Danny, yes, I believe Justice - for the following reasons: (1) He came into a public forum immediately and on his own (i.e. without a lawyer/mouthpiece), (2) He answered the questions posed to him without knowing them ahead of time (yes, Mssrs Clemens and Wallace, I’m looking in *your* direction), (3) He acknowledged a discussion with McNamee and acknowledge if it was pill form, he probably would’ve taken ‘em. I concede that it is entirely possible that he’s a really good liar, and I’ve been bamboozled - but I found him believable for the reasons I’ve mentioned. One other reason: I’d never heard him linked to anything previously, which shouldn’t mean much, but I guess for me it does. Maybe Justice was lying through his teeth - but I found him to be believable.

Since Clemens has lied through his teeth so many times before (”I didn’t know I was throwing a bat shard at Piazza! I thought it was a ball!”… which still begs the question, “Why were you throwing a ball at Piazza then?”), his credibility is near zero with me. Combine that with the approach and delays he took in denying it, and the stuff Danny listed above (which I agree with all of it)… I do not find Clemens to be believable.

You can call McNamee a drug pusher, but in reality, he is just a trainer that is insuring that IF his clients wanted to go down the steroid route, they would at least do it in the safest and most beneficial manner.

Lets go over a couple other issues about Clemens

1. His best friend admitted to using HGH from the same trainer
2. He doctored the phone call with McNamee…. If he was innocent, McNamee would have given some indication about that during the call
3. B-12 Shots are what wrestlers on Steroids said they were taking as a denial (not to mention that is what Miguel Tejada said was the purpose of the needles he gave to himself and Palmiero - who tested positive for WINSTROL)
4. Clemens repeatedly said on 60 minutes that Steroids are a short term fix…. How would he know that? Sounds like he has done a decent amount of research on the effects of Steroids for someone that knows nothing about them.

Cliffy, As for David Justice, why do you believe him? You say that all allegations of steroids have proven to be true, yet you don’t think Justice did steroids because he immediately denied it? An excuse of not liking needles, and the fact that he sucked the year he used them are interesting, but just as flimsy as any other excuse given by Clemens

If one assumes that instead of having his famous “workout regimen” rejuvenate his career from 1997 to 2005, during which time he recorded 149 wins and won four Cy Youngs, he had instead pitched plus or minus like he had over his last four years in Boston, and had recorded another maybe 100 wins, but had 100 losses and a 4.5 (or worse) ERA, you’d still consider him the second-best pitcher of all time? Really?

I’d probably argue that based on the dominance of his first nine years in Boston, the three Cys and close or just above 300 wins would probably have gotten him in the HOF still. But that’s assuming his doughy-ass body and the lack of healing power of the alleged steroid use would have allowed him to continue pitching for that long and approaching 300 wins. I don’t know whether there are any three-time Cy Young winners who aren’t in the HOF, so maybe he’s still a Hall of Famer based on his time in Boston alone, but second-best ever and a sure-fire first-balloter without the aid of the sauce (assuming he was on the sauce)? No freaking way.

And sorry Tank. I hear ya on the Mitchell Report being bullshit, but if Clemens did what the report says he did (and let’s face it, it’s very likely that he did), then he’s a lying, cheating piece of shit who deserves everything he’s getting right now. Regardless of the fact that there are very likely many, many others who should be getting the same treatment but aren’t because they were lucky enough to have a dealer who didn’t get pinched and handed to Mitchell by the Feds. It’s not fair, but like Eastwood said at the end of Unforgiven, “Fair’s got nothin’ to do with it.”

That said, even a man with Mitchell’s resume and integrity should’ve realized the obvious conflict(s) of interest. Its like the judge who recuses himself from a case due to a conflict of interest - not cuz he/she is actually unable to be impartial, but rather cuz there is the mere appearance of potential impropriety (isn’t that the term they use on “Law & Order” all the time?). Couse, Selig is too stupid to realize this - and names Mitchell anyway. All due respect to George Mitchell, and regardless of how one feels about his report ultimately, I submit that there was at least one other individual with similar credentials - but lacking in the conflict(s) of interest - who could’ve handled this “investigation”.

In closing, the report is - at best - incomplete, due to the lack of any real authority (i.e. subpoena power) to gather evidence, interview witnesses, and… well, do a complete investigation into the matter. *Whoever* did it, under these circumstances, would’ve produced - at best - an incomplete report. Now, if McNamee (or anyone else) is subsequently proven to have lied in this report, then that will bring into question *everything* in the report (except anything that players themselves admit to)… rendering its only use to be as very expensive toilet paper.

I still think Clemens is guilty - and I still hope I’m wrong… and regardless of his guilt or innocence, I still consider him #2 (behind Walter Johnson) and a sure-fire, first-ballot HOFer.

I have spoken.

I missed the ILR prof; who was it?

On a not really related note, did you catch the ILR prof on the Daily Show last night? Good stuff.

Would you be taking that tone if it came out that Ortiz, Varitek, or Schilling was in the report? Of course you wouldn’t. This just in - there weren’t only Yankees on the list…..You’re just a bitter, bitter Yankee fan….

As for his whiny “so I guess people are now guilty until proven innocent, right?”. Um… at least wrt high-profile athletes and allegations of illegal/PED drug use? Um… yup, Roger - that’s right. Time and time again the public has been treated to high-profile athletes angrily denying involvement in PED use, and every… single… time… the athlete has been proven guilty. Call us jaded… call us cynical… or just admit we’ve learned our lesson - but when evidence is uncovered suggesting an athlete used PEDs, it’s *always* ended up to be true. Now I’m not talking about one mediot writing a column wondering out loud if so-and-so is on drugs. But think about Ben Johnson, Marion Jones, Justin Gaitlin, Barry Bonds, Rafael Palmeiro, Floyd Landis… actually, perhaps you could put Lance Armstrong as the lone athlete who has steadfastly maintained his innocence and thusfar (at least), he’s not been proven guilty.

In Armstrong’s case, I’m not familiar with evidence other than the French government insisting “he must’ve done something cuz he won our race too often and we don’t like it”. But that said… would anyone *really* be surprised if evidence surfaced of Armstrong’s usage and we end up with the inevitable Marion Jones-like admission of guilt?

The fact that Rafael Palmeiro say in front of freakin’ *Congress*… wagged his finger at the camera and (at least at the time) convincingly denied usage… only to have the failed test he took *before* those proceedings subsequently be released to the public… yes, Roger, athletes accused of taking PEDs are indeed guilty until proven innocent. And in Roger’s case, there is evidence - mostly circumstantial, and at this point, the only eyewitness account is that of a less-than-upstanding guy. But, the fact that Clemens BFF acknowledged as true the testimony of that very same eyewitness… sorry, that just doesn’t look good.

Then Clemens tries to set up McNamee with that taped phone call. What a joke. What’s next? A note from Clemens wife assuring us that her husband didn’t do it?

Clemens has now filed a lawsuit - and local sportstalk station WEEI had a lawyer on (who they have on for sports-related legal discussions… and perhaps not surprisingly, he’s a regular contributor… go figure)… and I think the lawyer summed it up nicely: In filing this lawsuit, Clemens is either very innocent or very stupid - and by the time the lawsuit is concluded, we’ll know which.

By filing the lawsuit, and with McNamee answering the suit, the only way he can back out of the suit now is if McNamee agrees to back out. And even if that happens, barring McNamee going under oath to change his story and accept his punishment for having “lied” to Mitchell, Clemens will look bad. So as the suit progresses, McNamee’s lawyers now have subpoena power to tear apart Clemens life - including efforts to attack his integrity, as this he-said/he-said comes down in many ways to a question of character (in addition to whatever actual evidence each side can uncover). I think we are all in agreement here on the “integrity” of Clemens “character”… so personally, I’m leaning towards this being a case of Clemens being “very stupid” instead of “very innocent”.

But if he is “very innocent”, then it’s too bad… truly. I just don’t happen to believe that’s the case at this time. Sorry, Roger.