Jump to content

The Mitchell Report Out Today


lockmat

Recommended Posts

The beginning of the phone call was being played on the radio as I turned on my car to leave work. The fact that it was recorded and played made it feel like a really big deal.

The thing is, I think there's reason to believe both sides, but it's more of a sentiment thing w/ Clemens. But I still think Mitchell and the trainer have the leverage. I don't like the court of public opinion since it always thinks the party is guilty first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice logic, Rog- "I won 7 Cy Youngs, I couldn't possibly have taken steroids"

William Roger Clemens v. Brian McNamee

1/7/2008 2008-00703

Defamation of character action in which the plaintiff's former trainer, defendant McNamee, falsely claimed the plaintiff "used, possessed, or was injected with steroids and/or HGH in 1998, 2000 and 2001," The defendant made the allegations, published on Dec. 13, 2007 by former U.S. Senator George Mitchell, to federal authorities after being threatened with criminal prosecution if he did not implicate Clemens. Over the course of his more than 20 year pitching career in major league baseball Clemens received the Cy Young award seven times

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only problem with the issue, did he use steroids, did he not use steroids, is anything prior to August 7, 2002 is a moot point. Major League Baseball's adopted their newly strengthened ban on controlled substances, including steroids, starting in the 2003 season. So until it's made illegal it's legal correct. If they were using, Bonds, Clemens, and McGwire, would not be the only player to do what they may have, or may not have done. Second, let

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really could not care less about multi-millionaires throwing temper tantrums. Those that want to put Clemens on a pedestal will find plenty of reasons to do so. Those of us that suspected it prior to his being outed have not heard anything to change our minds. This is merely a male version of a Hollywood drama. I will not waste any of my short life reading about it, or debating it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only problem with the issue, did he use steroids, did he not use steroids, is anything prior to August 7, 2002 is a moot point. Major League Baseball's adopted their newly strengthened ban on controlled substances, including steroids, starting in the 2003 season.

Steroids, for the most part, have been illegal since 1988. The fact that baseball was almost 15 years too late with their policy in no way jusitifes their use.

Edited by west20th
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steroids, for the most part, have been illegal since 1988. The fact that baseball was almost 15 years too late with their policy is the moot point.

It's not moot in the sense that being a criminal is not the same thing as being a cheat in the eyes of sport.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Baseball theater at it's finest.

Roger waited way too long to respond to any of this. Every move he's made since the report was released, and the amount of time he took to do so, have felt calculated and rehearsed. The very types of responses that guilty people usually have.

The Mike Wallace interview was meaningless. Wallace and Clemens are personal friends, hence Roger picking him for his first of several calculated moves. No depth to the questions, no follow-ups to the answers.

Yesterday's press conference, complete with rehearsed outrage and sarcasm directed at the reporters - "can I drink water?... is that good or bad?..." - was just more of Clemens posturing - sort of an "I'm outraged and insulted, how dare you?!" type of response to all the reporters, news stations, fans, etc. Embarrassing. On the Wallace interview - "I wish the person who supplied me with the needles would come forward, really I do". Yesterday - "the injections he gave me..." Well Roger, which is it - mystery supplier or McNamee?

The taped phone call - a new low for Roger. How sad to have to listen to someone who isn't aware they are being recorded while someone else listens in, hoping they'll lie. Disgraceful on the part of the Clemens camp.

Also, along those lines - knowing he was being recorded and the tape was going to be played at his press conference - why in the world would Clemens not at the very least say "why did you lie about me?...", "you know I've never taken steroids..." or something in his own defense? Instead, he just asks him "why did you do it", "I need someone to tell the truth", etc, etc. 17 embarrassing minutes wasted.

The repeated comments that he doesn't give a rat's ### about records or the hall of fame?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, along those lines - knowing he was being recorded and the tape was going to be played at his press conference - why in the world would Clemens not at the very least say "why did you lie about me?...", "you know I've never taken steroids..." or something in his own defense? Instead, he just asks him "why did you do it", "I need someone to tell the truth", etc, etc. 17 embarrassing minutes wasted.

It always seems like when they're lying, they never do the obvious. Is it a simple as cuz they don't think about it?

If he really is lying, he's got huge balls if he follows through and says the same thing in front of congress. I guess these guys just think they're invincible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not moot in the sense that being a criminal is not the same thing as being a cheat in the eyes of sport.

But they are being seen as cheats in the eyes of their sport. Palermo will never see the Hall of Fame because (even though he has the numbers) he tested positive for steroids. If Roger Clemons can't convince people he didn't use steroids he probably won't see the hall of fame unless he buys a ticket.

Just because baseball was late on it's ban doesn't make them any less of a cheat. Since, as Clemons said, you can't prove a negative do you think it would be wise for him to take a lie detector test? If he is telling the truth I don't see how else he would prove it.

I guess these guys just think they're invincible.

....side effect of the roids?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It always seems like when they're lying, they never do the obvious. Is it a simple as cuz they don't think about it?

If he really is lying, he's got huge balls if he follows through and says the same thing in front of congress. I guess these guys just think they're invincible.

Actually, if he is lying, he has SMALL BALLS. A common side effect.

The man is a douchebag. This just confirms it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Pettitte tells Congress that Clemens revealed HGH use

Rocket faces tough test today after former teammate's allegations surface

As he prepares to face accuser Brian McNamee in today's hearing into the use of performance-enhancing drugs in baseball, Roger Clemens' biggest challenge could be the words of friend and former teammate Andy Pettitte.

According to last week's sworn affidavit from Pettitte, Clemens told Pettitte in either 1999 or 2000 that he used human growth hormone, the Associated Press reported Tuesday, citing a person who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

full article

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Roger is toast....he's changed his story too many times. Now he said he misunderstood what Pettitte was asking when he asked about HGH, and said he thought Andy was asking about his wife Debbie when he said yes about HGH usage. I am fixing to lose all respect whatsoever if he tries to scapegoat his wife to cover his own ass.

03_rclemens_01.jpg

They may have both been using them. The wifey does looked a little pumped up. however that means nothing. But I firmly believe Roger is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt now, just because all of his story flip flopping.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pettitte said in the affidavit that he asked Clemens in 2005 what he would do if asked by the media about HGH, given his admission years earlier. According to the account told to the AP, the affidavit said Clemens responded by saying Pettitte misunderstood the exchange from five or six years earlier and that, in fact, Clemens had been talking about HGH use by his wife in the original conversation.

Maybe someone familiar or who can remember the timeline of steroids in baseball can answer this question.

According to this story, Clemens admitted to Pettite he used HGH in '99 or 2000, then retracted his statements in '05. Everyone knows the steroid problem was widely known by '05. But was it in '99 or '00? I'm wondering if Clemens admitted his use in '99 b/c it wasn't a big story yet, but then retracted it in '05 b/c now it was.

The McGwire/Sosa year was before '99 wasn't it? If so, my theory is out the window.

Edited by lockmat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The McGwire/Sosa home run race happened in 1998.

Of course I'm sure there were whispers of steroid use that year, but it wasn't full blown until a year or two later, right? More of the talk was about that Andro stuff McGwire was taking.

That's what I'm remembering, but I could be wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pettitte said in the affidavit that he asked Clemens in 2005 what he would do if asked by the media about HGH, given his admission years earlier. According to the account told to the AP, the affidavit said Clemens responded by saying Pettitte misunderstood the exchange from five or six years earlier and that, in fact, Clemens had been talking about HGH use by his wife in the original conversation.

Does anyone recall that just LAST WEEK, Clemens' attorneys were screaming that McNamee's statements that he injected Clemens' wife with HGH PROVED he was a liar? Now, just a week later, it comes out that Clemens himself is telling Pettitte that his wife used HGH.

Anyone who even remotely believes Clemens' denials is delusional.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone recall that just LAST WEEK, Clemens' attorneys were screaming that McNamee's statements that he injected Clemens' wife with HGH PROVED he was a liar? Now, just a week later, it comes out that Clemens himself is telling Pettitte that his wife used HGH.

Anyone who even remotely believes Clemens' denials is delusional.

How did the fact that he injected his wife conclude that he was a liar?

-----

Something that the newspapers haven't reported yet that I've seen, that they just showed on tv was...When Clemens told Andy that he misunderstood him, Andy replied and said, "Yeah, Ok," or something to that effect, but not b/c he believed, but because he didn't want to argue w/ him.

*OUCH*

Edited by lockmat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How did the fact that he injected his wife conclude that he was a liar?

-----

Something that the newspapers haven't reported yet that I've seen, that they just showed on tv was...When Clemens told Andy that he misunderstood him, Andy replied and said, "Yeah, Ok," or something to that effect, but not b/c he believed, but because he didn't want to argue w/ him.

*OUCH*

There are several reasons why the wife's hgh usage is bad, that I don't feel like taking the time to explain. However, Clemens has taken some very severe hits, including the party, the nanny, Pettitte, Pettitte's wife and the fact that Clemens says he discussed HGH about his wife in 1999, yet she took HGH in 2003.

If I were a federal investigator, I would have numerous potential crimes to investigate that do not require McNamee's testimony. Not a good day for Clemens. I find him to be wholly unbelievable in his denials.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I the only one who is beyond pissed that FEDERAL dollars were spent on something like this?

Am I the only one who is pissed that a politician can levy accusations at people without any substantiation that can hold up to scrutiny in a court of law (this should be the standard).

Am I the only one who is pissed that someone like Clemens is forced to spend millions of his own dollars to battle allegations that should never have been brought in the manner that they were? I don't like the guy much, but come on. That is about as far from fair for him as what they are accusing him of doing.

Even playing fields don't exist. The best will always strive to get better by whatever means they have at their disposal. The fact that this is such a huge issue in a country who strives for the same with the same "no holds barred" attitude is absolutely ridiculous to me.

Three words.

GIVE ME A BREAK (damnit, ok, three words and a letter)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the kind of stuff that I'm a little upset about:

(From SI.com)

2:26 p.m. ET

From SI's Tom Verducci: "Finally. Elijah Cummings is the MVP of the hearing. Straightforward, with no grandstanding, Cummings stepped up and finally asked the most important question to Clemens: Why would McNamee tell the truth about Pettitte and Knoblauch but lie about Clemens, especially when Pettitte, by Clemens' own testimony a honest man, backed McNamee's story? Clemens whiffed. 'Congressman, I have no idea,' he said, before devolving into a rambling discourse on Pettitte's friendship with him. Cummings came back again. 'How do you explain that?' Clemens again stumbled, asking why Pettitte didn't tell him when he used HGH, which was not important to the question at hand. Finally, Cummings slammed the door on Clemens. 'It's hard to believe you, sir,' Cummings told Clemens. 'You're one of my heroes. But it's hard to believe you.'"

Why does that need to be said????

2:17 p.m. ET

From SI's David Epstein: "Souder just started talking about that tape that was played on national television. He told me previously that he thought it was in incredibly poor taste to play that tape. He was also perturbed by Clemens' conduct at that press conference. He did not like that reporters came to Houston and then Roger stormed off, answering questions only when he wanted. He also felt that Clemens was disingenuous when he said he didn't care at all about the writers' Hall of Fame votes. He agreed that it may not be primary to Clemens' motivation, but he thought it strange that a player who dedicated his life to a craft would not care at all about the Hall.

Why does this matter?

Edited by lockmat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are several reasons why the wife's hgh usage is bad, that I don't feel like taking the time to explain. However, Clemens has taken some very severe hits, including the party, the nanny, Pettitte, Pettitte's wife and the fact that Clemens says he discussed HGH about his wife in 1999, yet she took HGH in 2003.

If I were a federal investigator, I would have numerous potential crimes to investigate that do not require McNamee's testimony. Not a good day for Clemens. I find him to be wholly unbelievable in his denials.

I've tried not to jump too much into the speculation wave regarding this but here's what really makes it a bad deal for Roger in my book.

With regard to the HGH, Clemens just read a statement to the committee prepared by his wife that talks about how McNamee injected her but that she didn't know much about it (HGH) and that Roger didn't know much about it either including what kind of affect it would have on her.

This reeks.

Rogers knows enough about HGH to allegedly not use it for fear of being punished by baseball, which had outlawed it by then (IIRC) and yet he allows McNamee to inject his wife with it, despite "not knowing much" about it? Not good. Not good at all.

This and the fact that the attornies had said repeatedly leading up to today that McNamee had never injected Debbie makes his credibility less than McNamee's right now, which is horrible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've tried not to jump too much into the speculation wave regarding this but here's what really makes it a bad deal for Roger in my book.

With regard to the HGH, Clemens just read a statement to the committee prepared by his wife that talks about how McNamee injected her but that she didn't know much about it (HGH) and that Roger didn't know much about it either including what kind of affect it would have on her.

This reeks.

Rogers knows enough about HGH to allegedly not use it for fear of being punished by baseball, which had outlawed it by then (IIRC) and yet he allows McNamee to inject his wife with it, despite "not knowing much" about it? Not good. Not good at all.

This and the fact that the attornies had said repeatedly leading up to today that McNamee had never injected Debbie makes his credibility less than McNamee's right now, which is horrible.

AND he also said that she did it without him knowing. Did he read that just a minute ago, after the hearing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Roger would do well to fess up now and come clean. He is digging a HUGE hole.

It makes me sick that he is so desperate to save his own face that he is bringing his trophy wife down with him! How long until he turns on his sons? Will he make it through the day without claiming his sons were using and not him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AND he also said that she did it without him knowing. Did he read that just a minute ago, after the hearing?

What's worse is that he says that and yet he also said earlier in response to Andy Pettitte's testimony about them having a conversation about HGG back in about 1999/2000 that it was only about McNamee injecting his wife.

Well, Debbie Clemens was said to have first taken the injection in 2003 (and this is after Clemens' lawyers balked for week at the idea of Debbie Clemens even being accused of having taken injections). So you have a conversation three or four years earlier about your wife using HGH? Really? And after you supposedly found out about it, you still keep McNamee on as your trainer, even though you know that HGH and steriods were explicitly banned by baseball by then? Why would you keep a guy on as your trainer if you know that he's injecting people with HGH (including your wife)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's worse is that he says that and yet he also said earlier in response to Andy Pettitte's testimony about them having a conversation about HGG back in about 1999/2000 that it was only about McNamee injecting his wife.

Well, Debbie Clemens was said to have first taken the injection in 2003 (and this is after Clemens' lawyers balked for week at the idea of Debbie Clemens even being accused of having taken injections). So you have a conversation three or four years earlier about your wife using HGH? Really? And after you supposedly found out about it, you still keep McNamee on as your trainer, even though you know that HGH and steriods were explicitly banned by baseball by then? Why would you keep a guy on as your trainer if you know that he's injecting people with HGH (including your wife)?

He would do it b/c he's lying. We should just close this thread b/c we know he is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a very forgiving nation. If these guys had just come clean right away and said, "Yup, I did it. Sorry, my bad," all would have been forgiven in a very short time. Does anyone criticize Jason Giambi anymore? Of course, Pettite did the same thing, but isn't going to come off looking as good since his story is changing.

But when you consider that the amount of steroids that Clemens used according to McNamee likely made little difference in his career as a whole. He probably would have still gotten into Cooperstown if he had just owned up to everything right away. Now it's just ugly and dude might go to jail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know everybody bashed Jose Conseco when he wrote his tell all book, on whether or not it was true, and really questioned his integrity and so forth. He's looking like a whistle blower and an outstanding citizen, after all he said has come to pass, and more and more of these cases come to life. And I will guarantee you that this is really just a drop in the bucket, concerning the real number of guilty players. These are just the ones that are getting named. Mainly because they are high profile players and they sell a lot of press. If Joe Blow the third string utility player did any, no one really cares. Baseball is taking another trip to the gutter. The HR race of '98 I honestly believe was manufactured by league leaders to pull baseball out of the hopper, following the last ugly strike, when attendance went to hell and people were just fed up with the crap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know everybody bashed Jose Conseco when he wrote his tell all book, on whether or not it was true, and really questioned his integrity and so forth. He's looking like a whistle blower and an outstanding citizen, after all he said has come to pass, and more and more of these cases come to life. And I will guarantee you that this is really just a drop in the bucket, concerning the real number of guilty players. These are just the ones that are getting named. Mainly because they are high profile players and they sell a lot of press. If Joe Blow the third string utility player did any, no one really cares. Baseball is taking another trip to the gutter. The HR race of '98 I honestly believe was manufactured by league leaders to pull baseball out of the hopper, following the last ugly strike, when attendance went to hell and people were just fed up with the crap.

That's not really true. There were plenty of no-name or low-profile players in the Mithchell report.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now this latest revelation with the Nanny! This gets more and more bizarre.

Clemens' former trainer, Brian McNamee, told a congressional committee he saw the nanny at a party in Miami 10 years ago.

"(She was) chasing after a young child and she was wearing a peach bikini with green in it with board shorts," McNamee said.

The woman said she cared for Clemens' children at a party at Jose Canseco's Miami home in June 1998, where McNamee claimed he first talked with Clemens about steroids.

The former nanny said she was at the party, but Clemens was not.

"No, he wasn't," the woman said. "He wasn't. I was there with his little ones and he wasn't and that's what I told. I told the truth. If I have to swear on the Bible or whatever, he wasn't in there."

WTF. His Nanny was there with his kids but he wasn't? Was Wifey there or what? Coincidently Jose Conseco's house, and Steroids in the same instance? Very very bizarre indeed. There is some real reaching going on here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now this latest revelation with the Nanny! This gets more and more bizarre.

WTF. His Nanny was there with his kids but he wasn't? Was Wifey there or what? Coincidently Jose Conseco's house, and Steroids in the same instance? Very very bizarre indeed. There is some real reaching going on here.

Is that from channel two, this morning? I was sort of paying attention to that, but she also kept saying he's such a great man, so I figured that whatever truth she told, it was in favor of Roger.

Edited by lockmat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I the only one who is beyond pissed that FEDERAL dollars were spent on something like this?

Am I the only one who is pissed that a politician can levy accusations at people without any substantiation that can hold up to scrutiny in a court of law (this should be the standard).

Am I the only one who is pissed that someone like Clemens is forced to spend millions of his own dollars to battle allegations that should never have been brought in the manner that they were? I don't like the guy much, but come on. That is about as far from fair for him as what they are accusing him of doing.

I think so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jose Canseco, who then was Clemens' teammate on the Toronto Blue Jays, let Clemens' family stay at Canseco's home while the Blue Jays were in town to play the Florida Marlins. Or so that was what was said. But in her deposition, the nanny also said she met with Clemens last Sunday at his Houston home at his request to discuss her testimony - at a time when lawmakers were trying to locate her for an interview and before Clemens made her whereabouts known. It was the first time she had seen Clemens in seven years, she said. Clemens told her to "tell the truth" to Congress, she said, but he also told her "the reason that you don't remember a party is because I wasn't there."

Edited by Mark F. Barnes
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...