The Mitchell Report & Affect on MLB

[Dan Wishengrad]

Those of you defending Clemens and dismissing the McNamee evidence here are missing a crucial point, I believe. McNamee NEVER intended to "out" the Rocket, he sure didn't ever come forward voluntarily to accuse his former client of anything for over six years. Only under indictment was he compelled to tell his story, under oath, and to bring up Clemens' name in the first place. His story -- if reports of what he testified are accurate -- has otherwise checked out 100%, and Pettite has confessed that McNamee was telling the truth about Andy's use of HGH.

Why would McNamee lie? He had no reason on earth to not tell the truth, and plenty of reasons -- especially a possible prison term -- for doing so. He says he never quite trusted Roger's loyalty or truthfulness, so being an ex-cop saved his evidence just in case it all ever came out and Clemens' lied. This sure seems to be exactly what has happened. The Rocket's denials sound just like Palmeiro's, like Marion Jones', like so much other self-righteous blather from those who were using the juice but couldn't quite find the honesty to own up it.

I'm no attorney so can't intelligently weigh in on whether the evidence is admissable or not. It may be up to a judge to decide, and if it is allowed to be introduced will certainly have an impact on a jury. Remember that jurors are human beings, and these people can choose to ignore a judge's instructions. It was Clemens who has filed a defamation case against McNamee, after all, and not the other way around. A judge might very well allow the evidence to be admitted, as otherwise this case will be just one person's word against another's. What evidence does Roger have that McNamee lied about him, after all? Isn't the burden of proof on the Rocket to PROVE that McNamee lied? Rob Graff or another attorney out there, please weigh in on whether this evidence may or may not be admissable in a civil trial.

[CATLAX MAN]

Those of you defending Clemens and dismissing the McNamee evidence here are missing a crucial point, I believe.

Nobody here is defending Clemens. There are some people who are strongly questioning the circus that is surrouding this whole business and questioning the motives of those involved. I could give a rat's ass if Clemens did steroids or HGH. I ask why in God's name is Congress getting involved in this issue...other than drawing publicity for themselves? Certainly they could be putting their time to better use in solving our country's financial woes or any other pressing issue that they should be focusing on instead of this out-of-control trainwreck of a non-issue.

There are also people who are questioning trying people in the court of public opinion, half-truths, rumors & innuendos instead of a court of law where due process is afforded to all. It just a heaping pile of smelly doo-doo.

Everyone involved in this affair should have taken Mitchell's recommendation and not focus on what has happened, but rather spend effort in correcting the problem going forward. Everyone's hands in this issue are dirty, starting and ending with Bud Selig.

[StrykerFSU]

The Miller Lite can contains/ed the used needles.

You don't need to date the blood or drug residue, that's not the question. Clemens denies ever using steroids, these needles and gauze may prove otherwise.

Somebody please explain to me why McNamee would tell the truth about Pettite and lie about Clemens?

[CATLAX MAN]

You don't need to date the blood or drug residue, that's not the question. Clemens denies ever using steroids, these needles and gauze may prove otherwise.

Actually, that is the question. If you can't accurately date the blood or drug residue, how can you possibly prove that they both got there at the same time and not added together at different times?

Somebody please explain to me why McNamee would tell the truth about Pettite and lie about Clemens?

Who knows what his motives are? Perhaps he's willing to say anything to keep prosecutors from throwing the book at him? Perhaps he's telling the truth? The bottom line is...........who freakin' cares? It is muckraking journalism out of control.

[Beta]

People who do illegal things shouldn't be given leniency because of who they are (see: Mike Vick, Ricky Williams).

[Dan Wishengrad]

Who knows what his motives are? Perhaps he's willing to say anything to keep prosecutors from throwing the book at him? Perhaps he's telling the truth? The bottom line is...........who freakin' cares? It is muckraking journalism out of control.

Sorry, I respectfully disagree. It is not the press who is responsible for this whole situation. Canseco claimed in his book that steroid use was rampant during Jose's playing days, and MLB did everything it could as an organization to paint Canseco as both a liar and one of only a tiny minority of juicing abusers. Congress got involved -- rightly or wrongly -- because baseball enjoys an anti-trust exemption from the federal government and because constituents pressed their elected representatives to look into and get to the bottom of this blossoming scandal.

Sure the press has helped fuel and increase interest in this story. But "muckraking journalism" is definitely a stretch. Don't blame the messenger -- blame MLB itself for turning a blind eye for so long and refusing to clean up it's own mess.

[laxfan25]

I agree that McNamee has no reason to lie to a grand jury and every reason to tell the truth. I was just reading today that Andy Pettitte corroborated a lot of McNamee's story. Notice that Clemens doesn't deny that McNamee ever injected him, he just says it was flaxseed oil - er - B-12 shots. Yeah, that's it.
I don't think anybody is going to do jail time over steroids in baseball, even Kirk Radomski is not on the hook. It will likely come down to civil lawsuits, as Roger and his attorneys have really laid the wood to McNamee and he will need to defend his name, sullied as it is.
My feeling is that once Clemens started the denial thing he never expected it to blow up the way it has, and he has gotten entangled in this web. There is also a strong case of "I've heard this story before" as DW mentioned with Marion Jones and Rafael P. The court that Roger Clemens is most concerned about is the court of public opinion, and while it's not a unanimous verdict, it's still a majority, unfair or not.

The really ironic thing is, baseball is as popular as ever, and the vast majority of people couldn't really care if these guys were/are shooting up. We're all still enthralled by NFL Football as well, and those guys haven't gotten that big just by drinking protein shakes.
The sad thing though are the young athletes that are patterning this behavior, they are the real losers here.

[CATLAX MAN]

Sorry, I respectfully disagree. It is not the press who is responsible for this whole situation. Canseco claimed in his book that steroid use was rampant during Jose's playing days, and MLB did everything it could as an organization to paint Canseco as both a liar and one of only a tiny minority of juicing abusers. Congress got involved -- rightly or wrongly -- because baseball enjoys an anti-trust exemption from the federal government and because constituents pressed their elected representatives to look into and get to the bottom of this blossoming scandal.

Speaking of respectfully disagreeing, the reason the Congress got involved was that TV & newspaper face-time was at stake. Not once was baseball's anti-trust exemption ever a point of discussion is this whole sordid affair. Constituents pressed their representatives to investigate???????? That is just laughable. If the media at-large paid very little attention to this, there would be no Congressional inquiry....pure and simple. The current day media relishes the opportunity to rake a famous person through the mud, whether it is a sports figure, politician, actor/actress, what have you. It is lazy, titillating, sensationalistic, unethical journalism for the sole purpose of selling...no matter who they have to steamroll over and leave in their path. It is pandering to the lowest common denominator, at best.

[laxfan25]

It is lazy, titillating, sensationalistic, unethical journalism for the sole purpose of selling...no matter who they have to steamroll over and leave in their path. It is pandering to the lowest common denominator, at best.

And why is it so? Because that is what the people are buying, unfortunately. The audience drives the content. There are alternatives - McNeil/Lehrer News Hour - All Things Considered, etc., - but they don't draw even a fraction of the audience that the "entertainment" news shows bring in. Even the cable news shows spend hours pandering - "We're going to break from the assassination of Benazir Bhutto for this important bulletin - BRITNEY JUST WALKED OUT OF THE PSYCHIATRIC HOSPITAL!!"
However, you're just railing against the tides of history. Who used to pack into the Collisseum? It certainly wasn't the masses yearning to hear the latest from Virgil.
While I don't agree with her philosophy, Ayn Rand wrote one of my all-time favorite novels in "The Fountainhead" - which is a spot-on observation on this topic.

[Zeuslax]

Speaking of respectfully disagreeing, the reason the Congress got involved was that TV & newspaper face-time was at stake. Not once was baseball's anti-trust exemption ever a point of discussion is this whole sordid affair. Constituents pressed their representatives to investigate???????? That is just laughable. If the media at-large paid very little attention to this, there would be no Congressional inquiry....pure and simple. The current day media relishes the opportunity to rake a famous person through the mud, whether it is a sports figure, politician, actor/actress, what have you. It is lazy, titillating, sensationalistic, unethical journalism for the sole purpose of selling...no matter who they have to steamroll over and leave in their path. It is pandering to the lowest common denominator, at best.

Yup.....This discussion has 6 pages and counting dedicated to it. However, when we discuss something "important" on here it's the typically the same 7 people and it rarely goes above 1 page. Are we not buying into the same hype by being a part of this discussion here. Just a little microcosm………….

[laxfan25]

I see today that Congress is asking the Justice Dept. to investigate Roger Clemens on possible perjury charges. His biggest problem is not Brian McNamee, but the IRS investigator who handled the BALCO case, and who has also been involved in the Mitchell investigation. I don't remember his name, but I understand he is a tenacious, formidable foe who doesn't like the implication that he is making this stuff up.
Based on everything that has been reported to date I think Roger is going to feel the heat a little bit. As with many scandals, it's not the actual "crime" but the cover-up, if you will. (I think people would have pretty much done a ho-hum if he had taken the Pettitte approach, given how long ago it occurred).
I don't think he ever expected it to get this big when he issued his first denial. Now he's got his palpable mass in a wringer.