This is the first ocassion when I've had enough time to listen to the whole recording (one of the advantages of having resigned - still expected to turn up at work, but no-one wants to give me anything to do ...).
Anyhow, something about that conversation doesn't ring true to me ... I'm not commenting on the accuracy of the content at all - there's enough out there to put that beyond doubt.
What I'm talking about is the interaction between Lemond and McIlvain. It sounds less like a "true conversation" and more like something that is somewhere between a combination of a loosely scripted "act", a lecture style speech (from both, but primarily from Lemond) and bullet pointing (from both) of a series of key points that they, for whatever reason, want to get "on the record" in a way that gains widespread circulation.
A whole heap of things make me think this, including the fact that the two haven't supposedly spoken for ages but don't really spend any time reaquainting themselves, the lack of talking over each other, the lack of surprise from each of them at "revelations" by the other and the way that the topics range far and wide without a typical pattern of linking from one to the other. In fact, even the "you're not recording this?" exchange is pretty lame. For someone who's professing to be really concerned for her job and so forth, McIlvain is pretty low key in her pushing that point ...
So, what am I saying? That, if what I say is right, everything about the recording and release of the conversation would've been known between McIlvain and Lemond in advance. Plausible?
I'm sure that I'll get accused of conspiracy theorising and watching too many bad US cop programmes (for the record: I can't stand them - in fact I can't stand most US television programmes) ... but as I say, to me, this just doesn't sound like a spontaneous conversation ... Thoughts anyone??