jthor99 Posted February 14, 2008 Share Posted February 14, 2008 The real question to me is how are they going to actually convict either one of these Cats to perjury charges? For one, I can't see how they will with Clemens because there would be star witness Mr. McNamee has already lied, so than maybe Andy Pettite? Well he lied as well? He said he did HGH twice, and then finally said "He used it again in 05". So who is really going to put Clemens away or even McNamee? There all liars. I just don't see how were really ever going to come to a solid conclusion to all of this. We basically will just have our opinions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted February 14, 2008 Share Posted February 14, 2008 Clemens is an idiot. There were hundreds of names in the Mitchell report and HE was the only one that got all uppity about it. The nail that stands up is the one that gets hammered down. He should have just taken his millions of dollars, retired, and let it blow over. America would forgive/forget, and he'd be in the HOF in a few years. Now his legacy is going to be getting the gavel treatment on national tv. Big winner here: Barry Bonds. He is no longer the face (and giant head) of the steriod era. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted February 14, 2008 Share Posted February 14, 2008 Oil prices skyrocketingWheat prices skyrocketing Foreclosures out the ying yang Banks writing off BILLIONS of dollars of bad loans At first I'm tempted to say "Way to allocate time Congress":rolleyes: But on second thought, maybe we should have baseball hearings every day. That way we can keep the Dem COngress from ****ing anything else up God forbid they tackle some real issues I would much rather congress have their hands in baseball than in the economy where they could do real damage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted February 14, 2008 Share Posted February 14, 2008 No it's not. Petitte said he got steroids from McNamee once. Said he had a short conversation a year later in which Roger, his good friend, made a statement, which didn't mention steroids, but lead Petitte to believe Roger was also getting steroids from McNamee. something like, I'm going to get the "good stuff" from "Dr." McNamee. maybe you should read what he said: "In 1999 or 2000, I had a conversation with Roger Clemens in which Roger told me that he had taken human growth hormone This conversation occurred at his gym in Memorial, Texas. He did not tell me where he got the HGH or from whom, but he did tell me that it helped the body recover," the affidavit said."Shortly after my conversation with Roger, I spoke with Brian McNamee. Only he and I were parties to the conversation. I asked Brian about HGH and told him that Roger said he had used it. Brian McNamee became angry. He told me that Roger should not have told me about his HGH use because it was supposed to be confidential. While I don't remember if Brian told me that he supplied Roger with HGH, it certainly was my impression from the conversation that he did." In the affidavit, Pettitte said Clemens backtracked when the subject of HGH came up again in conversation in 2005, around the time the same House committee held a hearing on steroids in baseball. Pettitte said in the affidavit that he asked Clemens in 2005 what he would do if asked about performance-enhancing substances by reporters. Pettitte said Clemens responded by saying Pettitte misunderstood the previous exchange and that, in fact, Clemens had been talking about HGH use by his wife in the original conversation. Pettitte also recounted in his deposition how McNamee told him during a 2003 or 2004 conversation at Pettitte's gym that Clemens also had used steroids. "I can just remember, you know, Mac telling me that Roger, you know, that he had gotten steroids for Roger," Pettitte said. "That surprised me." Pettitte's affidavit and deposition often were cited by members of Congress who questioned Clemens under oath Wednesday, with Rep. Elijah Cummings saying it was the decisive factor in his decision to believe McNamee. California Democrat Henry Waxman, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, read from affidavits by Pettitte and his wife, Laura, supporting McNamee's accusations. Laura said her husband had told her contemporaneously of his knowledge of Clemens' alleged use. Clemens was asked whether he considers Pettitte an honest person, and Clemens said yes. "Andy Pettitte is my friend. He was my friend before this. He will be my friend after this and again. I think Andy has misheard," Clemens said. "I think he misremembers." Waxman commended Pettitte for making his admissions. "Mr. Pettitte's consistency makes him a role model on and off the field," Waxman said. JMS after you read then you can speak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d0ublestr0ker0ll Posted February 14, 2008 Share Posted February 14, 2008 Big winner here: Barry Bonds. He is no longer the face (and giant head) of the steriod era. I dunno about that. I think in time he'll just be sharing the spotlight of this era with Clemens. At least he has a buddy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted February 14, 2008 Share Posted February 14, 2008 No it's not. Petitte said he got steroids from McNamee once. Said he had a short conversation a year later in which Roger, his good friend, made a statement, which didn't mention steroids, but lead Petitte to believe Roger was also getting steroids from McNamee. something like, I'm going to get the "good stuff" from "Dr." McNamee.That doesn't mean anything. As for the Nanny. That doesn't prove anything either. McNamee said he injected Roger in Casenco's house. Roger says at the time Consenco was having a party in his house, he and his wife and kid attended and brought their baby sitter. But Roger played golf with other yankee's for 3 hours out of the four hour party. The baby sitter was employed by the Clemon's to look after their kid at the party and said she went to the party. That doesn't prove jack. McNamee's testomony isn't coroberated by anybody, from what I can tell. Like I said I watched most of the testomony yesterday. Why are you bothering to watch if you've already made your mind up? Pettite DID say Roger told him he took steriods, point blank. Nothing is PROVEN. But this isnt about the court of law, its about the court of public opinion and the Rocket is taking a beating. The Rocket-->:moon::hump:<--Congress Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinInsite Posted February 14, 2008 Share Posted February 14, 2008 "In 1999 or 2000, I had a conversation with Roger Clemens in which Roger told me that he had taken human growth hormone This conversation occurred at his gym in Memorial, Texas. He did not tell me where he got the HGH or from whom, but he did tell me that it helped the body recover," "Shortly after my conversation with Roger, I spoke with Brian McNamee. Only he and I were parties to the conversation. I asked Brian about HGH and told him that Roger said he had used it. Brian McNamee became angry. He told me that Roger should not have told me about his HGH use because it was supposed to be confidential. While I don't remember if Brian told me that he supplied Roger with HGH, it certainly was my impression from the conversation that he did." That's in the affidavit, sure looks like Clemons took HGH. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted February 14, 2008 Share Posted February 14, 2008 Nothing is PROVEN. But this isnt about the court of law, its about the court of public opinion and the Rocket is taking a beating. Bingo. Clemons may not go to jail, but I know he was cheating. Same as Bonds and all the rest of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted February 14, 2008 Share Posted February 14, 2008 That's in the affidavit, sure looks like Clemons took HGH. unless he did in french or something??? :laugh: :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted February 14, 2008 Author Share Posted February 14, 2008 Clemens is an idiot. There were hundreds of names in the Mitchell report and HE was the only one that got all uppity about it. The nail that stands up is the one that gets hammered down. He should have just taken his millions of dollars, retired, and let it blow over. America would forgive/forget, and he'd be in the HOF in a few years. Now his legacy is going to be getting the gavel treatment on national tv. Big winner here: Barry Bonds. He is no longer the face (and giant head) of the steriod era. Bonds admitted using Steroids. Clemons never have. We have a documented paper trail of bonds with Steroids. We don't have that with Clemons. With Clemons we have the word of a serial liar and self promoter in "Dr" McNamee who has been caught already in at least five lies before the comittee. We also have a single conversation eight years ago between Petite and Clemons which suposedly Clemons admitted to Petite two years before Petit used HGH, that Clemons used them too. Eight years ago. Clemons says Petit one of his best friends on the team is mistaken. Pettite declined to re-testify with Clemons at the request of the senate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted February 14, 2008 Author Share Posted February 14, 2008 Bingo.Clemons may not go to jail, but I know he was cheating. Same as Bonds and all the rest of them. There is no creditable evidence against Clemons. Bond's admitted to using Steroids. I don't understand how you can state certainty based on "Dr." McNamee's twisted tail.... Dude McNamee's suposed five year old evidence was a trash bag with a light beer can in it. Come on.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted February 14, 2008 Share Posted February 14, 2008 Bonds admitted using Steroids. Clemons never have. We have a documented paper trail of bonds with Steroids. We don't have that with Clemons.With Clemons we have the word of a serial liar and self promoter in "Dr" McNamee who has been caught already in at least five lies before the comittee. We also have a single conversation eight years ago between Petite and Clemons which suposedly Clemons admitted to Petite two years before Petit used HGH, that Clemons used them too. Eight years ago. Clemons says Petit one of his best friends on the team is mistaken. Pettite declined to re-testify with Clemons at the request of the senate. Well, you are entitled to believe whatever you want. You already said you are a Clemens fan, so im not trying to change your mind. Ive listened to the whole trial on ESPNradio at work. Clemens is guilty as hell and everyone that isnt completely biased knows this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dictator Posted February 14, 2008 Share Posted February 14, 2008 I thought it was funny that Clemens was systematically forgetting his lies as the day went on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted February 14, 2008 Author Share Posted February 14, 2008 That's in the affidavit, sure looks like Clemons took HGH. A single eight year old conversation between guys who were best friends and team mates for almost a decade. Clemons said he had seen a TV show on HGH and was discussing that with Pettite. That Pettite isn't remembering the 8 year old conversaton correctly. Clemons also points out that Petite never told Clemons that he himself tried HGH a year or two latter and that if Clemons had told Petitte he used HGH, their friendship was such that Petite would have confided in Clemons his own experience. A single eight year conversation with his best friend. That's not creditable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted February 14, 2008 Share Posted February 14, 2008 There is no creditable evidence against Clemons. The evidence is entirely credible. It doesn't just go away because you can attack the character of the witness. All of the circumstances point to guilt, unless you are a huge Clemons fan and bend over backwards to ignore the big picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted February 14, 2008 Author Share Posted February 14, 2008 Well, you are entitled to believe whatever you want. You already said you are a Clemens fan, so im not trying to change your mind. Ive listened to the whole trial on ESPNradio at work. Clemens is guilty as hell and everyone that isnt completely biased knows this. You are right. I am baised. I've grown up following Cleamon's career. I went to school in boston when he took the socks to the World Series in the late 1980's. I am also cursed with having to both justify my opoinions to myself, and give someone a benefit of innocents before proven guilty.. Having said that, I'm wondering how the hell anybody can claim Clemons is guilty. There just isn't any creditable evidence against him. It's all hearsay and the word of an admitted serial liar. Where is the Beef? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dictator Posted February 14, 2008 Share Posted February 14, 2008 JMS, I'm curious, why do you think Mcnamee kept the syringes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted February 14, 2008 Share Posted February 14, 2008 You are right. I am baised. I've grown up following Cleamon's career. I went to school in boston when he took the socks to the World Series in the late 1980's. I am also cursed with having to both justify my opoinions to myself, and give someone a benefit of innocents before proven guilty..Having said that, I'm wondering how the hell anybody can claim Clemons is guilty. There just isn't any creditable evidence against him. It's all hearsay and the word of an admitted serial liar. Where is the Beef? read the affidavit and you will see the "beef" :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dictator Posted February 14, 2008 Share Posted February 14, 2008 It's all hearsay and the word of an admitted serial liar. Where is the Beef? While He has lied about certain things, he seems to be coming clean now. He has one foot in prison at the moment. He has nothing to gain and everything to lose by lying to investigators now. His life and reputation are in ruins. Nothing he said to the Panel is going to restore that. He also has the benefit of having two former teammates of clemens stating he is telling the truth. Clemens on the other hand, was getting caught in just about every lie he told yesterday. Not even to mention the fact that he apparently coached up his former nanny before the hearings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted February 14, 2008 Share Posted February 14, 2008 You are right. I am baised. I've grown up following Cleamon's career. I went to school in boston when he took the socks to the World Series in the late 1980's. I am also cursed with having to both justify my opoinions to myself, and give someone a benefit of innocents before proven guilty..Having said that, I'm wondering how the hell anybody can claim Clemons is guilty. There just isn't any creditable evidence against him. It's all hearsay and the word of an admitted serial liar. Where is the Beef? You are going to believe what you want to believe in a case like this. This isn't a criminal trial. This is a question of what Predicto thinks really happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted February 14, 2008 Author Share Posted February 14, 2008 The evidence is entirely credible. It doesn't just go away because you can attack the character of the witness. All of the circumstances point to guilt, unless you are a huge Clemons fan and bend over backwards to ignore the big picture. Ok so you don't think "Dr" McNamee who twice lied to federal investigators while acusing Clemons cast any doubt on his acusations against Clemons. A guy who has misrepresented his credentials for going on two decades and lied to get most of the jobs he's gotten including his trainer job with the yankees. I would say you are the biased one, if you can make that statement. Petite is the only damning testomony against Cleamons and his testimony is so inconclusive it just cann't stand on it's own. A single two minute conversation between best friends almost a decade old. Clemons says they were discussing a TV show on HGH. Pettite claims Clemons confessed HGH use.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinInsite Posted February 14, 2008 Share Posted February 14, 2008 Clemons isn't going to jail but I don't believe a word he says. I belive Pettite when he said Clemons used HGH. Oh I don't think Pettite's a hero or something. He cheated same as Clemons, he lied to everyone except when he was caught, and he should have been dragged to testify before congress same as everyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dictator Posted February 14, 2008 Share Posted February 14, 2008 I might be wrong, but from what I gathered, a lot of what Mcnamee lied about to investigators, is centered around not giving up ALL the information he had. He wasn't claiming that he shot up Ichirio and that was proven to be a lie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G.A.C.O.L.B. Posted February 14, 2008 Share Posted February 14, 2008 Is it ClemEns or ClemOns? Serious question cause I see both. And yeah, they lock people up for life everyday based on the testimony of scumbags. If it works there it works here. He's guilty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted February 14, 2008 Author Share Posted February 14, 2008 JMS,I'm curious, why do you think Mcnamee kept the syringes? I don't think he did. He produced a plastic bag with an empty crushed beer can in it. I think McNamee knows that they can't get any evidence off this evidence and even if they could it wouldn't prove anything either way. I think "Dr." McNamee a former police drug task force officer knows the evidence is just one more prop so he and his testomony won't have to stand on it's own. It's hard for me to believe a retired police officer wouldn't know anything about how to handle evidence. It's hard for me to believe if McNamee really thought of this as evidence he would have stored it for a decade with a beer can. Why do you think he kept this material which in it's present condition can't be used to prove anything, but claims it proves his testimony. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.