Clemens, Pettitte, McNamee asked to testify to Congress

Which is why I'm giving Clemens the benefit of the doubt, until conclusive proof comes out that shows Clemens took steroids.

As of right now, nothing has come out that makes me say "Clemens took steroids". We just have name dropping by Canseco to get people to buy his book, a redaction by a newspaper because it connected Clemens to the Grimsley thing because once the report on Grimsley was made public Clemens was not involved, and then the McNamee thing where nothing conclusive has come out.

As I said earlier, before Canseco's book no one ever put Clemens with steroids. To do so now with no evidence is being in error regarding the truth.

There is no tangible evidence against Clemens except the word of McNamee and common sense.

Common sense tells me that if Pettite and Clemens were basically inseperable team mates, good friends, who had the same trainer and both pitchers entering the twilight of their career. They probably at LEAST talked about Steroids. Pettite said he used HGH, are you telling me not one word of conversation took place between he and the Rocket? Even with all their connections. Come on.....

They'll never get Clemens on anything, but if Pettite admitted to it then Clemens pretty much had to be involved.
 
There's a difference between talking about steroids and taking steroids
 
There is no tangible evidence against Clemens except the word of McNamee and common sense.

Common sense tells me that if Pettite and Clemens were basically inseperable team mates, good friends, who had the same trainer and both pitchers entering the twilight of their career. They probably at LEAST talked about Steroids. Pettite said he used HGH, are you telling me not one word of conversation took place between he and the Rocket? Even with all their connections. Come on.....

They'll never get Clemens on anything, but if Pettite admitted to it then Clemens pretty much had to be involved.

Who cares if they talked about it? How the hell would you even prove that if you wanted to? This is not even the main issue. I need to see McNamee's evidence. Again I repeat this, his word alone is not enough especially considering the situation he was in when he gave it.
 
Who cares if they talked about it? How the hell would you even prove that if you wanted to? This is not even the main issue. I need to see McNamee's evidence. Again I repeat this, his word alone is not enough especially considering the situation he was in when he gave it.

Ask yourself these questions:
Who has the most to gain by lying? Roger Clemens. By lying, he saves his HoF credibility and name?
Who has the most to lose by lying? Brian McNamee. He lies and he goes to jail.
Who has the most to gain by telling the truth? Brian McNamee. By telling the truth, he avoids going to jail.
Who has the most to lose by lying? Roger Clemens. If it is true, his HoF credibility is gone and he'll forever be associated with steroid use in baseball along with Bonds.
 
Ask yourself these questions:
Who has the most to gain by lying? Roger Clemens. By lying, he saves his HoF credibility and name?
Who has the most to lose by lying? Brian McNamee. He lies and he goes to jail.
Who has the most to gain by telling the truth? Brian McNamee. By telling the truth, he avoids going to jail.
Who has the most to lose by lying? Roger Clemens. If it is true, his HoF credibility is gone and he'll forever be associated with steroid use in baseball along with Bonds.

completely agree....great post :yay:
 
Ask yourself these questions:
Who has the most to gain by lying? Roger Clemens. By lying, he saves his HoF credibility and name?
Who has the most to lose by lying? Brian McNamee. He lies and he goes to jail.
Who has the most to gain by telling the truth? Brian McNamee. By telling the truth, he avoids going to jail.
Who has the most to lose by lying? Roger Clemens. If it is true, his HoF credibility is gone and he'll forever be associated with steroid use in baseball along with Bonds.

Hey, that's not proof. Try again sport
 
Ask yourself these questions:
Who has the most to gain by lying? Roger Clemens. By lying, he saves his HoF credibility and name?
Who has the most to lose by lying? Brian McNamee. He lies and he goes to jail.
Who has the most to gain by telling the truth? Brian McNamee. By telling the truth, he avoids going to jail.
Who has the most to lose by lying? Roger Clemens. If it is true, his HoF credibility is gone and he'll forever be associated with steroid use in baseball along with Bonds.


You actually believe that if Clemens wins this case he will get his credibility back? At this point I think Clemens is just defending himself against false accusations for himself and his family, as far as getting any kind of respect or credibility back from baseball fans in general, forget it. It's not going to happen, not in this day and age in baseball. The fans have been duped for too long to have any kind of positive kind of outlook on any players in question, especially Clemens. The damage has already been done. You think he actually cares about the HoF if they still aren't going to believe him after this? Did you hear his last press conference? I keep saying this, and you keep ignoring it, it's gone beyond baseball now for Clemens. It is not about his legacy or being in the Hall of Fame.
 
You actually believe that if Clemens wins this case he will get his credibility back? At this point I think Clemens is just defending himself against false accusations for himself and his family, as far as getting any kind of respect or credibility back from baseball fans in general, forget it. It's not going to happen, not in this day and age in baseball. The fans have been duped for too long to have any kind of positive kind of outlook on any players in question, especially Clemens. The damage has already been done. You think he actually cares about the HoF if they still aren't going to believe him after this? Did you hear his last press conference? I keep saying this, and you keep ignoring it, it's gone beyond baseball now for Clemens. It is not about his legacy or being in the Hall of Fame.

I think he does, i think he's saying that to make it seem like he doesn't. But Roger isn't going to want to be kept out of the Hall with his 350 wins and 7 CY Youngs and his World Titles and whatever else. If he can somehow prove that he never took steroids (although i believe he did) then he at least OFFICIALLY clears his name, which would mean Baseball would have to let him in.
 
It's one thing to not like the guy as a baseball player, for whatever reason, but to think at this point he is still worried about being in the Hall of Fame is getting kind of ignorant. He just wants to settle this so he never has to answer to it again in this kind of legal forum. The court of public opinion is still going to drop the hammer on him, he knows that, as demonstrated by you and Spidey Bat specifically among others here, and Clemens has already acknowledged that a lot of people, baseball fans have already judged him and nothing he does will change their mind. If he does clear his name it won't be enough for them. It's too late. All they needed was a reason, a more than just floating rumor.

It's not about being in the Hall of Fame, like he said, if/when he clears his name and they still are on the fence about him especially based on the word (because that's all we got right now) of a guy whose own life is upside down with a kid dying and him trying to get out of jail, then they can keep their vote, he doesn't want it.
 
Kinda seems like the tide is going in Clemens favor from the look of things on ESPN.

McNamee is looking horrible right now, and his refusal to even stand infront of a camera is strange to me.

And keeping syringes and stuff for 8 or 9 years....is creepy no matter how you look at it.

Why didn't he hand those over to Mitchell's people, though??
 
his reasoning behind it was because he was a cop and he was used to gathering evidence :huh:
 
It's not making much sense, really.

This is the first time in the case, so far, that someone's being contradictory. Supposedly, he didn't trust Rocket so he hid vials and syringes for 8 years. Because he's a cop? Yet, he trusted Rocket enough to call him after tossing him under the bus...or emailing him for help and staying over at his home within the 6 years he was not working with Clemens.

And McNamee digging through Clmens trashcan for a beer can is strange too.

And him ONLY having the syringes for Clemens is too.

And him with holding the evidence from the start is too.

His lawyers are doing a horrible job too, with they're press coverage.


Stranger and stranger.
 
McNammee really sounds like an odd cat. Sounds like he had a real thing for Clemens.
 
I'll throw this in here as well

Roger Clemens-S-Yankees Feb. 8 - 4:17 pm et

Brian McNamee told congressional investigators Thursday that he injected Roger Clemens' wife with human growth hormone.

According to McNamee, Debbie Clemens used HGH before appearing alongside Roger in Sports Illustrated's swimsuit issue in 2003.
Source: New York Daily News
 
and Clemens people are saying that congressional investigators have yet to even ask him for a DNA sample....
 
McNammee really sounds like an odd cat. Sounds like he had a real thing for Clemens.

The picture Clemens defense is painting of McNamee is starting to appear more plausible. Strange behaviors on the phone call, and everything in the past few weeks...like the 8 year held "evidence" and beer can he stole from Clemens trash.

I'll throw this in here as well

And stranger and stranger...

I mean, that kinda sounds like he just picked it out of thin air. Even if it is true, he probably shouldn't have mentioned it because of how odd and out of left field it sounds. If he had proof of it, then it'd be something to mention...but it just seems like he's low blowing Clemens by mentioning his wife.

and Clemens people are saying that congressional investigators have yet to even ask him for a DNA sample....

Yeah, which is strange as well...

I mean, McNamee's lawyers made it sound like the end all be all evidence, and challenged Clemens to turn in his DNA.

But why the Feds or Congress, or nobody official, has jumped on this and demanded anything...is odd.

This is by far, one of the strangest things to come off off field controversy.

On, and this just came out:

Apparently, proof that McNamee lied in the Mitchell report about Clemens being at Canseco's party:
http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/...proof-Rocket-wasn't-at-Canseco-party?MSNHPHMA

Lawyer: There's proof Rocket wasn't at Canseco party

WASHINGTON (AP) - A lawyer for Roger Clemens said Saturday the pitcher can prove he didn't attend a June 1998 party at Jose Canseco's home described by Brian McNamee in the Mitchell Report.


According to McNamee, Clemens first raised the subject of steroids not long after McNamee saw Canseco and Clemens meeting during the party.


Clemens' side has turned over evidence to congressional investigators, including an affidavit from Canseco, to support that the pitcher wasn't present at Canseco's home that day, the attorney, Rusty Hardin, said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press.

Hardin said video footage from telecasts of baseball games around the time of the party also were given to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. During the telecasts, Hardin said, TV announcers can be heard discussing Canseco's party and noting that Clemens wasn't there.
A person familiar with the committee's investigation confirmed to the AP the affidavit and video were turned over and are in Clemens' favor. The person spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the investigation.

The House panel is examining former Senate majority leader George Mitchell's report on drug use in baseball, and a public hearing Wednesday is expected to focus on Clemens' denials of what his former personal trainer, McNamee, alleged. McNamee told Mitchell he injected Clemens at least 16 times with steroids and human growth hormone in 1998, 2000 and 2001.
"One of the things the committee is going to hear on Wednesday is about this party that is supposed to have started this whole thing," Hardin said. "Roger wasn't even at this party."

Asked about what Hardin said, one of McNamee's attorneys, Richard Emery, replied: "It may be that he wasn't there for the whole time, but he was there at some point. ... His kids were there, his wife was there, and he was there."

The first mention of Clemens' name in the Mitchell Report is on page 167. On the very next page comes McNamee's account of "a lunch party that Canseco hosted at his home in Miami."

"McNamee stated that, during this luncheon, he observed Clemens, Canseco, and another person he did not know meeting inside Canseco's house, although McNamee did not personally attend that meeting," the Mitchell Report says.

The report goes on to say that Canseco told Mitchell's staff "he had numerous conversations with Clemens about the benefits of Deca-Durabolin and Winstrol and how to 'cycle' and 'stack' steroids."

The report continues: "Toward the end of the road trip which included the Marlins series, or shortly after the Blue Jays returned home to Toronto, Clemens approached McNamee and, for the first time, brought up the subject of using steroids. Clemens said that he was not able to inject himself, and he asked for McNamee's help."

Hardin said that last week Clemens' camp sent a lawyer to interview Canseco, whose book about steroids in baseball, "Juiced," prompted Congress to hold hearings in March 2005. According to Hardin, Canseco said Clemens was not at the party.

Canseco did not immediately respond to a telephone message Saturday night.

His lawyer, Robert Saunooke, said he was unaware of an affidavit but added that he could confirm Canseco has spoken to lawyers for Clemens recently.

As described by Hardin, the video footage turned over to the committee includes one announcer making reference to Canseco's party and saying Clemens didn't show up. Another announcer, Hardin said, then adds that he saw Clemens playing golf that day.

Hardin said Clemens has a receipt for greens fees from that day.
Hardin hopes the committee will show the video during Wednesday's hearing, he said, "and let the public see how dramatic and clear it is that Roger obviously was not at the very party that McNamee is testifying started this whole thing. It's the foundation of it."

Clemens raised the discrepancy about the party during at least some of his various face-to-face meetings with representatives Thursday and Friday.
"He told me he was never there," said Rep. Paul Kanjorski, a Pennsylvania Democrat. "They have physical, hard evidence that he was never there."
Kanjorski was one of seven lawmakers Clemens with Friday, raising the two-day total to 19 - nearly half of the 41 on the committee.
"Roger made it clear with all the congressmen he was talking to: He wasn't challenging the Mitchell Report," Hardin said. "He was simply challenging the part of it that dealt with him that's based on what McNamee says."
 
Clemens mentioned that Congress told him that no DNA test would be asked of him unless a perjury case was brought against him.
 
Which kinda makes McNamme turning over his evidence useless right now, doesn't it?

Oh, and unlike McNammes lawyers...I think Pettitte's dispostion will have a huge effect on this case.

And, he won't lie.

I mean, when under oath...doesn't that mean you're speaking in the name of God, and to lie is sinning since you're swearing to God?

Well, anyone who knows Pettitte knows he's a deeply religious man. He never travels without a bible, and is a man of strong faith.

So, unless I'm wrong about the rules of speaking under oath...I think there's no way a man of Pettite's belief would lie under oath.
 
Addendum said:
Hey, that's not proof. Try again sport
Didn't say it was proof. Just something to think about.

You actually believe that if Clemens wins this case he will get his credibility back?
His Hall of Fame credibility, yes. If he is proven innocent, he has a significantly greater chance of being elected. The public opinion has no effect on his HoF credibility. Bonds is widely hated but he'll likely get elected.
 
Andy Pettitte-S-Yankees Feb. 12 - 10:35 am et

Newsday.com reports that an affidavit given by Andy Pettitte generally supports Brian McNamee's claims against Roger Clemens.

While the details in their affidavits are different, both Pettitte and McNamee are thought to have given the House Oversight Committee similar stories that indicate Clemens injected illegal substances. Clemens has filed a separate affidavit that says both Pettite and McName are mistaken. He claims that Pettitte is wrong in thinking that when they discussed medications he was referring to HGH or steroids. All of their affidavits will become public at a public hearing tomorrow.
Source: Newsday
Related: Roger Clemens
 
Yeah, it looks like Andy just buried Clemens.

I think it's got to be the most destructive thing against Rocket, really.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"