February 13, 200818 yr I can not believe the money spent by our Gov. on this type thing. Insulting!!! In their defense, two or three of the committee members said that they didn't feel they should be spending time on this, that there were more important issues that they should be focusing on. I found it interesting how divided the members of the committee were on several issues......like I said, some didn't even feel they should be having the hearing while others thought it was important, some seemed to already have made up their mind to believe Clemens while others seemed to be siding with McNamee from the beginning. I thought the closing statement by Waxman at the end was inappropriate, especially apologizing to McNamee for some of the comments of the other committee members. I think he lost some credibility among his peers by doing so.
February 13, 200818 yr I can not believe the money spent by our Gov. on this type thing. Insulting!!! If this gives young athletes knowledge on the dangers of steroids and other illegal substances that are performance enhancing, I'm all for it. I'm not on top of this situation, but they're not saying Clemens was/is a long time user of the stuff like Bonds. They're just talking about a few shots here and there. Right? :confused: Yes, that is true.
February 13, 200818 yr Yes, that is true. So basically the old lady doesn't know what she's talking about.
February 13, 200818 yr So basically the old lady doesn't know what she's talking about. I'm guessing. Then again, what congressman or woman know much about anything anyway.
February 13, 200818 yr That's a big "if". So far, independent third parties have supported McNamee's story and not Clemens. Thus, McNamee has far less to worry about a potential perjury charge than does Clemens. That's what I was trying to say. If I didn't know about the depositions, I would have believed McNamee was lying. However, the nanny escapade blew this thing out of the water. Clemens invited a potential witness to his house??? Ooops.
February 13, 200818 yr As bad as Waxman was, what about the Rep from MO asking Clemens what hat he would be wearing on his Hall of Fame plaque??? What??? Who asks something like that?
February 13, 200818 yr As bad as Waxman was, what about the Rep from MO asking Clemens what hat he would be wearing on his Hall of Fame plaque??? What??? Who asks something like that? I thought that was extremely inappropriate as well. I thought the whole process was a circus. Why do the committe members come and go as they please during the hearing? You would think they would be required to be there for the entire hearing.
February 13, 200818 yr If ya gotta go, ya gotta go... I doubt that was it. After the opening statements, most of the chairs were empty except for the chairman and the ones whose time slots were coming up. The one lady at the end even admitted that she had missed pretty much the whole thing and only came in at the end for her allotted time.
February 13, 200818 yr That's what I was trying to say. If I didn't know about the depositions, I would have believed McNamee was lying. However, the nanny escapade blew this thing out of the water. Clemens invited a potential witness to his house??? Ooops. Not sure he did that. But Roger did talk to her. If you are being implicated in something it is in the defendants rights to find out what this witness knows. Or something to that effect. Just as long as he isn't "bullying" the witness into saying what he/she wants to hear. And Roger did say that he told this nanny to be truthful. As bad as Waxman was, what about the Rep from MO asking Clemens what hat he would be wearing on his Hall of Fame plaque??? What??? Who asks something like that? That was out of line. And Roger did the right thing by not answering or refusing to answer.
February 13, 200818 yr Chairman Waxman seems to already have his mind made up on the issue, and definitely seems to favor McNamee on this. Now I really don't know how something like this works, however I would think that someone who is a chairman can't show like favoritism or just whatever, and then go out of his way to apologize to someone like he did for McNamee. I some sense he was--Mitchell's report was accepted as true by the Committee and McNamee's testimony is confirmed by Knoblach and Pettite. Although, it appeared that the Committee was split in two before hand and told to grill one or the other. I would see no reason why ALL the Democrats would "favor" Clemens and ALL the Republicans would "favor" McNamee (from what I saw).
February 13, 200818 yr I thought that was extremely inappropriate as well. I thought the whole process was a circus. Why do the committe members come and go as they please during the hearing? You would think they would be required to be there for the entire hearing. The rest of Congress is still working. At one point there was a vote on something this morning.
February 13, 200818 yr I some sense he was--Mitchell's report was accepted as true by the Committee and McNamee's testimony is confirmed by Knoblach and Pettite. Although, it appeared that the Committee was split in two before hand and told to grill one or the other. I would see no reason why ALL the Democrats would "favor" Clemens and ALL the Republicans would "favor" McNamee (from what I saw). I saw it the other way. :confused: Seemed to me that more Democrats were going after Clemens and the Republicans hammered McNamee.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.