Digg - Is Clemens Attorney Trying to Intimidate Law Enforcement?

81 Comments
Who Dugg It?

jefbob, on 02/11/2008, -15/+7I really REALLY wish this would just go away. Stop worrying about the past, who cares, if it happened it happened, just keep it from happening anymore.
- kinglear, on 02/11/2008, -5/+15Yeah, that would be convenient for Clemens. Let him keep all his awards and still be regarded as one of the greatest pitchers ever. Except for the fact that he cheated.
  - Trammel, on 02/11/2008, -9/+2Shut up, or I'll eat your lunch!
  - texanbrit, on 02/11/2008, -3/+5Unless he didn't cheat. What happened to the presumption of innocence? If this was being pursued in a court of law instead of the court of public opinion then I would take this more seriously. I with jefbob; I'm tired of hearing about it and the country has far more important issues to deal with.
    - oldhick, on 02/11/2008, -1/+1It is being pursued in a court of law. Its just early.
    - dewfish, on 02/11/2008, -1/+4why is is everyone is so concerned about Innocent until proven guilty when it comes to clemens, but assumed Barry Bonds was guilty from day one. All of the venom people have for Barry Bonds, i see none of it towards Clemens.
    - bingobongony, on 02/11/2008, -1/+3He HAD the presumption of innoncence. And the evidence against him is so overwhelming that he lost that.
    - bingobongony, on 02/11/2008, -0/+4dewfish...Oh boy...here we go...it is racism in your eyes, right? *****! Clemens is getting A LOT of venom spewed at him. If you don't see that it is becuaes you are so caught up in trying to find racism that you refuse to see the facts. Alos, the fact that Bonds was ALWAYS a ***** prick, thinking he was above hte game, never having to give interviews, etc...which is part of his job, etc.
      People don't hate Barry Bonds because he is black. They hate him becuase he is a ***** *****.
      - dewfish, on 02/12/2008, -0/+1who said anything about racism? I said one person was being treated differently than another. I said nothing about race whatsoever. Seems like you are the person with a racial axe to grind.....
      - texanbrit, on 02/13/2008, -0/+1I said nothing about Bonds either. It's a bit of a leap to assume my opinion on that matter is any different that it is on this one. I say keep the media out of it, we do not have a right to know until after the legal process is completed. I say quit wasting tax payers money on all of this nonsense.
    - onwardknave, on 02/12/2008, -0/+1Presumption of innocence is for the legal system. He's guilty in the court of public opinion. Right now, the evidence is compelling (or at least enough to raise a few eyebrows), but not overwhelming as it is for Barry Bonds* (positive Balco drug tests, sworn statement admitting steroid use in sealed testimony). My perception is that people are willing to give him just a slight more metaphorical rope with which to hang himself. Presumption of innocence in the court of public opinion is somewhat a factor of the charisma of the accused. While Clemens still has some residual good will, Bonds* lost his long ago.
- bingobongony, on 02/11/2008, -1/+5Yeah...that's true...if you get away with cheating multi-billion dollar businesses, you really should just be allowed to get away with it. So really, Kenneth Lay should never have been prosecuted.
  - jefbob, on 02/12/2008, -0/+1I didn't say he shouldn't be prosecuted, I wish it would go away as such a big story and people would stop making such a big deal about this. And if you are so worried about people getting away with cheating, what about all the other people in the Mitchel report? Why aren't they getting investigated and prosecuted? Because the house committee cares about steroids in baseball? No, because they chose the biggest name on the list and know it will make a big story.
- coit, on 02/11/2008, -0/+3I really doubt this is about baseball at this point, it is about lying to federal investigators, congress, and oh yeah, the illegal drug trafficking.
  - jefbob, on 02/12/2008, -0/+1The problem I have with it is that baseball was doing nothing to stop it when it was happening. Now all of a sudden they care? No, they don't, congress cares, and that brings up another point, why is the senate and house committee investigating this? Isn't their job to enact new laws? Wouldn't this be a Supreme court job? Also, this is nothing more than a he-said, he-said thing. There is no evidence except a few syringes that Brian McNamee was keeping in an empty beer can. What? An empty beer can? These syringes have not been preserved properly, they do not have a proper chain of custody, and there is no reason he could not put Roger Clemens blood on them after the fact. If you all disagree, fine, but until he has actually been convicted of something, stop giving this story half an hour on Sportscenter every morning.
legendxx, on 02/11/2008, -4/+8Society needs laws. Citizens need to see justice done. If not then what keeps them from breaking the law?
- pianomahnn, on 02/11/2008, -4/+8Society needs laws, yes. But we don't need as many as what we have now. I don't care about steroid use, and I'd wager that most Americans don't either.
  - legendxx, on 02/11/2008, -2/+1Are you kidding me? You must be a girl or someone who hangs out with noone who watches any sports at all. Anyone I talk to who has passed by a television with some form of sporting event has an opinion on steroid use in professional sports.
    - jabrthel, on 02/12/2008, -0/+1I think his opinion is that he just doesn't care.
- jabrthel, on 02/11/2008, -1/+4Certainly there are more important things Congress could do other than prosecute a few baseball players for a victimless crime. After all, there are two wars going on, social security and Medicare are insolvent, our gov't keeps on piling on more debt, etc., etc..
  - bingobongony, on 02/12/2008, -2/+2Just because you consider it victimless does not make it so. Remember...you ar a ***** idiot and always will be.
- defektiv, on 02/11/2008, -0/+5first the people at the top need to start setting good examples. they break the law, they have no business telling others not to, nor punishing them for it.
- kuantan97, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1Who said "the law" really is law? I didn't agree to it; did you? What is justice? Why do citizens need "justice"?
- Joab, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1It's just ***** baseball. There's so much more going on the world that could use the energy people have been putting into this.
  - bingobongony, on 02/12/2008, -0/+1No...it is not just ***** baseball. Anymore than Enron was just a ***** energy company. PROFESSIONAL sports is a business like anything else. A very big business.
- rocket777, on 02/12/2008, -0/+2Justice in america means Just Us. If you are a warmongering murderer that lied to get us into wars, then you get a pass. If you don't harm anyone except possibly yourself, you get the full force of the federal government investigating. Suppose the use of a steroid, like growth hormone, helps heal some wounds. Why should a bunch of lying, murdering, federal criminals decide what treatment you decided to use.
  
  Orwell would be proud, or at least rolling over in his grave over such government bs.
  - kuantan97, on 02/12/2008, -0/+1Amen.
  - bingobongony, on 02/12/2008, -0/+1dude...you are embarassing yourself. Don't you realize that every time you speak, and people know you are a RonPaulian that you make them NOT want to vote for him?
mal1964, on 02/11/2008, -1/+3Jeff Novitzky, an IRS agent
- werkerb33, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2They took down Al Capone, right?
slvrbullet87, on 02/11/2008, -1/+17Just more proof that Greg Maddox is the best pitcher of the 90's
- mal1964, on 02/11/2008, -1/+3Yeah I agree, but he didn't get any chicks.
- kidendless, on 02/11/2008, -1/+5well, chicks DO dig the longball...
- mal1964, on 02/11/2008, -0/+5 90's SNW SNL SNPct SNWAR
  1. Greg Maddux 172.8 79.6 .685 65.5
  2. Roger Clemens 158.9 78.1 .670 58.1
  3. Randy Johnson 141.3 79.3 .641 47.6
  4. Tom Glavine 148.2 93.0 .615 45.7
  5. Kevin Appier 130.2 73.7 .639 43.6
  6. David Cone 133.6 81.9 .620 42.0
  7. Kevin Brown 140.9 96.6 .593 40.0
  8. Mike Mussina 121.6 70.5 .633 40.0
  9. John Smoltz 137.0 94.8 .591 38.5
  10. Chuck Finley 134.7 102.2 .569 34.0
  http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?arti ...
kirb59y, on 02/11/2008, -1/+11Sad.. We should be talking about Pitchers and Catchers reporting for Spring Training, not what Clemens's attorney insinuates.
- mal1964, on 02/11/2008, -2/+4"We should be talking about Pitchers and Catchers reporting for Spring Training"
  You can still talk about it
  - sgtbutterscotch, on 02/11/2008, -1/+1So who is your favorite pitcher and/or catcher reporting for Spring Training?
    - mal1964, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2 Roger Clemens and Rusty Hardin.
fissionignition, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2Despite all this, I'd probably crap my pants if Clemens decided to give Houston another run. The Astros rotation is such a mess...
- bingobongony, on 02/11/2008, -0/+4Did you WATCH his last year? He didn't exactly help the Yankees.
slappy83, on 02/11/2008, -1/+9What's up with that guys nose?
- kuppoppo, on 02/12/2008, -0/+1He's an ugly sonofabitch but I'm proud he's my Congressman. He's the one who launched Congressional investigations into Halliburton contract abuses, Enron-White House connections, and tons of cases of government fraud or abuse of power.
jgbiggs, on 02/11/2008, -2/+2An attorney-at-law, one of the few jobs where you get paid to be a full time jack-ass and spokes-whore. Just remember, they are paid to lie and then they call it attorney-client privilege when they are busted. pricks.
RizenBB, on 02/11/2008, -4/+10Why is the Federal Government investigating baseball steroid use? Is this really worthy of tax dollars?
- bingobongony, on 02/11/2008, -1/+2Yup...Just like they investigated Enron. Baseball is a VERY big business. (several billion dollars a year.)
  - xaxxon, on 02/11/2008, -1/+3Other than being large businesses, you can't really compare steroids to the financial mismanagement of Enron. Steroids aren't hurting anyone. Not ruining other people's lives. This is just a gimmick by politicians to make it look like they're doing work when they're just sitting on their arses.
    - rocket777, on 02/12/2008, -0/+1No, there is a comparison. Both Enron and Baseball's problems stem from the unconstitutional use of the federal government to get into the affairs of "free" citizens. Enron was a result of the illegal counterfeiting of the federal reserve which leads to the financial bubbles that plague our economy. Only gold and silver are legal tender. It's in the constitution, read it for yourself.
      
      As to baseball, who the hell cares what drugs these guys use. If the baseball owners and fans don't care, then why do the idiots in congress care, other than to grandstand.
      
      What a BS system American government is.
      - bingobongony, on 02/12/2008, -0/+1Oh boy...here we go...an idiot RonPaulians hijacking another thread. Oh...and RonPaul does NOT want to go back to the gold standard you ***** idiot. And the reason why he will not only not get the presidency, but also lose his congress seat is becyase he lack of understnading of what the Constitution is. It was NEVEr meant to be the end all, be all book of laws. The founding athers were not so stupid as to think that a fairly short document would be enough for the law of hte land for centuries.
    - bingobongony, on 02/12/2008, -0/+1Are you kidding? Steroids hurt every player, team, and FAN that was not using them. Every penny spent on a game that was tainted by cheating was a fraud.
      - RizenBB, on 02/12/2008, -0/+1How is that the responsibility of the government? It's a sport. If it's hurting the sport it will hurt their business and they will probably handle it themselves. It's not Congresses job to police recreational sports.
    - bingobongony, on 02/12/2008, -0/+1Also..steroids aren't ruining people's lives? what the ***** are you tlaking about? Are you that stupid? Or just that simple minded?
      - RizenBB, on 02/12/2008, -0/+1A single individual taking steroids is hurting himself. Enron screwed over tens of thousands of peoples lives and savings. There is a huge difference in scale.
- NeoCortex, on 02/11/2008, -1/+5Baseball has special anti-trust exemption status. This makes it fall under Congressional oversight.
  - rocket777, on 02/12/2008, -0/+2Anti trust laws are a crock. Most of the time they do the opposite they were intended to do.
    
    Consider that when the congress wanted to see a Washington Redskins football game that was blacked out on tv, these yahoos actually passed an "emergency" law to change the blackout rules.
    
    And this is the land of the free and home of the brave? BS, it's the land the chicken ***** surfs.
- kuantan97, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1They are investigating it with such zeal because they have failed to end the Iraq War; failed to balance the budget; and failed to bring under control a criminal executive branch. Grandstanding like this allows Congress to appear relevant.
Tenlow, on 02/11/2008, -7/+1Buried for the fox news style "question" headline.
- hockey, on 02/11/2008, -1/+1Buried for your mindless rejection of all things Fox News or things you consider Fox News.
  
  Perfect example of Digg sheeple group think.
  - Tenlow, on 02/11/2008, -1/+1No, actually "fox news" was the best way to describe it. The article did not ask the question in the headline. Nor did I get the feeling that's what it was implying either. I was able to think for myself and decide the headline was ***** lame as *****. You don't like it? Too goddamn bad.
kidendless, on 02/11/2008, -3/+2why doesn't clemens use his time-tested intimidation tactic of throwing a piece of a shattered bat at his accuser?

(sorry, still slightly bitter about 2000)
bingobongony, on 02/11/2008, -4/+2Well, Clemens has already caused a HUGE conflict of interest last week when he visited several members of Congress that he is going to testify in front of this week. Those Congressmen are ***** idiots for seeing him rather than throwing him out of their offices when he stopped by.
- xaxxon, on 02/11/2008, -0/+4You don't seem to know what a conflict of interest is. He was presenting EXACTLY his interest. The congressional members don't have a conflict of interest unless they took something from him or something. Although you may not realize it from the way they normally act, it's not wrong for them to be knowledgeable about what they deal with.
  - bingobongony, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1No he wasn't. Last week he went for no other reason then to schmooze. He was not presenting his case, or anything. It was absolutely unprofessional, and someting that the members of Congress would not have done if they were investigating a non-celebrity. You don't get photo-ops, and ask for AUTOGRAPHS of people that you are investigating. (And getting autographs and photos IS taking something from him. Actually the autographs are something with real monetary value.)
- werkerb33, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1Standard Operating Procedure on the Hill and remarkably not a conflict.
  
  Unlike a trial, a Congressional investigation is not about convicting or passing a judgment. It is about investigation. Meaning they can get any info any way they want - including sitting down for a chat and a drink. The assumption is that elected representatives are smart enough to hear all sides any time they want and not be unduly swayed. They are guided not by evidenciary process but by the will of the people (stop laughing).
  
  Energy, Tobacco, Unions, Environmentalists...basically anyone with a position does the same thing. Even guys accused of juicing up and lying about it.
  
  One thing people forget in all these little friendly sit-downs: Congress can "refer" someone for prosecution if they think something illegal happened (and they happen to care about it).
  - bingobongony, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2They were not meeting to be ian investigation. They were schmoozing with a celebrity...getting autographs, taking pictures, etc. Thayt absolultey IS a conflict of interest.
    - werkerb33, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1Autographs?
      
      Yeah, that would be slimy.
      
      That'd make an interesting commercial in a campaign: "Did you know your congress-critter was selling autographs of accused baseball cheaters while he was supposed to be investigating them? No? Elect me...and I'll be smart enough to get one of my staffers to do it for me!"
Ceeman, on 02/11/2008, -5/+7This is a distraction. Pay no attention to the war, falling dollar. Every second this gets a headline in a newspaper or a website is just helping them.
- sadilak, on 02/12/2008, -0/+0Of course they are. Listen to the song "Frail grasp on the big picture" by the Eagles. They sum it up beautifully. The problem is that we are all just a bunch of spectators and will remain so. I am not sure that a Barrack Obama or a Clinton or a McCain can make america a better place, but they could probably make the fall a bit more smoother. The Legal System is a mess, the Education system is a mess. The Jobs Market is an Outsourced mess. I dont see anybody doing anything to fix the system. Because everything around me is such a ***** mess, I am a totally ***** up too.
bjs3171, on 02/11/2008, -1/+2yes? wait...ok yes. no? i'm going with yes. yes.
werkerb33, on 02/11/2008, -0/+8Info for posters who are curious why Congress is involved...

Should Congress care: Yes

Why: Baseball is the only US business that is allowed an exemption to the Sherman Antitrust laws. Congress has allowed this in the interest of supporting our "National Pastime" and allowing MLB to prevent the relocation of teams, franchises and venues (read: stadiums) that would exist in a free-market system, as well as to control players.

Remember the big deal when DC wanted a stadium and all the other teams (businesses) had to collectively allow it? That is anti-trust at its core. As is forced revenue sharing for smaller teams. The NFL doesn't have it and neither does any other business of any other type.

The idea is that the United States has a vested interest in maintaining a one-rule majority in the national pastime was to prevent the sullying of the sport through crass marketization and simple economics. This helps keep stadiums in Milwaukee when it would be much more profitable to move (another) one to Northern Virginia, or LA , or...any big city with lots of people who can pay tons of money for tickets.

So Congress maintains the exemption (they can regulate it away any time they want) to keep America's National Sport pure and geographically diverse. If the MLB or the player's union is doing things that are dirty (drugs, cheating, etc.) than it is fair for Congress to evaluate their positions given the huge benefit given MLB by the people, through that same Congress.

If MLB wants to make Congress go away, they only need give up the power they hold over players, cities and owners that is afforded them by the Congress.

A quick source of basic info from ESPN here: http://espn.go.com/mlb/s/2001/1205/1290707.html

Oh...and if Clemens is lying her should burn real bad. That might just scare other cheats to come clean. I know fanboys hate the idea of their favorite player getting tarnished, but it is important to keep the sport clean.
- kinglear, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2I thought the NFL also had Anti-trust exemption? I thought that was one of the reasons Arlen Specter wanted to investigate the Patriots' so called spying.
  - ShugNinx21, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1I thought that also
  - werkerb33, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1Pretty sure they do not.
    
    I'm boosting this from the ESPN link above about non-baseball teams and anti-trust:
    
    "...Raiders owner Al Davis won an antitrust lawsuit in 1982 after the league wouldn't allow him to move from Oakland to Los Angeles. The NFL lost and Davis moved. The threat, and in some cases the actual filing, of antitrust lawsuits led to more movement among NFL teams, such as the Los Angeles Rams to St. Louis and the Cleveland Browns to Baltimore."
    
    Specter was just pissed his team lost and he was hoping to make a big deal.
- coit, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2You forgot the part about the drugs in question being illegal.
  - werkerb33, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1Uh, yeah. Forget that sometimes.
  - yunus, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1Should congress investigate every use of steroids or illegal drugs or should congress just be the new court for celebrities? Maybe Britney can get congress to reside over her custody battle. Not like they have anything more important to do.
hockey, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2Clemens has a long uphill battle ahead.

Virtually every big name who has been labeled as a steroid user has denied the charges then later had to recant when the truth truly did come out.

History (even though it's a short history) is not on this guys side.
voteobama4, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1I never had a problem with Clemens until I saw the utter lack of integrity he showed in that recorded phone conversation, when he had the nerve to actually pretend like he cared about the guy and his family. After that, and all the brutal attacks on McNamee's character, I hope they throw they book at this scumbag.
sponeil, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1Forgive me for asking the obvious, but isn't that pretty much what lawyers do? It seems like over half their time is spent threatening people with legal action. Anyone can "threaten" to take legal action against anyone for anything. It doesn't matter whether it would hold up in court. Lawyers love it because it means a hell of a lot more people need lawyers.
yunus, on 02/11/2008, -0/+1Hey Congress! Fix the budget, fix the war in Iraq, fix the immigration problem, fix the housing problems. Actually don't fix the housing problem, its messed up enough without you getting involved. But about the last thing you need to be worry about right now is steroids in baseball or comments from a lawyer of an accused player.
web2pointYo, on 02/11/2008, -0/+2Maybe a little chin music will back these guys off.
rocket777, on 02/12/2008, -0/+1Not one member of these congressional hearings has the integrity of a spitball. And these guys and gals who send people to their deaths or vote to allow a sick president to do this in their name are indignant over the use of unpopular medicine by baseball players.

BTW, what about those hyperbolic chambers, how's that any different. What about the harm caused to players knee joints from playing the sport to begin with. What's so natural about a tommy john surgery that makes a pitcher better than he was before his injury.

This whole witch-hunt is just another sign of our disintegrating republic. The founders would be shocked at all the ***** we take from these gods of the Potomac.
Login or register to add a comment

Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.

Is Clemens Attorney Trying to Intimidate Law Enforcement?

submitted by

What is Digg?

Top in Baseball

John Smoltz on the verge of signing with the Red Sox

Login or register to add a comment

Is Clemens Attorney Trying to Intimidate Law Enforcement?

submitted by

What is Digg?

Top in Baseball

John Smoltz on the verge of signing with the Red Sox

Related by Keyword

Roger Clemens Hires Attorney To Fight Steroids Allegations

Roger Clemens Will NOT Plead The 5th in front of Congress

Roger Clemens: The $18 Million Bargain

Login or register to add a comment