Return to Transcripts main page


House To Vote On More Sandy Aid; Spending Cuts Could Threaten Carriers; Oprah: Armstrong "Brought It"; David Walsh, Discusses His Book about Armstrong

Aired January 15, 2013 - 17:00   ET



Happening now, performance-boosting drugs led Lance Armstrong to an extraordinary fall from grace. Now the cyclist may finally be owning up to his actions, but the fallout may just be beginning.

As the White House gets ready to reveal its gun control plans, we'll talk -- we'll take to you Las Vegas, home of the world's largest gun show in a fancy club on the Strip, where gun owners can fire just about anything.

And Coca-Cola launches an ad campaign targeting obesity.

But is the maker of sweet drinks focused on weight control or damage control?

We want to welcome our viewers in the United States and around the world.

Wolf Blitzer is off today.

I'm Kate Bolduan, along with Joe Johns.


First up this hour, a sit-down interview with Oprah Winfrey alone won't be enough to ease sanctions against disgraced cyclist, Lance Armstrong. That's the word from the world anti-doping agency in the wake of news from Winfrey that Armstrong apparently came clean with her about using performance-enhancing drugs during his career.

JOE JOHNS, HOST: The reported confession comes as a bombshell after years of vehement denials and could have serious implications for Armstrong's future and his former teammates.

Let's bring in our Lisa Sylvester with the details.


Well, it's one thing, you know, for Lance Armstrong to go on Oprah's show and tell all. But the next step would be testimony under oath. The International Cycling Union, in a statement, urged Armstrong to testify before the independent commission that has been looking into these allegations. But that would be quite a reversal after years of denial.



LANCE ARMSTRONG, CYCLIST: Listen, I've said it for seven years. I've said it for longer than seven years -- I have never doped. The cynics and the skeptics, I'm sorry for you. I'm sorry you can't dream big and I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles.

All clean. Totally negative.


SYLVESTER: For more than a decade, Lance Armstrong looked into cameras and denied doping. But in a two and-a-half-hour interview with Oprah Winfrey, Armstrong talks candidly about what is said to be his use of performance-enhancing drugs.


OPRAH WINFREY, HOST, "OPRAH'S NEXT CHAPTER": I would say he did not come clean in the manner that I expected. It was surprising to me. I would say that for myself, my team, all of us in the room, we were mesmerized and riveted by some of his answers.


SYLVESTER: The interview is scheduled to air on Oprah's show Thursday and Friday.

She talked about her exclusive interview on CBS this morning.


WINFREY: Well, I would say there were a couple of times where he -- he was emotional. But emotional doesn't begin to describe the intensity or the difficulty that I think that he experienced in -- in -- in talking about some of these things.


SYLVESTER: Oprah said Armstrong came prepared and, quote, "Brought it."

Confession, though, from Armstrong could come with a price -- legal battles.

During his career, he hauled into court many of those who questioned his integrity or insinuated that he doped.


ARMSTRONG: You are not worth the chair that you're sitting on.


SYLVESTER: After his interview with Oprah, Armstrong could likely face counter-lawsuits.

The up side for him is the possibility of getting his life time ban in competitive sports lifted. That would allow him to compete in triathlons.

But to redeem himself, he may need to give up names to the U.S. Anti- Doping Agency.

DAVID ZIRN, SPORTS EDITOR, "THE NATION": Lance Armstrong is now in a position where he needs to do what they are telling him to do. He needs to dance to their tune. And that is very tough for a guy who makes Rahm Emanuel look like Tickle Me Elmo.

SYLVESTER: Armstrong's teammates have already stepped forward with what they know. Now, there are news reports that Armstrong may testify against high-ranking cycling officials and others. The team's director, a team doctor and the team trainer are also under investigation by the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency. They have denied the allegations.

PAUL CALLAN, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: If we're to believe what we've heard from other witnesses against Lance Armstrong, this is a huge conspiracy in professional biking. And I would think you would need a very full and frank disclosure by him before the public is going to consider redemption and forgiveness.


SYLVESTER: Now, Armstrong testified under oath that he didn't use performance-enhancing drugs back in 2005. Now, the statute of limitations has passed, so he can't be prosecuted for that.

But lawyers tell us that aside from potential civil lawsuits, that Armstrong could still -- it's still a possibility that he could still face criminal charges of mail fraud or wire fraud, if it's something that the Department of Justice chooses to pursue.

So these legal battles are just starting -- Joe and Kate.

JOHNS: Lisa Sylvester, thank you for that.

BOLDUAN: Let's talk more about this now.

Joining us from London is David Walsh, chief sportswriter for "The Sunday Times."

He's been covering Lance Armstrong's doping allega -- accusations -- since 1999 and has written three books on the subject. His latest is "Seven Deadly Sins: My Pursuit of Lance Armstrong."

David, thanks so much for coming in.

I mean after covering him for more than a decade now, I'm sure, at some point, you thought he would never be coming forward. I mean you even wrote, at one point, "Those who expect him to falter may have a long, long wait."

So what was your first reaction when you heard of this interview he was giving and also reports that he confessed to doping?

DAVID WALSH, AUTHOR, "SEVEN DEADLY SINS: MY PURSUIT OF LANCE ARMSTRONG": Well, my feeling is that everything depends on what exactly he said. In other words, the devil is going to be in the detail.

And I believe that the confession is going to be a pretty comprehensive confession. I mean Lance has been reaching out to people, journalistic adversaries, you know, people that would have been perceived to have been on the other side.

So I'll -- so I imagine that he's trying to -- to make a new start. And that begins with the proper confession.

BOLDUAN: I sense that you don't really trust it. And you said the devil is in the details until you hear it for yourself.

Did you, by any chance, receive one of those calls from him?

WALSH: No, I did not. But that may -- may or may not have had something they -- may have something to do with the fact that my newspaper, "The Sunday Times," is attempting to recoup money that they paid to -- to...

JOHNS: David, it's Joe Johns.

WALSH: -- Lance Armstrong in 2006, arising out of a lawsuit. And "The Sunday Times" was, perhaps, the only newspaper in the world at that time consistently asking questions of Lance Armstrong. And we were the ones he was always going to sue.

And, you know, the settlement that we made at that time was based on assurances from Lance Armstrong that he didn't dope, would never dope and we had no right to even question him on that.

Of course, the truth is now out there. And "The Sunday Times," at the very least, is entitled to its money back.

JOHNS: David, it's Joe Johns.

Oprah, this morning on CBS News, wouldn't give details of the interview. And she just guessed that he was ready to start talking about this now.

Why do you think he came forward at this point?

WALSH: My feeling is that he came forward because he's been in a pretty bad place since the truth has emerged in his story. And the only way he can begin to rebuild his life is to make a full confession of all the things he did. And I would say a confession won't be enough. He's got to make reparation to the people he wronged. He's got a lot of apologizing to do. I mean, if you consider that Lance Armstrong, speaking under oath in a Dallas, Texas tribunal in 2005, described his former masseuse, Emma O'Reilly, as a whore, I mean to do something like that under oath, to me, that was perhaps the lowest point, in terms of human behavior, during what was a very sad experience.

JOHNS: But the purpose, then, you think, is to start competing again, perhaps in triathlons?

That's what's motivating him to come forward now?

WALSH: No. I don't think that's the primary motivation, although it's certainly a -- an ancillary motivation. I think he -- he just needs to begin to rebuild his life, to regain some of the respect, or attempt to regain some respect, because he's in a very bad place now.

I mean how could you be Lance Armstrong and -- and walk into a room now, knowing that there are people looking at you, thinking, this is the greatest cheat that sport has never known?

And he -- and he hasn't even admitted it.

So, you know, for Lance to come back, it has to begin with a full confession. And that's why we're going to see, on Thursday evening, what we're going to see.

BOLDUAN: Ahead of this interview with Oprah, you, along with "The Sunday Times," put an ad out in the "Chicago Tribune" offering up some suggestive questions that she should ask Lance Armstrong. And we have a graphic here of it.

Some of the questions included, "Did you sue "The Sunday Times" to shut us up?"

Also, "Do you accept your lying to the cancer community was the greatest deception of all?"

Some pretty tough questions. Of course, we're not sure exactly what Oprah Winfrey asked. But we do know that she looked to you and your research in preparing for her interview.

Listen to this.


WINFREY: I had prepared. I'd read the recent decision. I watched all of Scott Pelley's report, "60 Minutes" report, team -- the Tyler Hamilton interview. I'd read "Seven Deadly Sins." I read "L.A. Confidential," David Walsh's books.


BOLDUAN: So, David, what was the point, the motivation of putting that ad out? And, also, after all of this time, does this -- if the -- if he acknowledges what you think he will acknowledge, is this vindication?

Is this redemption for all of your work?

How do you feel about it?

WALSH: I don't feel vindication. That's the first point. And because I never felt in -- in this story, that was any possibility that I was wrong.

From -- from the moment Lance won his first Tour de France in 1999, I was convinced that he was doping. I started asking questions. And once you started asking questions, the truth became very obvious.

So, in a sense, there is no vindication.

And -- but I do feel tremendous satisfaction for the people who helped me, people like Betsy Andreu and Emma O'Reilly, Greg Lemond, Stephen Swart. These people told the truth simply for the sake of telling the truth. They did it at great cost to themselves. They were vilified. Their characters were assassinated. And they were in a bad place.

I mean Betsy Andreo has said she spent 13 years telling people she wasn't a liar. And that's a very difficult place to be.

So for the truth to come out now is -- is tremendously satisfying for me, from their point of view. And I'm thrilled that now they will get the respect that they've always deserved.

As for "The Sunday Times" ad, I mean we wanted to make sure that Oprah Winfrey knew there were really serious questions to be asked here. And the interview had to be a serious journalistic interview.

JOHNS: At the end of the day, why do you think he got into doping in the first place?

And then, why do you think he lied about it?

WALSH: I think he got into doping because he came to Europe and he discovered a culture that was a doping culture. And he decided that the only way he could be a champion was to dope. And I think that was an understandable kind of a conclusion to come to.

What was, I suppose, a bit shocking, was that after having very serious cancer and, you know, life-threatening, according to some reports, he came back from that and put banned performance-enhancing drugs in his body. Because remember, his great defense at this time was after what I've been through, do you think I would put that stuff in my body?

And, of course, everybody said -- everybody bought that, because it was so plausible.

So -- so for Lance to have actually doped after cancer was a pretty tough thing to do. And I think it indicated a win at all costs attitude that was far from commendable. And but he regrets it now, hopefully, because it was a -- it was a seriously wrong thing to do.

JOHNS: You were one of the very first people to question Lance Armstrong. It goes all the way back to 1999.

What was it that made you suspicious in the first place?

WALSH: My first point of kind of suspicion was watching Lance's treatment of a young French rider. And there will be people out there who will say, but if they were all doping, how wrong was (INAUDIBLE), you know, how can you blame Lance and single him out?

They all weren't doping. And one of the guys who did not dope in 1999 was a young French rider, Christophe Bassons. And he offered the opinion that you couldn't win this Tour de France in '99 without doping.

And lots of his colleagues in the Peloton, you know, resented him saying that. The guy who most resented him saying that was Lance Armstrong. The guy who bullied him out of the race was Lance Armstrong.

And if you were watching that, the simple question I had was, if you believe Christophe Bassons was clean -- and it was obvious to me he was -- how could another clean rider be so opposed to him?

And to -- it was clear that Lance Armstrong had to be doping to have had that reaction to somebody who was trying to ride the race in the right way.

BOLDUAN: And, David, finally, you know, people will remember you for your work investigating this and all of your reporting on these allegations over a decade.

Now, in the end, why did you take -- champion this story so strong?

And are you OK with maybe having this Lance Armstrong story be your legacy?

WALSH: Well, I've known for quite some time that, you know, at the end of my journalistic life, this will be the story that will have defined my work as a journalist.

I went after this story because I thought it cut to the heart of what is wrong and sick about professional sport. There is a win at all costs attitude that means if that means duping the public, duping the journalists who cover the race, duping pretty much everybody, that's what will happen.

In this case, it was a particular case because the cancer community were being duped. And I thought that went so far down the wrong road that you just had to stand up and fight against it and say how wrong it was.

JOHNS: David Walsh, chief sportswriter with the "Sunday Times of London." Thanks so much. Fascinating discussion.

Aid to Sandy victims was delayed by one round of partisan bickering. Could more in-fighting over spending delay the next installment?

And first on CNN, why drastic cuts in U.S. defense spending could make Iran's leaders happy?


BOLDUAN: Two weeks ago, House Republicans delayed the first vote on financial aid to victims of superstorm Sandy. Now, lawmakers are due to vote on a second bigger aid package, but there's still plenty of bickering about spending for sure. Listen to this.


REP. ROSA DELAURO, (D) CONNECTICUT: We are asking. We are pleading and we shouldn't have to beg for money for the northeast to be able to survive this tragedy that hit us.

REP. TOM COLE, (R) OKLAHOMA: We have a national interest in getting this region on its feet as quickly as possible. Not only because it's the right thing to do and it certainly is that, but because it's the smart thing to do. Over 13 percent of our citizens lived in the four most affected states that were damaged by hurricane Sandy.

REP. TOM MCCLINTOCK, (R) CALIFORNIA: The treasury-like hurricane Sandy shouldn't be used as an excuse for a grab bag of spending having nothing to do with the emergency relief. But the rules committee hearing I was told, well, you have to understand, that's just the way things are done around here.

Mr. Speaker, Republicans were supposed to change the way things are done around here. Clearly, we have not.


BOLDUAN: Let's go live to CNN senior Congressional correspondent, Dana Bash. Dana, clearly, a lot of people in the Sandy stricken areas have been waiting for this money. Speaker Boehner said he would make it a top priority in this next Congress. So, what is the likelihood it's going to pass?

DANA BASH, CNN SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: It is very likely that the full $51 billion left on the table will pass by the end of the day, pass the House and will ultimately go to the president's desk. They've actually already passed 17 of it and the rest will likely come later, but, and there is a but.

This is not happening without a pretty significant protest vote that happened just a short while ago. A Republican amendment that would have offset the spending, $17 billion of the spending with across the board spending cuts. These are pretty steep cuts. If you talk about 17 billion, that's almost the entire operating budget of the agriculture department alone in a year.

So, it really is significant in telling, in kind of the feeling among Republicans and it really does illustrate why we're going to have the big fights over the next couple of months to raise the debt ceiling and to keep the government running. Republicans -- two-thirds of the Republican caucus voted for this.

They want to send a message that they really, really need it. As you just heard in that sound bite, that they want to cut spending for every dollar of spending that they put out there, even on disaster relief, which historically has not been required to have an offset.

BOLDUAN: And definitely has ruffled feathers in the last Congress. I mean, all of our viewers I'm sure remember how New Jersey governor, Chris Christie, didn't hold back in showing how angry he was at Congress, the House, and specifically even Speaker Boehner when the vote was delayed last time. Listen to him. This was on January 2nd.


REP. CHRIS CHRISTIE, (R) NEW JERSEY: New Jersey deserves better than the duplicity we saw displayed last night. America deserves better than just another example of a government that has forgotten who is there to serve and why. Sixty-six days and counting. Shame on you. Shame on Congress.


BOLDUAN: But Dana, when you listen to that but when you also look on the House floor and you listen to those sound bites before is what you're saying and what we're seeing today, is that kind of proof of why Speaker Boehner did what he did in the very beginning of January?

BASH: Absolutely. He took the hit. He pulled that bill knowing that he was going to get the kind of criticism that he got from his fellow Republicans of New Jersey but also knowing that if they took that vote at that time, it would have been effectively a mess because there was so much opposition from within his own party to voting for spending, even on something as a potentially worthy as relief for Sandy victims without offsetting it with other spending cuts.

So, that is a very significant reason why what we're seeing and the gyrations that we're seeing on the House floor all day long. They put it together in a very complicated way in order to make sure that it passed but also to give Republicans a way to kind of vent their frustration on the whole issue of spending.

BOLDUAN: Definitely a complicated way but welcome to the House and the Senate, I guess. And definitely further evidence of the spending battles to come. Dana Bash, thank you.

BASH: Thank you.

JOHNS: The White House and Congress have delayed the reckoning over automatic spending cuts, but if those cuts do happen, they'll be very painful. And military commanders are now warning that it could also be very dangerous. Here's CNN Pentagon correspondent, Barbara Starr.

BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Well, Joe, if there are spending cuts, one of the key questions is who might be one of the big winners? It might be someone nobody in the United States wants to see benefit from it all. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

STARR (voice-over): Iran's hard line leaders could be winners if Congress enacts $500 billion in mandatory military budget cuts.

GEN. MARTIN DEMPSEY, JOINT CHIEFS CHAIRMAN: Operations, maintenance, and training will be gutted. We'll ground aircraft, return ships to port, and sharply curtail training across the force.

STARR: CNN has learned that in the Persian Gulf, the U.S. navy may be forced to cut back to just one aircraft carrier, not two, watching the oil shipping lanes and being ready to attack Iran's nuclear facilities if ordered.

MAJ. GEN. JAMES "SPIDER" MARKS, (RET) CNN CONTRIBUTOR: What it tells Iran is that if it's no longer the priority that it has been for years, primarily because they could conduct operations in one location that would tie up the command and control and the capabilities of that carrier battle group.

STARR: Defense secretary, Leon Panetta, approved plans to keep two carriers in the Middle East as often as possible as part of a larger force.

LEON PANETTA, DEFENSE SECRETARY: That it is important to maintain our carrier force at full strength and that means that we'll be keeping 11 carriers in our force.

STARR: But even now, there are just ten carriers, one is in the Persian Gulf, five are east coast base, either in maintenance or conducting training. On the west coast, two are in the maintenance yard and a third is in port. Another is based in Japan.

If there is no budget agreement, the first casualty could be the USS Eisenhower, which is scheduled to deploy in a few months back to the Middle East. One military official told CNN, is the Pentagon crying wolf?

MARKS: Well, it's serious whether it's a scared tactic or not. It's very serious. And it needs to be resolved.

STARR: But if there's no money for the aircraft carriers and the fighter jets on the decks, the choices may be grim.

ANDREW KREPINEVICH, CENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND BUDGETARY ASSESSMENTS: Where do you take your risks? The navy certainly could send a second carrier back to the Persian Gulf if there was a crisis situation. The question is, what other areas do you leave uncovered?


STARR (on-camera): And that is really the question. All of services, of course, Joe, are facing the prospect of these spending cuts. And it may mean that President Obama's second term is characterized by a military force stretch may be a little too thin around the world -- Joe. JOHNS: Barbara Starr, and that certainly is something for a president to think about who's got his legacy on his mind. Thanks so much for that.

BOLDUAN: You know, it's so interesting, Joe. The same thing that go happens every time with these big spending battles. Folks may agree that they want -- everyone wants to cut spending and kind of trim the fat where need be, but when it comes to my priority, you don't touch that.

JOHNS: None of my backyard.

BOLDUAN: Someone is going to -- they have to take a hit, everybody.

Still ahead, a controversial new partner in the battle against obesity. Dr. Sanjay Gupta is going to join us with an eye-opening story. You're in the SITUATION ROOM.


JOHNS: The growing battle against obesity in this country has a controversial new partner. Coca-Cola. The world's largest beverage company is launching a new ad campaign targeting what is calling the issue of this generation. Take a look at this.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: For over 125 years, we've been bringing people together. Today, we like people to come together on something that concerns all of us. Obesity. The long-term health of our families and the country's at stake. And as the nation's leading beverage company, we can play an important role.


JOHNS: CNN chief medical correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, is joining us now with details. Sanjay, what exactly is the goal of this ad campaign?

DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, I think some of this is something that they had to do. I mean, you know, everyone is talking about this issue of obesity, and you know, it's no secret that sugary drinks have been the center of a lot of attention. They've been demonized in a lot of the discussions.

And you hear about it from the mayor of New York, you hear about it from the Center for the Science and Public Interest. So, I think, in part, this is reactive, but in part, it was a long time coming saying, you know, we want to be a part of the solution.

JOHNS: Now, we've been talking about America's obesity epidemic for years and years now, but how responsible or should I say irresponsible is soda really?

GUPTA: Well, it's an interesting question, because if you look at the couple of very important statistics, if you look, for example, how much sugary drinks do we drink now versus a few decades ago, what you find is that it's going down or consumption of sugary sodas has gone down, yet -- you know, we all know the obesity problem has continued to increase.

So, you know, obviously, you want to try and reconcile these things that be very factually based when you talked about this. But let me show you what we're talking about here, specifically, because a lot of people don't even know how many calories, for example, in a Coke. It's about 140 calories. That's an important, again, number to have. But it's also about nine -- a little bit more than nine teaspoons of sugar, as you see here.

And that's just, you know, what we know about the drink overall. But we also know that sugary drinks, unlike sugar that you get from other sources of food, you tend to -- it's not just the amount but it's the rate at which you absorb it. So you're getting a lot of sugar calories really quickly with these sugary drinks. And that's where a lot of the medical science has started focusing our attention. Not just the amount of sugar but also the rate at which your body absorbs it.

If you eat sugar in fruit, you have the fiber, you have the micronutrients. It slows down that absorption. And, you know, a lot of the research is showing that that makes a difference in terms of the amount and the rate.

JOHNS: Big picture now. What kind of impact do you think this ad campaign could possibly have?

GUPTA: You know -- you know, Joe, I think it's one of these things where, you know, you and I are obviously talking about it for a few minutes right now, I think most people will pay a little bit of attention to this. But I think the message that people are starting to hear over and over again, again from, you know, Mayor Bloomberg, from various scientific societies, now from Coke itself, is, look, we've got -- we've got to take it easy a little bit on these drinks.

You know, we're drinking too much of it. And they can offer smaller size cans, for example. They look in schools and they're exchanging a lot of these sugary drinks with water and stuff like that. So, if Coke is -- you know, if somebody says, look, I haven't really paid much attention to this issue, this campaign may just make them think twice, take an extra beat before they reach for another soda.

JOHNS: It's always a good idea. Thanks so much for that. Always good to see you, Sanjay Gupta.

GUPTA: Yes. You got it, guys.

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: I know there are a lot of people out there doing the same thing as me.

JOHNS: Absolutely.

BOLDUAN: Cringing when you see those nine teaspoons of sugar laid out. JOHNS: Right. I know. Good grief.

BOLDUAN: One can of Coke, everybody.

JOHNS: Right into your bloodstream.


BOLDUAN: Still ahead, as the White House prepares to reveal its vision for gun control, we'll show you the reality in Las Vegas. A fancy club on the strip where gun lovers can fire just about anything.


JOHNS: The Obama administration is ready to unveil a package of gun control proposals. They include banning assault-style weapons dealing with high capacity magazines and strengthening background checks.

The president vowed action after last month's massacre at a Connecticut elementary school and they will be joined by children who wrote to the president about that shooting rampage. The package spearheaded by Vice President Biden will include legislative measure but there are up to 19 executive actions the president could take without Congress.

BOLDUAN: And lawmakers in New York have acted in a bipartisan fashion and quickly approved tough new additions to the state's already tough gun laws. Today Governor Andrew Cuomo signed into law a package which tightens an assault weapons ban, puts limits on magazines, and strengthen rules to keep the mentally ill from obtaining firearms. The deal includes a statewide gun registry and also standardizes gun licensing.

JOHNS: The world's largest gun show is under way in Las Vegas and it's where a fancy new gun club caters to shooters' wildest fantasies.

CNN's Miguel Marquez is there.

MIGUEL MARQUEZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Joe, this is a place that is very comfortable with guns. The SHOT show is going on here. It does bill itself as the world's largest trade show for gun owners. And everywhere in this town, including that and convention hall, they are watching to see what happens in Washington tomorrow.


MARQUEZ: Whoa. My god.

(Voice-over): Go big or stay home, as they say in Vegas.

(On camera): Wow.

(Voice-over): Yes, that is a chrome plated, fully automatic 50- caliber machine gun, a one of a kind weapon that can now be fired right on the Vegas Strip.

(On camera): This is the place for the gun connoisseur.


MARQUEZ: Somebody who wants --

MICHAELS: We're going after a little bit of a higher end demographic.

MARQUEZ (voice-over): For gun lovers, it's the sort of things dreams are made of. The world's most powerful handgun. The Smith & Wesson 500 is here, too.

(On camera): Look at this thing. My god.

MICHAELS: Just make sure you not to put your finger on the trigger and point at anyone.

MARQUEZ (voice-over): The Strip Gun Club has only been open a month. Co-owner Justin Michaels is attending the SHOT show now in town hoping to find new sources of ammunition now in short supply.

(On camera): Why is there a shortage of ammunition?

MICHAELS: It's because there -- certain people have a fear that with the -- what they perceive to be upcoming gun legislation.

MARQUEZ: Rick Cass, an Indianapolis gun dealer, is also here for the SHOT show. Like ammunition, he says, gun owners are buying up AR-15s at about 2,000 bucks a pop in record numbers.

(On camera): Eighty percent of your business is AR-15s.


MARQUEZ: And you cannot keep them in stock.

CASS: I cannot keep in stock. We received 17 this week. And I sold them in 36 hours.

MARQUEZ (voice-over): He also sold 20 100 high capacity magazines in just three days, he says. All this the unintended consequence of talk of new gun laws.

This is a place perfectly comfortable with guns. You can even go to the state-of-the-art Clark County shooting range opening this week. We got a sneak peak.

Gun carts, desert views, 30 manicured shooting stations, it is golf with guns.

In Vegas anything goes. Sports shooters and high-end gun rangers don't think the new gun laws will have much effect on them, but retailers and manufacturers of guns gathered in here are watching, waiting and worried.

(END VIDEOTAPE) MARQUEZ: And that's really where we're seeing a lot of the concern here in Vegas at this gun show. The SHOT show here. It's the retailers and the manufacturers, for the most part, some of the manufacturers of those AR-15s, say that the -- they have, like, a two- year wait for some of those guns. And ammunition is selling out before it even gets to the store.

Back to you guys.

JOHNS: Miguel Marquez, thanks so much for that.

BOLDUAN: Coming up, Lance Armstrong's reported confession to doping. Raising new questions about why he denied it for so long. We're going to look at the psychology behind it next.


BOLDUAN: Let's -- let's get back to our top story right now.

Lance Armstrong's reported confession to doping after years of emphatically -- denying it.

JOHNS: Joining us to talk about all of this, CNN legal contributor Paul Callan and psychiatrist Gail Saltz. She's the author of the book, "Anatomy of a Secret Life: The Psychology of Living a Lie."

Gail, people look at this thing and the 30,000 foot view is here is a guy who told a big lie over and over again, on the biggest stage possible. What's going through a person's mind to sort of pull this off for as long as he did?

DR. GAIL SALTZ, AUTHOR, ANATOMY OF A SECRET LIFE: Well, unfortunately, we're seeing a lot of this and there are two possibilities. And I would say really only Lance Armstrong knows. One is that powerful, powerful denial can be employed when someone is afraid of being found out, doesn't want to admit to themselves that they've done something terribly, terribly wrong, and so denial can reach almost psychotic proportions where you just convince yourselves that what you're doing is right and in that case, lying.

The other possibility, obviously, is that you're sociopathic, that you simply don't feel guilt, you are not concerned about those you might be hurting. You feel justified to get what you want and you're really not concerned about the consequences and so manipulatively you will do whatever you need to do to hang on to, for instance, in this case it would be, you know, fame and money.

BOLDUAN: And, Gail, it was -- it's one of those things that people are looking at this and it's not just that he denied it for -- you know, for so long. It was this position that he took of kind of how dare you even question me.

SALTZ: Right.

BOLDUAN: To this extent. I mean, he went so much further than just denying it. He went absolutely on the attack. So, I mean, you said it could be kind of a -- maybe a defense mechanism. Is it a coping mechanism? Because he knew deep down if he confesses that he was lying.

SALTZ: Well, I think often when people are very afraid or very disturbed about something, particularly men, they may appear angry, and we don't know whether that's really anger or just sort of, you know, this mounted, you know, puffed up, I'm going to appear so angry that it's going to force you to back off because I'm really afraid of being discovered.

And I think that we've seen this in many of the recent cases of men who've been caught doing something, politicians, et cetera, that if they're uncovered that they're going to lose everything and in the fear of losing everything, they appear defensively, highly angry, attacking, aggressive, and an attempt to obviously make people back off.

JOHNS: And, Paul, obviously, it's a challenge to try to psychoanalyze a guy like this because so much still is not known. But one of the things a number of people have talked to me about is the competitive nature of Lance Armstrong. How much do you think that played into this big lie?

PAUL CALLAN, CNN LEGAL CONTRIBUTOR: Well, Joe, you know, with all due respect to the psychiatric profession, we lawyers have two words for this conduct, it's called fraud and perjury.


The -- telling a lie under oath which he -- if -- and by the way, we have to say, we still don't know precisely what he is going to say on the Oprah show.



CALLAN: And I don't want to jump to too many conclusions based on press releases because my bet is that he'll parse his words very, very carefully. But if he admits to doping, which is the use of human blood to enhance athletic capability and the use of other drugs, that would indicate that he committed perjury in 2005 in a deposition, he lied under oath, that's a crime.

I don't think people who are competitive are more inclined to commit crimes. I think this is something you've got to look not to competition but to his own inner psyche that would make him do this. I think, you know, when you look at his conduct, he was so aggressive in attacking his teammates, accusing them of being liars and perjurers and really destroying their reputations, when it's now readily apparent that they were probably telling the truth.

So it is true that this might be criminal conduct but in the end it may arise from some underlying, you know, problem that he has.

JOHNS: Yes. But the question is, if you get into a situation like this, what's the defense? What's the public defense for him and what's the legal defense?

CALLAN: Well, he's got -- he's got a great defense to criminal charges. It's called the statute of limitations. He lied under oath arguably in Texas in 2005. If he admits this to Oprah tomorrow. And the statute of limitations is gone on that. That leaves one possible area of wire fraud. If you do and engage in a fraudulent act and you use a telephone, the mail, or even television transmission wires to help you in the fraud you commit a federal crime, but frankly the last time he was accused of doping, his last race was in 2009.

The other allegations go back even farther than that. So he might even be out of the statute of limitations for federal wire fraud, and I'm sure he's discussed it very carefully with his attorneys and decided that although he faces criminal charges, they are unlikely. That leaves the civil charges. Now those are going to be serious.

Sponsors who paid millions of dollars for his good name undoubtedly had morals clauses in those contracts and they were deceived. And they can sue to get their money back claiming fraud. You could be looking at tens of millions of dollars in potential civil lawsuits against him if he admits to engaging in this illegal conduct.

BOLDUAN: All right. Unfortunately, we'll have to leave it there.

Dr. Gail Saltz, Paul Callan, thanks so much. We'll have much more to be talking about this in the days to come. And we'll be leaning on your guys. Thank you so much.

CALLAN: Thank you, Kate.

BOLDUAN: Still ahead, 20 surgeries, 36 plates and 46 screws. Up next, what happened to this girl could easily happen to anyone.


BOLDUAN: You know you're not supposed to do it, but taking your eyes off the road, even for a moment, can have a devastating impact.

JOHNS: And CNN's Sandra Endo is here.

You actually climbed into a simulator to sort of illustrate all this.

SANDRA ENDO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes. And it was very surprising, Joe and Kate, just what could happen if you take your eyes off the road just for a few seconds. And really, it just shows also how deadly cell phones could be or any type of distraction inside your car. And it happened to me in a simulator. But we also spoke with one woman who shared with us her tragic real-life story.


ENDO (voice-over): If this picture doesn't say enough, listen to 24- year-old Amanda Kloehr explain what happened to her in 2008.

AMANDA KLOEHR, UNDERGONE VARIOUS SURGERY AFTER ACCIDENT: I was in a very bad accident. I hit the back end of a tractor-trailer that had a forklift on it, and I've had over 20 surgeries to repair my face. I lost an eye, snapped an ankle, I have 36 plates and 48 screws on the right side of my face. I had to learn how to re-walk. I was in a coma. So I was distracted. I was texting and playing with my phone.

ENDO: She considers herself lucky to be alive. Kloehr was like many teens, who are five times more likely to text and drive. That's according to the cell phone industry, which has teamed up with the government to promote awareness.

DAVID STRICKLAND, NHTSA ADMINISTRATOR: Teens have a higher tendency to take more risks behind the wheel. We all know that. And because they do live a connected lifestyle, is being able sort of to break that cultural more of, it's OK, it can wait. You know, you put it down.

ENDO: A Department of Transportation report shows sending or receiving a text takes a driver's eyes off the road for merely five seconds, and at 55 miles per hour, that's blindly driving the length of an entire football field.

I got behind the wheel of one simulator that does much more than just teach the rules of the road.

(On camera): Going on to a freeway here, and my BlackBerry in sight. Someone's texting me. "You're not driving, are you?" Yes, I am. So I crashed? OK.

BOB DAVIS, CEO, VIRTUAL DRIVER INTERACTIVE: It was just at the time that you --

ENDO: Looked -- that I looked away.

(Voice-over): The system also teaches repercussions.

(On camera): $2,000 to fix my car. Oh, my goodness.

DAVIS: You now have to live through a first-person experience of going in front of an actual judge and being arraigned and being sentenced for what you did. And that's not a comfortable feeling. And people going through this really remember that feeling.

ENDO (voice-over): From someone who has experienced the worst, Kloehr has this message for young drivers.

KLOEHR: Whatever it is that you want to do that's a distraction can wait. It's not worth it. And you never, ever want to know what it feels like to be in my shoes and my kind of lucky.


ENDO: Now keep in mind, distractions could mean a variety of things, not just texting or talking on the phone, it could be eating or drinking, using a GPS, or grooming or even changing the radio station -- Kate and Joe.

BOLDUAN: When you look at that, I mean, we all know it. JOHNS: Wow.

BOLDUAN: We all know that it's dangerous, but we've all done it as well.

ENDO: We're all guilty.

JOHNS: Right. It really brings it home. And also, I assume, those pictures, you couldn't show all of them, because --

ENDO: Right, they're pretty graphic. And we tried to not show the most graphic ones, but just looking at the mangled car itself shows you the impact of what could happen when you text and drive.

JOHNS: Sandra Endo, thank for that.

BOLDUAN: Thanks, Sandra.

JOHNS: A chance to experience history and a chance for a financial windfall. Why the upcoming presidential inauguration manes different things to different people.


BOLDUAN: It's a huge moment in history, and for many, an opportunity to cash in. CNN's Emily Schmidt has more on the presidential inauguration.


EMILY SCHMIDT, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): An inauguration comes down to this. One hand on a bible, the other raised in an oath.


SCHMIDT: That's the moment in history, which makes so many others try to get their hands on this.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: How many different ways can you say you support Obama?


SCHMIDT: The Presidential Inaugural Committee store is up and running.

(On camera): Been going like flashy things.

(Voice-over): Ready for shoppers marking the occasion with officially sanctioned, made in the USA, memorabilia.

(On camera): What are you seeing that you like?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I like everything. And that's my problem, because just being such a historic event, I want to have a lot of merchandise to share and a lot of merchandise to give other people who could not, you know, come and visit.

SCHMIDT: It is likely President Obama will take the oath of office on what will be a cold January day, so people are stocking up on warm sweatshirts and these official hats, even some official blankets. The one thing sold out today, the official tube socks. They're coming in tomorrow. But people point out, still available online.

(Voice-over): Washington is preparing for an expected crowd of about 900,000 people. They'll need to eat, so about 100 permits have been issued for food trucks and vendors, down from the first Obama inaugural, but three times as many as the second President Bush event.

(On camera): In business, it's all about location. And right here, one block from the White House, it doesn't get much closer to the president. These vendors are preparing for big crowds. They've got 60 of these "Witness to History" T-shirts ready to go. Their challenge, they have to sell now, because by Monday, the day of the inauguration, they'll have to move farther away for security reasons.

SYLVIA NORRIS, INAUGURAL VOLUNTEER: I got the e-mail saying that I was selected to be a volunteer. I was excited, ecstatic.

SCHMIDT (voice-over): Sylvia Norris will be an inaugural volunteer Monday. She hasn't been told yet what she will be doing. She says it doesn't matter, as long as she's there making the same memories others are paying so much to have.

NORRIS: If I could afford it, I would do it. Why not? It's all part of history.


SCHMIDT: Members of Congress are passing out their allotted free tickets to the inaugural swearing-in ceremony, but if you look online, there are plenty of offers for tickets on sites like Craigslist and eBay. Prices ranging from hundreds to thousands of dollars -- Kate.

BOLDUAN: Emily, thank you.

Happening now, Oprah Winfrey speaks out about her interview with Lance Armstrong and how he surprised her.

We talk to the man who was uncovering the truth about Armstrong before anyone wanted to hear it.

Will the gun you own be outlawed?