First of all, Lance Armstrong is a good man. There’s nothing
that I can learn about him short of murder that would alter my opinion on that.
Second, I don’t know if he’s telling the truth when he insists he didn’t use
performance-enhancing drugs in the Tour de France — never have known. I do
know that he beat cancer fair and square, that he’s not the mastermind criminal
the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency
makes him out to be, and that the process of stripping him of his titles reeks.
A federal judge wrote last
week, “USADA’s conduct raises serious questions about whether its real interest
in charging Armstrong is to combat doping, or if it is acting according to less
noble motives.” You don’t say. Then when is a judge, or better yet Congress,
going to do something about it?
Quite independently of Lance,
with whom I wrote two books, for a long, long time I’ve had serious doubts
about the motives, efficiency and wisdom of these “doping” investigations. In
the Balco affair, all the wrong people were prosecuted. It’s the only so-called
drug investigation in which the manufacturers and the distributors were given
plea deals in order to throw the book at the users. What that told us was that
it was big-game hunting, not justice. It was careerist investigators trying to
put athletes’ antlers on their walls. Meanwhile, the Fourth Amendment became a
muddy, stomped-on, kicked-aside doormat.