Originally posted by Bobla45Eric Gagne.
Just another in a line of Yankees shooting juice. Clemens, Pettite, did I spell that right? Sheffield, Knoblach, the great Giambi.....I think you have to go all the way back to Mo Vaughn to find one on Gods team though. Yup, Yankee Pride. Belly on up to the juice bar boys!
Originally posted by PhlabibitHe told the prosecutors what they wanted him to and what they had already decided was "the truth'.
Sooooooooo Clemens is clean and McNamee lied to keep from getting put in jail? He told the truth to keep from getting in jail.
Go ahead and believe Andy did it twice, not like he's saying something we want to hear to cover his bottom.
You know, you always want to use evidence when it backs you up, and common sense when it fits your beliefs.
Roge ...[text shortened]... and believe what fits your opinions.
Whatever, live in your little world of fantasy.
P-
It's tiresome to correct you guys on the basic facts, BUT even McNamee said in the Mitchell Report that Petitte only used HGH 2-4 times during a period when he was injured. But I'm sure there's some talk radio guys with the REAL STORY.
If the evidence "backs me up", I don't need anything else. If the evidence leads to a conclusion I don't like, I accept it. But there is no reliable evidence that Clemens used steroids - certainly not the word of a multiple liar.
I require evidence of cheating here, too so I really don't know what you're talking about. Probably you don't either.
Originally posted by poundleeYour stupidity is amazing. Rather than just admit you were wrong about a judge believing McNamee, you come up with a beyond idiotic analogy. Since Vick was directly involved in the dog fighting operation, a more apt analogy would be if they gave Vick immunity in return for the names of the people who came and watched the dog fights. Your "logic" would also mean that drug dealers would go free while drug users were prosecuted - after all they "finance the drug operation". When are you going to stop sounding like a complete moron?
The prosecutors in McNamee understand that it is the athlete that finance the operation. It is same reasoning that gave Michael Vick the most time of anyone in his incident, but of course if you are the no1moron you would not undertand that.
There are a whole bunch of neutral people who look at McNamee's statements and Clemens statements and feel that Cle ...[text shortened]... ains it. Hopefully, his testimony before Congress will point out even more inconsistencies.
I repeat: THERE WAS NO JUDGE! So stop stupidly saying that "the judge accepted McNamee's statements were true". No players spoke to Mitchell on the advice of counsel because Mitchell refused to say in advance what allegations were being made; he refused to even release the finished report to the union at the same time he released it to the owners. Individual cases are decided individually; again just because someone, somewhere committed a rape doesn't mean EVERYBODY accused of rape is guilty. The specific facts must be examined. A fair examination of the facts here says there is no evidence against Clemens but the word of a multiple liar and felon. That's proof enough for you and most of the talk radio yahoos, but it doesn't cut it with me.
Clemens repeatedly in the conversation told McNamee that someone would have to tell the truth and denied using steroids. McNamee never once contradicted him. Why do you think MxcNamee's lawyers were so mad about the tape? Lawyers don't get mad about the release of evidence that helps their client.
For about the 10th time, MCNAMEE WASN"T EVEN THE TRAINER OF THE BLUE JAYS IN 1997! So how the **** could his "connection with McNamee (which didn't start until 1998 even according to McNamee) "explain" Clemens' CY Young season in 1997???? Please answer THAT question.
Originally posted by Bobla45Is God's team the one that got swept by the Yankees in a 5 game series in '06 and did not make the playoffs? Well here is what the Mitchell Report says about the post Mo Vaughn Red Sox.
Just another in a line of Yankees shooting juice. Clemens, Pettite, did I spell that right? Sheffield, Knoblach, the great Giambi.....I think you have to go all the way back to Mo Vaughn to find one on Gods team though. Yup, Yankee Pride. Belly on up to the juice bar boys!
The Red Sox continued to bolster their bulpen with guys named in the Mitchell report Brendon Donnelly and Eric Gagne are two recent acquisition for the Red Sox.
In June 2000, steriods were found in Manny Alexander's car. Jose Canseco who certainly is a central figure. Mike Spineeli a Red Sox minor leaguer admitted using steriods in an august 1998 article.
Paxton Crawford Admitted using steriods on HGH while on the Red Sox in 2001 and 2001. He even said that he had steriods in a towel and spilled them on the floor of the Red Sox clubhouse which caused laughter. Jeremy Giambi received HGH from Greg andreson before his 2003 season with the Red Sox. Jose Manzanillo, Mo Vaughn, Chris Donnels, Mike Lansing, Kent Mercker, Mike Stanton are also named in the Mitchell Report and spent time with the Red Sox. With a list this size and this list is presumably only the tip of the iceberg I wouldn't consider the Red Sox clean by any stretch of the imagination.
Let's see how things shake out from Clemens in front of Congress because i actually believe that prosecutors don't just believe everything they hear and Sen. Mitchell did not print every rumor he heard. I am confident that McNamee/ Mitchell will be vindicated by additional testimony and document which could not be previously gathered. Clemens story that his hand picked drug dealer trainer injected him in the behind with lidicaine and B-12 was the dumbest thing I ever read until I read number1moron continually tell me that he was clean when even his buddy Pettitte admits he cheated.
Originally posted by poundleeAre you going to answer this or not?
Let's see how things shake out from Clemens in front of Congress because i actually believe that prosecutors don't just believe everything they hear and Sen. Mitchell did not print every rumor he heard. I am confident that McNamee/ Mitchell will be vindicated by additional testimony and document which could not be previously gathered. Clemens story that h ...[text shortened]... er1moron continually tell me that he was clean when even his buddy Pettitte admits he cheated.
For about the 10th time, MCNAMEE WASN"T EVEN THE TRAINER OF THE BLUE JAYS IN 1997! So how the **** could his "connection with McNamee (which didn't start until 1998 even according to McNamee) "explain" Clemens' CY Young season in 1997???? Please answer THAT question.
Petitte never admitted he cheated; he admitted that he took HGH twice to help his recovery from an injury. That is not "performance enhancing".
From Petitte's statement: In 2002 I was injured. I had heard that human growth hormone could promote faster healing for my elbow,"
"I felt an obligation to get back to my team as soon as possible. For this reason, and only this reason, for two days I tried human growth hormone. Though it was not against baseball rules, I was not comfortable with what I was doing, so I stopped.
"This is it -- two days out of my life; two days out of my entire career, when I was injured and on the disabled list, I wasn't looking for an edge. I was looking to heal."
BTW, McNamee was hired by the Toronto Blue Jay organization in 1998; so your statement (which has been repeated several times)that he was "hand picked" by Clemens is yet another inaccuracy and/or falsehood.
I have no idea if Clemens met McNamee before he was trainer or not. Perhaps Clemens put in a good word for him. Maybe Clemens had a different drug dealer in 1997. It does not really matter when Clemens started using performance enhancers. It is pretty clear that he did and that is the real issue.
Clemens hired McNamee. That is a real big problem. Never really got an explanation why he thought an HGH man would be a good trainer. Can you explain that? I know Clemens introduced a lot of guys to McNamee and then McNamee ends up in the Mitchell report. Pettitte admits to getting HGH from McNamee. McNamee says Clemens got performance enhancers too. Make sense to me. I also know Clemens admits to letting McNamee inject him. Who would let a drug dealer inject them when there are team doctors? Can you explain that? Actually, the only explanation, I can come up with is that the substance that was being injected was illegal and therefore a doctor would refuse to inject it. I know Clemens' explanation that he got B-12 and lidicaine injected by McNamee makes no sense at all.
McNamee's lawyers want access to the reported second tape Clemens made becuase persuambly it is less favorable to Clemens. Clemens asks McNamee why he says he said. If Clemens were innocent he'd ask why McNamee lied, but of course he couldn't because then the inevitable response would by McNamee would be I did not lie.
Originally posted by poundleeI know it's too much of a bother to actually check the facts; you prefer to make up your own. "You have no idea" is the truest thing you've said in this thread.
I have no idea if Clemens met McNamee before he was trainer or not. Perhaps Clemens put in a good word for him. Maybe Clemens had a different drug dealer in 1997. It does not really matter when Clemens started using performance enhancers. It is pretty clear that he did and that is the real issue.
Clemens hired McNamee. That is a real big problem. Nev se he couldn't because then the inevitable response would by McNamee would be I did not lie.
Your argument was that Clemens had four "awful" years in a row from 1993-1996 (not true but that's your claim) and then because of steroids recovered to become a great pitcher again. Now you say: "It does not really matter when Clemens started using performance enhancers." But since your argument rests on Clemen's improved performance which you claim is entirely from steroids, if Clemens won the Cy Young in 1997 without steroids, your argument based on performance fails. And since you don't have a single shred of evidence that Clemens used steroids in 1997, your argument falls apart.
Get it?
I suggest you actually try researching some of the facts; it ridiculous to have to correct your errors every post merely to have you repeat them in the next. It is undisputed that Clemens didn't even know McNamee before Toronto, it is undisputed that when Toronto hired him they (and Clemens of course) had no idea that McNamee would deal steroids. For the second time, trainers routinely give shots to professional athletes - are you seriously asserting otherwise? Now there's a "second tape"!!!! For the second time, Clemens repeatedly denied steroid use in that phone call and said someone has to tell the truth - McNamee could have said "I did" but those words never passed his lips.
It's tiresome to speak with someone so intellectually lazy that they can't be bothered to even look up the facts and so brain addled that they can't retain the facts given them.
It is nice to intentionally misrepresent my arguments and then say it is not based on the facts. I said I always wondered how a guy could have a 4 year period in the middle of his career where he completely lost his dominance and then suddenly become a superstar again. I sort of wondered the same thing when McGuire and Sosa and Bonds hit homeruns at clips never before. But it was just wondering. Then I find out that Clemens hired a guy who dealt performance enhancers. It put Clemens in the mix for doing illegal things. I find out that people Clemens introduced to McNamee also used illegal perfromance enhancers. This is very incriminating. The time period is very close. The small gap does not exonerate Clemens. It merely shows that he did not get performance enhancing drugs from McNamee at that time. I also think only a fool would let a non-medical person inject them. No doctor thinks liticaine in Clemens' behind would help his sore arm. In fact it is so stupid it is hard to understand how Clemens could make up something so dumb. It seem far more likely that it was not liticaine and that he did not want to the needle marks to be readily visible.
I think it looks real bad for Clemens and now Knoblach is being subpoeneaed before Congress perhaps he can further confirm what McNamee, Mitchell and federal prosecutors already believe.
Originally posted by poundleeFor three pages you've been making the same argument regarding the 4 "awful" years Clemens had (in fact in 1994 he was second in the AL in ERA and strikeouts) claiming this was proof Clemens used steroids later and now "you were just wondering"????????
It is nice to intentionally misrepresent my arguments and then say it is not based on the facts. I said I always wondered how a guy could have a 4 year period in the middle of his career where he completely lost his dominance and then suddenly become a superstar again. I sort of wondered the same thing when McGuire and Sosa and Bonds hit homeruns at clip perhaps he can further confirm what McNamee, Mitchell and federal prosecutors already believe.
I once knew a guy who sold pot. Does that "incriminate" me?
Clemens never claimed he had McNamee inject him with the painkiller for his sore arm; if was for his back (Clemens has had back problems for years). So the "dumbness" here is yours for yet again being pathetically misinformed.
According to McNamee's lawyer, his client has a master's degree in sports medicine. Not exactly a complete yahoo.
I think we should look at the situation with you and your pot dealing friend with the Clemens-McNamee facts and I'd argue that it isn't a nice situation.
(1) Knowing a drug dealer is just step one, you actually give him a lot of money for him to take away your troubles.
(2) You show all the symptoms of a pot user (as Clemens mysteriously regains form after a 4 year absense)
(3) Your friend said he gave you pot. He said he gave two of your friends pot too (one admits it said he thought it was wrong and stopped like Pettittee and one said nothing).
(4) Congress will call you and your three friends. I'd be concerned.
(5) I'd be even more concerned when I found out that the New York Times said they had independent sources saying that I often talked about pot, prosecutors found my drug dealer's friend's story credible and an independent investigator who did not believe all rumors about drug dealing believed my drug dealer's story about me.
So your defense is I started showing symptoms of pot use before I met this dealer and my dealer gave me oregeno.
Originally posted by PhlabibitI can't believe there are fools still debating this issue. Clemens is a joke.
Sooooooooo Clemens is clean and McNamee lied to keep from getting put in jail? He told the truth to keep from getting in jail.
Go ahead and believe Andy did it twice, not like he's saying something we want to hear to cover his bottom.
You know, you always want to use evidence when it backs you up, and common sense when it fits your beliefs.
Roge ...[text shortened]... and believe what fits your opinions.
Whatever, live in your little world of fantasy.
P-
Originally posted by poundleeJesus H Christ; here we go again. 1994 - Clemens was second in the league in ERA and strikeouts. In 1996, he finished 6-2 after a poor start and his final ERA was 1.42 lower than the league average. In 1997, he won the Cy Young. All this BEFORE he even met McNamee! How many times does this have to be pointed out to you?
I think we should look at the situation with you and your pot dealing friend with the Clemens-McNamee facts and I'd argue that it isn't a nice situation.
(1) Knowing a drug dealer is just step one, you actually give him a lot of money for him to take away your troubles.
(2) You show all the symptoms of a pot user (as Clemens mysteriously regains form afte arted showing symptoms of pot use before I met this dealer and my dealer gave me oregeno.
What other people do doesn't make you guilty of anything. How many times does this have to be pointed out to you?
Congress should actually spend its time on something remotely related to legislation - the dispute between Clemens and McNamee is a private one which should be settled in court. Politicans grandstanding; who would have thought?
I'm really sick of hearing the unsubstantiated rumors and "100 million flies can't be wrong" arguments. But that seems to be all you have got. Mitchell was hardly an "independent" investigator; he was hired by management to name names and obviously wasn't too particular about what evidence he used. It is shockingly unprofessional to vouch for a witnesses' credibility when you never bothered to check into whether said witness had lied to police (about a RAPE) only a few years before. This is the guy you base your entire case on after threatening him with jail unless he tells you the "truth" i.e. name names like you want him to? Mitchell should be ashamed; it's no wonder he had MLB immunize him from lawsuits from players falsely accused in his kangaroo court of a report. If he was soooooooooooooooooo sure of his infallibility in these matters, he would have had the guts to face the consequences of such a breach of trust in a court of law.