Update: The New York Times reports that Roger and Rusty hired a private investigator.
In the interest of honesty and fairness Roger Clemens's lawyer announces that the Rocket will investigate this steroid thing hisself. From the New York Post:
Roger Clemens' attorney has launched his own investigation into whether the Yankees pitcher used performance-enhancing substances as the Mitchell Report claimed.
"We are convinced the conclusions in Mitchell's report are wrong and are investigating the findings ourselves," lawyer Rusty Hardin told The New York Times. "At this stage we have uncovered a lot of logical people who we thought Mitchell was going to talk to but never talked to him or his investigators. That's troubling."
Rusty Hardin sports a good resume. Hardin says Clemens did not use steroids and anyone who says he did, is itching for a fight:
"Roger Clemens did not take steroids, and anybody who says he did had better start looking for a hell of a good lawyer."
Maybe a lawyer as good as George Mitchell? But we digress...Hardin is quoted in the Houston Chron (Via East Coast Bias):
"Roger Clemens adamantly, vehemently and whatever other adjectives can be used, denies that he has ever used steroids or whatever the word is for improper substances."
'Steroids' is good, counselor. 'PEDs', 'anabolics', 'juice', 'gear', and ''roids' all work too. Besides, 'adamently', and 'vehemently' are not adjectives, they are adverbs. Not that we are all English experts, or whatever you call someone who 'intrinsically' knows English.
Is there any evidence Clemen's used PEDs, or them there ster-oids:
Roger Clemens vehemently denies allegations in the Mitchell report that he used
performance-enhancing steroids, and is outraged that his name is included in the report based on the uncorroborated allegations of a troubled man threatened with federal criminal prosecution. Roger has been repeatedly tested for these substances and he has never tested positive. There has never been one shred of tangible evidence that he ever used these substances and yet he is being slandered today.
MLB.Com expands on Hardin's thoughts:
When the Mitchell Report was first released, Hardin said he was leaning against filing a lawsuit, but on Sunday, he admitted he may be changing his tune.
"When I was asked about it the first time, I said I didn't think it made much sense," Hardin said. "[Clemens is] a public figure and the standard is much higher as to what you would have to prove to succeed. But I have to tell you, we're moving more and more in the direction of considering [a lawsuit] now, in spite of it.
"I would say simply that's a possibility. No decision has been made about it. Quite frankly, the decisions about lawsuits and stuff will come later. We'll get this initial thing out of the way, we'll let everybody talk to him and ask him questions about whatever they want and then we'll figure out where to go from there."
About the 'attacks' on Clemens:
"The attacks have been unbelievable," Hardin said. "I've represented a fair number of people the public is aware of, and I don't remember the meanness of the articles and of the commentary. There are some people on ESPN that really need to get a life. These things are really personally mean.
"There's a big distinction about a member of the public expressing their opinion, or a member of the media, saying, 'I think Roger Clemens took steroids.' That's perfectly legitimate. What's not legitimate is you better be truthful when you come out and say personally somebody did 'x' and concluded they did 'x.'
"Like the LA Times. Now, they've probably got six lawyers in a room trying to figure out what to do, and we haven't even said we were suing. But they filed a story that was based clearly on wrong information and stated it as a fact. And that's the danger problem. And if this judge had not unsealed the affidavit in LA, no one would still know."
Rusty sounds like a pretty clever lawyer. It will be very interesting to follow the Clemens/Hardin saga. As East Coast Bias says, this investigation will be one of a long line of truth- seeking impartial inquires for swift boat justice:
In other news, Dick Cheney has been assigned to investigate accusations of wrongdoing by Halliburton. Oliver North has announced that he will get to the bottom of Iran-Contra. The CIA, in conjunction with the Cuban government, is launching an independent probe into the assassination of John F. Kennedy. (Last one...) Lindsay Lohan has been named the new drug czar and will personally oversee counter-drug activities in Colombia.
i like your wrote style... thanks for your info anyway :)
Posted by: Busby SEO Test | 12/11/2008 at 10:55
I read the articles and all the things here inside this blog .,I got many information that
I really need .,Thanks for sharing.,
Posted by: SMS | 06/18/2009 at 17:26
that's nice info
Posted by: birthday sms | 08/19/2009 at 13:43
I don’t think that all the articles will remain in the mind without missing a single word whichever we read. I think this article done a great job.What a best way to describe your view. Thanks for sharing with us. Really like your informative article.
Hopefully we will get more interesting topic from you in future.
Posted by: Funny SMS Messages | 09/10/2009 at 05:51
thanks for sharing with us
Posted by: messages | 09/11/2009 at 18:44
'Steroids' is good, counselor. 'PEDs', 'anabolics', 'juice', 'gear', and ''roids' all work too. Besides, 'adamently', and 'vehemently' are not adjectives, they are adverbs. Not that we are all English experts, or whatever you call someone who 'intrinsically' knows English.
Posted by: Funny Questions | 09/20/2009 at 06:46
that's really informative
Posted by: funny sms | 11/21/2009 at 14:38
Thanks for sharing....
Posted by: latest 2011 horoscopes | 07/25/2011 at 08:55
PageRank is probably one of the most important algorithms ever developed for the Web.
PageRank is not simply based upon the total number of inbound links.
The basic approach of PageRank is that a document is in fact considered the more important the more other documents link to it,
but those inbound links do not count equally.
good points here about Trust now being a major factor in search engine results,
that goes with what Rand and others have been saying too.
this also settles for me the value of a natural approach to gaining backlinks and not getting a huge bunch of them,
or a large # of high pr backlinks in a short period of time - it rather undermines the Trust factor.
I do wonder what you think of bing and how Trust does/will play a role in their results.
it seems to me from a rather preliminary and cursory look at some results and comparing those to over at google and yahoo,
that bing ofter relies more on the keyword/s being the actual url,
which seems to me a rather poor way to rank sites/pages.
Mobile Pouches
Contact: 0345-3042844PageRank is probably one of the most important algorithms ever developed for the Web.
PageRank is not simply based upon the total number of inbound links.
The basic approach of PageRank is that a document is in fact considered the more important the more other documents link to it,
but those inbound links do not count equally.
good points here about Trust now being a major factor in search engine results,
that goes with what Rand and others have been saying too.
this also settles for me the value of a natural approach to gaining backlinks and not getting a huge bunch of them,
or a large # of high pr backlinks in a short period of time - it rather undermines the Trust factor.
I do wonder what you think of bing and how Trust does/will play a role in their results.
it seems to me from a rather preliminary and cursory look at some results and comparing those to over at google and yahoo,
that bing ofter relies more on the keyword/s being the actual url,
which seems to me a rather poor way to rank sites/pages.
Mobile Pouches
Contact: 0345-3042844PageRank is probably one of the most important algorithms ever developed for the Web.
PageRank is not simply based upon the total number of inbound links.
The basic approach of PageRank is that a document is in fact considered the more important the more other documents link to it,
but those inbound links do not count equally.
good points here about Trust now being a major factor in search engine results,
that goes with what Rand and others have been saying too.
this also settles for me the value of a natural approach to gaining backlinks and not getting a huge bunch of them,
or a large # of high pr backlinks in a short period of time - it rather undermines the Trust factor.
I do wonder what you think of bing and how Trust does/will play a role in their results.
it seems to me from a rather preliminary and cursory look at some results and comparing those to over at google and yahoo,
that bing ofter relies more on the keyword/s being the actual url,
which seems to me a rather poor way to rank sites/pages.
Mobile Pouches
Contact: 0345-3042844PageRank is probably one of the most important algorithms ever developed for the Web.
PageRank is not simply based upon the total number of inbound links.
The basic approach of PageRank is that a document is in fact considered the more important the more other documents link to it,
but those inbound links do not count equally.
good points here about Trust now being a major factor in search engine results,
that goes with what Rand and others have been saying too.
this also settles for me the value of a natural approach to gaining backlinks and not getting a huge bunch of them,
or a large # of high pr backlinks in a short period of time - it rather undermines the Trust factor.
I do wonder what you think of bing and how Trust does/will play a role in their results.
it seems to me from a rather preliminary and cursory look at some results and comparing those to over at google and yahoo,
that bing ofter relies more on the keyword/s being the actual url,
which seems to me a rather poor way to rank sites/pages.
Mobile Pouches
Contact: 0345-3042844PageRank is probably one of the most important algorithms ever developed for the Web.
PageRank is not simply based upon the total number of inbound links.
The basic approach of PageRank is that a document is in fact considered the more important the more other documents link to it,
but those inbound links do not count equally.
good points here about Trust now being a major factor in search engine results,
that goes with what Rand and others have been saying too.
this also settles for me the value of a natural approach to gaining backlinks and not getting a huge bunch of them,
or a large # of high pr backlinks in a short period of time - it rather undermines the Trust factor.
I do wonder what you think of bing and how Trust does/will play a role in their results.
it seems to me from a rather preliminary and cursory look at some results and comparing those to over at google and yahoo,
that bing ofter relies more on the keyword/s being the actual url,
which seems to me a rather poor way to rank sites/pages.
Mobile Pouches
Contact: 0345-3042844
Posted by: wholesale mobile pouches in lahore | 08/04/2011 at 08:40
Thank you for this article.I’m still waiting for some interesting thoughts from your site in your next post.i will read more.
Posted by: discount christian louboutin | 06/09/2012 at 16:02