You know what's funny about this: DD is skirting this question in the same manner he's accusing Clemens of skirting other questions. Hey DD: do you believe Roger Clemens lies to the press? Do you believe he would lie to the press about his testimony to Congress, knowing full well the public will soon have an opportunity to read it for themselves? Since it is your standard for Clemens, a simple "yes" or "no" will suffice.
Do I believe that Roger would lie to the press about his testimony to Congress. Yes, I do. I believe Roger would lie to anyone to protect his legacy/image. But if what he says matches his testimony, I will be more on his side. Still want to see how the evidence plays out, but at least I will see some consistency from Roger. DD
Do you understand how foolish this sounds? Someone who is so determined to protect his image/legacy, would be stupid enough to lie about what he testified about before members of Congress minutes after the testimony ended? Really? SHEESH!
What makes it even more ridiculous is that the testimony will effectively be made public in the hearing next week! Why in the world would he lie about his testimony when he knows it's coming out in one week anyway?
Yes really....SHEESH..... And did Roger speak to the press, or was it his lawyers? I don't recall Roger saying much of anything after he left Congress.....can you provide a link? DD
But the point is that he didn't say ANYTHING after testifying. And are you sure his testimony will be released? DD
He spoke to the press for about 30 seconds after his deposition, but specifically said he told them that he had never used steroids or HGH.
I'm not sure if it'll be released word for word, but the committee's questions next week will all center around what was said in the depositions, so it'll be obvious.
Link "I just want to thank the committee, the staff that I just met with. They were very courteous," said Clemens, looking resolute after his lengthy deposition. "It was great to be able to tell them what I've been saying all along, that I've never used steroids or growth hormone." Again, he says "I have never used".....still leaves an out. Which is why I want Congress to ask if he has ever been injected with HGH or Steroids..... That is the question that needs to be answered........he is hiding behind a semantic argument IMO. Round and round we go. DD
Honestly fellas, has anyone’s opinion on this matter changed at all (at least in this forum)? At the end of the day it is only two guys words against one another. I doubt the accuser could present any “evidence” that would actually hold up in court. Conversley, Roger could testify for 20 straight hours….it doesn’t mean that he didn’t tell 20 hours worth of bs. I think both parties have done some things to make guys on the other side of the fence wonder, and continue to believe what they want. I just don’t think anyone’s opinions will change….as nothing can be proven. The one thing I do find funny is the same “evidence” against Roger is the same evidence that was used against Bonds….someone’s word. At least that’s how it stands until the feds release more info for their trial. Yet, like 80% of the folks coming to Roger’s defense were happy to accuse Barry based on the same he said she said nonsense….
The funny thing is first Roidger basically says "Brian McNamee never injected me with anything" Link then changes his story to Lidocane and B-12.......come on..... So basically this is 2 liars going at it.....Brilliant ! DD
Regardless of whether he used steroids or not, and regardless of whether he admits if he did or not, Roger will remain for me one of the greatest pitchers of all time. It's a shame that his legacy will be tarnished either way.
Dada, I get that you want the congressional hearing transcript. In the meantime, I'd like you to try some reasonable deduction: What is the 1 thing that they had to ask Clemens in that 5 hour hearing (other than to swear him in and to have him state his name for the record) . . . Bingo . . . "Uh, Mr. Clemens, did you ever use steriods or HGH". And these folks aren't newbies at this. They'll ask it 25 different ways. "Uh, Mr. Clemens, did you ever get injected with steroids or HGH" "Mr. Clemens, did you ever eat steroids or HGH" "Mr. Clemens, were steroids or HGH ever inserted into your body via enema? How about nasal inhaler? How about through the ears? How about via your peepee. Mr. Clemens, did you ever bathe in steroids or HGH in the hopes it would soak in through your pores. . . " And each time, he's going to have to say "no". And do so unequivocally. He's not going to get away with "Uh, No, not to my recollection". Or, "No, I don't think so."
Can you delineate the logical steps you used to arrive at this? Specifically, what parts of the accusations against Roger Clemens are congrous to: --OJ's gloves at the scene --OJ's footprints *in blood* at the scene --blood on OJ's shoe What is "downright absurd" is your comparison. Debate the merits of the argument all you want, but save the ridiculous hyperbole and the questioning of people's intelligence. I'm not sure I believe Roger, btw. I'm not sure I believe McNamee. I just want something a little more than the word of a rapist who's been in trouble with the law and "evidence" he's had in has possession for God knows how long before I arrive at the conclusion that he's guilty of anything. And, this should be being handled by some criminal prosecutor in NY state, not the freaking Congress of the USA. But that's an entirely different issue.
Oh lighten up Leslie......I was having fun...... SHEESH Why do you keep calling him a rapist? He was not even charged, but yet you call him a rapist. Oh, I know, because Roidger Clemens PR/Legal team wants you to think that. Got it. DD
Link to Sports Illustrated artcle with McNamee as they watched the Clemens 60 minutes interview. But, I am sure that Clemens didn't do it...... DD
