The BikeZilla Jonathan Vaughters interview PtII

[Anonymous]

http://bikezilla.blogspot.com/2011/06/jonathan-vaughters-interview-part-2.html

 

[ScienceIsCool]

Excellent interview. I have one question for JV that never seems to be asked. Why should a doper, someone who has made very, very bad ethical choices in the past, be trusted when they say they are clean *now*? Working for a clean sport *now*. Working with authorities and growing clean talent *now*.

If such a person chose expediency, convenience, greed, opportunism in the past, why should I believe they wouldn't do so in the future?

For the record, I do believe JV, but the basis for doing so is exceedingly thin.

And to JV: you have stated many times it's the authorities and not the average observer that has power over the state of the sport (which is why you divulge the truth only to them). Untrue. We are the reason the sport exists as a commercial enterprise. In the long run, without us you will not exist. We have the power to turn against you and boycott any sponsor that gets near you.

John Swanson

 

[131313]

Why should a doper, someone who has made very, very bad ethical choices in the past, be trusted when they say they are clean *now*? Working for a clean sport *now*. Working with authorities and growing clean talent *now*.

If such a person chose expediency, convenience, greed, opportunism in the past, why should I believe they wouldn't do so in the future?

I certainly think that's a reasonable question. My own thoughts are that people tend to fit on an ethical continuum of "guys who will do what's right, no matter what", and "guys who will do anything to win, no matter what", with a big bell curve of guys in the middle. I simply don't think of it as a binary thing. I think JV's actions (leaving Postal, going to ride for a clean team at CA, leaving Europe to go ride in the US, starting up the Subaru team when he did) tend to suggest he's more towards one side of that continuum than the other. That doesn't excuse his decision to dope in my book, put it does put him in a different light than a guy like Landis who goes to the team boss and says "I'll do whatever it takes, coach". That's my take.

For the record, I do believe JV, but the basis for doing so is exceedingly thin.

I'm curious why you feel that way?

As far as his comments regarding the media, I have to simply disagree with the power of the media to affect change. The willfully complicity cycling press is a big part of the reason why nothing has changed. And when the organizations in charge of policing the sport are either willfully ignorant or complicit in the corruption, then maybe it's time to pursue some other avenues. With the existence of both WADA and the USADA, I do think there are useful options out there. But if he's have gone to the media 10 years ago and been a little more forthcoming, things may be a little farther along than they are now, IMO.

 

[Mambo95]

There's one bit right at the end which is really at the crux of The Clinic's distaste for JV. I quote:

"Like I said, I feel there are people, WADA and other authorities that have an absolute need for specific information in order to improve anti-doping and enforce the rules going forward. I don't think that CBS news or whoever need that.

"I've been in contact with WADA for many, many years regarding improving anti-doping.”

Essentially, the Clinic's antagonism comes down to "Mum, Jon won't tell me his secrets! I hate him! Boo Hoo Hoo".

The Clinic cares not about the cleanliness of the sport, it cares only for gossip.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

There's one bit right at the end which is really at the crux of The Clinic's distaste for JV. I quote:

"Like I said, I feel there are people, WADA and other authorities that have an absolute need for specific information in order to improve anti-doping and enforce the rules going forward. I don't think that CBS news or whoever need that.

"I've been in contact with WADA for many, many years regarding improving anti-doping.”

Essentially, the Clinic's antagonism comes down to "Mum, Jon won't tell me his secrets! I hate him! Boo Hoo Hoo".

The Clinic cares not about the cleanliness of the sport, it cares only for gossip.

Did you ask all 20,000+ members their opinion or did you just show your own ignorance? (PS thats a rhetorical question)

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

http://bikezilla.blogspot.com/2011/06/jonathan-vaughters-interview-part-2.html

The standard PR guff from Vaughters.

Good for Bikezilla for asking the questions. Nothing said by Vaughters that changes my view that he's a talking horse.

 

[hrotha]

There's one bit right at the end which is really at the crux of The Clinic's distaste for JV. I quote:

"Like I said, I feel there are people, WADA and other authorities that have an absolute need for specific information in order to improve anti-doping and enforce the rules going forward. I don't think that CBS news or whoever need that.

"I've been in contact with WADA for many, many years regarding improving anti-doping.”

Essentially, the Clinic's antagonism comes down to "Mum, Jon won't tell me his secrets! I hate him! Boo Hoo Hoo".

The Clinic cares not about the cleanliness of the sport, it cares only for gossip.

BS. We already know his secrets - at least the ones he's being asked to confess. We (some of us) just disagree with him over the power of public cathartic confrontations with the past of the sport. We disagree with his "let's look forward" stance because it's been everyone's favourite mantra for 13 years and it hasn't helped much. We disagree about trusting the authorities to fix the problem by themselves because those authorities have shown time and time again to be corrupt. We want to know why Vaughters advised Landis to tell only those bits of his story that didn't affect anybody else, and why Garmin's co-owner Millar is such an enforcer of omertà and completely against transparency. Most of us want to believe in Vaughters, but these are serious issues.

 

[Berzin]

Bz:

It also seems that you're implying, quite strongly, that riders and team members are not to, and not permitted to (or at least very strongly discouraged from), speak to any non-"authority", and that you may very well "throw anyone out" who does speak to a non-"authority".

JV:

"I would never throw anyone out for that. It's just that I'm not going to compel them to speak to the media.

It's my personal belief that that is not the best way forward."

The underlined sentences speak for themselves.

Transparency, eh? Best way to move forward? What a crock.

Vaughters missed his calling. He would have made an excellent political strategist.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I certainly agree with you, an excellent interview.

Excellent interview. I have one question for JV that never seems to be asked. Why should a doper, someone who has made very, very bad ethical choices in the past, be trusted when they say they are clean *now*? Working for a clean sport *now*. Working with authorities and growing clean talent *now*.

If such a person chose expediency, convenience, greed, opportunism in the past, why should I believe they wouldn't do so in the future?

For the record, I do believe JV, but the basis for doing so is exceedingly thin.

Really good questions.
To be fair to JV he has in various pieces articulated the why's and why he believes he can change things.

Sometimes you have made the mistake before you realized there were other options.

And to JV: you have stated many times it's the authorities and not the average observer that has power over the state of the sport (which is why you divulge the truth only to them). Untrue. We are the reason the sport exists as a commercial enterprise. In the long run, without us you will not exist. We have the power to turn against you and boycott any sponsor that gets near you.

John Swanson

This goes to the heart of it.

I think I have finally worked out the (slight) difference in opinion that JV and I have about him admitting his own doping.
He says in the interview:

"Some sort of informational, confessional, I don't see how that possibly changes the life of an eighteen year old up and coming rider that is coming into the sport and that you're trying to prevent him from ever being faced with the decision to use performance enhancing drugs or not.

.... his view appears to be about protecting those that come through his team or that he may have contact with.

My view is that the sport has such a poor reputation that kids younger than that are not encouraged in to cycling in the first place.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

BS. We already know his secrets - at least the ones he's being asked to confess. We (some of us) just disagree with him over the power of public cathartic confrontations with the past of the sport. We disagree with his "let's look forward" stance because it's been everyone's favourite mantra for 13 years and it hasn't helped much. We disagree about trusting the authorities to fix the problem by themselves because those authorities have shown time and time again to be corrupt. We want to know why Vaughters advised Landis to tell only those bits of his story that didn't affect anybody else, and why Garmin's co-owner Millar is such an enforcer of omertà and completely against transparency. Most of us want to believe in Vaughters, but these are serious issues.

Well said.

 

[pmcg76]

There's one bit right at the end which is really at the crux of The Clinic's distaste for JV. I quote:

"Like I said, I feel there are people, WADA and other authorities that have an absolute need for specific information in order to improve anti-doping and enforce the rules going forward. I don't think that CBS news or whoever need that.

"I've been in contact with WADA for many, many years regarding improving anti-doping.”

Essentially, the Clinic's antagonism comes down to "Mum, Jon won't tell me his secrets! I hate him! Boo Hoo Hoo".

The Clinic cares not about the cleanliness of the sport, it cares only for gossip.

Why do people always make sweeping statements about the Clinic as if everybody who posts here has the exact same opinion's on everything. That is BS right there. Sometimes I agree with opinions, other times I dont. There is no singular opinion other than most believe doping is still a problem in the sport. Does anyone not believe that?

I for one dont hate JV and I understand why JV feels it unnecessary to admit to doping, I dont need him too admit anyways because he has made it pretty clear.

However I do agree with the poster before who said that the media and fans can play a part in helping the sport. The authorities UCI & WADA have proved incapable of dealing efficently with doping and it has been left to other authorities like the police, FBI etc to pick up the slack.

A lot of the police involvement has come about because of people speaking out E.G Manzano, Kohl, Landis, without the media providing their stories, would Puerto, FDA investigation etc have happened, no. So where would cycling be right now, still back in the ometra dominated world of the early 00s.

 

[Merckx index]

BS. We already know his secrets - at least the ones he's being asked to confess. We (some of us) just disagree with him over the power of public cathartic confrontations with the past of the sport. We disagree with his "let's look forward" stance because it's been everyone's favourite mantra for 13 years and it hasn't helped much. We disagree about trusting the authorities to fix the problem by themselves because those authorities have shown time and time again to be corrupt.

Exactly. Who’s had a bigger impact on anti-doping, JV, who says he’s been providing the truth about his past “for many, many years” to the authorities "who matter", or Floyd, who went public with his accusations of LA a year ago? I understand JV wants to avoid all the hate and ridicule directed at Floyd or Tyler, the media circus, but it seems that a media circus is the only way to getting anything done. His tell-it-to-the-people-who-matter approach has not accomplished much, as far as I can see. Either they haven’t acted on all his insider information, or he didn’t really have that much to give them. Either in the way of big names, or in methods that would help improve testing.

His approach reminds me a lot of (American) liberals in the late 60s, who said, let’s not have mass protests, or sit-ins, or campus strikes, because we can work with the authorities if we just write letters and petitions and sit down and discuss things with them in a friendly way.

Also very interesting that he says he has not yet testified to the GJ. I would have thought by now they would have sought him out.

 

[Mambo95]

Why do people always make sweeping statements about the Clinic as if everybody who posts here has the exact same opinion's on everything.

People don't all have the same opinion, but there is a general similarity in those opinions and a common lust for doping and scandal that pervades (I've expanded on this on a different thread). But if you've bought into that creed, you probably won't see it.

 

[Topangarider]

"At least three times Bikezilla has had visitors from the DOJ and FDA, on searches based on doping or..."

As journalists can they not protect their sources?
Why are the Feds visiting Bikezilla so frequently?

 

[Anonymous]

"At least three times Bikezilla has had visitors from the DOJ and FDA, on searches based on doping or..."

As journalists can they not protect their sources?
Why are the Feds visiting Bikezilla so frequently?

same reason they are keeping their eyes on an awful lot of websites, and people.

Sometimes there are occasions when people "discover" things that the feds dont know about. The clinic has been the releasing ground for a number of very interesting documents over the last twelve months. There are a lot of people work very hard to "find" things. Im sure those things are just as interesting to the feds as they are to us.

I assume when they say "visits" they are referring to web visits by ip's known to be issued to federal agencies.

 

[LukeSchmid]

"At least three times Bikezilla has had visitors from the DOJ and FDA, on searches based on doping or..."

As journalists can they not protect their sources?
Why are the Feds visiting Bikezilla so frequently?

Interesting questions.
Why are they looking for information not only about Lance Armstrong but also on Vaughters in the "Lance Armstrong Jonathan Vaughter doping"?
Why would someone who has very strongly implied they have doped as part of US Postal not have been called before the Grand Jury?
Why did Vaughters just deny talking to the Grand Jury when asked about being talked to in a more general sense by authorities?

 

[pmcg76]

People don't all have the same opinion, but there is a general similarity in those opinions and a common lust for doping and scandal that pervades (I've expanded on this on a different thread). But if you've bought into that creed, you probably won't see it.

How is their a general similarity, as I said elsewhere the only similarity is that people here believe doping is a problem. To what degree and how to best fix it is worthy of being discussed and yes it might have no value in the real wordl but then this is a forum and in general, meaningless anyway but then its funny when people like Cavendish, the McQuaids and others get pretty wound up by what is said on here. JV obviously felt that the clininc was important enough to address and how many times have we heard the CN clinic referenced in different places. I would wager that you dont even know what my stances are on doping but yet you feel inclined to lump me in as the Clinic.

 

[Damiano Machiavelli]

Also very interesting that he says he has not yet testified to the GJ. I would have thought by now they would have sought him out.

I guess that shoots down the theory held by some that JV has not gone public because he is quietly working behind the scenes with the investigation. JV talks a good game, but it is all B.S. Merckx Index said it. Floyd has done more for the cause than JV has ever done.

JV's philosophy of doping can be summed up as sweep it under the rug. I cannot believe I initially had faith in this anti-doping fraudster. The involvement of Lance loving, Floyd hating, deceitful slime like David Millar should have been a red flag.

Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.

Secrecy is the new transparency.

 

[Topangarider]

same reason they are keeping their eyes on an awful lot of websites, and people.

Sometimes there are occasions when people "discover" things that the feds dont know about. The clinic has been the releasing ground for a number of very interesting documents over the last twelve months. There are a lot of people work very hard to "find" things. Im sure those things are just as interesting to the feds as they are to us.

I assume when they say "visits" they are referring to web visits by ip's known to be issued to federal agencies.

ah, I was imagining actual agents coming to bikezilla in person or something more invasive as I just read about a case ( NJ Supreme
court) in which the court ruled that bloggers don't have the same protections as other journalists. http://mobile.nj.com/advnj/pm_29221/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=eEJmDjJ2

I am not surprised Feds read the clinic.

Thanks

 

[Topangarider]

Interesting questions.
Why are they looking for information not only about Lance Armstrong but also on Vaughters in the "Lance Armstrong Jonathan Vaughter doping"?
Why would someone who has very strongly implied they have doped as part of US Postal not have been called before the Grand Jury?
Why did Vaughters just deny talking to the Grand Jury when asked about being talked to in a more general sense by authorities?

Yes, I am very intrigued that he has not been called
Maybe we can get bikezilla to offer some insight

 

[red_flanders]

We already know his secrets - at least the ones he's being asked to confess. We (some of us) just disagree with him over the power of public cathartic confrontations with the past of the sport. We disagree with his "let's look forward" stance because it's been everyone's favourite mantra for 13 years and it hasn't helped much. We disagree about trusting the authorities to fix the problem by themselves because those authorities have shown time and time again to be corrupt. We want to know why Vaughters advised Landis to tell only those bits of his story that didn't affect anybody else, and why Garmin's co-owner Millar is such an enforcer of omertà and completely against transparency. Most of us want to believe in Vaughters, but these are serious issues.

Total agreement. I didn't have a strong opinion of JV before reading this, some positive and some negative, but his reasons he outlines for his choices...well, I don't respect them. They appear to me to be completely self-interest motivated and I think his views on the "way forward" are bull****. He can't seriously believe that public silence and "I'll answer the authorities if they ask" are any way to fix the sport.

There is no "way forward". There's only "the way".

 

[Bikezilla]

I don't know that I have any insight to offer, but I'll clarify a point.

When I say that the DOJ or FDA have visited Bikezilla, I mean that it shows in my stat log.

For instance, there will be an IP, "usdoj.gov" and when I open the stats for that hit the words "Department of Justice".

Which is how I knew when CSE / Capital Sports & Entertainment came in.

Why are they coming in? My assumption is that they do general searches for topics related to cases. But they might also simply be cycling fans who work at DOJ or FDA, surfing the web on their break.

Hope this helps.

And thank all of you for coming in, especially those of you who read regularly, and for expressing your thoughts and opinions.

Regards

Bikezilla

 

[I Watch Cycling In July]

Yes, I am very intrigued that he has not been called
Maybe we can get bikezilla to offer some insight

BZ: "Have you been contacted by any law enforcement agency seeking information you might have regarding doping, either within professional cycling in general, specifically at U.S. Postal or regarding Lance Armstrong?"


JV: “I have not appeared in front of a Grand Jury at this time. I fully expect that at some point I will, or that I'll be asked to.

As of here and now, today, that hasn't happened."

He doesn't say he hasn't been contacted. He doesn't say he didn't supply a sworn statement. He doesn't even say he and Novitski didn't have a friendly chat while sharing a nice bottle from JV's cellar.

I fully expect that there is a reason JV fully expects to be called at some time.

 

[Damiano Machiavelli]

He doesn't say he didn't supply a sworn statement.

Probably the same statement he supplied to the SCA case:

It was all gossip. I know nothing. Nothing.

Sincerely,
JV

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I don't know that I have any insight to offer, but I'll clarify a point.

When I say that the DOJ or FDA have visited Bikezilla, I mean that it shows in my stat log.

For instance, there will be an IP, "usdoj.gov" and when I open the stats for that hit the words "Department of Justice".

Which is how I knew when CSE / Capital Sports & Entertainment came in.

Why are they coming in? My assumption is that they do general searches for topics related to cases. But they might also simply be cycling fans who work at DOJ or FDA, surfing the web on their break.

Hope this helps.

And thank all of you for coming in, especially those of you who read regularly, and for expressing your thoughts and opinions.

Regards

Bikezilla

Firstly - well done on securing a good interview and especially for asking lots of pertinent questions.

One point if you could clarify - was the exchange with JV an email exchange or was it done by phone/skype etc?