TGJB, the line of discussion you are taking here makes sense if Baffert says he gave the horse the drug weeks ago and there's only a trace amt left (going to put aside the performance enhancing question for now).
But unless I've missed something, he's flat out saying he never gave the horse the drug at all.
That leaves only 3 possibilities:
1) He knew about an arrangement to give the horse the drug off the record at some points
2) He knew nothing about it and someone thought they would sneak it in and it would be out of system by race day
3) He knew nothing about it and someone is trying to sabotage him
None of these explanations cast Baffert in a positive light, especially for someone who has prior violation issues. He is supposed to have 100% responsibility for these horses, the buck stops with him.
With the millions of dollars that are at stake, it does seem highly illogical and downright implausible that he would be doing anything that would potentially risk those millions.
Then comes the story that one of his recent violations was because a groom pissed on the horse's hay, and any arguments grounded in logic and the protection that they might/should be offering these horses goes out the window.
At best, Baffert is guilty of what the NCAA would call "failure to monitor". At worst, something nefarious. Either one is not excusable for him. I do feel badly for the horse and connections, if they truly knew nothing about it.
