Tweet
Interesting that Clemens never answers the question of "what do you want me to do."
Your story has more and less to it than the espn version:
<begin>
One of McNamee's lawyers, Earl Ward, told Andrew Marchand of ESPN 1050 radio in New York that "the tape adds absolutely nothing."
The New York Daily News also reported on Monday that days before the scheduled release of the Mitchell report Clemens' investigators asked McNamee whether he would be willing to recant.
McNamee reportedly called Clemens and Pettitte to warn them that he had spoken to the government. During an interview on "60 Minutes" which aired on Sunday night, Clemens denied knowing that he would be named by Mitchell.
</end>
Clemens is gonna get caught in his web of lies. Attorney friend speculates that Clemens filed his lawsuit so he wouldn't be able to fully testify. Kinda thing where he can say, "i can't comment as i have ongoing lawsuit it could affect."
BTW, couple of things. In Canseco's book, which at this moment looks like the most truthful thing out there, the term b-12 is used for juice by ballplayers.
At this stage we have a he said/he said type of situation. We can gather all the evidence we want and determine the likelihood McNamee is telling the truth. We can compare that to the likelihood Clemens is telling the truth. But all that would give us is percentages.
Another McNamee client, Andy Pettitte, has copped to the performance-enhancer usage McNamee described. That gives McNamee credibility, and hurts Clemens' credibility. We can look at Clemens' body, and look at his freakish ability to dominate at an age when most pitchers are done and say that fact hurts Clemens' credibility.
We can play this game all day. But we'll never get more than percentages of truth.
That's where the legal system comes in. Now, I am not naive enough to think that raising your right hand guarantees that a witness will spill his guts and tell the truth. But I do know that it's a pretty good impetus to stick with the facts. Perjury charges are a drag. Barry could tell Roger about that.
Ideally, if McNamee lied about Clemens, the legal system would come into play immediately. Clemens would sue McNamee, not so much for money, but to save his reputation. As part of McNamee's deal with prosecutors, if he is found to have lied, he will go to jail. So put him on the witness stand. And put Clemens on the witness stand, get him under oath, remind him that perjury is a crime, and let him give his side.
If Clemens did nothing wrong, the legal system is his best hope for salvation. Say it under oath, and your credibility spikes upward.
Clemens' lawyer, Rusty Hardin, said in a press conference that he won't take such a tack. "I hope you don't tell future clients of mine this, but a lawsuit is the least desirable way to resolve anything," Hardin says. "It drags on two or three years, very often it reaches inconclusive results because of money and time and expenses. It makes you unable to concentrate on anything else. It takes over your life, and he doesn't need that."
This is a very bizarre statement. Clemens is done with baseball. His only challenge now is salvaging his reputation. When Hardin says a lawsuit would make Clemens unable to concentrate on anything else, you have to wonder, what else does he have to concentrate on? Is Clemens, as Hardin suggests, worried about money and expenses? The guy made nearly $18 million for half a season's work last year. How is it that money could even remotely be an issue when the legitimacy of everything Clemens accomplished is being called into question?
Your story has more and less to it than the espn version:
<begin>
One of McNamee's lawyers, Earl Ward, told Andrew Marchand of ESPN 1050 radio in New York that "the tape adds absolutely nothing."
The New York Daily News also reported on Monday that days before the scheduled release of the Mitchell report Clemens' investigators asked McNamee whether he would be willing to recant.
McNamee reportedly called Clemens and Pettitte to warn them that he had spoken to the government. During an interview on "60 Minutes" which aired on Sunday night, Clemens denied knowing that he would be named by Mitchell.
</end>
Clemens is gonna get caught in his web of lies. Attorney friend speculates that Clemens filed his lawsuit so he wouldn't be able to fully testify. Kinda thing where he can say, "i can't comment as i have ongoing lawsuit it could affect."
BTW, couple of things. In Canseco's book, which at this moment looks like the most truthful thing out there, the term b-12 is used for juice by ballplayers.
At this stage we have a he said/he said type of situation. We can gather all the evidence we want and determine the likelihood McNamee is telling the truth. We can compare that to the likelihood Clemens is telling the truth. But all that would give us is percentages.
Another McNamee client, Andy Pettitte, has copped to the performance-enhancer usage McNamee described. That gives McNamee credibility, and hurts Clemens' credibility. We can look at Clemens' body, and look at his freakish ability to dominate at an age when most pitchers are done and say that fact hurts Clemens' credibility.
We can play this game all day. But we'll never get more than percentages of truth.
That's where the legal system comes in. Now, I am not naive enough to think that raising your right hand guarantees that a witness will spill his guts and tell the truth. But I do know that it's a pretty good impetus to stick with the facts. Perjury charges are a drag. Barry could tell Roger about that.
Ideally, if McNamee lied about Clemens, the legal system would come into play immediately. Clemens would sue McNamee, not so much for money, but to save his reputation. As part of McNamee's deal with prosecutors, if he is found to have lied, he will go to jail. So put him on the witness stand. And put Clemens on the witness stand, get him under oath, remind him that perjury is a crime, and let him give his side.
If Clemens did nothing wrong, the legal system is his best hope for salvation. Say it under oath, and your credibility spikes upward.
Clemens' lawyer, Rusty Hardin, said in a press conference that he won't take such a tack. "I hope you don't tell future clients of mine this, but a lawsuit is the least desirable way to resolve anything," Hardin says. "It drags on two or three years, very often it reaches inconclusive results because of money and time and expenses. It makes you unable to concentrate on anything else. It takes over your life, and he doesn't need that."
This is a very bizarre statement. Clemens is done with baseball. His only challenge now is salvaging his reputation. When Hardin says a lawsuit would make Clemens unable to concentrate on anything else, you have to wonder, what else does he have to concentrate on? Is Clemens, as Hardin suggests, worried about money and expenses? The guy made nearly $18 million for half a season's work last year. How is it that money could even remotely be an issue when the legitimacy of everything Clemens accomplished is being called into question?
)
Comment