Trump calls on Baseball Hall of Fame to admit Roger Clemens

[packs]

Is there really any doubt Clemens cheated? I see all these technicalities listed but ignoring that a friend changed their mind about what a friend said to them when reporters and the law came asking about it and pushing the narrative that maybe he really did mishear his friend seems to be the biggest leap of them all.

We all live real lives in a real world. Is it really so hard to believe a friend would cover for a friend?

[G1911]

Originally Posted by packs

Is there really any doubt Clemens cheated? I see all these technicalities listed but ignoring that a friend changed their mind about what a friend said to them when reporters and the law came asking about it and pushing the narrative that maybe he really did mishear his friend seems to be the biggest leap of them all.

We all live real lives in a real world. Is it really so hard to believe a friend would cover for a friend?

Is there any evidence he cheated?

Of course Pettitte may well have lied on the stand to cover for Clemens after previously accusing him. Or perhaps his lie was in accusing him while getting pressed by investigators to give up other people. Hence the attraction of evidence - people say things that are simply not true constantly for myriad reasons and motive and regularly contradict themselves at different times.

[packs]

Originally Posted by G1911

Is there any evidence he cheated?

Of course Pettitte may well have lied on the stand to cover for Clemens after previously accusing him. Or perhaps his lie was in accusing him while getting pressed by investigators to give up other people. Hence the attraction of evidence - people say things that are simply not true constantly for myriad reasons and motive and regularly contradict themselves at different times.

The evidence was that Pettitte openly admitted his mistakes and confirmed the report on him was true. The evidence against Pettitte was being named in the report.

Later on, Pettitte said during testimony that Clemens told him about using HGH. During cross, Pettitte's memory of the conversation reverted to him not being sure anymore.

I have friends. It's not a stretch for me to see myself walking back comments about them if I think I might be jeopardizing them by syaing anything at all.

[gunboat82]

Originally Posted by packs

The evidence was that Pettitte openly admitted his mistakes and confirmed the report on him was true. The evidence against Pettitte was being named in the report.

Later on, Pettitte said during testimony that Clemens told him about using HGH. During cross, Pettitte's memory of the conversation reverted to him not being sure anymore.

I have friends. It's not a stretch for me to see myself walking back comments about them if I think I might be jeopardizing them by syaing anything at all.

Beyond that, Clemens was the beneficiary of rulings that some evidence against him was inadmissible, including inconsistent statements he made and testimony from Pettitte's wife. There was also DNA evidence linking Clemens to vials, syringes, and cotton balls with steroids, but the defense was able to establish reasonable doubt because of chain of custody problems.

Clemens was guilty as sin, but his lawyers were better than the prosecutors. For what's it's worth, Bonds was ultimately not convicted either, but has also been blacklisted. As far as I know, Trump has never publicly complained about the treatment of Bonds.

[SyrNy1960]

President Trump Not Happy With National Baseball Hall of Fame

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/article...154818426.html

[BobbyStrawberry]

Originally Posted by SyrNy1960

President Trump Not Happy With National Baseball Hall of Fame

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/article...154818426.html

And he would've gotten in too, if not for those pesky voters! Time for a march on Cooperstown! January 6 is coming up...

[Brent G.]

Originally Posted by SyrNy1960

President Trump Not Happy With National Baseball Hall of Fame

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/article...154818426.html

StOp ThE sTeAl!

[G1911]

Originally Posted by packs

The evidence was that Pettitte openly admitted his mistakes and confirmed the report on him was true. The evidence against Pettitte was being named in the report.

Later on, Pettitte said during testimony that Clemens told him about using HGH. During cross, Pettitte's memory of the conversation reverted to him not being sure anymore.

I have friends. It's not a stretch for me to see myself walking back comments about them if I think I might be jeopardizing them by syaing anything at all.

Exactly, he ended up with meaningless statements about how he was 50/50 on if he'd heard a conversation right and blew the case against Clemens by leaving only an accusation from a convicted perjurer and no evidence. Speculation about which of his stories (even though Pettitte is so honest!) is true and which is false is just speculation and people's beliefs. By the standard applied to Clemens here, I'd have to believe most anyone accused of anything was guilty of that thing. Compare Clemens' situation to how this board will exonerate Ortiz, for whom the evidence is greater than it is for Clemens but people like him so he gets a pass. Evidence is a good standard to use, because among many reasons it helps to steer towards the center and around people's narratives of good guys and bad guys.

The best thing against Clemens is that his career trajectory tracks with McNamee's charges and is highly abnormal. But that ain't much evidence either.

[D. Bergin]

Originally Posted by G1911

Exactly, he ended up with meaningless statements about how he was 50/50 on if he'd heard a conversation right and blew the case against Clemens by leaving only an accusation from a convicted perjurer and no evidence. Speculation about which of his stories (even though Pettitte is so honest!) is true and which is false is just speculation and people's beliefs. By the standard applied to Clemens here, I'd have to believe most anyone accused of anything was guilty of that thing. Compare Clemens' situation to how this board will exonerate Ortiz, for whom the evidence is greater than it is for Clemens but people like him so he gets a pass. Evidence is a good standard to use, because among many reasons it helps to steer towards the center and around people's narratives of good guys and bad guys.

The best thing against Clemens is that his career trajectory tracks with McNamee's charges and is highly abnormal. But that ain't much evidence either.

Do you think Ortiz did more gear then Clemens?

Not a court of law. Nobody is going to jail or even paying a fine. What's your opinion?

Yes, I believe it's a level of complicity.

Personally, I think Ortiz, Sheffield and Pettitte stole a few packs of gum from the convenience store. I think Clemens and Bonds and McGwire and Sosa robbed an armored car as it was making a pickup at the bank.

Hell, Sheffield and Pettitte (I'm not sure about Ortiz), at least fessed up about it, and showed some remorse about it, unlike these other top tier guys who went into denial mode......though I think McGwire finally admitted to it eventually also. I don't think Pettitte is quite a HOF'er anyways, but it's why he still gets support, on top of his Postseason record.

I think most of the people responsible for voting in these popularity contests, feel the same way.

Everybody who votes on these committees, including the ballplayers who have been in the clubhouses, and likely really knew what went on behind closed doors, form their opinions around they're own circumstantial evidence.

Oh, Jose Canseco never failed a drug test either. Pretty sure he was geared up LOL! He only started throwing everybody else under the bus, after he got pissed off he was never invited back into the league after his age 36 season.

[packs]

Originally Posted by G1911

Exactly, he ended up with meaningless statements about how he was 50/50 on if he'd heard a conversation right and blew the case against Clemens by leaving only an accusation from a convicted perjurer and no evidence. Speculation about which of his stories (even though Pettitte is so honest!) is true and which is false is just speculation and people's beliefs. By the standard applied to Clemens here, I'd have to believe most anyone accused of anything was guilty of that thing. Compare Clemens' situation to how this board will exonerate Ortiz, for whom the evidence is greater than it is for Clemens but people like him so he gets a pass. Evidence is a good standard to use, because among many reasons it helps to steer towards the center and around people's narratives of good guys and bad guys.

The best thing against Clemens is that his career trajectory tracks with McNamee's charges and is highly abnormal. But that ain't much evidence either.

HOF voting is about opinion though. Opinion is influenced by facts but not limited to them.