forsberg_us wrote:

If anything good comes of this, maybe the government decides its time to stay out of the business of spending countless hours and dollars worrying whether athletes used steroids and devote those resources to more deserving subjects.

X2+fist pump!

I would agree with you AP. I understand the criminal implications of perjury, but the application here was senseless. There is no check where federal prosecutors get to decide which crimes are worth pursuit, and which are not. Unfortunately allowing that leads to all kinds of potentially scary loopholes that I wouldn't be comfortable allowing.

The story of interest will be whether Clemens and Bonds can get into the Hall of Fame, an entity that does not require the burden of proof in order to withhold their vote (as evident with McGwire). To me, Clemens has a better shot then Bonds, but I'm not sure either of them make it. Bonds had lab tests at Balco that show without a shadow of a doubt that he was doping, but they were ruled inadmissable in a court of law due to improper search and seizure. While that keeps him from a conviction, it still may not get him into Cooperstown. Clemens is more of a mystery. Can you really put much faith in syringes that were over 10 years old and stored in some dude's house? They weren't handled by labratory staff and put away with vaccuum sealed, tamper proof, marking containers...

I don't know. It seems like the HoF voters have ran a pretty clean ship on who they are willing to show the love too. We'll see.

I don't know either Fors. It's a vote. Which means that if a Boston voter still hates Clemens being a Yankee, he won't vote for him. That's ridiculous, but totally on the table. Nobody voting has to justify their vote.

Notes of importance:
- Bonds was a bit of a dickhead to the media, and we all saw how well that played for McGwire.
- The voters have yet to accept anyone with even an alledged history of sterroids since the Mitchell Report (to my knowledge, I may need to look that up to be certain). At some point they may decide to relax that standard, but it doesn't fare well for either Clemens or Bonds.

I guess we'll see, one way or another.

"(The accusations) were about me and my family, my entire reputation. If I didn’t have a family, if I were single, what they were saying wouldn’t have mattered in the same way. But these lies hurt people.â€

The "protecting my family" thing is hackneyed and disingenuous to begin with, but it's especially ironic coming from a guy who so easily threw his wife under the bus.
I hope Fat Ass isn't under the impression the baseball world has been sufficiently convinced he didn't take steroids because 12 jurors who don't know the difference between a 4-seam fastball and an Italian meatball found his slimy drug-dealing accuser to be an incredible witness.


http://blog.chron.com/clemens/2012/06/in-exclusive-interview-clemens-says-protecting-his-family-fueled-his-fight/

Well that and his kid took him yard earlier in the game.
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2346877

forsberg_us wrote:

Wasn't it Clemens who once threw a fastball at his kid's head because he felt the kid was crowding the plate?

Something like that. I think Kiki or Kooky or Kobayashi or whichever K Kid kame out of Deb's krotch had just been signed by the Astros, was taking the ritualistic introductory batting practice with the big club at the Juice Box and had the temerity to make contact off one of the old man's fastballs, so Mr. Father of the Year buzzed little Kinky's tower to remind him who the alpha dickhead is in the family.

OK, I got some of the details wrong.
I've heard of fathers and/or coaches plunking a kid in the rear end to help him get over the fear of being in the batter's box, but the kid in most instances is 5 or 6-years-old and the adult doesn't come up and in with a 95 mph heater.