Monday, February 11, 2008

Looking Ahead to Wednesday...

It's getting difficult to keep up with the latest antics of the dueling lawyers in this Clemens/McNamee public feud. They will all meet before Congress on Wednesday, and there appear to be major developments daily! Last time I blogged about this, McNamee's lawyers had just released pictures of "evidence" they had turned over to federal investigators. It appears that these lawyers were engaging in a campaign to "return the favor" to Clemens who had publicly embarassed McNamee by some of the tactics he has employed in an attempt to clear his name in the court of public opinion.

Well, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Clemens' lawyers are now touting evidence that proves McNamee was lying in The Mitchell Report. Here's the key excerpt from pages 168-169 of the Report:

Jose Canseco was playing for the Blue Jays in 1998. On or about June 8-10, 1998, the Toronto Blue Jays played an away series with the Florida Marlins. McNamee attended a lunch party that Canseco hosted at his home in Miami. McNamee stated that, during this luncheon, he observed Clemens, Canseco, and another person he did not know meeting inside Canseco’s house, although McNamee did not personally attend that meeting. Canseco told members of my investigative staff that he had numerous conversations with Clemens about the benefits of Deca-Durabolin and Winstrol and how to “cycle” and “stack” steroids. Canseco has made similar statements publicly.

Clemens' lawyers now say that they have proof (in the form of a receipt from a golf course at the time of the party & a sworn affidavit from Jose Canseco) that Roger Clemens never attended this party or was a part of this meeting. ESPN reporter T.J. Quinn offers some perspective on this admission of evidence:

Also, in this case, current Major League pitcher Andy Pettitte has admitted that he did receive performancing enhancing substances from Brian McNamee. What will this committee meeting Wednesday do to his & Roger's long-time relationship? Will they be pitted against one another?

Are Clemens' lawyers over-stepping their bounds? One Congressman said that Clemens' lead lawyer Rusty Hardin better watch what he says, especially in relation to federal investigators.

Which person is lying? What will the fall-out be? This story has so many compelling issues involved with it. I can't wait to see it all play out on the congressional stage Wednesday.

No comments: