Weasels on ESPN

Yes - they are real scoundrels!

"Stolen" documents, you say. Why do you place stolen in quotations? Do you think they stole any documents? Do you have any proof? Have they been convicted of stealing these documents? Or any others? Have you heard Messrs Fanairu-Wada or Williams say, or seen quotes attributed to them in which they said "I took these documents & records of testimony, but I didn't know I was stealing"?

I think these men are among the finest investigative reporters in the nation. I have seen no proof that they have done anything illegal. Have you? There have been no charges of libel or slander filed against them associated with this work. It is ridiculous to suggest that they have done anything illegal in pursuit of this investigation as there have been no charges filed, no jury trial or conviction.

Really! What could you possibly be thinking?

quote:

What weasels!!!!!!

The term 'pot calling the kettle black' comes to mind....

If Been thinks ill of them then these two writers must be pretty good guys. Think I'll go out and buy their book tomorrw to put some coin in their pockets. I reckon they'll need it for the libel suit and all....

quote:

It is ridiculous to suggest that they have done anything illegal in pursuit of this investigation as there have been no charges filed, no jury trial or conviction.

It is obvious from your statements, that neither one of you watched the program.

The one guy answered, when asked by Dibble, if it was illegal to have transcripts of the grand jury testimony which they used in their book, by advising everyone that they will fight to protect their "sources". "Even by going to jail?....they didn't answer.

Will be interesting how all of this unfolds.

I would bet a $1,000.00 that they never expected to be called before a grand jury to testify how they obtained federal grand jury transcripts of testimony.

Barry is squirming. Watch them squirm.

----

Buy the book, DBat. They'll (or, rather their company) spend more money defending themselves than they make on the book.

Been,

It's obvious from your response that you missed dbg's point completely. Perhaps it would help if you go back and read many of your pro-Bonds posts. TR's too.

Holden,

I don't have to re-read anything.

I watched the show and I heard the "weasels".

Now they are fighting their subpoena. They want to protect their "sources", i.e., CROOKS who gave them purportedly "secret" grand jury testimony.

Of course, they don't want to go to jail to protect their "sources", they just want to make money from their book, a bulk of which information for that book, was likely gleaned from the grand jury testimony!

I'm not talking Barry now. I'm talking about "investigative reporters" obtaining information illegally!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

YEAH!! We're not talking about Barry taking anything "illegal"!!

dbg was apparently too subtle, HC. Me, I thought the post was exceedingly well done and absolutley spot on.

Orlando,

I agree. dbg has that kind of wit in him.

Frank,

You and Orlando should try and restrain yourselves. Don't think you'll see him on Letterman tomorrow.

The issue has shifted from Barry to the reporters and the Federal Courts and the Grand Jury and someone STEALING/PROVIDING secret Grand Jury minutes to these two folks.

You were so quick to condemn Barry. I just want this scenario to play itself out.

Let's let this scenario (with the "reporters") play itself out. It is not going to be pretty.

You are, again, throwing around words about the reporters that imply criminality; the sort of thing you objected to adamantly when applied to Bonds.

You're right, however, it may not be pretty. Particularly if the First Amendment gets tap danced on ---- and that's way the blank more important than B flipping B..

quote:

Particularly if the First Amendment gets tap danced on

lololololololololololololol...It is absolutely laughable.

Now you worry about First Amendment rights of reporters when you were SO QUICK TO CONDEMN BARRY!

Unbelievable.

Especially considering that you have identified yourself as a lawyer, that's one of the saddest posts I've seen here, been.

Hey, let's be nice to the lawyers on here....

Orlando....I worry less about some reporter's rights and what he does with material that he obtained ILLEGALLY than I worry about what is going on with Barry Bonds...being CONVICTED in the press.

Absolutely consistent, in my opinion.

---------

Look at the Duke case...Look at the case with the missing girl in Aruba.

Why don't they try these cases in a Court instead of on tv and in the press?

As much as you dislike being told to reread, reread the quote you pulled from my post. Reporters' (that would be ANY reporters') rights under the First Amendment protect an independent press. A high-profile case that could compromise that institution by an unfortunate precedent should be of concern to any citizen.

I wasn't referring to the narrow view of these reporters or any particular potential accused person; I was referring to the Constitution.

"Why don't they try these cases in a Court instead of on tv and in the press?"

Who is "they"? I wasn't aware these "cases" had gone to trial yet. I certainly don't
think anyone from the tv and/or press can convict and sentence anyone. But if you're
talking about swaying public opinion by bringing things out in the open, yes it happens
every day-the same way you were able to form YOUR opinion that these writers were scoundrels-from what you saw and read on the tv and press.

What is it you and TRHIT keep saying? Innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

I think what most of us agree on is that we don't need a court of law to form our "opinions". None of us will be putting the "scoundrels" or "roidman" behind bars. It's good to know you've seen the light.

EDIT-Sorry, I apologize-you called them weasels , not scoundrels.

Spare me...

All of a sudden we have Constitutional scholars on the site.

Gees.

O, you have a PM.

No, been, just responsible citizens.

Glove: .

Dibble did steriods throught his career,

2 of his teammates and roomates , said he use to have roid rage often and eat up all their food too. When they complaigned he wanted to fight them too.

John, was anyone in your family in the Confections business?

bubble tape?

Just peaked in again. I guess he still doesn't get it...

Just want to make my sure i have the (double) standards here straight-

barry, who has admitted to steroid use (just not knowingly taking them);

barry, whose melon head has increased about 3 hat sizes (the only known scientific explanation being the use of human growth hormone (his ego alone may have accounted for one increase in hat size perhaps;

barry, with performance at his age beyond and completly inconsistent with his own past performance (bonilla's comparative numbers when both were Pirates are arguably better) and his performance at his age that is inconsistent with that of any human being to have previously lived on planet earth;

barry is presently completely "innocent" but,

the reporters trying to uncover the truth are weasels (judged, convicted and hung)...


go barroid go

The Grand Jury testimony has now been opened as public record.

If they lied about the story, Barroid had a tailor made lawsuit against them.

His silence is deafening.

If anyone should be considered a "weasel", it should be Bud Selig, for waffling on the whole issue, and going into deep hiding whenever Steroid conversation starts.

quote:

Quote from Barry Bonds, "Doctors ought to quit worrying about what ballplayers are taking," Bonds told The Associated Press last week. "What players take doesn't matter. It's nobody else's business. The doctors should spend their time looking for cures for cancer."