[bigboydan]

What else could Clemens really do though after his lawyer said a few days ago that he didn't. I'm sorry, but I'm not buying his statement below.

Clemens fires back, denies taking steroids or HGH

NEW YORK -- Roger Clemens denied allegations by his former trainer that he took performance-enhancing drugs, calling them "a dangerous and destructive shortcut that no athlete should ever take."

The accusations against the seven-time Cy Young Award winner from former trainer Brian McNamee were the most striking in last week's Mitchell Report. Former Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell said McNamee said he injected Clemens with steroids in 1998 while with the Toronto Blue Jays, and steroids and human growth hormone in 2000 and 2001, while with the New York Yankees.

"I want to state clearly and without qualification: I did not take steroids, human growth hormone or any other banned substances at any time in my baseball career or, in fact, my entire life," Clemens said Tuesday in a statement issued through his agent, Randy Hendricks. "Those substances represent a dangerous and destructive shortcut that no athlete should ever take.

"I am disappointed that my 25 years in public life have apparently not earned me the benefit of the doubt, but I understand that Senator Mitchell's report has raised many serious questions. I plan to publicly answer all of those questions at the appropriate time in the appropriate way. I only ask that in the meantime people not rush to judgment."

Another former McNamee client, Yankees pitcher Andy Pettitte, said last weekend that he took HGH twice while rehabbing from an injury in 2002. Mitchell said McNamee told him he injected Pettitte with HGH two-to-four times that year.

Baseball players and owners didn't have an agreement banning steroids until September 2002. They banned HGH in January 2005.

McNamee's lawyer, Ed Ward, said he would attempt to reach his client to determine whether McNamee wanted to respond to Clemens' statement.

Clemens' lawyer, Rusty Hardin, issued a denial last Thursday, hours after Mitchell's report was issued. Tuesday marked the first public comments by Clemens, an 11-time All-Star who spent 24 years in the major leagues with Boston, Toronto, the Yankees and Houston.

The 45-year-old right-hander was 6-6 with a 4.18 ERA for the Yankees this year and may retire. He said he planned to retire after the 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006 seasons, only to return each time.

A six-time 20-game winner, Clemens was considered by most to be a first-ballot Hall of Famer before McNamee's allegations.

[Illusion]

I hope congress makes him testify. Maybe he will change his tone there.

[cobra_king]

I'd love to see him in front of congress. I actually think he'll pull a Barry Bonds and not speak the truth.

[harsh506]

lol i can see him pull a palmero when hes up there

[Dark Horse]

Funny that the lesser players have no trouble admitting their sins, while superstars like Clemens and Bonds are way too deep into their own legend to take anything away from it. The trappings of ego.

[Willie Bee]

Equally interesting to me, Dark Horse, is how most of us don't seem to care about the lesser players whether they come clean or not yet have no problem sticking it to one of the bigger names if they do come clean, or simply refuse to believe them when they say they didn't do it as if we have some internal lie detector that is all-knowing, all-seeing. The trappings of fandom, perhaps?

[drftrader]

Look at what he said, I did not take steroids, human growth hormone or any other banned substances at any time in my baseball career or, in fact, my entire life. The operative word is banned. McGwire also did not take banned substances-Andro was legal at the time. Sometimes its all in the wording. Just a thought. Also why did it take hime a week to say something? If I knew I did not do anything wrong, I would be shouting it from day one.

[ChuteBoxe]

Originally Posted by drftrader

The operative word is banned.

Yup, HGH didn't get outlawed until January, 2005.

[Dark Horse]

Originally Posted by Willie Bee

Equally interesting to me, Dark Horse, is how most of us don't seem to care about the lesser players whether they come clean or not yet have no problem sticking it to one of the bigger names if they do come clean, or simply refuse to believe them when they say they didn't do it as if we have some internal lie detector that is all-knowing, all-seeing. The trappings of fandom, perhaps?

You think? I thought THE hair raising sports moment of 2007 was the steroids confession by Marian Jones. That, and especially the way she did it, took a lot of guts. She reclaimed something there that Bonds and Clemons most likely never will. That confession had an almost spiritual power. I admire her for that.

[Willie Bee]

First, I wouldn't consider Marian Jones a 'lesser player' in her sport. Secondly, her confession only came after years of denying she used steroids and lying to federal investigators about it. If she had told the truth from the get-go, then I might admire her. Of course, if she was someone prone to telling the truth from the start, she probably wouldn't have used the stuff in the first place.

I'm not sure it took a lot of guts for Bill Clinton to finally come clean about his promiscuity after lying through his teeth about the whole mess for so long, just as I don't think it will necessarily show a lot of guts on Roger Clemens' part if he ends up admitting he used PEDs after lying about it the whole time.

Did coming clean leave everyone with warm and fuzzy feelings for Jason Giambi? I'd say not, in fact, by trying to come clean, tell the truth and apologize, MLB muzzled him with all sorts of threats. Who believed Jose Canseco? The talk was he just said those things to sell his book. He was yesterday news before the sun set that day his book came out.

[pavyracer]

Clemens is right. He did not take steroids. Someone else injected them in his butt. Please set the record straight.

[Dark Horse]

Originally Posted by Willie Bee

First, I wouldn't consider Marian Jones a 'lesser player' in her sport. Secondly, her confession only came after years of denying she used steroids and lying to federal investigators about it. If she had told the truth from the get-go, then I might admire her. Of course, if she was someone prone to telling the truth from the start, she probably wouldn't have used the stuff in the first place.

One of the top Olympic champions, in medal count. An international star that may well be better known around the world than Roger Clemens.

It was the sincerity behind her confession. Not the time that had passed. It was inspiring because she came clean with herself.

Originally Posted by Willie Bee

I'm not sure it took a lot of guts for Bill Clinton to finally come clean about his promiscuity after lying through his teeth about the whole mess for so long, just as I don't think it will necessarily show a lot of guts on Roger Clemens' part if he ends up admitting he used PEDs after lying about it the whole time.

Outside of his own marriage it was never anybody's business what Clinton did or did not do with that girl. Some strange, perverse, Republican element in society thought it was center stage. That little fling from his private life had no impact on his job performance, nor was it illegal. He cheated on his wife; not the American public, as in the case of steroids.

Originally Posted by Willie Bee

Did coming clean leave everyone with warm and fuzzy feelings for Jason Giambi? I'd say not, in fact, by trying to come clean, tell the truth and apologize, MLB muzzled him with all sorts of threats. Who believed Jose Canseco? The talk was he just said those things to sell his book. He was yesterday news before the sun set that day his book came out.

Look at the consequences. What did Giambi lose? Nothing. What did Marian Jones lose? Everything. That was the most 'naked' public apology I've ever seen.

[Doc JS]

It's hard for me to believe the trainer told the truth about Pettitte (which Andy has now verified) and lied about Clemens!

[Willie Bee]

Originally Posted by Dark Horse

It was the sincerity behind her confession. Not the time that had passed. It was inspiring because she came clean with herself.

So if Clemens 'comes clean with himself,' regardless of the time that passes, you're going to be left with the warm fuzzies for him as well?

Outside of his own marriage it was never anybody's business what Clinton did or did not do with that girl. Some strange, perverse, Republican element in society thought it was center stage. That little fling from his private life had no impact on his job performance, nor was it illegal. He cheated on his wife; not the American public, as in the case of steroids.

Taking the oath of office and lying to your constituents is my business, period. Presidents don't have 'little flings;' Love how you have implied this was just a GOP problem, and not a case of the President lying to ALL Americans.

Look at the consequences. What did Giambi lose? Nothing. What did Marian Jones lose? Everything. That was the most 'naked' public apology I've ever seen.

Again, I'd have respect for her if she told the truth from the start, DH. Just once, I wish someone had the guts to be honest from the start. Guess we'll have to just chalk this up and agree to disagree, but lying will never go over well in my book, regardless of when someone decides to eventually tell the truth or how sincere or naked their confession is.

[BuddyBear]

All the players who've been named in the Mitchell Report who are now admitting they did do steroids: Brian Robers, Andy Pettitie, Frenando Vina, etc... Does not bode too well for Clemens because it makes it seem like Mitchell actually knew what he was doing.

[BuddyBear]

Sorry but who cares what Clinton did.....DH is absolutely right about that. That's the biggest spectacle I've ever seen in my life for absolutely nothing.

[Willie Bee]

Will just have to agree to disagree with you as well on the Clinton mess, Buddy. I just happen to care a lot about what our elected leaders are doing, and care even more when they're untruthful about it.

Switching gears back to the thread topic...Have you read the Mitchell Report, Buddy? It's pretty boring in places, but I'm glad I muddled through it and then went back to reread some bits. Not really anything in there that hasn't already crossed the newswire, but it does confirm some things that before the report were just column inches or hearsay in my opinion.

A lot of it still is hearsay, shame they couldn't really get real testimony from present players and, more importantly to me, owners. One of the best post-Mitchell Report articles I've read about it is HERE. Does a good job of drawing the conclusion that nothing in the report is due to cooperation from either the players or the owners.

[Dark Horse]

I would have to assume then that the president is more like a king to you. Personally, I only judge him on his job performance, as I would a CEO. And no, that does not include blow jobs. What he does in his private life is none of my business.

For that matter, if anyone asks you a question that you know to be inappropriate, do you really owe him a truthful answer? I would hope not.

My answer to that idiotic Inquisitioner Kenneth Starr would have been to go f*ck himself, and that my sex life, in spite of me being president of the United States, was none of his f*cking business. Have you seen the level of secrecy of the present administration?!?! About state matters! About things they have no legal right to hide... So why aren't you questioning them about that?

[Willie Bee]

Originally Posted by Dark Horse

My answer to that idiotic Inquisitioner Kenneth Starr would have been to go f*ck himself, and that my sex life, in spite of me being president of the United States, was none of his f*cking business. Have you seen the level of secrecy of the present administration?!?! About state matters! About things they have no legal right to hide... So why aren't you questioning them about that?

Who says I'm not questioning Bush's administration and the crap they've pulled? You're assumptions have incorrectly painted me as some GOP loyalist and Dem basher.

[Dark Horse]

My point was not directed at you as such, but at the overwhelming amount of (media) attention paid to a non-issue as Cllinton's BJ's, while the alarming secrecy of this administration, unmatched in the history of the US, has gone almost completely ignored.

What this administration has been -unlawfully- concealing does concern us all. Crimes against humanity. And so, to me, and against that background, it shows an almost comical lack of perspective if we lift out Clinton's transgressions as even slightly meaningful. There are things that are private, and things that belong in the public domain. Those who seek to blur that line, for the purpose of political gain, in doing so only reveal their own lack of character and integrity.


(On a side note, it wouldn't surprise me if the people who cried foul the loudest against Clinton at the time, are the same puritans who went on a crusade against internet betting.)

[bigboydan]

Heres the UTube and the story on Clemens latest denial.

http://www.youtube.com/wrclemens

Clemens repeats steroids denials, plans to interview on '60 Minutes'

By RACHEL COHEN, AP Sports Writer
December 23, 2007

NEW YORK (AP) -- Roger Clemens posted a video Sunday repeating his denials of the steroids use alleged against him in the Mitchell Report and plans to be interviewed for a future episode of "60 Minutes."

The seven-time Cy Young Award winner was accused in the report of using steroids, an allegation made by his former trainer.


In October last year, the Los Angeles Times reported Clemens was linked to steroids in the May 2006 sworn statement of a federal agent who cited former big league pitcher Jason Grimsley. At the time, the names of players in the public version had been blacked out. When the full affidavit was unsealed Thursday, Clemens' name was not in it, and the paper issued a correction and an apology.

"I faced this last year when the L.A. Times reported that I used steroids. I said it was not true then, and now the whole world knows it's not true, now that that's come out," Clemens said in the video, which was posted Sunday on the Web site of his foundation and on You Tube.

George Mitchell, a director of the Boston Red Sox and a former Senate majority leader, wrote in his report that former Toronto and New York Yankees strength coach Brian McNamee said he injected Clemens with steroids in 1998 while with the Blue Jays, and in 2000 and 2001 while with the Yankees. McNamee also claimed he injected Clemens with Human Growth Hormone in 2000.

"Let me be clear, the answer is no. I did not use steroids, or human growth hormone and I've never done so," Clemens said. "I did not provide Brian McNamee with any drugs to inject in to my body. Brian McNamee did not inject steroids or Human Growth Hormones into my body either when I played in Toronto for the Blue Jays or the New York Yankees. This report is simply not true."

Baseball players and owners did not jointly ban steroids until September 2002. They did not ban HGH until January 2005.

While Clemens has released a written and video statement since Mitchell issued his report on Dec. 13, he has not answered questions.

"After Christmas, I'm going to sit down with Mike Wallace of `60 Minutes,' and I'll do an interview, and he'll ask me a ton of questions on this subject, and I'll answer them right there in front of him, and we'll do all of this again," Clemens said.

CBS spokesman Kevin Tedesco said the interview is scheduled to air Jan. 6.

"I'm angry about it," Clemens said of the allegations. "To be honest with you, it's hurtful to me and my family, but we're coming upon Christmas now, and I have been blessed in my life. I've been blessed in my career, and I'm very thankful for those blessings."

Mitchell said McNamee, a former personal trainer to Clemens and Yankees and Houston Astros teammate Andy Pettitte, told him Pettitte had used HGH two-to-four times in 2002. Pettitte issued a statement Dec. 15 saying he used HGH twice in 2002.

On the Net:

http://www.rogerclemensonline.com

[Willie Bee]

Originally Posted by Dark Horse

My point was not directed at you as such...

Sorry, guess all of those references to 'you' in the post had me thinking that 'you' was 'me.'

I would have to assume then that the president is more like a king to you.

For that matter, if anyone asks you a question that you know to be inappropriate, do you really owe him a truthful answer?

Have you seen the level of secrecy of the present administration?!?!

So why aren't you questioning them about that?

My point to all of this, making reference about Clinton lying, had nothing to do with politics. My point was that people who lie for several years and then come clean don't get gold stars in life from me, regardless of how sincere or naked their eventual confessions might seem. Men who cheat on their wives are probably more prone to cheat on others, be that the game they play or the constituents they represent.

Originally Posted by Dark Horse

(On a side note, it wouldn't surprise me if the people who cried foul the loudest against Clinton at the time, are the same puritans who went on a crusade against internet betting.)

So I want to make sure here, since I've been bellyaching about Clinton in this thread, do you think that I'm among those who have crusaded against on-line gambling?