Of course not, the guy is basically asking Roger for a handout...... Honestly, let's see how it develops now that Roger has illicitly taped the phone conversation. MacNamee has to know that Roger is not in it to help him in ANY way now....and if he is telling the truth, I expect him to fire back. DD
The lawsuit thing is easy to figure. Roger filed a suit against his accuser so that he can go before congress as use it to not say anything. It is an amateur move but it works. Bloody liar. He will be had - just let him keep digging.
Probable? Max, I asked a question in the other thread about the lawsuit, I would appreciate a lawyers perspective. Thanks, DD
You think it's PROBABLE they manipulated the tape?? You realize the tape is discoverable evidence at this point, right? That puts Roger in the crosshairs of an obstruction of justice charge as well. So we're now at the point of assuming any evidence that might be beneficial for Roger is manipulated....and McNamee is Honest Abe. I'm not a Clemens fan at all...but do you not see how ridiculously unfair that is?
Bingo! I couldn't have said it better myself Max. The whole conversation was pretty pointless from my stand point. Seemed like a smoke screen more than anything else. Both Clemens and Mcnamee had their chance to corner the other but neither took the opportunity. Doesn't the whole conversation just seem very odd and strange? I mean there were times in the conversation that you had anywhere from 2-5 second pauses between questions and answers. The only thing that the phone call did for me was gave me more reasons to not like Roger Clemens even more.
I could be wrong, but I don't think the tape itself was edited for that stuff...I think networks bleeped it out at their own discretion. ABC 13 didn't even play the tap because of the langue, but then ESPN was airing it, presumably on a 5 sec delay to bleep out that kind of information and language...If they edited the tape itself, even for swear words, wouldn't that be obstruction?
What's up with McNamee saying he thinks Clemens could pass a lie detector test? Talk about a huge hedge. I think this hurts McNamee's credibility a lot. "I think he's the one guy who could probably beat the test," McNamee opines. "He might actually believe that he's telling the truth." He might believe he's telling the truth? C'mon, now that sounds pretty desperate.
This boggles my mind. He has said he is going to speak candidly before Congress yet everyone is saying he's lying to them before he even speaks! It's so obvious what's going on here it isn't even funny. People want him to be guilty are going to manipulate every fact, every reaction, every thing he does into some sort of signal that he is guilty. There is nothing he can do to vindicate himself. With Bonds people said "If it isn't true why doesn't he sue!" With McGwire it was "if he's got nothing to hide why'd he take the 5th?!" Richard Justice said in the past they should get reporters together and let them ask questions. Clemens has sued, gotten reporters together to ask him questions, says he will speak openly with Congress, has gone on tv with Mike Wallace, has made public statements, etc. And it's all turned against him. All of this on the word of a guy who was facing major jail time, is going broke, losing his son, lost his wife, has a rape issue hanging over his head, and sounds like an emotional wreck.
Exactly right. If you don't like Clemens, that's one thing. Heck, I don't really like Clemens. But this is taking it to a whole different level. Every assumption is that McNamee is telling the truth and Roger is a liar. Every benefit of the doubt goes to McNamee...to the point where we assume that anything positive coming out from Roger is manipulated and fake. Tons of skepticism for all things Roger....benefit of doubt over and over again for McNamee.
That's my issue. I'm not going to say I don't believe he used steroids, because I really have no idea. But I certainly don't think McNamee's claims are worthy of being treated as gospel. He had reason to lie. There is no evidence that we know of. I just wish we could step back and let our hatred of him be removed and let the facts play out. Heck, people are even using the fact that he mentioned his former coach losing his son against him. All of this because he decided to play for the Yankees instead of the Astros lol.
Wait - what is the reason to lie? McNamee clearly considers Clemens a close friend. You think the feds wanted him to make up stuff about Clemens for what purpose exactly? It's not like they are pursuing anything against Clemens.
Yes, he had a reason to lie. It could be that Clemens provides them with publicity. It could be that they simply said 'c'mon - you trained with the guy for ten years. We don't believe you when you say he didn't do it and unless you come clean there is no immunity.' We can't be sure but there is definitely incentive to throw Clemens under the bus and no risk to doing so. Clemens can't prove he didn't so the move that risked jail was to continue to deny Clemens was involved.
I don't think the Feds wanted him to make anything up, but I can easily see this situation unfolding. McNamee is busted and the Feds want him to give up names. They grill him and he finally gives up Andy Pettitte using it twice to recover from an injury and Chuck Knoblauch, a player out of the league for like 5 years using. The Feds laugh and say "We've got you for X years for distribution of illegal drugs and this is what you give us? It's gonna take a lot more than that." He then faces the reality that his life is going to be OVER if he doesn't give them something bigger and he says Roger Clemens. He's in no danger of being shown as a liar here. Roger Clemens literally CAN NEVER prove his innocence (if he is) as he has no way to retroactively prove that McNamee did nothing to him.
I used to not care, but now I want Clemens to be exonerated. Beyond that, this whole thing is a media creation. If the public really cared about steroids in baseball, it wouldn't be nearly as popular as it currently is.
This is like saying if the public really wanted a playoff system in college football, it wouldn't be nearly as popular as it currently is. It's possible to still be entertained by something but know that's its wrong or messed up. As for the media creation - the media is a money-making enterprise, unfortunately. They wouldn't cover something if no one cared about it because no one would watch and thus they wouldn't get good ad rates. They may have caused people to care about it, but people clearly do - at least in terms of the stars (Bonds, Clemens, etc).
I meant they bleated out stuff that may be damning for the press conference which is not a legal issue at all. DD
I don't think that's a fair comparison. If we thought the NCAA refs were cheating by calling games unfairly or players were throwing games, would people still watch? Doubtful. All we hear is that these players had an unfair advantage because of the steroids/HGH/etc. To me, that sounds something more along the lines of crooked refs or players throwing games rather than a crummy way to determine a champion of a sport. Yet, MLB's revenues are close to the NFLs. I guess what I'm getting at is that the media seems to be very self-righteous about it. They constantly proclaim how these guys have ruined the integrity of the sport, so on and so forth. If that was true, why would the public still be buying tickets and merchandise at the rate we are? The public may care, but we care because it's about sports. We don't care in a "I'm never going to watch the game because Barry Bonds/Roger Clemens/Bud Selig ruined the game" kind of way.
