Steve and the Tank! - Clemens' Congressional Circus

Thursday, February 14, 2008

I really hoped to sit down Wednesday and do my taxes. I really lost a day of my life and want a huge tax refund as I felt my tax money wasted by our elected representatives.

It was painful watching Roger Clemens, Brain McNamee, Charlie Scheeler (Senator Mitchell's representative), and our elected representatives. I can live with a innocent or guilty Roger Clemens. What I disliked was the trying of this case in the media prior to yesterday's testimony. What ever happened to "innocent until proven guilty?" Everyone deserves their day in court, even one as unusual as a non-traditional courtroom like Congress.

I started taking notes for a post but felt like I was scoring a boxing match. I had hoped to save the boxing report for the Klitschko-Ibragimov fight next Saturday night at the Garden. Here's how I scored it:

Hurt Clemens:
(1) Andy Pettitte's and Chuck Knoblauch's testimony. When your best friend goes against you, it's hard to survive it. Pettitte even testified that his Dad gave him the HGH.

(2) Contacting his nanny. This doesn't look good as potential tampering of a witness.

Helped Clemens:
(1) Brian McNamee has much less credibility than Clemens. Where do I start? Congressman Waxman said that "Mr. McNamee has twice failed to tell government investigators the truth."

(A) In the decade since the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal in 1998-1999, we have gone from trying to figure out the meaning of "'is' is" to "It is what it is." If you figure out the new meaning of "is", please feel free to comment in our blog. Many thanks to Steve to troubleshooting the dasBlog issue last week.

(B) His medical credentials: I have heard of correspondence degrees. But PhDs to a university that has no building? Come on. Maybe Congressman Issa was right when he said that PhD stands for Piled Higher Deeper.

(C) Holding onto syringes is the ultimate "get out of jail card." As Congressman Soulder pointed out, what is on them? Are they admissible? (Suggestion: Let's get some conclusive results on these syringes before admitting them as evidence.)

(D) Jose Cancesco's barbecue/"luncheon": Clemens has Blue Jays radio announcer and Roger's golf receipt hurt McNamee's claim that Clemens was at Jose Canseco's house.

(2) Why didn't Senator Mitchell's staff contact Roger Clemens? David Justice went through the same thing on Michael Kay's ESPN 1050 Radio show the day after the Mitchell Report came out. The Players Union did a bad job of representing the players and Clemens paid the price. Andy didn't find out that he was going to be in the Mitchell Report until five or six days before its release.

(3) Abscess on Roger's behind: The trainers didn't find it but McNamee did. I can't address this further, more than I want to know. TMI.

(4) The LA Times was wrong with Jason Grimsley's testimony and had to issue an apology last year. Will Senator Mitchell have to issue one if McNamee's credibility continues to be brought into question?

Verdict: This is hard to say because of the following:

(1) This did NOT take place in a real courtroom.

(2) How admissible is the evidence? Not only physical but the "he said, he said" nature of the proceeds.

(3) Cross examinations: Roger's counsel tried to stand up for him but were NOT allowed to address the panel.

(4) Conflict of interest: As I have stated months ago, baseball is bereft with conflict. It starts with Commissioner Selig who transferred ownership of the Brewers to his daughter Wendy. He still maintains an office in the new Miller Park in Milwaukee. He is a fox guarding the chicken coop.

The next fox guarding the chicken coop is Senator Mitchell. As I mentioned months ago, Senator Mitchell has a conflict of interest as a Red Sox Director. How can Senator Mitchell be impartial?

Even Congressman Kanjorski who has known Senator Mitchell for over 25 years and wanted him to be a Presidential candidate had his doubts on other issues. I agree with Congressman Kanjorski that "We would have liked to talked to God." Me too.

(5) What does the House Government Oversight Committee have to do with any of this? Congressman Chris Shays was quoted in Wednesday's New York Post as saying "I feel we've gone beyond our mandate. Our mandate is not to decide the legacy of individual baseball players."

Where Do We Go From Here:

(1) I don't know. We are going into some unchartered territory.

If you can get an impartial jury, is Clemens guilty beyond a reasonable doubt? Will he be indicted?

In a weird way, this makes me look forward to a Barry Bonds trial because it will be a circus but in a more traditional legal framework. OK, I am trying to somehow comfort myself and it's not fully working. I will have to get a prescription for Prozac.

(2) Will this really clean up steroids amongst kids? Probably NOT because there are NO enforcement exercises. This is an exercise in futility and another waste of our tax dollars.

(3) Does this better Commissioner Selig's legacy or worse it as he closed the barn door AFTER the horse got out? MLB owners should NOT have extended Commissioner Selig's contract this year. MLB owners should NOT have extended Commissioner Selig's contract this year. Get a truly independent commissioner.

(4) Baseball better clean up or they will have to deal with the Congressional Circus on a regular basis. Just ask anyone affected by Sarbanes-Oxley what government overregulation can do to destroy your industry.

Posted by a disappointed Tank in NY.

P.S. The Senate isn't going to let the House have all the fun. Watch for Spygate hearings in the near future. More wasted tax dollars. I better go back and finish my taxes before the Congress wastes my refund.

MLB | Steroids

Thursday, February 14, 2008 12:33:19 AM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)

Comments [1] |

Thursday, February 14, 2008 4:36:41 PM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)

I totally respect your belief one is innocent first. More importantly, you asked the correct question (maybe obliquely, but you asked it); why is this an issue that belongs in the Federal Legislature? Even granted baseball is a special industry that violates anti-trust statues, why is the Congress interested? If anybody in baseball commits a crime, that is an issue for law enforcement, whether the crime is drunk driving, dog fighting or illegal steriod use.

If the Congress really believed regulating baseball should be a big feature of the Federal Government, it should do as it has done for electric companies (created the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission). Those of you who know Bill N are probably thinking something happened, Bill N would never suggest and expanded government. I belive the minute the American people heard some of their tax dollars would be funding a federal agency to police baseball, they would vote the jokers out. That would end this over-reaching by the legislature.

I suggest everybody go on a tax-strike this year. OK, maybe not, since we know that leads to prison (prison is probably the most depressing and stressful place one could ever want to be) but write your federal representative a letter telling them to leave the law enforcement business. In fact, invite the Congress to refrain from passing any new laws for a 12 month period, how great would that be?

Lastly, the blog software update has been great.

Bill N. in a snowy VT

Bill N. in VT

Comments are closed.