“I don’t know if you pulled those two words out of the air, jerk and humanitarian. But I was both. And we saw both."
"I was a jerk and a humanitarian. I am flawed. Deeply flawed... And now I'm paying the price for it. And I deserve it."
I made it this big." Are talkin' fishin' now
Plus, apologies don't work when you are blaming others are forcing others into the apology. PR rules and what we learned in second grade aren't that different.
The statute of limitations for perjury for his deposition testimony ran a long time ago..
'I deserve this' - at least he's not delusional
His flaws? "My ruthless will to win. That arrogance, defiance, that attitude."
"Look at this arrogant prick. I say that today."
Bus-throwing comes in Part II ...
Ben Davis: PR wise, why are we hearing him refer to it as "the disease" instead of cancer?
"Look at that arrogant prick" - ... "we had to for seven years," just chimed in a journalist here at TDU
Listing the "ruthless will to win" is close to a job interview response to "what's your biggest flaw." "I just want to succeed too much."
I don't know why he calls it the disease. I'd bet that's his own lingo. I can't think of a reason not to call out "cancer". Unless he is doing everything he can to avoid connecting Livestrong and his cancer work to this interview.
Armstrong isn't naming names, and he's isn't admitting to all of his bullying. He's trying to be transparent, but he's still Lance Armstrong. He's not going to be a completely different human being over the span of a few weeks or months. Maybe never.
For real good to come for cycling, Armstrong needs to sit down, as WADA has said, under oath and outline the system. TV won't do it.
It was not my fault, it was the microphone's fault ...
Asked about his 2005 TDF victory speech, LA answers: "I am embarrassed." Asked if there was happening in winning, he answers "There was more happiness in the process."
Armstrong says there was more happiness in the prep than the winning when using dope. The dope was just part of the job and the winning was forgone conclusion.
Armstrong says he did not feel he was cheating: "At the time, no."
Did you feel like you were cheating? "At the time, no."
Did it feel wrong? "No. Scary." Did you feel bad about it? "No. Even scarier." Did you feel that you were cheating? "No. The scariest."
Interesting: It did not feel wrong, did not feel bad, did not feel like cheating ... that's the way cycling was ... or still is?
@Neal Rogers You are right. He is not admitting very much. He is not giving his potential litigation adversaries any ammunition.
"I viewed it as a level playing field."
Going to Webster's Dictionary for definition of cheat, Armstrong pushes the level playing field argument.
Ah, the Miss America segment. "Webster's Dictionary defines cheating as..."
Sometimes it seems like he's trying not to smile. There's still some pride there.
"I didn't view it as taking an advantage over a rival or foe. I viewed it as a level playing field."
Oprah seemed positively excited about encountering someone so unmoored from righteousness.
As mentioned earlier, it's a thin line between expressing remorse and being honest, and protecting from litigation.
LA underestimated the fallout ... he never expected it to come to this
On a related note, we understand that Armstrong had a collection of handlers in the room during the interview.
"i'll spend the rest of my life trying to gain back trust from people."
The way he is handling the answers to these questions - I didn't feel like I was cheating - is really effective. There's no other adequate answer to explain this. The number one rule is honest, authentic answers. Answering he didn't see it as cheating is about as true and real as he could be.
Armstrong's claiming that he did not know that he was cheating may be an attempt to defuse any claim that he engaged in fraud, an element of which is knowingly making a false representation with the intent to deceive.