Andy Delivers Serious Blow to Rocket

Before I go into the details I thought it was important to state a fact first; there are two contributors to this blog and sometimes we disagree on certain topics. One of those topics is the Roger Clemens saga. I am stating this because my post is about to contradict the feelings and beliefs that my blog partner has expressed here previously and some of you may simply think this is a 180 based on the evidence. It is not, I have always felt this way.

Roger Clemens' case has now taken a huge credibility hit. According to Newsday....

Sources said McNamee has told investigators that in the winter of 2002, he, Clemens and Pettitte were working out together at the gym in Clemens' Houston home. According to the sources, McNamee says that during a break in the workout, Pettitte went over to McNamee by himself and asked: "How come you don't give me the stuff you give Roger?" McNamee supposedly replied, "Because it's illegal."
...and now on to Pettitte

Pettitte's account matches McNamee's in most details

So now we are supposed to believe both are lying? Or as Rocket claims they are talking about medications besides steroids? Even if it was something other than steroids that's enough to create suspicion. After all, if a player will take other illegal drugs why wouldn't he take steroids? I have always believed Roger was lying and this does nothing but solidify that. Look at some of the relevant facts:

• Nobody else has disputed McNamee's claims
• Andy backed up McNamee and his story
• The needles
• "I was eating Vioxx like it was Skittles" - Roger Clemens
• The Tape - Why wouldn't Roger ask McNamee why he was lying?
• McNamee had everything to lose by lying, nothing to gain.
  

Tomorrow should be an interesting day as Rocket will most likely bring out all the stops to defend himself. The thing that I do not understand is why hasn't a player taken the stance we all know is true and might actually give them some vindication? I want someone to stand up and say:

"Yes, I did steroids but it was necessary to compete at a high level. Was it wrong ? Yes. I apologize for it but I wanted to maintain a high-level of performance for me, my family and my team. To do that I needed to have the same advantage as the other top players and that meant taking steroids."

I know the truth is not something baseball, its union, or Selig is really interested in.

Roger - Say it Ain't So!

Uh-oh! Word is leaking out that Roger may not make the trip to proclaim his innocence in front of congress after all. This would be an incredibly bad move for an innocent man. However, this is the ONLY option for a guilty man.

Tarnishing a Hall of Fame legacy is one thing; lying in front of congress is quite another.

I've said before that if Roger stands before congress and continues to boldly and emphatically deny he used PEDs I am going to believe him.

If, however, he wiggles his way out of testifying, my mom's old saying comes to mind - when in doubt, actions speak louder than words.

McNamee/Clemens Mitchell Report Revisited

Now that Roger is in full attack mode there is a lot of misinformation floating around about what McNamee said to Mitchell and what is in the Mitchell report. Lets take a look back and clear some things up;

1. I heard Robb Dibble and Kevin Kennedy discuss how McNamee was up to something because he didn't even have a written agreement with the feds. Mitchell report says
   "McNamee, through his attorney, entered into a written agreement with the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of California."
2. Some so called experts have also used the McNamee never said he provided Clemens with drugs defense. Mitchell report once again debunks "According to McNamee, during the middle of the 2000 season Clemens made it clear that he was ready to use steroids again. During the latter part of the regular season, McNamee injected Clemens in the buttocks four to six times with testosterone from a bottle labeled either Sustanon 250 or Deca-Durabolin that McNamee had obtained from Radomski."
3. Some also question why there isn't a paper trail like in the Balco scandel. A couple of experts provide a window into that; " McNamee stated that he has no ill will toward Clemens and “was always ahead [financially] with Roger.” McNamee received money for expenses from Clemens’s business representatives. They paid McNamee for training Clemens, and for his expenses. From time to time Clemens also gave McNamee “extra money.” Clemens never gave money to McNamee specifically to buy performance enhancing substances."

Roger really had the best possible cover for his dealer; a guy already on his payroll who was also paid by his business partners. He also gave him extra money, we'll call it a Christmas bonus but never paid specifically for steroids. Roger is lying I firmly believe that, I suspected him prior to the report coming out and nothing has made me change my opinion.

The thing I am anxious to see is what Andy Pettitte is going to do with congress. The hearing was delayed so prosecutors could gather evidence and prepare, maybe for a Bonds like perjury follow-up. So how does Andy handle that? Refuse to go? Plead the 5th? Sell out his best friend? And how has this affected their relationship? By Andy coming out and admitting guilt he is clearly taking a different path then Clemens. This is just going to get worse and drag on longer then the Johan situation....

A Brilliant Strategy?

As has been posted here before, the incredibly difficult burden of proof in slander/defamation suits makes it highly unlikely that Roger Clemens would bother to sue MLB as a result of the Mitchell Report. Roger has, however, been extremely vehement in his denials of PED use. It has gotten to the point where Brian McNamee has hired an attorney to explore a defamation suit against Rocket (well, I use the term 'hire' loosely as all of McNamee's lawyers have taken his case pro bono (for free).

What if it is Rocket's plan to force McNamee to go forward with a defamation case by screaming on 60 Minutes and in every newspaper in the country that McNamee is a liar? If McNamee were to sue Rocket for slander/defamation he would have the same burden of proof in his case against Roger as Roger would have if he had sued MLB. McNamee would have to not only prove that Roger did, in fact, use PEDs (almost impossible), he would also have to prove that Clemens made the statements to 60 Minutes and the other media in an express effort to harm McNamee. HA! There is truly no way that he can do that; unless, of course, McNamee video taped himself shoving a syringe in Rocket's backside, and also taped Roger confessing that his evil master plan was to ruin McNamee's reputation, NOT to defend his own!

As McNamee's attorneys are not getting paid, they will want as much press and exposure out of their McNamee time as possible. To get max airtime there is little doubt his lawyers will convince McNamee to initiate an unwinnable slander/defamation suit against Roger.

What then? Well, as it is practically impossible to win any defamation suit (let alone one that is purely 'he said, he said'), and as Roger will be paying his attorneys (quite handsomely, I'm sure), Roger would no doubt win that lawsuit.

All Roger has to do is push McNamee into suing him and then the burden of proving an impossible thing would shift to McNamee's lawyers instead of his own.

After inevitably beating McNamee in court (it may take perjury, but that's a topic for another time), Roger could then look into the cameras and say "See! I told you I was clean!"

I have no idea if this is Roger's plan, but Wow! wouldn't it be brilliant if it were!