That's a dangerous game Clemens is playing there. If he's not telling the truth he'll come off looking worse than ever and I expect it would cost him any chance he has at the HOF. Even before Mitchell's report came out I thought he took steroids so I'll be shocked if he's telling the truth.

wait until congressional hearings convene again and pettitte gets called to testify. what does he say about clemens?

Hopefully he tells him to capitalize at the beginning of every sentence.

Clemens seems like the kind of guy who would lie under oath anyway, how could they possibly convict him of perjury unless there's far more evidence that hasn't yet been uncovered?

I have heard this "I never used steroids period" before

Can somebody in Washington send Roger a subpoena please?

I don't believe Clemens, but he must know something that the rest of us don't in order to make these declarations. Perhaps he knows every last ounce of dirt anyone can dig up on him and knows they don't lead to definitive proof that he juiced.

By the way, slightly off topic question here. If Rafael Palmeiro said this before Congress, and I assume he was under oath... why are perjury charges not being brought against him?

Oh come on. Who hasn't wanted to throw a bat at Mike Piazza?

By the way, slightly off topic question here. If Rafael Palmeiro said this before Congress, and I assume he was under oath... why are perjury charges not being brought against him?

Roger has put himself in a postion where he has to prove his innocence (which was made much harder by Andy's confession). He has now stated twice, with no equivocation, that he is innocent. If he is that adament, either sue someone or take a lie detector test.

I believe Palmeiro tested positive after his statements to Congress.How has he done that? If he does sue, then he would do as you claimed and put the burden of proff on himself. Which is why he likely won't sue.

Well if he says he didn't do it. I guess "innocent until proven guilty" applies.

Not to Rogah. I think he should be tortured until he admits to everything (including his part in the Kennedy assasination).

Duquette. He's been fielding calls of congratulations ever since the release of the report, which goes a long way toward explaining how Clemens extended the "twilight of his career,'' by, oh, a decade or so. Duquette, who despite a largely successful tenure as Red Sox GM, has been ridiculed hundreds of times for predicting Clemens was nearing the end. Since leaving the Red Sox in 2002, he has never offered another GM job and is currently working as the director of operations for the Israel Baseball League and president of the Duquette Sports Academy. Yet, he won't gloat. Prodded as to whether he's been vindicated, Duquette said, "I'm not sure what I need to be vindicated for ... Red Sox fans are very sophisticated, and you can leave that judgment to them.'' He did get a chuckle when I asked him whether he himself was in the twilight of his own career. Laughing, the 49-year-old responded, "No, I'm still a young guy.''

The Red Sox and our fans were fortunate to see Roger Clemens play in his prime and we had hoped to keep him in Boston during the twilight of his career.

Sweet Baby Jesus if one more person states that Duquette said that Clemens was in the twilight of his career, I’m going to punch them in the baby maker. This is the entire quote:
What he was saying that he hoped that Clemens would stay here until the twilight of his career not that he was in it.

I agree that those four words ("twilight of his career") are often isolated and thus taken out of context, however, Duquette did say "we had hoped to keep him in Boston during the twilight of his career" rather than "until the twilight of his career." I would infer that Duquette was talking about the near feature, and opining that Clemens was, well... "on the back nine", as they say. And arguably he was right, since it appears likely that Roger had a little "help" lengthening his career.

That’s a fair point. I disagree on the semantics as you present them, but I can certainly see your point. I mostly want to smack the people who misquote(d) what Duquette said by taking it out of context and killed him for it in the past, but are now lauding his statement.

Well, as a 37 year old man, if you look at a pic of me when I was 23, you'd think I've eaten that fella. My head/body is different, bigger, and I'm far less likely to leap tall buildings in a single bound.

I don't and have never believed the "look at pics of him when he was a rookie"...People's bodies change drastically sometimes. That said, if there is any more evidence or witnesses that come forward, Rocket and Bonds might as well move in together and start a reality show. Yes, I'd watch every episode.

Joba Chamberlain had the locker next to Roger Clemens during his two months in the majors this year. On Thursday, Chamberlain stood by the Rocket's side when asked about the allegations made against the legendary pitcher in the Mitchell Report.

"Over the last 15 days, it's been extremely difficult, for my family, my children, my extended family," Clemens said. "I'm holding up better than they are. I'm almost numb to some of these suggestions that I used steroids. It's amazing to me that I'm going to lengths that I'm going to have to defend myself.

"It's surfaced again later now with this Mitchell report. Let me be clear: The answer is no, I did not use steroids, human growth hormone, and I've never done so. I did not provide Brian McNamee with any drugs to inject into my body. Brian McNamee did not inject steroids or human growth hormone into my body, either when I played in Toronto for the Blue Jays, or the New York Yankees. This report is simply not true."

on ESPN's MLB front page, ESPNews Headline: Clemens 'almost numb' about (or "to", depending on which headline you find) steroid accusations
Roger really DOES speak, here on his official website! And ESPN has picked it up and posted it in print here.

Excerpt from Roger's statement today:


The video statement from Roger found on either on YouTube.com or his website linked above -- while seemingly as sincere as anyone could wish for -- has a gaping hole in it. As referenced above, Roger mentions specifically that Brian McNamee was not the injector and Roger the injectee, and further, specifically references any such occurrence while he "played in Toronto for the Blue Jays, or the Yankees."

Technically all that is probably correct, as far as it goes. However -- first, I hope someone asks Debbie if she had a role in Roger's post-Boston resurgence, like being Roger's needle-handler. Second, in the statement referenced above, Roger is leaving out all the offseason months, and the additional 2-1/2 to 3 months "grace" into his 2005 and 2007 seasons, and his ENTIRE Houston Astro career.

I hope Mike Wallace asks the "tough" questions. I'm glad it isn't Barbara Walters who's doing the 60 Minutes interview...

I hope they ask if he is willing to take a lie detecting test.

If he were telling the truth, it would still be pretty stupid to take a lie detector test.

Why?

I wouldn't trust my reputation on something like that. Too unreliable. What Clemens is going to do is charge people to prove he was using. He's going to demand evidence. He's going to play this like an attorney in a court of law - never ask a question you don't already know the answer to.

1) Explain your career surges coinciding with your career path crossing that of known/confessed steroid user and facilitator Jose Canseco -- teammates as a Red Sox, particularly in the latter half of 1996; a Blue Jay in 1998; and a Yankee in 2000.
2) Relate in detail the conversation, as referred to in the Mitchell Report, that you had with Jose Canseco between June 8th and June 10th, 1998 at a luncheon party at his home in Miami during a Blue Jays road trip to play the Florida Marlins.
3) The first time McNamee worked for the Yankees, assistant GM Tim McCleary hired him. McNamee lost his job with the Yankees when Joe Torre was hired as manager. Tim McCleary was hired by the Blue Jays in 1995, and McNamee followed him in 1998. Please tell us whether or not you (as the Mitchell report put it) "persuaded" the Yankees to re-hire McNamee in 2000, and what services McNamee performed for you for which you separately paid him.
4) You've stated that McNamee did not inject you with PEDs (or more specifically, HGH or steroids) "either when [you] played in Toronto for the Blue Jays, or the New York Yankees", and that you "did not use" steroids or HGH. Can you state further, unequivocally, that NO ONE including teammates, club attendants, other trainers, yourself or any member of your family has ever injected you with either anabolic steroids or HGH at any time in the past 10 years?
5) Why did you refuse to meet with George Mitchell when he invited you, as reported in the Mitchell Report, "to provide [you] with information about these allegations and to give [you] an opportunity to respond"?

http://boston.redsox.mlb.com/news/article....sp&c_id=mlb
Asked why Clemens waited so long to address the issues, Hardin absorbed the blame, stating he wanted to make sure he had all of the facts straight before facing public scrutiny. He also wanted to make sure that he personally believed Clemens' denials. "It was the natural caution of lawyers who want to make sure they're aware of the facts before they start speaking publicly," Hardin said."If Roger stepped in front of the cameras that first day and said, 'I didn't do it,' without us later being able to give you some reasons as to why you should believe that, I think it would have been rejected," he continued. "That was my judgment at the time. People were, and are, so emotional about this that they weren't willing to listen.

What "facts"? Doesn't Hardin mean "story" instead of "facts"? Roger hasn't stated any "facts", just a rather hole-y denial of certain portions and timeframes of the scenarios laid out in the Mitchell Report in his website video, as well as 180-degree reversing his public opinion of Bruce McNamee within the space of a few months, in the statement first issued by Hardin.

Q. President George W. Bush has declined to be interviewed by you. What would you ask him if you had the chance?A. What in the world prepared you to be the commander in chief of the largest superpower in the world? In your background, Mr. President, you apparently were incurious. You didn't want to travel. You knew very little about the military. . . . The governor of Texas doesn't have the kind of power that some governors have. . . . Why do you think they nominated you? . . . Do you think that has anything to do with the fact that the country is so [expletive] up?

I highlighted the portion I did because I found it to be about as fishy as you point out in your analysis.

If he were telling the truth, it would still be pretty stupid to take a lie detector test.

I agree with you on this. But if he's telling the truth, he should publicly demand a Congressional subpoena and go to D.C. to testify under oath that he did not have an injecting relationship with that woman, Miss Steroids. If he did that, it might sway some people into believing McNamee is lying.

On whether he has advised Clemens to take legal action (lawsuit) to combat the claims:
``I hope you don't tell future clients of mine this, but a lawsuit is the least desirable way to resolve anything. It drags on two or three years, Very often it reaches inconclusive results because of money and time and expenses. It makes you unable to concentrate on anything else. It takes over your life, and he doesn't need that.
``He's 99.9 and 9/10s percent retired and he's going to move on. His concern is, when he moves on, how does he repair his reputation after this initial flurry? And a lawsuit right now wouldn't do it.''

On any concern that there is evidence against Clemens:
``I know there is no evidence out there.''

[...] So this is a special event. I wonder if Roger asked for Mike Wallace specifically (I would have enjoyed a special interview by Andy Rooney, even though he's known for his essays).
I got a kick out of one Q/A in this Boston Globe article from 2005 when Mike Wallace was interviewed, returning to his Brookline MA roots.
Maybe, even at 89, he can ask questions like that of Roger -- so long as he isn't a closet devoted Clemens fan who wouldn't want to derail Roger's HOF goal.

Indeed.

I sorta figured they had a connection, 89-y/o-fanboy and baseball legend, baseball legend and venerable media personality to be cultivated...

[...] only WC is old enough to remember when Mike Wallace would stop in the middle of an interview during the late 1950s and early 1960s, hold up a pack of Winston cigarettes, and tell his audience how tasty they were.

Can't remember if they were filtered or not, tho...

Yeah, I also remember when he actually LOOKED like the picture you see in the bios at CBS, etc.

wallace also smoked DURING his interviews, following the lead of edward r. murrow. those were the good old days!