Roger Comes clean

Mr. Wozniak:
Please don't insult your intelligence NOR mine. If you or I paste an entire article by itself should that be considered a post? Please answer a simple question. Are you the ballroom spoke person or lawyer? UHM?
Thank you


Note to self: The next time I post an article add the words; blah blah blah, to make it official.

The article was on topic, I think the rhetoric by the attorney is BS, but what's wrong with posting an article. If it would have had nothing to do with the topic, then that would be different.
 
It's not rhetoric. After taking a couple thousand depositions in my life, I think I'm qualified to comment on how people typically address questions posed at a deposition or before a tribunal.

Note to self: The next time I post an article add the words; blah blah blah, to make it official.

The article was on topic, I think the rhetoric by the attorney is BS, but what's wrong with posting an article. If it would have had nothing to do with the topic, then that would be different.
 
I have no idea what you're talking about. Someone asked me what Petite would say, and I responded. I never commented on the statement.

Quote=Bijou Media;1215271]Whatever you say Mikey,

For an alleged Lawyer, you obviously are too blind to see the holes in that statement.

Ward said the discussion he was referring to occurred at Clemens' house.

"Based on what we know, there was a situation where Andy was speaking to Roger in Brian's presence, then Andy came over to Brian and essentially said, 'Why didn't you tell me about this stuff?' He referred to HGH," Ward said. "Brian discouraged him and then several months later, when he [Pettitte] got injured, he came back and asked Brian about it, and that's when Brian injected him. We believe that based on the fact that Andy came to Brian and asked him about HGH, it was Roger who told Andy about HGH and that's why he asked Brian about it."


He's Rogers freind so he MUST have ask him LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

. . . and how did they figure that out; from a bum on the street? Stupid! If it comes out of Andy's mouth then I'd say it's true, otherwise it was just a lame response to the report put out by Clemens lawyers. I found a few things questionable in the report, I'm waiting on some more information before I will say anything.

I have found sooooooooooooooooooooooooooo many holes in Mcnamees statements in the Mitchell report it has left my head spinning! Therefore I don't believe a thing that comes out of his mouth.[/quote]
 
I have no idea what you're talking about. Someone asked me what Petite would say, and I responded. I never commented on the statement.

You replied to what I said about the article. I said nothing about what you said in post #83.

I commented the content in the article that Salsadancer posted. I didn't say anything on what You said Petitte would say; you're probably right.

The attorney meant, the attorney that made the comments that were written in the article, not you.
 
Where did I make a comment about the statement. Not that it matters, but I don't see it.

I have no idea what you're talking about. Someone asked me what Petite would say, and I responded. I never commented on the statement.

You replied to what I said about the article. I said nothing about what you said in post #83.

I commented the content in the article that Salsadancer posted. I didn't say anything on what You said Petitte would say; you're probably right.

The attorney meant, the attorney that made the comments that were written in the article, not you.
 
Where did I make a comment about the statement. Not that it matters, but I don't see it.

Note to self: The next time I post an article add the words; blah blah blah, to make it official.

The article was on topic, I think the rhetoric by the attorney is BS, but what's wrong with posting an article. If it would have had nothing to do with the topic, then that would be different.

This was the post you replied to, I assumed that you were responding to my statements about what I said about the article.

In response to what Nuetron posted: I said that there is nothing wrong with posting the article, I thought what was said in the article was BS, but there was nothing wrong with posting it. Not word for word, but that's what I meant.

I deleted the post, since it was based on a misconception
 
Bye Bye, just kidding. I am laughing too hard to ban you.

Thank you sir. I will try to refrain from this type of behavior in the future. Getting banned would have left a big hole in my morning activities. Coming here is one of my pleasures. I will become a pub member soon as soon as business picks up again. It's my slow season.

Also I would like to apologize to my FRIENDS, for my rather boorish manners of late. Thanks, to those of you whom PMed me their support.

Again my apologies.

Paul.
 
Thank you sir. I will try to refrain from this type of behavior in the future. Getting banned would have left a big hole in my morning activities. Coming here is one of my pleasures. I will become a pub member soon as soon as business picks up again. It's my slow season.

Also I would like to apologize to my FRIENDS, for my rather boorish manners of late. Thanks, to those of you whom PMed me their support.

Again my apologies.

Paul.

Well how could you?!? J/K
Written in perfect grammar, I believe you deserve a medal. Sir. :D
 
:rolleyes:

If, I expected him to say something, I wouldn't have wrote, "as expected he had no comment"

Naaaahhh......he wouldn't gain anything by saying something against his so-called good friend by talking to the media. I am sure he would rather let either the government or lawyers same something....that way, he will not come out looking some much like the bad guy...the guy that 'was supposed to be Roger's friend but threw him under the bus' type of guy...
 
Yes sir.....suddenly proof is staring to show up. NOW we need a little testing to see IF Roger's DNA is anywhere to be found.

After meeting with lawyers from the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee for a seven-hour deposition, McNamee beat a path to an exit without saying a word to reporters. He left the talking to his trio of lawyers, who discussed the two color photos of items they say McNamee saved for several years and, when tested, will link Clemens to the use of performance-enhancing drugs. Less than an hour later, also in the Rayburn House Office Building, the seven-time Cy Young Award winner held his own news conference, after wrapping up the first of two days of meetings with more than a dozen lawmakers, including committee chairman Henry Waxman and ranking Republican Tom Davis.

McNamee's attorneys said he turned over physical evidence to federal prosecutors, shortly after Clemens held a Jan. 7 nationally televised news conference at which he played a taped conversation between the two men.
"At that point," Ward said, "[McNamee] decided there was no holds barred."
One photo shows a beer can that Emery said was taken out of a trash can in Clemens' New York apartment in 2001. Emery said the beer can contained needles used to inject Clemens. That picture also shows what Emery said was gauze used to wipe blood off Clemens after a shot. The other photo shows vials of what Emery said were testosterone, and unused needles -- items the attorney said Clemens gave to McNamee. While Clemens' camp called it "manufactured" evidence, Emery said the items were "just a collection of stuff" thrown in a box and "kept in a basement for seven years."
Emery said McNamee kept the items because he "had this inkling and gut feeling that he couldn't trust Roger and better keep something to protect himself in the future."


ESPN - McNamee's lawyers offer photos of needles, vials of testosterone - MLB
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)