One of Clemens' sports medicine doctors, Dr. Fran Pizzitola, came out and said he was never aware of any steroid or HGH usage by Clemens and he found it highly unlikely that he was taking them in any instance. Check out Dr. Fran, because he is doctor for many prominent athletes and stands to lose considerable amounts of credibility for coming out if Clemen's was guilty.
Also, take the taped phone conversation with McNamee, and the fact now that came to light that McNamee lied to the grand jury in some of his testimony. Looks as if the house of cards is about to come tumbling down.
McNamee seems credible on sterois issue. Pettitte admitted what he said was true. Clemens has the credibility issue (1) why does he need a trainer (2) why does he have a non-doctor giving him injections? (perhaps Dr. Fran Pizzitola should have given him injections) (3) why does he have anyone shoot him in the behind?
How can any doctor know what Clemens and his drug dealer buddy McNamee say?
Why did the New York Times report that Clemens talked about steriods all the time?
Why did fomer Senator George Mitchell find McNamee credible? Why did the judge and prosecutor who had McNamee's case find his disclosure credible?
I think Roger is in a lot of trouble and if he is not careful he will lose his libel case against McNamee (although there won't be much damages).
Originally posted by poundleeDo you always speak without any credible facts to back up your arguement?
McNamee seems credible on sterois issue. Pettitte admitted what he said was true. Clemens has the credibility issue (1) why does he need a trainer (2) why does he have a non-doctor giving him injections? (perhaps Dr. Fran Pizzitola should have given him injections) (3) why does he have anyone shoot him in the behind?
How can any doctor know what Clemens ...[text shortened]... ot careful he will lose his libel case against McNamee (although there won't be much damages).
1. Since when does ANYTHING that ANY news reporter have to be accurate? Have you ever heard of slander, libel, and retractions? Do you think those can occur if reporters were not wrong?
Reporters are nothing more than glorified whores searching for a scoop. Go watch a movie called "Absence of Malice" and see what you think. This stuff happens ALL THE TIME!!
2. Did you see Clemens buy any drugs? Do you have any paper trails proving he bought any illegal drugs? Do you have any failed drug test evidence? Do you have anything more than the testimony of a convicted felon, who is about to be indicted, again, for not telling the truth to a grand jury?
3. You obviously did absolutely no research on who Dr. Fran Pizzitola is and what kind of medicine he practices, yet you pop off about "(perhaps Dr. Fran Pizzitola should have given him injections). What a rube.
4. I will lay you odds Roger doesn't lose his lawsuit against McNamee, and furthermore, I will lay you odds that McNamee goes to prison.
You and Phlabby playing judge and jury with nothing but innuendo and supposition surely goes against the grain of the US Constitution where you are presumed innocent until proven guilty.
If you want to be given any credibility in your remarks, support your claims with something concrete that is defensible, not something that will get blown out of court.
And, before you jerkwads bring up taking a lie detector test, there is a reason they are inadmissible in a court of law? Do you know why that is? Because they are not accurate. It is VERY possible to be shown as lying when you are actually telling the truth for a litany of reasons. It is also possible for someone who is a stone cold liar to pass one. They are strictly a guideline tool and they make judgement calls with them, but there is no certainty. If I was an attorney, I would NEVER agree to my client taking a lie detector test whether they were guilty or innocent, for that very reason. Rusty Hardin won't let Clemens take one either.
You can lay whatever odds you want but right now the New York Times seems more accurate than Roger Clemens.
Of course I did not see Clemens buy drugs and I don't have a failed drug test. But only a moron thinks that is the only evidence you need.
I can read the Mitchell Report and I know the Senator did a thorough investigation and found the evidence credible. I know people like Brian Roberts and Andy Pettitte who had less coloborating evidence admitted that the Mitchell report is accurate, I know there is an unexplained resurgance in his career, I know he acted like 'roid rage twice with Piazza, I know his career lasted longer than just about any power pitcher, I know he hired a drug dealer trainer and let him inject him with substances when he had free doctors/ trainers provided to him by his employer, I know his story that he got lightacine injected in his behind is so stupid only a idiot like Clemens could come up with it, I know Clemens was afraid to talk to Mitchell even though he knew he would be named and probably therefore had things to hide, I know his buddy Pettitte who already admitted to HGH is reluctant to go in front of Congress and tell the truth (perhaps to protect his friend Clemens), Furthermore, his inability to immediately say he has absolutely no involvement with steriods/ HGH makes his denial even more questionable and his need to create more than one set of tapes in his conversation with McNamee puts great question into whether Clemens was seeking the truth or to change the truth. In fact if anyone is tampering with the turth it certainly seems like it is Clemens not his performance enhancing supplier.
Originally posted by poundleeYou haven't got a clue.
You can lay whatever odds you want but right now the New York Times seems more accurate than Roger Clemens.
Of course I did not see Clemens buy drugs and I don't have a failed drug test. But only a moron thinks that is the only evidence you need.
I can read the Mitchell Report and I know the Senator did a thorough investigation and found the evidence c ...[text shortened]... g with the turth it certainly seems like it is Clemens not his performance enhancing supplier.
I am sick to death of the rage roid crap. Roger was firey as hell even back in his college days. He is extremely high strung and wound up tight in a game. If you don't believe me, go back an d look at the NCAA national championship game in 1983 against Alabama. You will see the same behaviour then that you attribute, erroneously, to "rage roid".
Regarding evidence, only a moron believes you can convict anyone without evidence. There is no provable evidence...period!! George Mitchell's primary sources are both convicted felons for God's sake. I know it is ludicrous of me to believe that a convicted felon would lie.
Regarding Brian Roberts and Andy Pettite's statements...they only support the statements made aginst THEM....not against ANYONE ELSE!!! Do I need to repeat that for you?
Your ignorance regarding litocaine is also funny. As I said on several occasions, most players take injected painkillers at some time in their careers. B-12 is also widely used in high concentration. Both of these are perfectly legal to take. I am still taking B-12 and while I only had litocaine once, I had cortisone several times (before they found out what it does to your bone marrow over time). They are both injected and the injections are painful too. But if you are injured and the team needs you to go, you do what you have to do. I know you probably can't comprehend that because you were never in that position, but I was and I do fully understand it.
What tapes did Clemens "create"? He recorded a phone conversation that, if you would listen to the contents, is not coercive in the least. In fact, Roger repeatedly requests that McNamee "tell the truth". No incentives, no inducements, no nothing else. McNamee is the one who screws up his credibility worse by saying he said the things he said because "he didn't want to go to jail" not because "they were the truth".
You sit there in judgement, but you do not have an open mind. I hope you are never in a situation where you are innocent and you were framed and you get 12 jurors just like yourself sitting in the box. Roger hasn't even had the benefit of having a trial or facing his accusers. Instead, the media whores are attempting to try it in the press because there are tons of gullible individuals who will step up and make rash judgements just like you have.
It is too bad you never lived it on the other side...maybe then you wouldn't be sitting there with your blinders on.
(1) You get drugs from a drug dealer, not Mother Theresa so of course people will question their credibility. But this is not McNamee just trying to get publicity Jose Canseco style. Clemens admits that he hired McNamee instead of the other million trainers in the world or the trainers, pitching coaches and doctors provided by his major league club. McNamee had somthing reputable people don't. Seems to me to be very strong cicrcumstanial evidence that that it had to be performance enhancers.
(2) McNamee under oath testified that it was performance enhancers. This is verified by a New York Times source. People have been convicted beyond a reasonable doubt by far less than that two direct witnesses.
(3) The Mitchell report, an independent investigation, believes Clemens used performance enhancers. Subsequent admissions such as Pettitte (who is another druggie Clemens associated and worked out with is his legendary secret workout) and Roberts show the accuracy of both McNamee and Mitchell. It is a simple concept but if Mitchell and McNamee were right about Pettitte and right above Roberts than the are simply more likely to be correct about Clemens. Furthermore, secrecy and continual assocaition witha HGH user and and an HGH dealer is additional cicrumstantial evidence of guilt.
(4) Clemens has two recording of a phone conversation and turned over one. How about turning over the other one? Clemens is talking to McNamee becuase he wants him to change his story. If charges were pending against Clemens, prosecutors would investigate to see if he was tampering with a witness. But there is nothing honorable and talking to your dealer and secretly taping the conversation.
(5) Clemens always had the opportunity to explain his actions. He turned down Mitchell's request. Mitchell almost begged for players to talk to him. Only a hypocrite like Clemens could say he was denied his day to present evidence afterwards. Clemens could have immediately answered reporters questions, but instead gets some 90 year old guy to interview him and choses to release the part of a phone conversation he believes is most favoraible to him.
(6) I am not sure I believe it roid rage but I can tell you this. The only guy in the NFL I ever say rip off someone's helmet and hit with it was Lyle Alzado and he died from steriod related illness and the only guy I ever saw throw a bat a batter was Clemens who apparently was in the middle of his steriod years. Any detective will tell you that when the facts just sort of fit, you don't disregard the theory until you get something better.
(7) Finally I am not sure what you mean by "it is too bad I never lived the other side" but I glad I never had to lie and pretent that all my accomplishments weren't fraudulent. But if I were as dumb as Clemens and I used performance enhancers I certainly would have a better story. Clemens claim that I am a honest guy who merely chose to have a non-medical doctor convicted felon shoot liticane and b-12 into his behind is so stupid I cannot believe anyone on planet earth would believe it.
Originally posted by darvlayWell, I hav'nt read through all the posts yet so I don't know if anyone has brought up the telephone conversation he had with McNamee that Clemens recorded and then made public. In the conversation Clemens tells McNamee that he is being ridiculous. Outraged McNamee counters by adressing the charge ranting, "So you think I am being ridiculous?" Clemens then backs down and says, "No, I mean I think the whole affair is ridiculous." For me this is the most telling aspect of the whole conversation. Why did Clemens back down? Is McNamee not being ridiculous if he has made up the whole affair? It seems to me that if guilty Clemens had no other choice than to back down because McNamee would then feel compelled to spell it out for him why he is not being ridiculous.
http://assets.espn.go.com/media/pdf/080107/mlb_clemens.pdf
Roger Clemens has filed a defamation suit against Brian McNamee.
Whom do you believe is telling the truth or does it even matter? Last night on 60 Minutes with Mike Wallace (who looks like he is 120 years old), Roger stated that it may not even matter who is telling the truth anymore because ...[text shortened]... s of what proof exists.
What is your opinion? Do you give Clemens the benefit of the doubt?
Originally posted by poundleeI just think it was ill advised of Clemens to pull this stunt. It really did nothing for him other than provide more material for people to attack.
Gotta agree with whoody, for a guy who is so aggressive he hit Piazza in the head with a pitch and then throws a bat at hit in a World Series game, he sure backs down when he is afraid his drug dealer buddy might accuse him of buying performance enhancers.
Once you cheat you ruin all your accomplishments not just the ones after you start cheating. I'd take away ALL his Cy Young Awards. It is consistent with the way Pete Rose was treated and his whole career was denied entry into the Hall of Fame. It is also consistent with the way Shoeless Joe Jackson was treated after the Black Sox scandal (and his role is far more questionable than Clemens involvment with performance enhancers). Clemens, Rose Jackson were great, but the interfered with the integrity of the game and everything is tarnished.
Originally posted by poundleeThere's no evidence besides McNamee's saying so that Clemens "cheated" (assuming for the sake of argument that the use of steroids in the period 1998-2002 would constitute cheating in MLB).
Once you cheat you ruin all your accomplishments not just the ones after you start cheating. I'd take away ALL his Cy Young Awards. It is consistent with the way Pete Rose was treated and his whole career was denied entry into the Hall of Fame. It is also consistent with the way Shoeless Joe Jackson was treated after the Black Sox scandal (and his role i ...[text shortened]... kson were great, but the interfered with the integrity of the game and everything is tarnished.
Originally posted by no1marauderTrue. Then again, they got Capone because of tax evasion. Perhaps McNamee could audit Clemens? LOL.
There's no evidence besides McNamee's saying so that Clemens "cheated" (assuming for the sake of argument that the use of steroids in the period 1998-2002 would constitute cheating in MLB).