Comments on: …. Perjurific

By: …. Perjurific | barry bonds indictment

…. Perjurific | barry bonds indictment — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 23:55:57 +0000

[...] Read the rest of this great post here [...]

By: marc

marc — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 03:57:10 +0000

care to explain why Clemens missed the first third of the last two seasons?

By: Mark O’Connor

Mark O’Connor — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 15:13:59 +0000

“Evidence” is not something you will find in a newspaper or on ESPN. In Bonds’ testimony, the prosecutors refer to piles of stuff we never “see.” Evaluating the “evidence” against either of these guys is speculation at best.

By: El

El — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 13:33:51 +0000

He’s always been seen as a primadonna and not a team player. Kind of a horses-a$$, really.

Barry in a phrase.

the evidence against Roger Clemens is staggering compared to Bonds

Bullshit.
Read the testimony.

By: marc

marc — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 20:38:21 +0000

The difference is, to me (in addition to what others posted) is that Clemens didn’t really have that great a reputation in the first place. He’s always been seen as a primadonna and not a team player. Kind of a horses-a$$, really.

I’m talking about a “gleaming example for the youth of America”, as ballplayers are apparently supposed to be. A real scandal of the same ilk, where the media will have to face their lack of unbiased coverage.

I also see Clemens on the roster of the Astros, whereas I have a feeling no-one will even return Bonds’ phone calls.

By: Jay T.

Jay T. — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 20:26:40 +0000

Exactly… the evidence against Roger Clemens is staggering compared to Bonds, yet some reporters are still trying to side-step the fact that he’s just a bold-faced liar. At this point, anyone who thinks Bonds is dirty and Clemens is clean is either one of two things…

1. Seriously misinformed and out of the loop with recent events.
2. Racist.

By: uncle joe mccarthy

uncle joe mccarthy — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 18:00:57 +0000

did you see one sports reporter taking bonds’ side?

did you see any politicians questioning the evidence against him?

By: El

El — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 15:02:37 +0000

so the media will be forced to sanctify a great white american hero

Google Clemens, Roger
How is he getting a ‘break’?

By: marc

marc — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 03:31:57 +0000

I’m more impressed by the Rangers batting around without a hit today. Must be them new baseballs.

anyway, yes, good comments about Bonds – intent is the hardest thing to prove in law, and how in hell can they prove he “knew”? Outside of a video camera or phone conversation (which would probably be disallowed as Bonds wouldn’t have known about it, thus not giving permission), there’s just no way. And the clock ticks away – by the time this gets to trial, a 5 year old conversation will seem pretty shaky.

I just want Cal Ripken to be outted as a meth freak, so the media will be forced to sanctify a great white american hero, and Bonds will get a break.

By: Aaron B.

Aaron B. — Mon, 03 Mar 2008 23:03:27 +0000

“Denker might not make the Giants’ roster…”

we should all hope that Denker isn’t on the roster at the end of ST. He still needs a season or two in the minors, and there’s already a logjam of bad contracts, err, older infielders, plus the guys without options.