McNamee sounds like someone who could easily be pushed around by anyone if he thinks it would help him somehow. Still he didn't say anything that absolves Clemens of any wrongdoing. On the other hand, he didn't say, "I said this because you did 'roids, Roger," he just kept saying "What do you want me to do?"

Also, the tape recording happened with Clemens lawyers present in the room and he had to be careful not to say anything which would be considered witness tampering. As crazy as it sounds, questions such as "Why don't you just tell them I didn't do steroids?" would be considered tampering.

The more Roger Clemens talks the more guilty he looks. I watched about 30 minutes of the press conference and he is coming off as kinda of arrogant and like a kid backed into a corner just trying to find anything to blame this on.

Whoops did a double post there.

I should start off by saying that I hate Roger Clemens far more than I dislike Barry Bonds, so yes, my opinion is quite biased.  Clemens, to me, is just coming off as a lying peice of feces.  Its clear that his ego has gotten the best of him.  I'm honestly not sure if he realizes that he cheated.  This isn't the first time his name has been thrown around with banned substances.  In the end this whole charade is rather meaningless, as no name should be surprising to hear thrown around with steriods and HGH.  Its been used a lot more than any of us would like to imagine.

He's in a lose-lose situation. If he gets angry, people will say, "Look how angry he is, he must be lying." If he stays calm, people will say, "Look how calm he is, he must be lying."

I'm a big Clemens fan since his rookie year.  Don't think that tape helped him and probably hurt him more. 

With respect to pressing him, I think they both were playing cat & mouse.  In one regard he was setting him up because anything Clemens said, would have been used against him.  I believe Clemens didn't press him simply because of this... Whether McNamee was telling the truth or not, all he had to say is "I am telling the truth".  I don't think even the Goose could save Clemens from that.  They were trying to get the other to reveal more without revealing much themselves. 

McNamee didn't say that he lied although some things can be inferred.  From what I got he was basically saying "I appreciate what you did for me and my family" but I'm not going to jail for you. 

It looks worse that one of his best friends, Andy Pettite, admitted that he did use HGH and they have used the same trainer for some time. Clemens would have been better served to come out on the day of the release of the Mitchell Report and said "yes I did use HGH, I was desperate and thought I needed that boost. I am sorry." But Clemens waited a week or so, then made his statement and wanted everyone to give him the benefit of the doubt but his silence for so long was very loud.

Yeah, it doesn't look good when Pettitte admits to using and, but it doesn't prove that he's guilty. Also, waiting to talk publicly for a week was probably done at the advice of his attorneys. Also doesn't prove anything. I'm totally open to the idea that Clemens is trying to play us all for a bunch of fools, but I'm also open to the idea that he's innocent. Am I suspicious? Of course. But I need proof.

I want to see how this plays out. I want to see what happens in front of Congress. I suspect there are more layers to this story.

We all put in our "If it were me" scenarios and so anything outside of that seems suspicious.  However, we are still not assured all the facts will surface and the only thing left is, "If it were me".   The biggest injustice is that whether or not Clemens "did it", this tag will follow him forever and no matter what comes out he will never be able to prove his innocence. Even if McNamee recants his story Clemens will be accused of paying him off. 

Let me tell you what I can't get my arms around.  Baseball aside, Clemens appears to be a great family man, great friend, hard-working and basically a guy full of integrity.  Do you see how much fire he has when he talks about any one of those things and rightfully so?  Yet a guy has basically attempted to destroy all of those things by defaming him and..."I'll let my attorney answer that"! Doesn't fit to me. 

Lastly, The Mitchell Report! I have to believe that there is "evidence" other than hear-say.  Maybe McNamee has the vials with Clemen's prints??? From my limited knowledge, Clemens was named by two sources (McNamee and Canseco) the latter of which had no actual knowledge.  To hinge so much on "hearsay" doesn't really look like a "Mitchell" thing as he wouldn't be where he is today? 

That aside, this is not a criminal investigation and I would have hoped that the people accused in the report would have had an opportunity to deny or confirm the allegations before the report was issued.

A) McNamee had no reason to lie and put himself into jeopardy and face jail time, which is what it ultimately comes down to

B) Why would he tell the truth about Pettite but lie about Clemens

C) Clemens went 14-0 after the three supposive injections

D) If McNamee really lied then Clemens wouldn't have waited 3 weeks after it was said to claim it was a lie.

 

Roger is digging himself into a deeper and deeper hole. At least Andy Pettitte handled it right.

A) How do you know McNamee had no reason to lie? Have you ever know a person to lie for no reason? We can't get into people's mind to find out why they did what they did.  Here's one though.... Throwing a HOF'er will take the heat off of him.  Let's not get it confused, he's a drug dealer.  Calling Clemens the Sunday before the report and asking him "where is the good fishing equipment" is BS.  He's a coward and he has no honor.  That should give you a look into his character.  Hey Roger, bend over

B) Pettitte is not a HOF'er.  Although one never knows with the way they vote today!

C) Ok, let's break that season down.  7 times that streak could have been broken and he got "No Decision".  They lost 3 and the rest comebacks.  They also averaged 5 RPG.  When he was 6-6 they averaged 2.4 RPG  In 97' before any of this he started the season 11-0 could have been 13-0 but they averaged 1 RPG. Was he juiced then.  He's a great pitcher and to win double digit wins is not outside his abilities.

D) Time is relative and Bonds has always claimed his innocence but that doesn't matter.  Had Clemens come out immediately how many people would believe him now? In that, why would time have more weight than evidence.  Clemens is a pitcher and this is about the accountability, integrity of MLB, the HOF and all the young Cy Young's picking up the glove for the first time.  At the end of the day, he handled it differently than we would have and less proof, that's all we can really say.

E) Clemens played with the biggest doper on the planet, Canseco.  Yet Canseco has no knowledge? He knew everyone in the business? Hmmm! That doesn't sound good!

F)  Clemens is being dishonest about one thing and that's the HOF. Granted his family, friends and life is far more important but he didn't work as hard as he has for nothing.  But I can't prove  :)
 
G) Let's look at this realistically... If he fights and wins he loses.  If he fights and loses, he loses, If McNamee recants he still loses.  How fair is that? 

Yes, he is digging himself a deeper hole.  But it proves nothing!  Pettitte handled it for him and only him.  He did it and he admitted it and so he has honor.  We can't judge Clemens on how Pettitte handled his situation.

Hey Roger, bend over, I have another injection for you and it aint B-12.

That last comment came from an excerpt from a conversation I had with McNamee!  I asked him, "why did you do that to such a close friend"? His reply, "Because he didn't tell me where the good fishing equipment he bought was"! Oh, well that explains everything!  Me, being an avid fisherman am appalled at the actions of Clemens and therefore side with McNamee.  Can anyone prove that this conversation didn't happen?  My point and no insult intended is that we give more credit to McNamee than Clemens despite the fact that Clemens was on his way to the HOF anyway.  That's gotta count for something and if nothing else at least wait to the jury's in.

This reasoning wouldn't hold up in a court of law. Some of it's suspicious and some of it's weird, but in and of itself isn't proof.

Jewel, you're absolutely right.  However, this is the court of "Public Opinion" and suspicion can far outweigh proof!

In regards to comments made in your second paragraph: when you get into legal issues, especially when you very well might sue someone for defamation, you damn well better let your attorney handle it. By ripping on McNamee in a public forum, he'd be throwing fuel on the fire, and basically give ammo to McNamee's lawyers for a countersuit. He also has to be careful of witness tampering.

As for comments in your third paragraph: If McNamee had vials and any kind of paper trail, that evidence would have been in the Mitchell report. My biggest problem with the accusations against Clemens is that I don't see a paper trail. Right now, it is very much a he said, he said situation. And I don't think that's really enough for Mitchell to go on for inclusion in a report such this.

More tangible evidence, paper trails and whatnot, may exist somewhere. Maybe it will come out eventually. But as of today, it's not there.

The issue I have is that he wasn't pressing him on the truth.  Which is a bit different than ripping on him.  I'm not sure how much trouble Clemens or his attorney would get in because he "wanted him to tell the truth".  I believe Clemens said, "I need someone to tell the truth".  My understanding of witness tampering is basically intimidation or physical force to change his testimony.  I didn't get that impression from the tape. Merely wanting to have someone tell the truth is outside the scope and I can't imagine a judge or an attorney would pursue that. fruitless course.  In all honesty, that tape also hurt McNamee.  His credibility is shot because he said "I'll do whatever you want". Hmmm! Even lie? So we conclude it is within his character to lie.  More to the point, McNamee opened the door with that statement and therefore tampering might only apply if Clemens had asked him to lie. He didn't, he asked him to tell the truth!

Perhaps, but believe me, there are politics at work here.  You're talking about the HOF and a sport since the beginning that has had it's integrity tested.  It's called the "Great American Past Time" for a reason and don't think for a minute that they won't try and protect that image. 

Ok, let's go with that "no evidence" theory.  Why, if no evidence exists, no paper trail and only two people know about it, would one tell on the other?  I got one, JAIL TIME!  Who benefits? McNamee!  I'm right with you though.  If there is no evidence, then the names of the players should not have been released.  If you do release the names, give them the opportunity to deny or confirm the allegations before the report goes out.  Personally, I need something more than hearsay and names on mailing lists. 

There are now 60-80 players that hypothetically can sue MLB for defamation.  Innocent or guilty, that "cheater" label will always be attached.

But it matters to someone trying desperately to salvage their reputation.

If someone told you that you could go to jail for doing something, wouldn't that be enough of a reason not to do it? That's what McNamee faces if he really is lying about Clemens.

Good point and of course I would.  But without evidence, how would they know if he were telling the truth or not?  Actually, he was facing jail time for illegal use of hGH!