Just heard, did I hear correctly....RC aka The Rocket, is going to be called to answer some questions in front of the house committee?
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
One of the more interesting things about this is that they also invited the trainer who said he injected him. So if they both show up, they will both be on record with their ?conflicting? stories.
Its important to note that this is similar to the way the government went after Bonds. Got him to testify on record in a grand jury investigation against the word of others and then go after him on perjury charges when the evidence mounts.
It seems clear to me that the government wants to make examples of some folks in this. The bigger the name the better it appears.
If Clemens did use steroids (and I hope he did not but I have my doubts), then he needs to look no further than Bonds for an example of what road may be in front of him if he lies about it on the record.
I think this is all about painting him into a corner. I hope, for his sake, he has good legal advice. The government has proven through Bonds that they will press forward in whichever way they can.
Its important to note that this is similar to the way the government went after Bonds. Got him to testify on record in a grand jury investigation against the word of others and then go after him on perjury charges when the evidence mounts.
It seems clear to me that the government wants to make examples of some folks in this. The bigger the name the better it appears.
If Clemens did use steroids (and I hope he did not but I have my doubts), then he needs to look no further than Bonds for an example of what road may be in front of him if he lies about it on the record.
I think this is all about painting him into a corner. I hope, for his sake, he has good legal advice. The government has proven through Bonds that they will press forward in whichever way they can.
Pettitte will be there also.
"Mr. Pettitte, my understanding is Mr. Clemens and you are very good friends. Has Mr. Clemens ever discussed steroids with you? Has he ever told you he took steroids?"
"Mr. Pettitte, my understanding is Mr. Clemens and you are very good friends. Has Mr. Clemens ever discussed steroids with you? Has he ever told you he took steroids?"
quote:justbaseball posted: I think this is all about painting him into a corner.
If he is in a corner adjacent wet paint, he put himself there. Nobody went out of the way to frame him. He is just another name on McNamee's list. This is Pete Rose all over again, a slow motion train wreck.
I agree with you Dad04. I just think the same trap (sorry, can't think of a better word) is being set all over again, aka Bonds, and if he used steroids he'd be wise to learn from Bonds' situation and fess up before he creates a criminal problem for himself too.
At this time, it does remind me of Rose too. Very painful to watch.
At this time, it does remind me of Rose too. Very painful to watch.
So that's what they meant by the rocket's red glare?
If this is so easy for you guys to figure out, why is it so hard for the guys involved and their lawyers? Does the ego get in the way?
Why is is that so many fans or foes clearly see the path ahead, and the accused press on as if they will prevail no matter what?
Why is is that so many fans or foes clearly see the path ahead, and the accused press on as if they will prevail no matter what?
ihearbb - Of course none of us knows. Just being fans I guess. 
I think almost no one knows. Thats why you see all of the posturing...by fans, by baseball, by players, by the media...and by Congress.
If you had used steroids to significantly extend or enhance your career you have two choices now:
1. Deny, deny, deny and make it your word against anyone else in hopes of saving your HOF chances.
2. Admit it and say you're sorry, throw yourself to the mercy of the fans...but possibly (likely?, e.g. McGwire) give up your shot at baseball immortality.
If you didn't use them but were falsely accused, you have one choice:
1. Challenge it as hard as you can to clear your name.
Where does Clemens fit? Obviously I don't know, but like anyone else I can have an opinion. Frankly, I hope its demonstrated that he did not...and I even hope for some miracle that Bonds is exonorated. But I'm not counting on it. I suspect the lawyers, along with the players, know the truth...but one cannot tell from their actions which of the above they fit into.
I personally do NOT believe that it makes a player a "bad person" if they used steroids. Mike Schmidt has said he probably would have if it had been around during his days. I believe it says they're an incredibly competitive person. I believe they ignored some serious health risks and ultimately (although I doubt they thought about this) set a bad example. I also believe it would be incredibly embarrassing and difficult to admit it now if it were true. And regretfully and somewhat hesitantly, I also believe a player who used PEDs signficantly tampered with the integrity of the game and does not belong in the HOF. It would not, however, cause me to think of them as a "bad person."
For the most part, I think the government has better things to do than chase this down. However, as the parent of a serious baseball player, who happens to also be an incredibly competitive and driven baseball player, I am thankful that at least someone (even if its the government) is trying to fix it. The desire a young man can have and the pressure he can put on himself to succeed can sometimes cloud good judgement.
For all of our kids who dream the "dream," its best for them (IMO) if the truth on PEDs in baseball is told, whatever the truth is. I would have no problem if it were all done anonymously but accurately, including the risks. I think its too bad that baseball didn't fix it on their own, but I also think we fans helped them to turn a blind eye when we bought millions of tickets to games to watch all of the home runs and 98 mph pitchers. I know I ignored the rumors about Canseco 15+ years ago and still went to A's games. I cheered Sosa and McGwire during their chase and bought the best seats I could find to watch Bonds launch another one into McCovey Cove.
Specifically on Clemens, when I heard today that he'd been "invited" along with the trainer to testify in front of Congress it occurred to me, that given the government's ambitious pursuit of Bonds, that if I were Clemens' lawyer (I'm not a lawyer, just a layman) I'd be concerned about my client ultimately getting the "Bonds treatment" by the government if he were to lie under oath. Of course, Clemens knows the truth, whatever it is and ultimately he has to make the decision about what to say. And if he did not use steroids or PEDs then he should absolutely defend himself as vigorously as possible with all of the righteous denials he can muster.
Its just all something to think about...but I am sure he and his lawyers are doing just that. I'm hoping for a "good" outcome from all of this, whatever that means.
I think almost no one knows. Thats why you see all of the posturing...by fans, by baseball, by players, by the media...and by Congress.
If you had used steroids to significantly extend or enhance your career you have two choices now:
1. Deny, deny, deny and make it your word against anyone else in hopes of saving your HOF chances.
2. Admit it and say you're sorry, throw yourself to the mercy of the fans...but possibly (likely?, e.g. McGwire) give up your shot at baseball immortality.
If you didn't use them but were falsely accused, you have one choice:
1. Challenge it as hard as you can to clear your name.
Where does Clemens fit? Obviously I don't know, but like anyone else I can have an opinion. Frankly, I hope its demonstrated that he did not...and I even hope for some miracle that Bonds is exonorated. But I'm not counting on it. I suspect the lawyers, along with the players, know the truth...but one cannot tell from their actions which of the above they fit into.
I personally do NOT believe that it makes a player a "bad person" if they used steroids. Mike Schmidt has said he probably would have if it had been around during his days. I believe it says they're an incredibly competitive person. I believe they ignored some serious health risks and ultimately (although I doubt they thought about this) set a bad example. I also believe it would be incredibly embarrassing and difficult to admit it now if it were true. And regretfully and somewhat hesitantly, I also believe a player who used PEDs signficantly tampered with the integrity of the game and does not belong in the HOF. It would not, however, cause me to think of them as a "bad person."
For the most part, I think the government has better things to do than chase this down. However, as the parent of a serious baseball player, who happens to also be an incredibly competitive and driven baseball player, I am thankful that at least someone (even if its the government) is trying to fix it. The desire a young man can have and the pressure he can put on himself to succeed can sometimes cloud good judgement.
For all of our kids who dream the "dream," its best for them (IMO) if the truth on PEDs in baseball is told, whatever the truth is. I would have no problem if it were all done anonymously but accurately, including the risks. I think its too bad that baseball didn't fix it on their own, but I also think we fans helped them to turn a blind eye when we bought millions of tickets to games to watch all of the home runs and 98 mph pitchers. I know I ignored the rumors about Canseco 15+ years ago and still went to A's games. I cheered Sosa and McGwire during their chase and bought the best seats I could find to watch Bonds launch another one into McCovey Cove.
Specifically on Clemens, when I heard today that he'd been "invited" along with the trainer to testify in front of Congress it occurred to me, that given the government's ambitious pursuit of Bonds, that if I were Clemens' lawyer (I'm not a lawyer, just a layman) I'd be concerned about my client ultimately getting the "Bonds treatment" by the government if he were to lie under oath. Of course, Clemens knows the truth, whatever it is and ultimately he has to make the decision about what to say. And if he did not use steroids or PEDs then he should absolutely defend himself as vigorously as possible with all of the righteous denials he can muster.
Its just all something to think about...but I am sure he and his lawyers are doing just that. I'm hoping for a "good" outcome from all of this, whatever that means.
i think this is all voluntary as of now. the news said they may use subpenoas. sticky mess if he did use,considering his up coming denial on 60 minutes. i'm surprised it isn't on pay per view.
roger and petite best friends no more. i think the wheels on the bus are wobbling.
reminds me of the old saying, deny, deny,deny, lie lie lie. even when caught in the act.
roger and petite best friends no more. i think the wheels on the bus are wobbling.
reminds me of the old saying, deny, deny,deny, lie lie lie. even when caught in the act.
Justbaseball-
I too have a son that may be in this enviornment soon, and I am worried. I have a vested intrest in curbing this behavior. A scout that we are close to recently but his .02 forward and said to me that at the time that he was compteing to become an MLB player, he would have seriously looked at illegal peds as a way to stay in the game. Becauace he was that driven. He thanks God that he did not have the ways or the means to persue it. But he did think about it. He's a really good guy with high morals, and played the game that way - but....his thoughts about it are telling. There has to be another way to monitor this behavior besides urine and blood tests since science always seems to be one or two steps ahead.
Maybe we need to get a really good accountant that keeps track of expenceses baseball related seperate of health insurance. Not with the familiy, just with the individual player, involve the IRS someway.
Thesse guys can't get it for free - follow the money.
I too have a son that may be in this enviornment soon, and I am worried. I have a vested intrest in curbing this behavior. A scout that we are close to recently but his .02 forward and said to me that at the time that he was compteing to become an MLB player, he would have seriously looked at illegal peds as a way to stay in the game. Becauace he was that driven. He thanks God that he did not have the ways or the means to persue it. But he did think about it. He's a really good guy with high morals, and played the game that way - but....his thoughts about it are telling. There has to be another way to monitor this behavior besides urine and blood tests since science always seems to be one or two steps ahead.
Maybe we need to get a really good accountant that keeps track of expenceses baseball related seperate of health insurance. Not with the familiy, just with the individual player, involve the IRS someway.
Thesse guys can't get it for free - follow the money.
quote:Originally posted by iheartbb:
Thesse guys can't get it for free - follow the money.
I'm sure some of them are smart enought to understand that, you can't follow cash.
Interesting sidebar here---the SI writer who was to co write OH SAY CAN YOU SING Jose's second book has pulled out saying " there is no meat on the bones"
INterestng--very interesting
INterestng--very interesting
I haven't given this a ton of thought, but it would be interesting if Clemens filed a lawsuit against his former trainer for defamation or some other alleged injury before they appear before Congress.
I could just see it; "Congressman, I'd love to answer your questions, but under the advice of my lawyer, I'll have to decline to comment due to pending litigation."
I could just see it; "Congressman, I'd love to answer your questions, but under the advice of my lawyer, I'll have to decline to comment due to pending litigation."
I guess if he didn't do it, then his choices are easy...show up and stick to his guns.
But if he did use PEDs, he is in a real corner now:
* If he doesn't appear, bad PR...most will assume he's guilty.
* If he appears, he must tell the truth or risk the "Bonds treatment."
* ...or appear and use 06catcherdad's scenario as a temporary way out for now, even if he never files a civil suit.
And if he did use PEDs, filing a civil court action would seem messier for him in the long run than just about any other scenario. If he didn't use PEDs, he should file a civil suit.
I still think there's going to be a 'tell-all' book someday by a baseball insider that could be pretty ugly.
But if he did use PEDs, he is in a real corner now:
* If he doesn't appear, bad PR...most will assume he's guilty.
* If he appears, he must tell the truth or risk the "Bonds treatment."
* ...or appear and use 06catcherdad's scenario as a temporary way out for now, even if he never files a civil suit.
And if he did use PEDs, filing a civil court action would seem messier for him in the long run than just about any other scenario. If he didn't use PEDs, he should file a civil suit.
I still think there's going to be a 'tell-all' book someday by a baseball insider that could be pretty ugly.