ImageImage

OT: McNamee and Pettitte vs. Clemens Live on the Hill

Moderators: MickeyDavis, paulpressey25

User avatar
ReasonablySober
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 106,961
And1: 41,488
Joined: Dec 02, 2001
Location: Cheap dinner. Watch basketball. Bone down.
Contact:

 

Post#21 » by ReasonablySober » Wed Feb 13, 2008 4:56 pm

For those not watching live or are at work:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/blog/ind ... l_hearings
Mags FTW
RealGM
Posts: 35,291
And1: 7,937
Joined: Feb 16, 2006
Location: Flickin' It

 

Post#22 » by Mags FTW » Wed Feb 13, 2008 4:59 pm

BuckFan25226 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-




Wait, I missed some of that part. What does the mass on his buttocks prove or not prove?

He saw a specialist about the mass (or abscess) and the specialist concluded that it came from deep muscle injections other than a B12 or lidocaine. Something along those lines...
User avatar
BuckFan25226
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,707
And1: 1,091
Joined: Jan 30, 2006
Location: Wauwatosa, WI

 

Post#23 » by BuckFan25226 » Wed Feb 13, 2008 5:00 pm

Mags FTW wrote:-= original quote snipped =-


He saw a specialist about the mass (or abscess) and the specialist concluded that it came from deep muscle injections other than a B12 or lidocaine.



ahhhhhh, that sucks.
"didnt you watch the game with the raptors?bucks is also a playoff team ,they have enough ability to find wins from dalas and utach,
blow jazzs bitches and mavericks bitches out !"

- yiyiyi
Profound23
RealGM
Posts: 20,371
And1: 8,174
Joined: Jun 29, 2005
     

 

Post#24 » by Profound23 » Wed Feb 13, 2008 5:10 pm

The Pettite information is enough IMO to prove Clemens is lying. He kept responding with the same answer over and over again "if Pettite took steroids or HGH we would have talked about it", that response made no sense and wasn't a response to the actual questions being asked.

Then add on top of that Clemens saying he never spoke about HGH with McNamee EVER three times, then in the same interview saying he spoke about it and had his wife take it.

He told Pettite back in 99-00 he took HGH, then years later in reference to their conversation....Clemens told Pettite the conversation back in 99-00 was about his wife taking steroids, and he agrees that was the conversation. However, Clemens wife didn't take the HGH until 2003.
Profound23
RealGM
Posts: 20,371
And1: 8,174
Joined: Jun 29, 2005
     

 

Post#25 » by Profound23 » Wed Feb 13, 2008 5:13 pm

The whole thing about Canseco's party is stupid.

McNamee said Clemens came late to the party, well if all of the people who say he wasn't there had left by then.. ...then of course they would believe he was never there.

I like how the guys who are calling out McNamee and Co. are telling them to stay on point with their answers because they only get 15 minutes of time a piece. However when Clemens was talking he went off on 5 minute tangents for every question, without answering them at all.
User avatar
Kerb Hohl
RealGM
Posts: 35,496
And1: 4,430
Joined: Jun 17, 2005
Location: Hmmmm...how many 1sts would Jason Richardson cost...?

 

Post#26 » by Kerb Hohl » Wed Feb 13, 2008 5:49 pm

So what I've gotten from the blog is that Mcnamee is being grilled for lying about a rape case from 7 years ago, lying about talking to Clemens at a party(although everyone who says Clemens wasn't there was gone when Mcnamee said he talked to him), and asked about the ethics of holding onto evidence of your friend/employer for years.

Clemens is being told that his story about not talking about or using steroids and HGH contradicts accounts and evidence from others...

Sorry Roger, this has done nothing to change the opinion I have had of you for a few years already.
User avatar
WEFFPIM
RealGM
Posts: 38,521
And1: 473
Joined: Nov 14, 2005
Location: WEFFPIM. I'm the real WEFFPIM.
   

 

Post#27 » by WEFFPIM » Wed Feb 13, 2008 5:50 pm

Chairman with a possible bombshell on Clemens talking to his nanny before the House spoke with her.
ReddWing wrote:Being a fan of this team is tantamount to being in hell...There is no Christ that is coming to save us. Even if there was, we'd trade him for a 28 year old wing.
User avatar
TheGhostDog
Senior
Posts: 639
And1: 2
Joined: Mar 05, 2007

 

Post#28 » by TheGhostDog » Wed Feb 13, 2008 6:17 pm

Love the nanny information, I just wish she could have been present to see if Clemens would call an old lady a liar. Basically the congressmen ask Clemens on Thursday or Friday to give them contact information for the nanny. Clemens people delay. That weekend Clemens brings the nanny to his house and presumably coaches her testimony. Then Clemens lawyers give the nanny's contact info after Clemens talks to her, on Monday or Tuesday. Then the nanny still testifies that while she remembers no party per se, she does remember Rocket, the wife and kids all stayed as guests at the Canseco house the weekend in question.

I guess my point is I am confused that people would think Clemens is being "unfairly placed on trial" when he clearly has a cadre of legal attack dogs treating this very much like a trial. He is getting all the protection and opportunities for plausible denial that money can buy.
User avatar
Kerb Hohl
RealGM
Posts: 35,496
And1: 4,430
Joined: Jun 17, 2005
Location: Hmmmm...how many 1sts would Jason Richardson cost...?

 

Post#29 » by Kerb Hohl » Wed Feb 13, 2008 6:19 pm

It boggles my mind that people have such a problem with the government getting into this saying that "they should be sticking their noses in bigger matters." OK, maybe they should put more effort into the war issues, but think about it this way.

Baseball brings in billions of dollars in revenue per year, which puts it up there with some of the major companies in this country. In Enron, executives used insider information to cheat the system and get rich...very unethical. So in baseball? The top players have been using illegal drugs to improve their ability and make millions of extra dollars. This method of cheating is also very unhealthy for the players. On top of that, owners and commissioners are potentially lying about it all to increase their profits and record viewership.

Now add to the fact that no young kids watch big business conference calls on TV every day, rather MLB baseball games, and they aspire to be just like those players on TV...why not to take the Mitchell report and the Sosa/Mcgwire/Palmiero issues to the higher levels of our court system?
User avatar
ReasonablySober
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 106,961
And1: 41,488
Joined: Dec 02, 2001
Location: Cheap dinner. Watch basketball. Bone down.
Contact:

 

Post#30 » by ReasonablySober » Wed Feb 13, 2008 6:20 pm

Jason Stark wrote:1:05 p.m. ET
Finally, the Rocket found a congressman who was on his side. Rep. William Lacy Clay fed him a BP softball about what he should tell his kids when they asked about these allegations about how Clemens achieved all he achieved.

That gave Clemens a chance to go through his most impassioned monologue of the day -- one that included this pithy sound bite:

"Somebody is trying to break my spirit in this room. And they're not going to break my spirit. ... You can tell your boys I did it the right way, and I busted my butt to do it."

Clay's mushy follow-up to those words: "A colleague of mine, Mr. Capuano of Massachusetts, wants to know what uniform you're going to wear to the Hall of Fame."

There are times and places for hero worship. This hearing wasn't one of them. We charge Clay with inappropriate pandering. What's the federal punishment for that?


:roll:
Profound23
RealGM
Posts: 20,371
And1: 8,174
Joined: Jun 29, 2005
     

 

Post#31 » by Profound23 » Wed Feb 13, 2008 6:23 pm

I like how Clemens says "I was doing ya'll a favor", for witness tampering.
User avatar
WEFFPIM
RealGM
Posts: 38,521
And1: 473
Joined: Nov 14, 2005
Location: WEFFPIM. I'm the real WEFFPIM.
   

 

Post#32 » by WEFFPIM » Wed Feb 13, 2008 6:28 pm

Profound23 wrote:I like how Clemens says "I was doing ya'll a favor", for witness tampering.


Nothing says "I'm helpin' you out, pal!!!" like witness tampering
ReddWing wrote:Being a fan of this team is tantamount to being in hell...There is no Christ that is coming to save us. Even if there was, we'd trade him for a 28 year old wing.
User avatar
TheGhostDog
Senior
Posts: 639
And1: 2
Joined: Mar 05, 2007

 

Post#33 » by TheGhostDog » Wed Feb 13, 2008 6:38 pm

Someone PLEASE ask the Mitchell report representative if they ever personally tried to ask Clemens to come in and talk. He's sitting right there for goodness sake!

Clemens: "I am an easy person to find!"... if you manage to get through my phalanx of advisers and staff, who know better than to actually tell me about this sort of thing so that I can plausibly deny later that I knew anything about it.
User avatar
SupremeHustle
RealGM
Posts: 28,408
And1: 30,935
Joined: Feb 11, 2005
Location: Cloud 9
 

 

Post#34 » by SupremeHustle » Wed Feb 13, 2008 6:43 pm

Are you a Vulcan?
jschligs wrote:Am I the only one who doesn't know who the **** SupremeHustle is?
User avatar
TheGhostDog
Senior
Posts: 639
And1: 2
Joined: Mar 05, 2007

 

Post#35 » by TheGhostDog » Wed Feb 13, 2008 6:52 pm

SupremeHustle wrote:Are you a Vulcan?


No, but when we get fascinating live public testimony with two people calling each other liars while sitting a few feet apart, I am all ears.

That, and I stayed at a Holiday Inn last night.
User avatar
SupremeHustle
RealGM
Posts: 28,408
And1: 30,935
Joined: Feb 11, 2005
Location: Cloud 9
 

 

Post#36 » by SupremeHustle » Wed Feb 13, 2008 6:58 pm

TheGhostDog wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



No, but when we get fascinating live public testimony with two people calling each other liars while sitting a few feet apart, I am all ears.

That, and I stayed at a Holiday Inn last night.


I was just making fun at the guy who was asking Clemens if he was a vegan and Clemens was dumbfounded.
jschligs wrote:Am I the only one who doesn't know who the **** SupremeHustle is?
User avatar
europa
RealGM
Posts: 44,919
And1: 471
Joined: Jun 25, 2005
Location: Right Behind You

 

Post#37 » by europa » Wed Feb 13, 2008 7:02 pm

Profound23 wrote:The whole thing about Canseco's party is stupid.


It goes to Clemens' credibility. If he says he wasn't at the party and other witnesses come forth to say he was, he's now a confirmed liar and you pretty much can't trust or believe anything he says.
Nothing will not break me.
User avatar
TheGhostDog
Senior
Posts: 639
And1: 2
Joined: Mar 05, 2007

 

Post#38 » by TheGhostDog » Wed Feb 13, 2008 7:18 pm

Thank you! Someone finally asked the Mitchell guy, who clarified that they had to ask players through the players union, and that the Mitchell committee informed the players union that Clemens was named, and that the players union replied on Clemens behalf that he wouldn't come in to talk to them. Add the players union to that phalanx I mentioned earlier.
MajorDad
Banned User
Posts: 6,496
And1: 0
Joined: Jul 28, 2005

 

Post#39 » by MajorDad » Wed Feb 13, 2008 7:18 pm

I am begining to wonder what any of this has to do with the original intent of these hearings? Wasn't the original intent to look at ways of preventing our youth from using HGH and steriods? Clemens disagreed with the Mitchell report. The Mitchell report was something sponsored by MLB, not the Congress. if roger has a problem with that report, he should take it up with MLB, not Congress. this looks more like a Mccarthy witch hunt than anything that will have any real lasting impact on US drug use.

and in the last minute perry mason will appear with a surprise witness onlt to find that matlock will force that surprise witness to recant her story.

I guess nobody in congress cares if 99% of the NFl is on HGH and neither does the NFL. life is good in football..

and why aren't Senators McCain, Clinton and Obama on this cool hearing committee? Did they learn from watching past hearings that ted kennedy and other congressmen always came across as fools, and therefore declined to be a part of this? I guess with the writer's strike going on, Disney had to have something to fill it's air time on ESPN. Steven Smith could have easily have filled it and been just as boring. I have to believe to liven up the hearings, we should inject a couple of payton manning's latest oreo commercials or that girl who sang that song during the super bowl. i sure want to see that commercial again. perhaps if congress subjected Roger and Mcawhateverhisnameis to that commercial where she sings her song nonstop for 2 hours, one or both of them would crack.
User avatar
TheGhostDog
Senior
Posts: 639
And1: 2
Joined: Mar 05, 2007

 

Post#40 » by TheGhostDog » Wed Feb 13, 2008 7:39 pm

MajorDad wrote:I am begining to wonder what any of this has to do with the original intent of these hearings? Wasn't the original intent to look at ways of preventing our youth from using HGH and steriods? Clemens disagreed with the Mitchell report. The Mitchell report was something sponsored by MLB, not the Congress.


But baseball was forced into conducting the Mitchell report because of congressional pressure. Also, while protecting our kids is high on congress' list of concerns about drug use in baseball, I also think (and I could be misunderstanding this) congress is also concerned about baseball because of its exemption to federal anti-trust law.
http://espn.go.com/mlb/s/2001/1205/1290707.html

As for why go after baseball instead of football, well there's the anti-trust exemption, plus for years now the MLB and the baseball players union has fought the notion of drug testing tooth and nail, whereas the NFL Players Association has been much better at playing the game, allowing some drug tests they could trumpet to congress and the public, knowing full well there is no reliable test for HGH so that the players are free to keep right on using it without fear of failing a test.

Return to Milwaukee Bucks