Master Index of Archived Threads


Roger Clemens; Queen of Denial

Frayed Knot Dec 13 2007 05:26 PM

Via a lawyer: Roger Clemens vehemently denies allegations in the Mitchell Report that he used performance-enhancing steroids, and is outraged that his name is included in the report based on the uncorroborated allegations of a troubled man threatened with federal criminal prosecution," Hardin said in a release sent to reporters late Thursday afternoon. "Roger has been repeatedly tested for these substances and he has never tested positive," Hardin continued. "There has never been one shred of tangible evidence that he ever used these substances, and yet he is being slandered today." Be interesting to see how far he wants to take this. There was no specific paper trail linking Roger to roids, just the words of the trainer (MacNamee) who followed him from Toronto to New York and, while he never admits to selling him the dope, claims to have both given RC advice to as to which to use and also to administering the stuff; ie, shootin him up. MLB, meanwhile, claims they are prepared to back anything in the Mitchell report and supposedly Mitchell only took this if there were assurances that HE could not personally be held liable. My reaction: OH MY GOODNESS GRACIOUS, ROGER CLEMENS IN ON GEORGE MITCHELL'S STEROID LIST!!! OF ALL THE MIRACULOUS THINGS I'VE EVER SEEN ... Also: I guess taking 'Winstrol' and those other equine injectables meant that Roger took the phrase 'being the workhorse of the pitching staff' a bit too literally. David Justice is apparently also ready to publicly deny ever using.

themetfairy Dec 13 2007 05:32 PM

His balls have shrunk to the extent that he won't even face the press himself to deny the charges.

metirish Dec 13 2007 05:35 PM

I suppose now there will be no need to argue over what cap he wears into the HOF, for what this is worth Jon Heyman who has a HOF vote says Clemens is now not a first ballot entry,but like Bonds he probably will vote for him to get in. My opinion is that Clemens should be treated no different than Bonds as far as the HOF goes.

Frayed Knot Dec 13 2007 05:55 PM

Irony is so ironic Andy Pettitte: [url=http://www.beliefnet.com/story/167/story_16732_1.html]Living a Pure Life[/url]

Nymr83 Dec 13 2007 05:58 PM

Clemens is full of shit (and steroids.) If he really hasn't done anything lets see him file a libel suit. question(s): he's alleged to have used in Canada, would a canadian court have jurisdiction of his libel suit? i havent the slightest clue what canadian law says as to jurisdiction. do canadian libel laws mirror those of the united states or those of england? (who has to prove the truth of the allegations?)

Frayed Knot Dec 13 2007 06:09 PM

IF he filed a suit it would be in the U.S. since he's going to be suing MLB for spreading false info about him. That part of the story originated in Canada would have nothing to do with it. Besides, the trainer followed him to NYC (he was put on the NYY staff via Rajah's request) and continued working with both him and Andy P there.

cooby Dec 13 2007 06:37 PM

Kudos to Frayed Knot for this thread title My friend May at work is a Yankees fan and she will be disappointed to see Pettite's name there; she named her son after him. When I got to work this morning, she had already emailed me saying "do you think any of your boys will be there today?" and I honestly couldn't think of one Met that I was worried about.

metirish Dec 13 2007 07:19 PM

I can't wait to hear what Hank has to say, if the Astros had waited would they have got Tejada for less?

Willets Point Dec 14 2007 04:12 PM

cooby wrote: My friend May at work is a Yankees fan and she will be disappointed to see Pettite's name there; she named her son after him. A child named Rat Faced Boy probably gets made fun of a lot at school.

cooby Dec 14 2007 04:47 PM

He does. Poor kid's a Red Sox fan too

seawolf17 Dec 14 2007 04:58 PM

I'm stealing OO's Trentonian image from the other thread and posting it here, just because it's that funny. In fact, this image might just be funnier than John Rocker and the kitten.

themetfairy Dec 14 2007 05:24 PM

As much as I love the Trentonian front page, absolutely NOTHING is as funny as Rocker and the kitten -

Fman99 Dec 14 2007 08:25 PM

I always assumed that it was Jeet that was getting male hormones injected forcefully into his rear end.

Frayed Knot Dec 15 2007 03:46 PM

Pettitte fesses up to HGH use. Now the fun part will be to see if Rajah continues to try to make the case that the trainer McNamee was lying about his 'roid use (as his lawyer claimed immediately) even while the very same source was apparently telling the truth about AP.

Kid Carsey Dec 15 2007 04:04 PM

I knew he wouldn't ultimately lie about it when the 'no comment' thing came out of his camp vs. Clemens' hollow lawyer bullcrap statement. Kudos to him for saying he did it. Move on. Next ....

metirish Dec 16 2007 08:09 AM

Jeez Andy is a great guy because he took HGH to get back from injury quickly to help his team, so did a Doctor prescribe it for him?, no I don't think so. Bullshit Andy.

Kid Carsey Dec 16 2007 10:26 AM

I didn't say he was a great guy (if you're answering me), I'm applauding his admitting it and not commenting on what he said in his admission.

metirish Dec 16 2007 10:30 AM

Not intended towards you at all , I just think Petitte is full of shit.

themetfairy Dec 16 2007 11:45 AM

metirish wrote: Not intended towards you at all , I just think Petitte is full of shit. [url=http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/yankees/2007/12/16/2007-12-16_andy_pettitte_can_spare_us_the_crocodile.html]Lupica shares your view[/url].

Kid Carsey Dec 16 2007 12:11 PM

I ain't clicking on any Lupica link right now, but if there's anyone who's full of shit it's Roger and not Andy.

themetfairy Dec 16 2007 12:18 PM

It's not an either/or kind of thing. They're both full of shit.

Kid Carsey Dec 16 2007 12:29 PM

Whatever, have a nice day.

metirish Dec 16 2007 01:14 PM

Well I was talking about Andy, but yes Clemens is full of shit too.

Valadius Dec 16 2007 03:12 PM

Clemens took it in the butt. That's the big distinction between them, I think.

Rotblatt Dec 18 2007 01:18 PM

Pettite: ]"Everything else written or said about me knowingly using illegal drugs is nonsense, wrong and hurtful. I have the utmost respect for baseball and have always tried to live my life in a way that would be honorable. I wasn't looking for an edge; I was looking to heal." Except being able to heal faster DOES give you an edge, douchebag. I'm glad he came clean, but I suspect it's because he didn't think denying it would be a winning argument, rather than because it was the "right thing to do." They had the goods on him and he knew it, so he decided to spin his HGH use in the best possible light rather than deny now, and have still more evidence come out against him later. Roger, on the other hand, has more at stake--namely, the HOF--and his purported use is much greater AND includes steroids. None of them give a shit about the game, so far as I can tell, and are only looking out for their own self-interest. Which is fine and all, but I wish they'd stop pretending to be altruistic or whatever bullshit they're spinning. At least Bonds is upfront about being selfish.

Edgy DC Dec 18 2007 01:35 PM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Dec 18 2007 01:48 PM

What would put Clemens in his own group, after his categorical denial (is he the only one?), would be if some corrobaraton surfaced. Heck, maybe they can find a trail of pills, injections, and erotic steroid-cream rubdowns going back to the day after he failed his Mets audition in Houston in front of Bob Gibson. You know, in a perfect world.

Vic Sage Dec 18 2007 01:38 PM

everybody is a hero in their own story. Or, as Jeff Goldblum says in THE BIG CHILL: "Don't knock rationalization. Its more important than sex. Did you ever try and go a week without a good rationalization?" As cynical as i am, i'm willing to give Andy the benefit of the doubt in saying that he may truly believe he was "doing it for the team". He seems that sort of fellow to me. Regardless, HGH is not legally prescribed for healing, so Andy went thru the black market. In so doing, he had to know he was doing something wrong at the time, and he should be held accountable. And quick healing, as Rotty points out, IS a competitive advantage. So shut up already, Mr. Pettitte.

Valadius Dec 18 2007 01:44 PM

I'm disappointed that amphetamines were ignored by the Mitchell Report. Of course, that's due to lack of evidence, but still.

Nymr83 Dec 18 2007 01:45 PM

like everyone else he claims to have "used" the exact number of times that he was caught. i find that hard to believe and he's got no credibility given his previous denials. come clean for real or don't bother.

Fman99 Dec 18 2007 02:31 PM

The [url=http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3160063]denial is now official.[/url] Highly enjoyable reading. Clemens fires back, denies taking steroids or HGH Associated Press NEW YORK -- Roger Clemens denied allegations by his former trainer that he took performance-enhancing drugs, calling them "a dangerous and destructive shortcut that no athlete should ever take.'' The accusations against the seven-time Cy Young Award winner from his former trainer, Brian McNamee, were contained in last week's Mitchell report. Former Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell said McNamee said he injected Clemens with steroids in 1998 while with the Toronto Blue Jays, and steroids and human growth hormone in 2000 and 2001, while with the New York Yankees. "I want to state clearly and without qualification: I did not take steroids, human growth hormone or any other banned substances at any time in my baseball career or, in fact, my entire life,'' Clemens said Tuesday in a statement issued through his agent, Randy Hendricks. "Those substances represent a dangerous and destructive shortcut that no athlete should ever take. "I am disappointed that my 25 years in public life have apparently not earned me the benefit of the doubt, but I understand that Senator Mitchell's report has raised many serious questions. I plan to publicly answer all of those questions at the appropriate time in the appropriate way. I only ask that in the meantime people not rush to judgment.'' Another McNamee client, Yankees pitcher Andy Pettitte, said last weekend that he took HGH twice while rehabbing from an injury in 2002. Mitchell said McNamee told him he injected Pettitte with HGH two-to-four times that year. Baseball players and owners didn't have an agreement banning steroids until September 2002. They banned HGH in January 2005.

Valadius Dec 18 2007 02:33 PM

The "my entire life" bit suggests he's flailing to me. There's no doubt he took it in the butt.

Nymr83 Dec 18 2007 02:38 PM

]"I am disappointed that my 25 years in public life have apparently not earned me the benefit of the doubt..." yes, your throwing bats at opposing players and beaning them intentionally in the head has shown that you deserve the benefit of the doubt.

metirish Dec 18 2007 02:38 PM

I believe Doctor McNamee on this, sorry Rajah.

Benjamin Grimm Dec 18 2007 02:54 PM

Roger Clemens wrote: "I am disappointed that my 25 years in public life have apparently not earned me the benefit of the doubt" In other words, you should trust him because he's a celebrity. Hard to argue with that kind of logic.

HahnSolo Dec 18 2007 03:46 PM

]"I want to state clearly and without qualification: I did not take steroids, human growth hormone or any other banned substances at any time in my baseball career or, in fact, my entire life,'' I also didn't inhale, and I did not have sex with that woman.

Frayed Knot Dec 23 2007 10:58 AM

Roger seems determined to go as far as it takes to fight his recent ties to PED's After the initial statements via agents and lawyers, he is now using his own voice on camera (OK, one on his own website) to issue more complete, and seemingly loophole-free, denials of use and repudiation of MacNamee's claims via the Mitchell report. He also announces that he will do a sit-down interview with Mike Wallace on the subject for '60 Minutes' to air sometime in January.

MFS62 Dec 23 2007 11:14 AM

metirish wrote: I believe Doctor McNamee on this, sorry Rajah. Speaking of the Doctor, I heard an interview with ex-Met C. J. Nitkowski who approached the Doc to be his personal trainer around the time C.J. was a Tiger/ Met. The interviewer asked if they had discussed steroids. C.J. said: 1) The topic was discussed a few times. 2) C.J. asked about them. 3) The Doc was knowledgeable about them, describing which one was better/ worse for which need; that the steroids for pitchers were different than those best for position players. 4) He said the Doc did not offer any steroids, nor did he volunteer where the player could obtain them. 5) The Doc was trying to enroll players in his own training regimen that did dot include steroids. C.J. implied that the Doc discouraged their use. I found #4 very interesting. C.J. is a bright, well spoken ,St. John's alum, and I believe when he said. Later

OlerudOwned Dec 23 2007 11:40 AM

HahnSolo wrote: ]"I want to state clearly and without qualification: I did not take steroids, human growth hormone or any other banned substances at any time in my baseball career or, in fact, my entire life,'' I also didn't inhale, and I did not have sex with that woman. You bet I did, and I enjoyed it.

metirish Dec 23 2007 08:34 PM

I saw the video that FK references on the news but I can't for the life of me find Clemens's website.

Frayed Knot Dec 23 2007 08:44 PM

http://www.rogerclemensonline.com/

metirish Dec 23 2007 08:51 PM

Weird, I saw that site but not that page. Roger sounds genuswine so I believe him.

SteveJRogers Dec 24 2007 06:18 AM

Actually I just heard some ESPN Radio host say he believed Clemens because he "always has been a great team leader, teammate" and has done nothing to suggest that he doesn't have good character. Another great example of a national media person that has no clue about the local levels of various issues.

OlerudOwned Dec 24 2007 05:34 PM

SteveJRogers wrote: Actually I just heard some ESPN Radio host say he believed Clemens because he "always has been a great team leader, teammate" and has done nothing to suggest that he doesn't have good character. Another great example of a national media person that has no clue about the local levels of various issues. It's not even a local issue. He threw a bat at somebody in the World Series.

themetfairy Dec 24 2007 10:39 PM

Q. How can you tell when Roger Clemens is lying? A. When his lips are moving.

SteveJRogers Dec 25 2007 06:49 AM

OlerudOwned wrote: ="SteveJRogers"]Actually I just heard some ESPN Radio host say he believed Clemens because he "always has been a great team leader, teammate" and has done nothing to suggest that he doesn't have good character. Another great example of a national media person that has no clue about the local levels of various issues. It's not even a local issue. He threw a bat at somebody in the World Series. Not to mention getting thrown out of an ALCS game in 1990 (IIRC) and then proceeded to throw a Gatorade bucket onto the field. To say nothing of his headhunting ways through the years and the allegations of not wanting to finish Game 6 of the 1986 World Series.

Frayed Knot Jan 03 2008 05:46 PM

Roger's 60 Minutes interview is going to trot out the Bonds/Sheffield/Tejada defense: 'yeah MacNamee injected me with some stuff, but it was just pain-killers and vitamins ... no really, I swear' Meanwhile, MacNamee's lawyer says if Clemens calls his client a liar on air then they're prepared to file a suit.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Jan 03 2008 05:55 PM

Flaxseed oil to the rescue.

metirish Jan 03 2008 06:29 PM

WOW, really un-fucking-real. http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3179745 Why not just have his regular family Doc take care of stuff like that,

AG/DC Jan 03 2008 07:32 PM

]"I think that this is a lawyers' game, which allows him to try and attempt to say that McNamee didn't know what he was injecting or that at least Clemens didn't know what he was injecting,'' Emery said. I think this is true enough, even if it's a lawyer responding to a lawyer. But it looks like he's seen Rog's next gambit. If the trainer can present credible evidence that it was a banned substances, Rog can act all shocked-like.

Frayed Knot Jan 03 2008 09:25 PM

"Roger took bunches of his shots over his career, much the way racehorses do" And, apparently, much of the same medicine as the horses too. "The reason he hasn't stepped out personally before now was really our decision, not his, and that was to more deliberately look into how in the world the Mitchell report could have reached what we believe was this totally wrong conclusion before we started talking out." Ever stop to think that maybe Mitchell reached that conclusion because you refused to speak to him in the first place? "Now we're more comfortable with all of that, and he's going to answer whatever questions they have.'' You mean, now that his entire legacy has been trashed leaving you no other choice you're going to HAVE to answer these questions.

metirish Jan 04 2008 07:17 AM

I haven't read Ian O'Connor in years but today he sums up Clemens very well, for me at least. [url=http://www.northjersey.com/page.php?qstr=eXJpcnk3ZjczN2Y3dnFlZUVFeXk3ODMmZmdiZWw3Zjd2cWVlRUV5eTcyNDEyNzYmeXJpcnk3ZjcxN2Y3dnFlZUVFeXk2]Clemens[/url]

AG/DC Jan 04 2008 07:46 AM

There's some goofy stuff in there. He seemingly deliberately mis-interprets Clemens' defense in the Piazza incident --- which is damining enough without doing so --- and he mixes metaphors with Milli Vanilli.

Centerfield Jan 04 2008 08:08 AM

I thought that was Clemens' defense to the Piazza incident.

seawolf17 Jan 04 2008 08:39 AM

Wait... Roger Clemens was in Milli Vanilli? Well, that explains a lot.

KC Jan 04 2008 03:06 PM

Gets more bizarre every day. Clemens, Pettitte, and McNamee have been asked to testify to Congress under oath.

Benjamin Grimm Jan 04 2008 03:58 PM

Clemens won't want to "talk about the past."

Nymr83 Jan 04 2008 04:31 PM

fine, then he can get a subpoena to "talk about the past" and lawyer-up like McGwire did. That'll shoot all his denials down.

Frayed Knot Jan 06 2008 08:50 PM

He came, he talked, he denied. Nothing particularly new (or interesting) in the 60 Minutes interview. He never took 'em ... doesn't know why McNamee claims he did ... wasn't aware that Pettitte did ... yadda, yadda. The only real interesting news on this subject (if you're under the impression that there's ANYTHING interesting on this subject) was a report in Newday that Clemens & McNamee had about an hour-long phone conversation in the last day or two. No datails were available, however, of what was discussed or even who contacted who first. It did label the coversation as "emotional". The '60 Minutes' interview was taped several days ago and was done prior to this supposed phone call.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Jan 06 2008 09:16 PM

He's Pete Rose, Barry Bonds and O.J. Simpson. Guilty and convinced we still owe him one. If I were Mike Wallace I'd have walked away.

metirish Jan 06 2008 09:51 PM

Mike is his buddy, I watched it and Clemens came across as pathetic.

Valadius Jan 06 2008 10:00 PM

Can you believe that Mike Wallace is 89 freaking years old?

AG/DC Jan 06 2008 10:01 PM

Did he take credit for procuring the B-12 or whatever. Because the video says that "I did not provide Brian McNamee with any drugs to inject into my body."

metirish Jan 07 2008 06:47 AM

Clemens talked a lot about taking Vioxx and not sure what the future holds for his health since that drug has been banned by the FDA and found to be dangerous, it was nearly a teary moment.

Farmer Ted Jan 07 2008 07:24 AM

Clemens has officially filed a defamation suit against McNamee. This basically gives Clemens another excuse not to answer questions before Congress ("I can't answer that question due to pending litigation") rather than pleading the 5th before Congress.

AG/DC Jan 07 2008 07:35 AM

Whoah, never looked at it that way. Nice.

AG/DC Jan 07 2008 08:12 AM

Seriously, his defense is aggressive enough that we have to be open to the idea that he may be able to clear himself, right? Am I the world's biggest sucker for even opening that door?

Willets Point Jan 07 2008 08:22 AM

Do you think Clemens did it with Zest?

metirish Jan 07 2008 08:23 AM

His defense might be aggressive but for me at least the more he opens his mouth the bigger the hole he's digging, I think Clemens is getting bad advise from his lawyer, at the very least the 60 minutes interview is a good starting point for whoever to ask a bunch of follow up questions that were not asked last night.

themetfairy Jan 07 2008 08:23 AM

Ack! My Eyes!

Willets Point Jan 07 2008 10:57 AM

themetfairy wrote: Ack! My Eyes! Your eyes? It's your ears that should be hurting after listening to Clemens lipsync about Zest.

themetfairy Jan 07 2008 11:24 AM

My whole system went into shutdown. I need a shower. But not with Zest!

Farmer Ted Jan 07 2008 12:19 PM

From ESPN.com. The hole Clemens is digging gets bigger and bigger. The last question is the best. He said, he said: In the Mitchell report, trainer Brian McNamee claims he injected Roger Clemens with steroids more than a dozen times over the course of three different seasons, usually "in the buttocks." Meanwhile, Clemens told "60 Minutes" that McNamee never injected him with steroids, but rather with vitamin B-12 and lidocaine, the latter an anesthetic that Clemens claimed was "for my joints." Does Clemens' explanation make medical sense? Page 2 talked to a pair of experts: 1. What is lidocaine, and how does it work? Dr. Ken Dretchen, pharmacology department chair, Georgetown University: It's a member of a class of compounds that work as local anesthetics, which means it's injected close to where there's a nerve area to decrease sensation and pain by deadening the nerve fibers. Dr. John F. Dombrowski, director of pain medicine at the Washington Pain Center and former president of the D.C. Society of Anesthesiologists: We've all had experiences with it. We've gone to the dentist and had a tooth numbed up, or a dermatologist to get a wart or mole removed. They inject it under the skin to make it numb. 2. So would it work for joint pain? Dr. Dretchen: Joint pain means you have pain fibers being excited, being set off with irritation or inflammation. If you inject lidocaine near those nerve fibers, you can decrease their transmission of pain signals. However, most people would treat [joint pain] with anti-inflammatory drugs. Dr. Dombrowski: In our practice, I use local anesthetics for what is known as myofascial pain -- run of the mill, my neck or back hurts, muscular-skeletal pain that comes from stress or overuse. If you're working at a computer desk all the time and your neck and shoulders are in knots, and you can push on that spot and say, "Oh my God, it hurts," that's the perfect spot for an injection. And if we're using that, we're probably also using a little bit of steroids. 3. Wait -- steroids? Dr. Dombrowski: Steroids are like alcohol. There are different kinds. For pain, I'll use a corticosteroid, like a cortisone shot. Those are done to joints and muscles to decrease inflammation. They will never make you big, unlike anabolic steroids such as testosterone. I would never use an anabolic steroid for pain management. 4. Right. So would it make sense for a pitcher to inject lidocaine? Dr. Dombrowski: If it's your pitching arm, I could see injecting the shoulder to loosen up, throw some better heat. That's not unreasonable. 5. How long do the pain-relieving effects of lidocaine last? Dr. Dombrowski: It's very short-lived. Four, six, maybe eight hours at most. Local anesthetics are a Band-Aid approach. They help you feel a little bit better. Lidocaine would not do anything about joint inflammation. 6. Can you get pain relief in your joints by injecting lidocaine into your, well, buttocks? Dr. Dombrowski: No. Never. Unless Clemens was limited by hip pain or whatever in his buttocks, then no, that's not what you do. You use big deep muscles for injecting steroids. But you would never treat shoulder or elbow pain in that way. If what he was injected with was truly lidocaine, his butt cheek would be numb. And that's it. Dr. Dretchen: Just a blind injection into the gluteus area, that would be a strange usage of the drug. When you go to the dentist, would you get an injection into your arm? Of course not. Patrick Hruby is a columnist for Page 2.

metirish Jan 07 2008 12:25 PM

Sounds reasonable that Ted, McNamee will be on ESPN today at 3PM.

AG/DC Jan 07 2008 12:44 PM

I love the statement "If I had known what that man, Brian MacNamee, had said about me, I would have been down there in a heartbeat." First, there's the Clintonian gambit of feigning only passing familiarity with the figure that implicated him, as if he learned of the guy from the papers just like everbody else. Second, there's the notion that he alone among major leaguers that Mitchell sought would have broken the stonewall. Third, there's the notion that he would have spoken to Mitchell if he knew he was accused. What did he think Mitchell wanted to talk to him about? Fourth, there's the plastic ethic that his own good name is the only thing that would compel him to talk. The guy is the former Senate majoirty leader, charged with seeking the truth and cleaning up the game Clemens claims to love and seek to serve. And, if Clemens is innocent, his only targets are those other guys who cheated, and kept Clemens and his team from winning more games. If he's squeaky clean --- Zest-fully clean --- even if he disagrees with the approach that the investigation represents, wouldn't he at least talk to the guy? The phrase "after all I did for baseball" sticks in my craw too.

metirish Jan 07 2008 12:47 PM

Clemens knew for a week before it was released that he was in the report, at least that's what I'm reading and hearing.

Benjamin Grimm Jan 07 2008 12:55 PM

Well, as we (and the world) saw in 2000, Clemens isn't a very convincing liar. That whole "I thought the bat was the ball" business wasn't even worthy of a six-year-old. It's funny that he claims that his two decades as a celebrity should give him credibility, especially since his track record has shown that he's a blatant liar. I really hope that Pettitte flips on him while under oath. And I REALLY hope that Clemens ends up in jail with Barry Bonds. Even without the steroids, they'd be great assets to their prison softball team.

Nymr83 Jan 07 2008 03:03 PM

]Clemens has officially filed a defamation suit against McNamee. This basically gives Clemens another excuse not to answer questions before Congress ("I can't answer that question due to pending litigation") rather than pleading the 5th before Congress. he can give whatever reason he wants for not talking to Congress if he's simply asked to speak, if he's actually subpoenad though i would assume that works that same way as a witness in court- "pending civil litigation" isn't an excuse. As far as why he instituted this suit in the first place? i doubt he'll win but he looks more innocent when he claims his eagerness to resolve this in court and likely wants the opportunity to air McNamee's dirty laundry (from what i've read he has a long rap sheet)

KC Jan 07 2008 03:42 PM

His atty just said at the news conference going on that he'll appear without subpoena.

Frayed Knot Jan 07 2008 04:27 PM

Very strange press conference. - They played a tape of the entire 17 minute phone conversation between Clemens & McNamee from a few days ago (the one Newsday leaked the existance of). In it McNamee sounds upset (pathetic really) about having ratted on Roger but at no point in the transcipt does he either condemn or exonerate him. Nor does Clemens specifically ask BM why he "lied" to Mitchell. Both sides were obviously aware that the conversation was being recorded so the words seem to be chosen carefully. - Clemens will go to the Congressional hearing next week. - And basically he playing the angry man defense, angry that he's being put through this and determined to clear his name. He took some Q&A from the assembled press after the tape played and his lawyer yapped for a bit but cut it off after 10 minutes or so as he appeared to be on the verge of losing his temper. Sounds like a guy determined to fight this thing right down the line. Of course so did Pete Rose.

SteveJRogers Jan 07 2008 04:32 PM

DQ's (Drama Queen) purpose, and it worked for Rose, OJ, etc, is to get that "shadow of doubt" into someone's mind rather than going the Bonds route and not talking about anything, ever.

Nymr83 Jan 07 2008 04:46 PM

From Espn.com's Lester MunsonL ]But the adjective is the most important here. The lawsuit is a "proactive" strike against McNamee. Clemens filed his case in Houston, his home court, where his lawyers have enjoyed extraordinary success. When McNamee gets around to filing his countersuit, he is stuck now. He must file it in Texas, the forum selected by Clemens and his lawyers. thats a good point but other ones should be made. It is almost a gaurantee that McNamee will successfully remove the case to federal court in Texas (from the state court where Clemens filed.) From there, McNamee may succeed in moving the case to the federal court house in NYC. Texas is by no means the gauranteed forum right now.

metsmarathon Jan 07 2008 04:52 PM

the most telling thing to me about that tape recording was that each and every time mcnamee said "what do you want me to do?" roger never once said "tell the truth about me" or "say i didn't do steroids" and the only reason i can think of why is that the whole point of the conversation was to try to get mcnamee to waver on anything, by beating to death their prior friendship and relationship and staying the hell away from anything that might put him into a defensive stance where, when accused of lying, mcnamee would say "but roger, you did take steroids" or "i'd go to jail if i lied for you" i'm not sure i call mcnamee pathetic, necessarily, but really broken up about what he's done to his good friend and older-brother-figure - that he's truly conflicted over what he's had to do. but in the parts of the recording that i heard, it never sounded like he was sorry for lying - rather that he was sorry for telling the truth. i'll admit, i'm looking at it from my presupposed conclusion of clemens' guilt, but i'm just not seeing anything that roger says as the words of a reasonable, innocent person. rather, they strike me as the words of a reasonable, guilty person trying to clear his name.

Nymr83 Jan 07 2008 04:57 PM

]i'm looking at it from my presupposed conclusion of clemens' guilt shhhh!! now they won't let you serve on the eventual Clemens Jury!

Benjamin Grimm Jan 07 2008 05:49 PM

Here's a question for the lawyers in the house: What's the difference between "defamation of character" and libel or slander? And, in a lawsuit like the one Clemens is pursuing, on whom is the burden of proof? Does Clemens have to prove that MacNamee lied, or does MacNamee have to prove that he told the truth?

KC Jan 07 2008 06:45 PM

mm: >>>it never sounded like he was sorry for lying - rather that he was sorry for telling the truth<<< B-I-N-G-O

Rockin' Doc Jan 07 2008 08:34 PM

Ben Grimm -"And I REALLY hope that Clemens ends up in jail with Barry Bonds. Even without the steroids, they'd be great assets to their prison softball team." I doubt that Clemens would be of much help to the prison softball team seeing as it's nearly impossible to brushback a hitter in slow pitch. Now if there's a bat throwing event, then Roger would be their man. Of course, without 'roid rage, he would likely suck at that too. If Clemens gets the same treatment from HOF voters as Palmiero and McGwire, then I'll be satisfied.

Fman99 Jan 08 2008 06:31 AM

I've got some real [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schadenfreude]nice feelings[/url] about this entire process. His uppance has come, finally.

AG/DC Jan 08 2008 08:44 AM

"I want to play this phone call that I recorded, trying to prove that I wasn't lying." "Roger, considering the situation, why would he speak with candor?" "Well, I got him to open up by lying to him."

metsguyinmichigan Jan 08 2008 10:03 AM

I had some fun with Clemens' apparent butt obsession on the Mets Guy blog. Honestly, I don't see how that press conference could have gone worse for Clemens. Dreadful.

Benjamin Grimm Jan 08 2008 10:05 AM

metsguyinmichigan wrote: Honestly, I don't see how that press conference could have gone worse for Clemens. Dreadful. Well, at least there wasn't any foam coming out of his mouth.

themetfairy Jan 08 2008 01:39 PM

Perhaps Roger should take a cue from John Rocker -

Rockin' Doc Jan 08 2008 06:20 PM

Metfairy -"Perhaps Roger should take a cue from John Rocker." I would be quite pleased if Clemens would quietly fade away as the subject of scorn and ridicule as Rocker eventually did.

AG/DC Jan 09 2008 01:53 PM

Chris Shays, not looking forward to meeting the Rocket: Congressman blasts Roger Clemens' taped-call tactic against Brian McNamee By CHRISTIAN RED and MICHAEL O'KEEFFE DAILY NEWS SPORTS WRITERS Wednesday, January 9th 2008, 12:36 PM Cataffo/News A congressman said he didn't like that Roger Clemens (r.) taped a conversation with Brian McNamee on Jan. 4. One of the congressmen who will interrogate Roger Clemens next week blasted the pitcher's efforts to discredit his former trainer Brian McNamee, calling the attempt "sleazy." Rep. Christopher Shays (R-Conn.), a member of the House Oversight Committee - the panel that will question Clemens next week, said he is disturbed by Clemens' attacks on McNamee. "I'm not comfortable that there was a dialogue between the two men," said Shays, referring to the taped conversation between Clemens and McNamee that was played at Monday's press conference in Houston. "It's really ugly." Shays also said he wasn't convinced by the seven-time Cy Young Award winner's performance on "60 Minutes" on Sunday. Clemens adamantly denied using performance-enhancing drugs during the interview with veteran journalist Mike Wallace. "With Roger Clemens' body language, I'm not comfortable when he was making those denials," Shays said. Shays did not want players to be part of the hearing, and he said he was "dreading" the Jan. 16 hearing where Clemens, McNamee, Andy Pettitte, Chuck Knoblauch and former Mets clubhouse attendant Kirk Radomski are scheduled to testify under oath. "I'm not looking forward to putting players in the position where they might perjure themselves," Shays said. "When they try to commit perjury, we have an obligation to go after them." Shays said he "wouldn't be surprised" if the committee had already requested the tape. A Capitol Hill source told the Daily News that the committee would also be interested in hearing a tape of a Dec. 12 meeting between McNamee and two private investigators sent to New York by Clemens and Pettitte. Clemens has already said he will appear at next week's hearing, but Jay Reisinger, the lawyer for Pettitte, said on ESPN Radio yesterday that it is "premature" to say if Pettitte will attend next Wednesday's hearing on Capitol Hill. Pettitte could be subpoenaed if he refuses to appear. Meanwhile, McNamee's lawyer, Earl Ward, said he is considering filing an ethics complaint with the State Bar of Texas against Clemens' attorney Rusty Hardin because the pitcher's lawyer contacted McNamee, a witness in a federal investigation, without notifying Ward. Clemens spokesman Joe Householder declined to comment. In St. Petersburg, Fla., police released documents yesterday that said McNamee lied to them when he was questioned during a 2001 sexual assault investigation. McNamee denied having sex with a possibly drugged woman in a hotel pool, which conflicted with accounts from security guards and other witnesses. Witnesses quoted in police reports obtained by the Daily News last year also contradict McNamee's statement. McNamee was not charged in the case. "The allegation in Florida was investigated and it went nowhere," Ward said. "It's just an attempt to further damage his character." For the record, Shays had this to say about his last hearing with baseball players on the subject: "Let me just say that they were deceitful,'' Shays, a Republican, said of the collective baseball group. "They weren't cooperative. And they were arrogant. And they were like, 'How dare you question us,' kind of attitude. And I want you to know I don't take offense at that. There are certain things as a member of Congress I don't like. But personally, I was just stunned by it because I haven't see worse behavior in anyone in my 20 years in public life in Congress.''

Nymr83 Jan 10 2008 12:31 AM

I can't wait for Congress to rip into Clemens. I bet they can't wait either, what better way to bring your approval ratings up without having to do anything meaningful?

AG/DC Jan 10 2008 09:33 AM

New schedule: next week's hearing will only features appearances by Senator Mitchell, Don Fehr, and Bud Selig. Clemens, MacNamee, and the other players invited will appear next month. Perhaps this is to make things more comfortable for Congressman Shays, or perhaps its to give Roger more time to line up some plausible bullshit. Likely its neither. But Nymr who can't wait is going to have to wait.

A Boy Named Seo Feb 06 2008 02:54 PM

[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3233878]Uh, oh.[/url] Could be scary for Rajah that this news "breaks" the second he's done testifying for Congress.

Benjamin Grimm Feb 06 2008 03:02 PM

A Boy Named Seo wrote: [url=http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3233878]Uh, oh.[/url] Could be scary for Rajah that this news "breaks" the second he's done testifying for Congress. Very nice! I hope this is Roger's ticket to jail. (It's interesting that McNamee would have saved this yucky stuff. It's just like Monica and that blue dress.)

Nymr83 Feb 06 2008 06:05 PM

my honest guess (with no proof)? i think mcnamee saved it either because he could forsee being in a position to play stool-pigeon some day or because it would present an opportunity to blackmail Clemens.

Benjamin Grimm Feb 06 2008 06:33 PM

Clearly McNamee is motivated by more than the thought of vindicating himself. Holding back this evidence until after Clemens has perjured himself shows that this is personal. It sure seems like he wants Clemens to go to prison.

HahnSolo Feb 07 2008 09:31 AM

I thought McNamee gave this to the Feds before Clemens testified?

Benjamin Grimm Feb 07 2008 09:40 AM

HahnSolo wrote: I thought McNamee gave this to the Feds before Clemens testified? Actually, it turns out that he did. (I wasn't aware of that when I made my previous post.) He turned the stuff in back on January 10.

AG/DC Feb 07 2008 09:40 AM

I think MacNamee probably has all sorts of shit lying around from stuff he used to do. I do. I just didn't used to poke people in the butt.

Benjamin Grimm Feb 07 2008 09:53 AM

I also have a lot of old crap lying around. But none of it has blood on it. Stuff with blood (or semen, Monica) I'd probably clean or dispose of.

holychicken Feb 07 2008 09:59 AM

I keep all my old blood and cum around. . . . just in case.

metsmarathon Feb 07 2008 12:29 PM

i'm actually not terribly surprised by it. it's smart of any little fish who helps some bigger fish break the law to keep records and evidence. and macnamee had been a cop, too, right? and really, what's he supposed to do, go to the beach and dump the bloody syringes?

Benjamin Grimm Feb 07 2008 12:44 PM

metsmarathon wrote: what's he supposed to do, go to the beach and dump the bloody syringes? That would be illegal! Oh, wait...

Centerfield Feb 08 2008 05:35 AM

I hate Clemens, but I'm skeptical about this evidence. Wouldn't it be possible for McNamee to take steroids, and mix it with Roger's blood that he might have had from legitimate injections? (cortisone, B12 etc.)

AG/DC Feb 08 2008 06:01 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Feb 08 2008 02:14 PM

Possibly, indeed, but reports indicate that it certainly doesn't discredit him.

Benjamin Grimm Feb 08 2008 06:10 AM

Centerfield wrote: I hate Clemens, but I'm skeptical about this evidence. Wouldn't it be possible for McNamee to take steroids, and mix it with Roger's blood that he might have had from legitimate injections? (cortisone, B12 etc.) If that were the case, then there would probably also be traces of the B12, or cortisone, or whatever. If it's just blood and steroids, and Clemens says that the steroids were added later, then the question is, why was he being poked in the butt with an empty syringe?

AG/DC Feb 08 2008 06:55 AM Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Feb 08 2008 02:14 PM

Unless CSI is lying to us, it'd be tough for an amateur to get that sort of stuff by the pros.

metirish Feb 08 2008 10:21 AM

Clemens is back on the Hill today with two lawyers and a PR person and is slated to meet six more representatives after meeting 12 yesterday, why is he being indulged like this?

A Boy Named Seo Feb 08 2008 10:38 AM

holychicken wrote: I keep all my old blood and cum around. . . . just in case. I laugh every time I read that. The fact that Clemens is going around smiling and shaking hands and trying to meet these peeps in person indicates to me that he's nervous and trying to use his extreme likability, charm, and charisma to win these guys and gals over. Good luck with that.

metirish Feb 08 2008 01:30 PM

Newsday is reporting that McNamee told the federal prosecutors Thursday that Debbie Clemens took HGH....doesn't say when.......WOW.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Feb 08 2008 01:35 PM

Oh my gawsh goodness gracious. Of all the dramatic things I've seen...

Frayed Knot Feb 08 2008 01:54 PM

metirish wrote: Newsday is reporting that McNamee told the federal prosecutors Thursday that Debbie Clemens took HGH....doesn't say when....... Hey she had to prep for that SI swimsuit issue. A girl's gotta do what a girl's gotta do, yaknowwhattimean?

Benjamin Grimm Feb 08 2008 02:24 PM

They shouldn't say such things about her after she put her butt on the line like that.

AG/DC Feb 08 2008 02:26 PM

Sports Illustrated needs to be investigated. These are role models!

holychicken Feb 08 2008 03:07 PM

It's funny how Pettitte came out of this smelling like roses, really, just by admitting it right away. . .while Clemens, who denied it, might come out smelling like the inside of a jail cell.

Frayed Knot Feb 08 2008 03:10 PM

Frayed Knot wrote: Hey she had to prep for that SI swimsuit issue. I was kidding when I wrote this earlier but apparently that was exactly the timing of the whole thing. (as per Bill Madden on WFAN)

Benjamin Grimm Feb 08 2008 03:10 PM

As we've seen so many times before, there's often a greater consequence in covering up a deed than in committing it.

soupcan Feb 08 2008 07:20 PM

Frayed Knot wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: Hey she had to prep for that SI swimsuit issue. I was kidding when I wrote this earlier but apparently that was exactly the timing of the whole thing. (as per Bill Madden on WFAN) I had assumed you somehow got the news before it broke. Well done.

metirish Feb 08 2008 07:33 PM

Incredible.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Feb 08 2008 08:23 PM

Test their kids!

soupcan Feb 08 2008 09:49 PM

From the photo shoot in question... Well, at least the drugs worked.

Nymr83 Feb 08 2008 10:22 PM

Were there any other pictures of her inside? (don't lie, you know you subscribe)

AG/DC Feb 08 2008 10:31 PM

No they had to make room for other pharma-enhanced jocks and their trophy brides. The best part about the McGwires is that the missus is a former pharameceutical rep.

themetfairy Feb 09 2008 05:42 AM

How does HGH help a person prepare for a photo shoot?

Frayed Knot Feb 09 2008 07:11 AM

Nymr83 wrote: Were there any other pictures of her inside? (don't lie, you know you subscribe) No, they just used that first one. ]How does HGH help a person prepare for a photo shoot? A single, or even short-term, use certainly wouldn't do much if anything. But some doctors are (illegally) prescribing the stuff as an anti-aging potion (for vain aging boomers largely) and enhanced body image is one of the benefits.

soupcan Feb 09 2008 08:10 AM

themetfairy wrote: How does HGH help a person prepare for a photo shoot? I think it also helps with muscle definition.

themetfairy Feb 09 2008 08:36 AM

Thanks guys. Man - I can't see why someone would risk long-term health for that. Doing it for a competitive edge in baseball is at least understandable, considering the money at stake. But for a photo shoot? It makes Botox seem reasonable by comparison. And toxic is part of its name!

soupcan Feb 09 2008 10:11 AM

="themetfairy"]Thanks guys. Man - I can't see why someone would risk long-term health for that. Doing it for a competitive edge in baseball is at least understandable, considering the money at stake. But for a photo shoot? It makes Botox seem reasonable by comparison. And toxic is part of its name! [url=http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/09/sports/baseball/09clemens.html?_r=1&ref=sports&oref=slogin]This article[/url] from today's New York Times makes it seem that she may have a financial interest in being and looking fit as well. February 9, 2008 Clemens Campaigns as His Wife Is Named By DUFF WILSON and MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT WASHINGTON — Roger Clemens met privately with seven more members of Congress on Friday, completing a two-day sweep of nearly half of the members of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform who will hear his sworn testimony Wednesday. One of the congressmen, Edolphus Towns, a Democrat who represents Brooklyn, gave the most complete account yet of what Clemens has been saying in the closed-door meetings. Towns said he came away believing that it was Clemens’s accuser, Brian McNamee, who might ultimately be charged with perjury. The good tidings did not stop there. Denise Mixon, Towns’s deputy chief of staff, happily had her picture taken with one of the most decorated pitchers in baseball history, with Clemens placing his arm over her shoulder and flashing a big smile. It was one of a number of souvenir moments involving Clemens in the last two days, although a Clemens spokesman said he did not know if any of the 19 members of Congress with whom Clemens had met had actually asked for an autograph. But for Clemens and his lawyers, there was still plenty of turbulence in the Capitol. Information emerged that McNamee, Clemens’s former trainer, had stated in a sworn deposition Thursday that he not only injected Clemens with steroids and human-growth hormone but had also injected Clemens’s wife, Debbie, with H.G.H., at Clemens’s request. In the deposition, which was made behind closed doors with lawyers for the committee, McNamee said he injected Debbie Clemens with H.G.H. in late 2002 or early 2003, a person with knowledge of the matter, insisting on anonymity, told reporters. McNamee had previously told federal investigators the same thing, the person said. Clemens’s camp reacted angrily to the public disclosure without specifically denying it. “This shows what kind of person we’re dealing with,” Clemens’s lawyer Rusty Hardin said. McNamee’s own lawyers said the disclosure was unauthorized and did not come from them. “I said I didn’t want to discuss matters that were part of yesterday’s testimony, so I really can’t confirm that,” the lawyer Richard Emery said. “I won’t deny it, but I won’t confirm it.” The significance, if any, was unclear. A broad immunity applies to people testifying about their spouses, and the allegation, if true, would not prove that Roger Clemens was injected with performance-enhancing drugs by McNamee, although it would suggest that Roger Clemens was familiar enough with H.G.H. to have a family member use it. McNamee’s other lawyer, Earl Ward, said in a telephone interview Friday evening: “We are not interested in Debbie Clemens or anything associated with her. We are interested in Roger Clemens and his use.” Emery and Ward said they wanted to turn attention back to what they described as important corroborating evidence for McNamee — used syringes, vials and bloody pads they said were used when McNamee injected Clemens on various occasions in 2001. The materials were given to federal investigators Jan 10, and lawyers for McNamee released photographs to congressional staff members Thursday. As all this was gradually occurring, Towns, the Brooklyn congressman, was speaking in positive terms about Clemens, saying his half-hour personal visit made him a believer in Clemens’s character. But Towns said he did not feel that way about McNamee; he said he found his story of holding onto used syringes and swabs for seven years to be “weird.” “Doesn’t that seem a little strange?” Towns said. “This is a really weird one. This one is interesting, man. I have been in this business for a long time.” Towns said Clemens explained why he had not responded to invitations to meet with George J. Mitchell before his report on baseball and performance-enhancing drugs in December. Clemens, Towns said, did not take the Mitchell invitation seriously because he thought it was only about allegations linking him to a drug affidavit involving pitcher Jason Grimsley in a 2006 article in The Los Angeles Times, which later proved to be inaccurate. Clemens did not know, Towns said, that McNamee had already talked to Mitchell and told him that he had injected Clemens on 16 occasions with steroids and H.G.H. “He really thought it wasn’t a serious kind of issue,” Towns said of Clemens, “and he was focused on the story about him in The Los Angeles Times, not recognizing it was a new allegation.” Towns said when he asked Clemens and his lawyers about McNamee, they attacked McNamee’s credibility. They said he had lost his job with the New York Police Department because of “a questionable situation with a criminal person”; lied in a 2001 date rape case; and was “money hungry,” Towns said. The police department has not said that McNamee was fired, and he was not charged in the 2001 case. Towns was hardly the only member of the committee to speak about Clemens in friendly terms the last two days, which would seem to affirm the decision of his lawyers to have him meet with as many committee members as possible. McNamee’s lawyers said Clemens was inappropriately lobbying members of Congress. But Hardin, Clemens’s lawyer, described the two days of meetings as “fun” and “social.” “It is a heck of an Americana experience,” Hardin said in a phone interview Friday evening. “When you get to go through and see all the representatives and how diverse and passionate they are, you feel better about the whole process.” “The Congress people were very responsive,” he added. Meanwhile, the allegation about Debbie Clemens is likely to reverberate in the days to come. Clemens’s lawyers are expected to hold a news conference Monday to address the issue, which might have caught them off guard Friday. But even if Debbie Clemens has information relevant to McNamee’s allegations against her husband, she would not have to speak to either Congress or the courts because of a broad spousal immunity, Deborah L. Rhode, a professor of law at Stanford University and a former counsel to the House Judiciary Committee, said in a phone interview Friday. In his deposition Thursday, McNamee said Roger Clemens asked him to inject Debbie Clemens with H.G.H. some time before the couple appeared in the Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue in February 2003, the person familiar with the matter said. H.G.H. is used by some people for body-building purposes; others believe it slows the aging process. It is not approved by the government for either use. Debbie Clemens did not respond to a request for comment left with a receptionist in her Houston office. The Clemenses were married 23 years ago and have four sons, one of them a minor leaguer with the Houston Astros. Debbie Clemens is a designer and a fixture at golf charity events. She has her own Web site, debbieclemens.com, which says its intent is to “help women achieve their goals of balance in family, fitness, fashion and fun.” On the Web site, Debbie Clemens emphasizes an exercise routine to be used six days a week. Now she finds herself as the newest member of an intense public struggle between her husband and McNamee, with potential perjury charges looming as the confrontation plays itself out. The 19 members who met with Clemens and the 22 who didn’t are scheduled to be part of a full committee hearing at 10 a.m. on Wednesday. The hearing is titled “The Mitchell Report: The Illegal Use of Steroids in Major League Baseball, Day 2.” The first day, last month, featured Mitchell and baseball officials. This one features Clemens versus McNamee, with each in attendance.

themetfairy Feb 09 2008 10:15 AM

Thanks soup.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Feb 09 2008 11:23 AM

It would be awesome if Debbie broke down on the stand, raging against her meathead husband.

AG/DC Feb 09 2008 11:26 AM

That's really depressing to think that his strategy of gladhanding members of Congress is working. Somebody vote Towns out of office NOW!!!! Regarding "This shows what kind of person we’re dealing with,” which side again is calling press conferences to broadcast evidence and which side is presenting evidence only in sealed depositions under duress and threat of jail time? The notion that Clemens would have cooperated (and that Towns should buy it) had he known the scope of the investigation is garbage. None of the players broke rank and allowed themselves to be interviewed by Mitchell. Mr. All-I've-Done-for-Baseball was stonewalling to protect himself. And I'd be surprised if the union wasn't advising them to do exactly that.

Nymr83 Feb 09 2008 12:05 PM

what really bothers me is the phone call he placed to McNamee.

soupcan Feb 09 2008 01:50 PM

AG/DC wrote: That's really depressing to think that his strategy of gladhanding members of Congress is working. Somebody vote Towns out of office NOW!!!! I agree and felt exactly as you did after reading this. I'm surprised that the article didn't emphasize that angle more.

MFS62 Feb 09 2008 07:44 PM

metirish wrote: Newsday is reporting that McNamee told the federal prosecutors Thursday that Debbie Clemens took HGH....doesn't say when.......WOW. If ever there were a need for a warning slogan for the young'uns, this is it. C'mon, help me out with this one: "The family that juices together ..... " Later

soupcan Feb 11 2008 07:51 AM

="AG/DC"]That's really depressing to think that his strategy of gladhanding members of Congress is working. Somebody vote Towns out of office NOW!!!! The New York Post's Phil Mushnick agrees with you on the impropreity of these 'social gatherings'... CAPITOL SHILLS By PHIL MUSHNICK February 11, 2008 -- HOW would you like to be heading for court, the defendant in, say, an alimony dispute, when, as you pass the judge's chamber, you see your ex-wife and the judge making out? Welcome back to "The Roger Clemens Variety Show." It makes "Curb Your Enthusiasm" seem like "This Old House." First, there was that news conference at which Clem ens' attorney, Rusty Har din, played that "Aha!" tape of Clemens' phone chat with Brian McNamee, a tape that was supposed to provide strong evidence that McNamee lied about Clemens. But it turned out to be a "Huh?" tape, thus casting doubt on Clem ens. Then, over two days, late last week, Clemens and Hardin stopped by the offices of mem bers of Con gress. And what a coinci dence, the 19 they succeeded in chatting up are all on the committee that this Wednes day is assigned to pull from Clemens his sworn testimony on drug use. Yup, as long as he was in the neighborhood he figured he would stop in to say howdy. WHAT ARE YOU DOING?: Phil Mushnick says Edolphus Towns (D-N.Y.) and other congressmen should not have met with... ...Roger Clemens before Wednesday's hearing, because it puts their objectivity into question. Though at least several of those Congressmen, including Brooklyn's Edolphus Towns (D-N.Y), seemed swayed by their private time with Clemens - good grief, Towns' deputy chief of staff posed for a picture with Clemens, his arm around her shoulder - all have created a public contamination of the process. Are all of those Congressional members, having allowed themselves to be personally lobbied by Clemens, now, five days later, supposed to be seen as uncompromised? Those Congressmen have allowed themselves to be perceived as too lacking in discretionary wisdom - too short on basic foresight - to credibly serve a sub-committee on stubborn grease stains. Those who received Clemens, last week, who this Wednesday seem to "go easy" on him, will be regarded with great and deserved suspicion. And then there are those who received Clemens who may now be forced - for the sake of appearances - to cast him in a bad light. How many now must consider how things might appear - as opposed to pursuing the truth? How many put celebrity ahead of sense? How many personal autographs and photo poses did Clemens provide to Congressional members days before he sat before them? Why didn't they refuse to meet with him at such an hour? Have they no sense of their positions? The issue? Have they no sense of common sense? But might such a contamination have been the goal of Clemens' visits? Hardin, who had to know that what he was doing was, at best, inappropriate, described the Congressmen who met with Clemens as "very responsive." He characterized their time together as "fun" and "social." Geez. You think such fun and social time - and access - would be available to McNamee? "Congressman, Roger Clemens is here. He'd like a few minutes of your time, just a friendly visit." "What! Does he think I'm an idiot? Five days before I take his sworn testimony? Get rid of him. Tell him it's entirely inappropriate - for both of us!" Instead, nearly half of those who shortly would solicit Clemens' sworn testimony, said, in essence, "Send him in!" Gee, Roger Clemens. Wait'll they tell their kids! What should have not happened with one congressman or congresswoman, last week, happened with 19. And all 19 who played ball with Clemens - with contempt of Congress and/or a federal perjury charge eventual possibilities, no less - should now disqualify themselves from this investigation. You think that days before committee investigations into organized crime, reputed mob bosses, subpoenaed to testify, stop by for some fun time with those Congressmen who will be asking them questions? Is fundamental, right-from-wrong discretion dead everywhere, or has everyone gone nuts? Or maybe everyone's on HDH: human dope hormone. * If Russ Salzberg hadn't been on the scene, Channel 5's and Channel 9's coverage of the Giants' Manhattan victory parade wouldn't have been able to distinguish Kevin Boss from Boss Tweed. . . . Tonight during Phoenix-Dallas, Versus will have Wayne Gretzky wired. Though logically anticipating the live reaction shot of Steve Valiquette after he shut out the Flyers in Philadelphia on Saturday, MSG cut to and stayed on a shot of an expressionless Tom Renney. A graphic explained: Renney just tied Phil Watson for sixth place for wins by a Rangers coach. Oh. Superb, eye-opening piece on ESPN's "Outside the Lines," yesterday about the legal international gambling scene in pro tennis. That small fortunes are bet on early-round matches played by virtual unknowns seems to ensure more fixed matches than previously imagined. Last week TNT announced an extension of Marv Albert's deal through the 2015-16 NBA season (when Albert, who counts backward, turns 30). This week, SNY will announce an extension of Keith Hernandez's deal (anticipated annual suspension not included). Baylor's women's team defeated Texas Tech on Saturday on FSN. When the cameras showed Baylor head coach Kim Mulkey, she was seen in a frilly white blouse - that carried a Nike swoosh. Nothing to identify her as Baylor's coach, just a Nike coach. phil.mushnick@nypost.com

AG/DC Feb 11 2008 07:58 AM

It's amazing, isn't it? What is the chairman thinking? Basic ethics are bieng explained to us by The Post.

themetfairy Feb 11 2008 11:48 AM

[url=http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=caple/080211&campaign=rsssrch&source=jim_caple]Caple has some fun at Mrs. Clemens' expense[/url].

John Cougar Lunchbucket Feb 11 2008 11:53 AM

Mushnick, given something substantial to care about, is usually pretty good. His line on Hernandez is pretty good too.

metirish Feb 11 2008 11:59 AM

] Waxman Warns Clemens Attorney on Intimidation Sunday, February 10, 2008 WASHINGTON — House Oversight Committee Chairman Henry Waxman blasted comments in Sunday's New York Times attributed to the attorney of all-star pitcher Roger Clemens. Waxman, who is holding a House Oversight and Government Reform hearing on Wednesday on steroid abuse in Major League Baseball, said Clemens attorney Rusty Hardin shouldn't be trying to intimidate a federal law enforcement agent. The Times quoted Hardin as saying it would be "unbelievable" and "brazen" for federal agent Jeff Novitzky to appear in the audience at the hearing in which Clemens is supposed to testify publicly on whether he illegally doped up with performance-enhancing drugs. Novitzky helped to turn former trainers Brian McNamee and Kirk Radomski into federal informants for the baseball probe. Much of the information fingering Clemens and former teammate Andy Pettitte as abusing steroids — revealed in former Sen. George Mitchell's investigative report for Congress — rests on information from McNamee and Radomski. Hardin told the Times that if Novitzky ever "messes with Roger (Clemens), Roger will eat his lunch." The Times report apparently lit a fire under Waxman, who suggested Hardin was trying to intimidate a federal officer. Waxman wrote a letter to Hardin telling him that it is not up to Clemens or Hardin as to gets to attend the hearing. "Some of the previous comments by both you and the attorneys representing Mr. McNamee in recent weeks have struck me as inadvisable but I have refrained from making any comment. If today's quotation is accurate, however, it goes beyond any personal enmity that exists between Roger Clemens and Mr. McNamee," Waxman wrote, adding that he has no idea if Novitzky will attend the hearing because "as an independent branch of government, our inquiry operates independently of the executive branch." "Given your long service as both a prosecutor and a private attorney, I trust you did not intend your comments to be a signal that there could be adverse repercussions to a federal law enforcement official for attending the hearing or taking other official actions. I would urge you to clarify the record at your earliest convenience," Waxman concluded

Frayed Knot Feb 11 2008 12:10 PM

]Hardin told the Times that if Novitzky ever "messes with Roger (Clemens), Roger will eat his lunch." I don't think Novitzky is someone they want to fuck with. This issue is a virtual crusade to him and he brings a whole buncha weapons to the fight.

metirish Feb 11 2008 12:14 PM

Whatever happens with this case I can see Hardin with his own TV show...he seems made for it( and I don't mean that as a compliment).

MFS62 Feb 11 2008 12:35 PM

I have a feeling that Clemens may get a lot of press coverage in China because this is the Year of the Rat. Or maybe not. Later

soupcan Feb 11 2008 12:40 PM

I'm thinking two things about Clemens/Hardin. -Clemens has lied through his teeth to everyone including his lawyers regardless of the fact that they should have told him that in no way, shape or form should he deny his steroid use to them or especially while under oath if in fact he did it. -Hardin knows Clemens is lying and is giving him the most absolutely ridiculously bad advice - to the point oof malpractice. 'Rog, even though you did it, there is no evidence. You can beat this thing. Deny, deny, deny...' An attorney friend of mine stresses that there is no way that Clemens' attornies would advise him to not be truthful under oath even if they thought that by lying he could beat it. With that in mind I have to think that while his attornies may have their own suspicions, he has been emphatic in his denials of his use to even them. And you know what? That wouldn't surprise me. Here's a guy who has been treated like a god for probably the past 30 years of his life. Why wouldn't he think he could get away with it?

John Cougar Lunchbucket Feb 11 2008 12:44 PM

Just like Pete Rose and OJ.

Benjamin Grimm Feb 11 2008 12:45 PM

In my favorite scenario, both Clemens and Hardin end up doing jail time.

Nymr83 Feb 12 2008 03:28 PM

if Clemens did it and doesnt want to say so his best bet would be to pulla mcgwire, you dont face perjury charges for saying "my attorney told me to shut up" i think pettite erased any lingering doubts anyone might have had, and boy did he come out of this smelling like roses... clemens should learn a lesson here... perjury is worse than confession both for public opinion and your chances of a conviction down the line.

Vic Sage Feb 12 2008 03:56 PM

As a rule, I try not to indulge in shadenfreude, but the hole Clemens is digging for himself makes me positively giddy.

KC Feb 12 2008 04:33 PM

I'm quietly enjoying all this too and decided early on to not comment and let it all play out. It gets better every day between the wifey thing and all. I'm holding out hope for a near nervous breakdown in front of the cameras followed by a sobbing admittance of guilt and a pleading for forgiveness. Then, six or seven years from now he can go in The Hall as one of the great pitchers of his era. That's what Rose shoulda done instead of being a head-strong prick too.

SteveJRogers Feb 12 2008 05:36 PM

Kase, you are freaking scaring me! From [url=http://forums.nyyfans.com/showthread.php?t=108442&page=41]NYYFANS.com[/url] Quote: Originally Posted by silverdsl I think this is possible - if someone truly wants to believe something they will. If Clemens was going to deny it, he should have done so immediately, maybe had a brief press conference to explain his side to the media, then kept quiet like Pettitte and others. But the more Clemens talks the more material he gives people to rip apart and the worse it's going to be for him if Pettitte's account (or something else that surfaces) provides evidence that he did in fact use performance enhancers. Pete Rose is probably a perfect example of this. His "acts of contrition" with the book a few years ago would have been much better received if he had just laid low for all those years, even if he felt "betrayed" by Giamatti's successors (Vincent and Selig). Certainly Rose looks small as well with that "special" ball signing that he was hawking some time ago when he inscribed "I'm sorry I bet on the game" or something that seemed like it was right out of the opening credits of The Simpsons (reference to Bart's chalkboard running gag), so if he had done a different tactic, or even just came out and admited it at the start rather than spend over a decade bashing the Dowd report, then either the ban would have been lifted and/or he'd be in the Hall.

KC Feb 12 2008 05:53 PM

I knew I shouldn't have chimed in.

Farmer Ted Feb 27 2008 08:39 AM

http://sportswrap.berecruited.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/liar-liar.jpg