Sally Jenkins wrote two books with Lance Armstrong “near the height of his alleged illicit activities,” notes Glenn Nelson. The Washington Post sports columnist “closely hitched her star to Armstrong’s,” he writes, and now “I wonder if she consequently will — and should — be sucked into the draft of Armstrong’s nosedive.”
Sally Jenkins has accomplished too much to be dragged down by Lance Armstrong, who did so much bad to offset so much good. She was just a partner in telling his story, not an accomplice to his misdeeds.
She’s also continued to be a Lance loyalist.
Jenkins wrote on August 24: “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. …For a long, long time I’ve had serious doubts about the motives, efficiency and wisdom of these ‘doping’ investigations. …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.” [My boldface.]
A Washington Post commenter points out that “Jenkins has done a total disappearing act with the subsequent Post reporting on the Armstrong scandal being done by other reporters. Jenkins owes her audience a follow-up” to the late August piece.
UPDATE: What Washingtonian’s Harry Jaffe wrote earlier this month:
Sally Jenkins is one of the Post’s most brave and incisive columnists. In the case of Lance Armstrong, she has tied herself to his fortunes, to his veracity, to his worthiness as a champion. If he takes a fall, will she write about it? Will she take one, too?
Jenkins has yet to respond to questions about whether she would write about Armstrong’s latest travails. Her readers deserve her take.
I’ve asked Jenkins when she’ll next write about Armstrong. UPDATE: In an email, Jenkins explains she has a Nov. 15 book deadline, and that writing about Armstrong isn’t her No. 1 priority now.