Transcript of part 1 of Oprah Winfrey’s interview with Lance Armstrong.
We found Lance to be sincere, apologetic and forthcoming in most questions. Some areas he wasn’t ready to discuss in this forum but it’s a more mature Lance that has been seen previously.
O: Did you ever take banned substances to enhance your cycling performance?
L: Yes
O: Was one of those banned substances EPO?
L: Yes
O: Did you ever blood dope or use blood transfusions to enhance your cycling performance?
L: Yes
O: did you ever use any other banned substances like testosterone, cortisone, human growth hormone?
L: Yes
O: In all 7 of your Tour de France victories did you ever take banned substances or blood dope?
L: Yes
O: In your opinion, was it humanly possible to win the Tour de France without doping 7 times in a row?
L: Not in my opinion.
O: when did you begin?
L: Earlier in my career it was cortisone. And then the EPO generation began.
O: Why now admit it?
L: That’s the best question, the most logical. I don’t know that I have a great answer. I’ll start my answer by saying that it’s too late. It’s too late probably for most people. And that’s my fault. I viewed this situation as one big lie. That I repeated a lot of times. I didn’t just say no and moved off it.
O: You were defiant. You called other people liars.
L: I understand that. While I’ve lived through this process, I know the truth. The truth isn’t what I said. This story was so perfect for so long. I mean that I try to take myself out of the situation. You overcome the disease, you win the Tour de France 7 times, you have a happy marriage, you have children. It’s just this mythic perfect story and it wasn’t true, on a lot of levels.
O: Was it hard to live up to that picture?
L: Impossible. I’m a flawed character as I know and I couldn’t live up to that.
O: Didn’t you help paint that picture?
L: Yes I did. And a lot of people did. All the fault and all the blame are falling on me. But behind that picture and behind that story is momentum. Whether it’s fans or whether it’s the media, it just gets going. I lost myself in that. I couldn’t handle it and I was used to controlling everything in my life. I controlled every aspect in my life.
Now this story is so bad and so toxic and lot of it’s true.
O: You said earlier you didn’t think it was possible to win without doping.
L: Not in that generation. It’s been well documented. I didn’t invent the culture. But I didn’t try to stop the culture. That’s my mistake. That I have to be sorry for. And the sport is now paying the price because of that. So I am sorry for that.
I didn’t have access to anything else that nobody else did.
O: Tygart said you and USPS team pulled off the most successful and elaborate doping system the sport has ever seen? Was it?
L: No. It wasn’t. It was definitely professional and smart if you can call it that. But it was very conservative and very risk averse and very aware about what mattered. But to say that that program was bigger than the East German doping program in the 70s and 80s, no.
O: So you’re saying you didn’t have access to things other people didn’t have access to.
L: Absolutely not.
O: Can you explain the culture to us?
L: It’s hard to get into that. I don’t want to accuse anyone else or talk about anyone else. I made my decisions and my mistakes and I acknowledge my mistakes. The culture was what it was.
O: Was everybody doing it? That’s what we’ve heard
L: I didn’t know everybody I can’t say that. There will be people who say that. There will be people who will say I can tell you 5 guys who didn’t. they think they’re heros.
O: What did you think of those guys when you were riding? Did you think they were suckers?
L: No. The idea that anybody was forced, pressured or encouraged, that’s not true.
O: Taggert claims some of the doping program was conducted like the mafia. Some team members were flown to Spain for doping, blood was stored in hidden refrigerators, money went across borders.
O: How is it done? You said it wasn’t the most sophisticated. Motoman was that true?
L: Yes, that was true.
O: Were you blood doping in stage 11 of the 2000 Tour, stopping at a hotel.
L: I’m confused on the stages.
O: Hamilton said there were times when you all were injecting in the trailers and fans would be outside.
L: I didn’t read Tyler’s book
O: I would like you to walk me through it. How did it work?
L: We’d need a long time.
L: Very simple. We had things that were oxygen boosting drugs. That were incredibly beneficial for endurance sports. And that’s all you needed. My cocktail was only EPO, not a lot, transfusions and testosterone.
I almost justified because of my history.
O: So you could justify the testosterone. Could you justify the blood transfusions, because it is your blood? And then put your blood in?
L: There’s no true justification.
O: Were you afraid of getting caught?
L: No. Drug testing has changed. It’s evolved. In the old days they tested at the races. They didn’t come to your house, they didn’t come to your training camps. They tested you at the race. That’s shifted a lot. So now the emphasis is on out of competition testing.
O: In 1999 there wasn’t a test for EPO.
L: And there was no testing out of competition…And for most of my career there wasn’t that much of that. So 2 things changed. There wasn’t that much out of competition testing. So you’re not going to get caught. Cause you’re clean at the races.
O: You take it and give yourself enough time for it to move through your system?
L: Yeah. Scheduling. Two things changed-the shift to out of competition training and the biological passport. I’m no fan or defender of the UCI but they implemented the bio passport .
O: the bio passport began in 2008. ..The WADA report for 2009 and 2010 said Armstrong’s bio passport was consistent with blood doping.
L: That was the only thing in that whole report that really upset me. The accusation and the alleged proof that they said that I doped after my comeback is not true. The last time I crossed that line is 2005.
O: So in 2009 you did not dope?
L: No. The biological passport was in place.
L: Does that include blood transfusions?
L: Absolutely.
O: So you did not do a blood transfusion?
L: Absolutely
O: And in 2009 you did no doping or blood transfusions in 2010?
L: Absolutely. 2009 and 2010. Those are the 2 years I did the Tour. Absolutely NOT.
O: So 2005 was the last time.
L: Absolutely true.
O: A was a team captain and according to USADA a part owner of the team. According to USADA he had the power to hire and fire the other riders. The USADA report stated that Armstrong had ultimate control not only over his own drug use, which was extensive, but also over the doping culture of his team.
O: Were you the one in charge?
L: I was the top rider. The leader of the team. I wasn’t the manager, the director,
O: But if someone was not doing something to your satisfaction, you could get them fired?
L: It depends what they’re doing. If you’re asking me if somebody on the team says I’m not going to dope, and I say you’re fired, absolutely not. Could I? I guess I could have. I never did. I was the leader of the team. And the leader of any team leads by example and there was never a direct order or a directive that said you have to do this if you want to do the Tour if you want to be on the team. That never happened. It was a competitive time. We were all grown men. We all made our choices. But there were people on the team who chose not to.
O: One of your former teammates, Christian Vandevelde, told USADA that you threatened to kick him off the team if he didn’t shape up and conform to the doping program.
L: That’s not true. There was a level of expectation. We expected guys to be fit to be strong to perform. I certainly didn’t. I’m not the most believable guy in the world right now, I understand. But I did not do that.
O: When you say that there was a level of expectation, could that level of expectation be implied to mean that if you don’t do this you’re not going to be on the team? Cause you were Lance Armstrong. And if you say it,
L: Even if I don’t say it, if I do it, I’m a leader of the team, you’re leading by example. So that’s a problem.
O: Can you understand how he would feel or someone would feel that if you’re doing it and this is how we win, and if I don’t do it, then I might not be able to be on the team.
L: I can understand that. But I can also understand the difference between that and saying you have to do this if you want to do the Tour if you want to stay on this team. There’s a big difference. But neither are good but
O: Are we talking semantics here? A fine line between you have to do it but hey if you’re on this team and you want to win?
L: I view one of them as a verbal pressure, a directive. And that didn’t exist.
O: But you do accept that if you are Lance Armstrong
L: I take that.
O: The captain, the power, the leader of the team
L: The guy that my teammates look up to. Yeah I accept that 100%.
O: Accepting that if he didn’t do it then maybe he would feel that he wouldn’t make the team?
L: Correct. Having said that, I don’t want to split hairs here but if guys go on to other teams. Christian, I care a lot about Christian, he is a really good guy. If they go on to other teams and continue the same behavior, it’s not, I wasn’t on those teams.
O: Same behavior, meaning doping?
L: Yes.
O: Were you a bully?
L: Laughing, ugh, yeah. I was a bully.
O: Tell me how you were a bully?
L: I was a bully in the sense that I tried to control the narrative and if I didn’t like what somebody said, for whatever reason, in my own head, whether I viewed that as being disloyal or as a friend turning on you or whatever, I tried to control that. That’s a lie, they’re liars.
O: Is that your nature, when somebody says something that you don’t like, you go on the attack?
L: My entire life.
O: So were you doing that when you were 10 years old? 12 years old, 14 years old?
L: It’s interesting. I grew up, most people know, we grew up as fighters. My mom was young when she had me. We sort of always felt like, maybe it wasn’t reality, but we felt like we had our backs against the wall. I was always a fighter. My mom was a fighter. She still is. Before my diagnosis I would say I was competitive, but I wasn’t a fierce competitor. And in an odd way that process turned me into a person who was truly win at all costs. When I was diagnosed and I being treated, I said I will do anything I have to do to survive. And that’s good. And I took that attitude that ruthless and relentless and win at all costs attitude and I took it right into cycling. Quite frankly it followed it up almost immediately. And that’s bad.
O: But you had already been doing drugs before that? Doing drugs meaning taking banned substances.
L: Correct but I wasn’t a bully before that.
O: So what made you into a bully?
L: I think just trying to perpetuate the story. And hide the truth. This is the second time in my life I cannot control this outcome.
O: First time was the cancer.
L: That was the disease. And now. The scary thing (chokes up) is winning 7 Tours I knew I was going to win.
O: How important was winning to you and would you do anything to win at all costs?
L: Basically. Winning was important. I still like to win. I view it a little differently now.
O: You’ve been quoted as saying we had one goal, one vision and that was to win the greatest bike race in the world. And not to just win it once but to keep on winning it. And to keep on winning meant you had to keep on using banned substances.
L: Yes. But I’m not sure that this an acceptable answer but that’s like saying that we have to have air in our tires or we have to have water in our bottles.
O: Did you require your riders, your key guys, to dope to reach that goal?
L: Absolutely not
O: You never suggested that they see Ferrari?
L: Ferrari, it’s hard to talk about some of these things and not mention names. There are people in this story that are good people. We’ve all made mistakes and there are people in this story that are not monsters and they’re not toxic and they’re not evil. I viewed Michele Ferrari as a good man. And a smart man. And I still do.
O: According to USADA Lance started working with Ferrari as early as 1994. Armstrong and other riders paid Ferrari for putting them on a doping program. Armstrong paid Dr Ferrari $1 million over the course of 10 years. Ferrari has denied doping Armstrong.
O: Would you say Ferrari was the leader and mastermind behind the team’s doping program?
L: No.
O: How would you characterize his influence?
L: I’m not comfortable talking about other people. It’s all out there.
O: David Walsh says your association immediately dialed up suspicion on you. Looking back at that time would you say that it was reckless for you to be involved or engaged with Ferrari?
L: From a public perception, sure. But there were plenty of other reckless things. That’s a very good way to characterize it in my life.
O: As reckless?
L: Yes.
O: What was going on with you? You and I both know that fame just magnifies whoever you are. So if you’re a jerk, you’re a bigger jerk. If you’re a humanitarian, you’re a bigger humanitarian. So what was going on with you during that time and what did the fame do?
L: I don’t know if you pulled those two words out of the air, jerk and humanitarian. I’d say I’m both. And we saw both. And now we’re seeing more of the jerk part than the activist, than the humanitarian, the philanthropist, the leader of the foundation. We’re not seeing that now. I am flawed. Deeply flawed. I think we all have our flaws. If the magnifying glass is only this big, I made it THIS big because of my actions, my words, because of my attitude, my defiance. And I’m paying the price for it. And I think that’s okay. I deserve this. I don’t look around and say I’m getting so screwed here. Are there days were there days when I said that? Absolutely. Those days are fewer and fewer and farther and farther between. I deserve it.
O: What was for you the flaw or flaws that made you willing to risk it all?
L: I think just this ruthless desire to win. Win at all costs truly. Serves me well on the bike, served me well during the disease. But the level that it went for whatever reason, is a flaw. And then that defiance, that arrogance you cannot deny it. You watch that clip, that’s an arrogant person. Look at this arrogant prick. I say that today. It’s not good.
O: In 2005, LA rolled through the streets of Paris in triumph. He had achieved the unimaginable. He had won a record setting 7th consecutive win of the world’s toughest race. This is the clip that I just can’t reconcile what you were thinking.
(His speech on the Champs Elysee –sorry people can’t believe in miracles… there are no secrets..}
O: What were you trying to accomplish there?
L: That’s for sure one of the mistakes. That’s not one I think of often, but watching that, it was a mistake.
O: Were you particularly trying to rub in the face of those people who came out against you and said you were lying? Were you addressing them?
L: I don’t know. It’s interesting. That was the first year that they gave the mic to the winner of the Tour. And I found out just before and went what the hell am I going to say? I didn’t have any time and that just came out. Looking at that now it just sounds ridiculous.
O: When you look at that, do you feel embarrassed, do you feel ashamed, do you feel humbled? Tell me what you feel?
L: I’m definitely embarrassed. Listen, that was the last time I won the Tour de France. That was my last day. I retired immediately after that. That’s what you leave with? You can leave with better than that Lance. That was lame.
O: Tell me Lance, was there any happiness in winning? When you knew you were taking these banned substances?
L: There was more happiness in the process. In the build, in the preparation. The winning was almost phoned in. I don’t want this issue of performance enhancers, oh yeah we’re going to pump up our tires, put water in our bottles, and oh yeah, that too is going to happen. That was it.
O: Was it a big deal to you? Did it feel wrong?
L: At the time? No.
O: It did not even feel wrong?
L: No. It’s scary.
O: Did you feel bad about it?
L: No. Even scarier.
O: Did you feel in any way that you were cheating?
L: No.
O: You did not feel that you were cheating taking banned drugs?
L: At the time, no. I had this exercise where I kept hearing that I’m a drug cheat, I’m a cheat, I’m a cheater. I went and looked up the definition of cheat. The definition of cheat is to take an advantage on a rival or a foe that they don’t have. I didn’t feel that way. I viewed it as a level playing field.
O: But you knew that you were held to a higher standard. You’re Lance Armstrong.
L: I knew that but of course hindsight is perfect. I know it a thousand times more now. I didn’t know what I had. Look at the fallout.
O: What do you mean by you didn’t know? I don’t think people will understand what you’re saying.
L: Well I didn’t understand the magnitude of that following. And we see it now because this is why it is such
O: That’s going to be hard for people to believe. When we met a week ago you said I didn’t realize it was this big which I was like, how could you not know? How could you not know it’s big? Presidents calling, you’re dating rock stars, ecverywhere you go,
L: You asked me the question and I said I didn’t know. I didn’t. The important thing is that I’m beginning to understand. And I’m understanding it not because I see clips and we’re talking about this. I see the anger in people. I see people
O: Anger and disappointment
L: And betrayal and it’s all there. These are people that supported me, believed in me, believed me, not in me but believed what I was saying. And they have every right to feel betrayed. And it’s my fault. I will spend the rest of my life. Some people are gone forever. But I will spend the rest of my life trying to earn back trust and trying to apologize to people. For the rest of my life.
O: When you say you didn’t know that it was this big, when you’re in it, it feels like what?
L: (a little choked up) Um, it was easy. It just flowed. I was in the zone that athletes get. It wasn’t exactly a perfect world. It wasn’t the happiest time of my life, believe it or not. I can tell you with all honesty, I am happier today than I was then for a whole host of reasons.
O: Even with all of this that’s happened?
L: I said I’m happier today not yesterday.
O: After winning the Tour in 1999, samples of Armstrong’s urine were frozen and stored. Tygart of USADA-6 samples were retested in 05 and they were positive. In 99 there was no test for EPO. They were not tested at that time. 6 were positive.
O: You’ve said time and again in dozens of interviews that you’ve never failed a drug test. Do you have a different answer today?
L: No. I didn’t fail a test. Some stuff was retroactively tested and so yes, I retroactively failed those. But the hundreds and hundreds of tests that I took, I passed them because there was nothing in the system.
O: For the 164 pg “Reasoned Decision” USADA interviewed 11 former teammates including Tyler Hamilton and Floyd Landis. Hamilton and Landis said that Armstrong told them on separate occasions that he had tested positive for EPO at the Tour de Suisse in 2001 and implied that it would not come to light.
In the 60 Minutes interview, Tyler Hamilton gave this account: “Lance kind of told me in a nervous laughter that he had an EPO positive. But no worries it was going to be taken care of.
O: What about the Tour de Suisse?
L: Again, I’m going to tell you what’s true and not true. That story isn’t true. There was no positive test. There was no paying off of the lab. There was no secret meeting with the lab director.
O: The UCI didn’t make that go away?
L: No, and I’m no fan of the UCI. That did not happen.
O: You made a donation to the UCI and unfortunately those two came together. You made a donation to the UCI and you said that donation was about helping their anti-doping effort. Obviously it was not. Why did you make that donation?
L: Because they asked me to. It’s impossible for me to answer this question and have anybody believe it. It was not in exchange for any cover-up. I’m not a fan of the UCI. I have every incentive to sit here and tell you right, they’re all crooked, There are things that were a little shady. That was not one. They called and said they didn’t have a lot of money. I was retired, I had money. They said would you consider a donation, I said sure.
O: So you did not pay UCI in helping them to or in aiding them or assisting them in any way in overlooking some of your tests?
L: No. The only one there really is would be from the 2001 Tour of Switzerland. There was the retroactive stuff later on which was obviously the time of huge story.
O: Even before those 1999 samples were tested retroactively, Armstrong had another positive test. That same 99 TdF, a cortico steroid.
Emma O’Reilly a former masseuse for Armstrong’s team told journalist David Walsh she was in the room when Armstrong and other team leaders came up with a plan to cover it up. O’Reilly said a team doctor back dated a prescription claiming Armstrong needed treatment for saddle sores.
What about the story Emma O’Reilly tells about the cortisone and you having the cortisone back-dated. Is that true?
L: That is true.
O: What do you want to say to Emma O’Reilly?
L: She’s one of these people that I have to apologize to. She’s one of these people that got run over, got bullied.
O: You sued her?
L: To be honest, we sued so many people, I’m sure we did. But I have reached out to her and tried to make those amends on my own.
O; This is what doesn’t make any sense. When people were saying things, David Walsh, Emma O’Reilly, Betsy Andreu, many others were saying things. Youd then go attack them. You’re suing people and you know they’re telling the truth. What is that?
L: It’s a major flaw. And it’s a guy who expected to get whatever he wanted and to control every outcome. And it’s inexcusable. When I say that there are people that will hear this and will never forgive me, I understand that. I do. I’ve started that process. All of this is a process for me. One of the steps in that process is to talk to those people directly and just say to them that I’m sorry. And I was wrong, you were right.
O: Have you called Betsy Andreu?
O: Betsy while visiting Lance in the hospital she overheard LA admitting using performance enhancing drugs. He rattled off EPO, testosterone, cortisone, growth hormone and steroids.
In his 2005 deposition he testified that Betsy’s story was not true. Betsy said that in the aftermath Lance went on the attack against both her and her husband. It affected Frankie’s ability to work in the sport.
O: Have you called Betsy Andreu?
L: Yes
O: Did she take the call? Was Betsy telling the truth about the hospital?
L: I’m not going to take that on. I’m laying down on that one.
O: Why is that? Is she lying?
L: She asked me and I asked her not to talk about. The details of the call the confidential personal conversation, 40 minutes long. I spoke to Frankie as well.
O: Is it well with the two of you? Have you made peace?
L: No. Because they’ve been hurt too badly. A forty minute conversation isn’t enough.
O: Yes because you repeatedly characterized her as crazy. You called her other horrible things.
L: I did call her crazy. I think she’d be okay with me saying this. I’m going to take the liberty to say it. I called you crazy, I called you a bitch. I called you all these things. But I never called you fat. She thought I said you were fat, crazy. But I never said you were fat.
O: This is what’s interesting to me. If a person is accusing you and they say 3 things that are true but one of them is out of order and not true, do you then take it to mean the whole thing is not true?
L: Yeah
O: That’s how you operate?
L: But that’s 3:1 wouldn’t be accurate. I would say that’s a score. If they said 10 things and two of them are right, and 8 of them are false, I would think I have every right to go after them. But if one of those things is that Lance Armstrong doped during the Tour de France they win. You can’t overcome that.
O: well, she said that. And you still went after her. All these years.
L: I did.
O: Emma O’Reilly, in the tapes under your breath, you implied, you used the whore word. How do you feel about that today?
L: Not good.
O: You were just trying to put her down, or you were trying to shut her up?
L: No. I was just on the attack. Territory being threatened. Team being threatened. Reputation being threatened. I’m going to attack.
O: 4 days after his victory Landis tested positive and stripped of his title and banned for 2 years. 3 years later Landis he admitted to doping and alleged Armstrong had done the same. Said he saw Lance using drugs.
O: Many people think the real tipping point was Floyd Landis and his decision to come forward and confess.
L: I’ll agree with that. I might back it up a little and talk about the comeback. The comeback didn’t sit well with Floyd. That period began this.
O: Do you remember where you were when you heard that Floyd, your former teammate, protégé, was going to talk?
L: I was at a hotel room from the Tour of California. Actually Floyd had been sending me text messages and said I videoed everything and I’m going to put it on You Tube. And I kept getting these messages. Finally I said look, do what you got to do. Just leave me alone. He didn’t go that route, he didn’t go the You Tube route. But he went to the Wall Street Journal with the story.
O: Did you rebuff him? Would you say you rebuffed Floyd?
L: I rebuffed him after he came out. Until that point, actually I had supported him. Even when he tested positive, I supported him when he went on trial, even afterwards I supported him.
O: Did you rebuff him when he was stripped of his Tour win?
L: No.
O: You didn’t just blow him off?
L: Well, we didn’t give him a spot on the team which he wanted. But that’s not necessarily entirely my decision. But if that’s a blow-off, yes. I tried to keep him on “my team”. Of course you would because you know what others don’t.
O: Because he knew what others didn’t.
L: But saying that I shunned him or put him out, no, I didn’t. Obviously, I think he did, but I think he felt like the sport did. He felt like the sport just didn’t want to take him back.
O: But that was the tipping point. And your comeback was also a tipping point. Do you regret now coming back?
L: I do. We wouldn’t be sitting here if I didn’t come back.
O: After winning his 7th Tour de France in 2005, Lance Armstrong retired. Three years later with much fanfare, he announced a comeback. That year he placed third. He raced one last time in 2010 and placed 23rd.
O: You would have gotten away with it?
L: It’s impossible to say. Much better chances. But I didn’t.
O: Did you not always think that this day was coming? Did you not think that you would be found out at some point especially since so many people knew?
L: I just assumed the stories would continue for a long time. This wasn’t an issue of news stories or of interviews. That’s not why we’re sitting here. We’re sitting here because there was a 2 year criminal federal investigation. Athletes, everybody involved in this story was called in, suppoenaed, deposed. There’s a man with a gun, a badge, and the consequences are serious.
O: In 2010 shortly after Floyd Landis accused Lance Armstrong of using performance enhancing drugs, the US Dept of Justice launched an investigation into those allegations. Among the possible charges against Lance Armstrong were fraud, drug trafficking, and witness tampering. Last February after a nearly 2 year investigation federal prosecutors dropped the case. With no explanation.
L: And then USADA started. Again with the same not equal pressure but similar pressure. And guys were offered deals. And that’s the way it works. That’s why this is out. I assumed the stories and accusations would continue forever.
O: When the department of Justice dropped that case, nobody knows why, I have to ask you, did you have any influence in that?
L: No. None. That’s very difficult to influence.
O: When they dropped the case, did you think now it’s finally over? Victory?
L: It’s hard to define victory, but I thought I was out of the woods.
O: In the 2012 USADA investigation, 26 witnesses were called, including 11 former teammates who were questioned about their own banned substance use. Former cyclist and long time friend and confidant George Hincapie was one of them. Hincapie was the only teammate to race in all 7 of Lance Armstrong’s Tour de France wins. In July USADA charged Lance Armstrong with possession, taking and using banned substances. Armstrong filed a lawsuit to block the charges. A judge dismissed the case. By August USADA had found overwhelming evidence that Armstrong doped through much of his professional cycling career. This time Lance Armstrong chose not to contest their findings. In October he was stripped of all 7 Tour de France titles and banned for life from elite competition.
O: What was your reaction when you learned that USADA was going to pick up the case and do their own investigation of you?
L: Great question. My reaction was the same as it always had been. Coming in on my territory, I’m going to fight back. I’d do anything if I could go back to that day.
O: Why
L: Because I wouldn’t fight, I wouldn’t sue them, I’d listen. I’d do a couple of things first. I’d say, guys, granted I was treated differently than the other guys. That’s okay. I’m bigger, I’ve won more races. But I was treated differently.
O: Treated differently how?
L: Treated differently in the sense that I wasn’t approached at the same time as the other riders. There were lots of riders that were approached. They approached them and asked them to come in and talk about ultra cycling and what they did or didn’t do. And of course with that they were going to be penalized. They gathered all of the subpoenas, the affidavits and the evidence.
O: 26 people including 11 of your former teammates testified
L: And they came to me and saw okay what are you going to do? To go back to that moment I would say, guys, give me three days. I’m going to call, again, this is in hindsight, I’d like to redo it but I can’t. Let me call some people. Let me call my family. Let me call my mother. Let me call my sponsors. Let me call my foundation. And tell them what I’m going to do. I’ll be right there. I wish I could do that. But I can’t.
O: So in the future, you can’t take that back, and you can’t go back there will you cooperate with USADA in order to help them clear up the sport of cycling?
L: I love cycling. I really do. I say that knowing that I sound like, people will see me as somebody that’s disrespected the event, the sport, the color yellow, the jersey. I did.
O: You abused your power?
L: Yeah. And I disrespected the rules of regardless of what anybody says about the generation. That was my choice. I stand on no moral platform here. Certainly not my place to say “let’s clean up cycling.” If there was an effort to know the truth and reconciliation, again, I can’t call for that. I’ve got no credit. If they have it and I’m invited, I’ll be the first man in the door.
O: When you heard that George Hincapie had been called to testify and had spoken did you feel that was the last card in this deck of card?
L: Well, my fate was sealed. I think for those people that were my supporters, I’m assuming have left, they could have heard anybody say anything. And if George didn’t say it, they’d say, well, George didn’t say it’s so I’m sticking with Lance. And I don’t fault George at all. He had a lot of pressure with that. George is the most credible voice in all of this. He did all 7 Tours, I knew him since I was 16. We practically lived together, trained together every day. And for the record we’re still great friends. We still talk once a week. I don’t fault Geoge Hincapie. George knows this story better than anybody.
