There’s nerviness -- that was
Then there's chutzpah, the kind of eye-widening impudence that defies all our inner sense of logic and proportion. That would be Armstrong seeking to have a lawsuit against him thrown out on the grounds that his sponsors should have known all along that he was a liar.
That interesting notion, reported by the
The question, really, is whether Armstrong's argument is simply an example of appalling chutzpah or the definition of it.
I’m trying to think of a worse case of unmitigated gall, but it isn’t coming to mind easily. Even Anthony Weiner’s insistence that he’s continuing his run for New York mayor, despite the revelation that he continued to engage in sexting even after his resignation from
But then, who does give Armstrong a ride for his money on this score?