as a ‘No comment’. And you can take that however you would like.”
And so it goes.by