Pftttt on the whole thing!!!!

[Old Sweater]

New indictment against Barry Bonds unsealed
By PAUL ELIAS, Associated Press Writer
8 hours, 23 minutes ago



AP - May 13, 8:34 pm EDT

In this Dec. 21, 2007 file pho…

AP - May 13, 8:33 pm EDT 1 of 2 MLB Gallery SAN FRANCISCO (AP)—Federal prosecutors have unveiled a revamped indictment against Barry Bonds, but the career home run leader’s lawyers say nothing has changed.

“Barry Bonds is innocent,” the player’s lead attorney, Allen Ruby, said after his client was once again charged with lying to a grand jury and hampering the federal government’s doping investigation.

Bonds originally was indicted in November by a federal grand jury on four counts of perjury and one count of obstruction of justice.

On Tuesday, a grand jury handed up a superseding indictment charging him with 14 counts of making false declarations to a grand jury in 2003 and one count of obstruction of justice. No new lies were alleged.

“It’s exactly the same,” Golden Gate University law professor Peter Keane said. “It’s two ways of saying it’s lying, and there’s really no substantial difference between what he was charged with then and what he is charged with now.”

Following a motion by Bonds’ lawyers to dismiss the case, U.S. District Judge Susan Illston in February ordered prosecutors to rewrite the indictment because multiple alleged lies were lumped into single charges.


The case against Bonds remains built on whether he lied when he told the grand jury that his personal trainer, Greg Anderson, never supplied him with steroids and human growth hormone.

Bonds’ next hearing already had been scheduled for June 6 before the new indictment was unsealed, but Ruby said it is unclear whether Bonds’ will be expected to enter a plea then. Ruby said Bonds will appear in court to plead not guilty to the new charges.

The Major League Baseball Players Association said last week it was investigating whether to file a collusion grievance against teams for not pursuing Bonds, who became a free agent when the Giants decided they didn’t want him back after 15 seasons.

The 43-year-old outfielder, a seven-time NL MVP, says he wants to play this year. His agent claims no team has made an offer for the 14-time All-Star. Bonds hit 28 homers last year to raise his total to 762, seven more than Hank Aaron’s previous record.



http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=AhZjJj.c_r1yAhWiNHTUSvapu7YF?slug=ap-bondsindicted&prov=ap&type=lgns&print=1


Gov't blowing tax payers money. Good ol' Boys Club keeping one of the sweetest swings ever from a job.

[Captain Cold Nose]

Gov't blowing tax payers money. Good ol' Boys Club keeping one of the sweetest swings ever from a job.

Why does his swing excuse him for possibly lying to a federal grand jury?

[whoisonit]

Gov't blowing tax payers money. Good ol' Boys Club keeping one of the sweetest swings ever from a job.

How dare law enforcement waste money on people who break the law. Especialy when the law breaker is a gifted jock. How dare they. Don't these trouble makers know talented athletes should be allowed to do their thing ? Why isn't the money being spent on something important, like busting pot heads ? pfttt is right. Stupid government.

[BenHertz]

If he was just a professional body builder, would this have gone to federal court?

[whoisonit]

If he was just a professional body builder, would this have gone to federal court?

Many people you have never heard of are in Federal Court every single day. Some are even unfairly persecuted. What is your point ?

[BenHertz]

Many people you have never heard of are in Federal Court every single day. Some are even unfairly persecuted. What is your point ?

I was wondering if they prosecute other steriod-related people, such as body builders. I wasn't trying to make a point.

[Captain Cold Nose]

I was wondering if they prosecute other steriod-related people, such as body builders. I wasn't trying to make a point.

They're not prosecuting him for steroids. They're prosecuting him for perjury from the steroid investigation. There is a difference. If a body builder lied about it to a grand jury, they absolutely would persue prosecution if they were so inclined.

[BenHertz]

If a body builder lied about it to a grand jury, they absolutely would persue prosecution if they were so inclined.

That's what I was trying to find out, if the federal prosecutors would go after them. I probably didn't ask about it in the best way. Sorry about that.

[SamtheBravesFan]

They're not prosecuting him for steroids. They're prosecuting him for perjury from the steroid investigation. There is a difference. If a body builder lied about it to a grand jury, they absolutely would persue prosecution if they were so inclined.

That's exactly right. This just happens to be a high-profile case because of the entertainment industry.

[BoweryBoys]

I don't see a problem with this...

1. It is not a "witch hunt" of innocent ballplayers. If there was not good probable cause to suspect that there has been illegal drug use in MLB then there would not investigations in the first place. Also, as far as all sports, if Balco hadn't apparently tried to invent new substances to circumvent federal drug laws, then there would have been no hearing for Bonds to apparently committ perjury at. As of yet, no MLB player has suffered any real meaningful punishment and consequences. The two who may suffer the harshest fate, there is good reason to believe that through lies and arrogance they may have brought this on themselves.

2. It is not a waste of tax payer money. It is the use of only some of that money to prosecute someone who they have good reason to believe commited acts of perjury and one of obstruction of justice. If they didn't feel they had good evidence then there would be no prosecution. Just because someone is an athlete, and a highly accomplished one, does not give them special immunity from prosecution for the possible commitment of crimes. Because Bonds is a high profile person, to just let him get away with possible crimes will cause more worse problems. Better to argue for the elimination of perjury and obstruction of justice as crimes then to find solid moral ground in letting Bonds off because he was a great player and his alleged crimes are not as serious as other crimes. Either we have laws or we don't.

3. The only "good ol' boys club' is MLB itself. If they were left alone they would do whatever they felt like, illegal or not. The whole mentality of MLB has been one of arrogance and "good ole boys club", don't rat out another player and other examples of questionable moral behavior. There is a lot of questionable morals in a lot of modern institutions. One bad person or act does not excuse another. Either go after all or none, or those you think you have a good provable case against.

4. Al Capone also had a sweet swing, just ask Anselmi, Scalise and Guinta, but that didn't stop the government from going after him. And as for Bonds being kept out of a job by the government... The man is going to be 44 years old and without the help of chemicals. Perhaps most clubs just feel that the 20 some HRs he would probably hit would not be worth his high price and not help lead the team to a WS championship. After all, there is no law that says Bonds has the right to keep being employed on a major league roster until he no longer feels like it. Bonds is done and had his day, let some deserving young player have his chance now.

[Old Sweater]

I don't see a problem with this...

1. It is not a "witch hunt" of innocent ballplayers. If there was not good probable cause to suspect that there has been illegal drug use in MLB then there would not investigations in the first place. Also, as far as all sports, if Balco hadn't apparently tried to invent new substances to circumvent federal drug laws, then there would have been no hearing for Bonds to apparently commit perjury at. As of yet, no MLB player has suffered any real meaningful punishment and consequences. The two who may suffer the harshest fate, there is good reason to believe that through lies and arrogance they may have brought this on themselves.

2. It is not a waste of tax payer money. It is the use of only some of that money to prosecute someone who they have good reason to believe committed acts of perjury and one of obstruction of justice. If they didn't feel they had good evidence then there would be no prosecution. Just because someone is an athlete, and a highly accomplished one, does not give them special immunity from prosecution for the possible commitment of crimes. Because Bonds is a high profile person, to just let him get away with possible crimes will cause more worse problems. Better to argue for the elimination of perjury and obstruction of justice as crimes then to find solid moral ground in letting Bonds off because he was a great player and his alleged crimes are not as serious as other crimes. Either we have laws or we don't.

3. The only "good ol' boys club' is MLB itself. If they were left alone they would do whatever they felt like, illegal or not. The whole mentality of MLB has been one of arrogance and "good ole boys club", don't rat out another player and other examples of questionable moral behavior. There is a lot of questionable morals in a lot of modern institutions. One bad person or act does not excuse another. Either go after all or none, or those you think you have a good provable case against.

4. Al Capone also had a sweet swing, just ask Anselmi, Scalise and Guinta, but that didn't stop the government from going after him. And as for Bonds being kept out of a job by the government... The man is going to be 44 years old and without the help of chemicals. Perhaps most clubs just feel that the 20 some HRs he would probably hit would not be worth his high price and not help lead the team to a WS championship. After all, there is no law that says Bonds has the right to keep being employed on a major league roster until he no longer feels like it. Bonds is done and had his day, let some deserving young player have his chance now.


I do.

1/It's a witch hunt of future HOF'ers. Ask Mark McGwire about not receiving a harsh punishment and he hasn't tested hot, nor has he admitted squat and still he hasn't received more then 26% votes by the BBWAA.

2/It is a big waste of tax payers money. HOF'ers are being singled out for cheap press and a false front for MLB and Congress.

3/Explain #3 to Bonds face to face if you have the nuts. The guy had the top OBP in the NL last year.

4/Apples & Oranges/You're comparing a murderer to a fine ballplayer.

5/Phttt!!!


Why does his swing excuse him for possibly lying to a federal grand jury?


It don't just as any other MLB player. I'm just tired of players with HOF #'s getting singled out as if MLB really gave a hoot about PED's.



How dare law enforcement waste money on people who break the law. Especially when the law breaker is a gifted jock. How dare they. Don't these trouble makers know talented athletes should be allowed to do their thing ? Why isn't the money being spent on something important, like busting pot heads ? pfttt is right. Stupid government.



Pfttt is right! You know how much money the Gov't would waste on such trivial matters if they tried prosecuting every Joe Citizen for not knowingly taking some PED? Most of the MLB players can just sit back and laugh at it.



If he was just a professional body builder, would this have gone to federal court?


Could be, we'll never know. Gabe Kapler(body builder) sat out a year for the Red Sox and coached minor league ball for them while the triple conflict of interest George Mitchell ran his witch hunt pointed right at Clemens. Then Kapler comes back in the years of his prime and is doing just fine for Selig's old club, the Brewers??????<plain as the nose on my face IMO

Gov Jesse Ventura admitted to PED use a couple of weeks ago on the Tim McCarver show. Of course I don't think that'll hurt his chances at the Wrestling HOF since Pete Rose is a proud member of it. Future HOF'ers is the only one's that Congress can dangle something over their heads and all the while get their names in the national media along with MLB like they actually care or are doing something about PED use in MLB. Selig still won't give PED testing rights to an independent company so he, the owners can keep singling out the future HOF'ers when need be. Phtttt!!!!



Many people you have never heard of are in Federal Court every single day. Some are even unfairly persecuted. What is your point ?


Don't know about his point but mine would be I didn't follow Joe Citizen during their career. I do know if I had a relative singled out in a witch hunt where the governing body allowed the use of PED's then turned on them as soon as they broke records, while they was putting butts in the seats, I'd be screaming from the top of my lungs.

Put Selig and the owners in front of Congress and ask them under oath "Did you know players was using PED's and could you have done more about it since 1970?" Heck, MLB didn't even ban amphetamines until 2006 even though it is an illegal street drug. Phtt!!!!


They're not prosecuting him for steroids. They're prosecuting him for perjury from the steroid investigation. There is a difference. If a body builder lied about it to a grand jury, they absolutely would pursue prosecution if they were so inclined.


Yeah, if that were so inclined, which they will never be. Why should they??? They can't get there names in the media headlines then as if they really cared to push the unbeatable "save the kids" stand they always take. A lot of the youth(& adults???) watches Pro Wrestling and power lifting competitions plus the physique competitions. Face the facts, MLB and Congress going after HOF'ers is as phony as a 3 dollar bill.

Phttt!!! It is so obvious that it is at the point of ridiculous prosecution.

[BoweryBoys]

Ole Sweater says...

I do.

1/It's a witch hunt of future HOF'ers. Ask Mark McGwire about not receiving a harsh punishment and he hasn't tested hot, nor has he admitted squat and still he hasn't received more then 26% votes by the BBWAA.

2/It is a big waste of tax payers money. HOF'ers are being singled out for cheap press and a false front for MLB and Congress.

3/Explain #3 to Bonds face to face if you have the nuts. The guy had the top OBP in the NL last year.

4/Apples & Oranges/You're comparing a murderer to a fine ballplayer.

5/Phttt!!!

I answer...

1-McGwire has not received votes partly because of the way he acted in front of Congress and good reason to believe that he used steroids. McGwire in a sense evoked the fifth in that hearing without really saying so. That is his constitutional right. However, no ball player in history , no matter what his numbers are, has a constitutional right to HOF induction. The HOF is not even officially controlled or affiliated with MLB. The HOF and the voters have every right to keep anyone out that they choose. McGwire has every right to be as evasive as he was but his possible steroid use is not, as some would like to believe, "nobody's business". It is the business of every paying fan, all HOF voters, HOF officials and even baseball historians. The bottom-line is that McGwire may have been elected on the first ballot but reasons have come to light to question his HOF credentials. There would be no questions if not for McGwire's behavior himself. So, it is not a "witch hunt" if the voters decide that they have good reason to doubt his eligibility and decide to lean towards doubt and not reward someone who took shortcuts to greatness. This is not a "witch hunt" because McGwire is not being thrown in jail or burned at the stake, nor deprived of life, liberty or the pursuit of happiness. Again, he has no legal right to the HOF and is not being illegally deprived of anything. I'd like to see him try to sue to demand HOF induction, what a joke that would be.

2. Where is your proof to back up such blatant made up statements? What exactly is a "HOF'ers". Last time I checked neither McGwire, Bonds or Clemens were members of the HOF. If they never make it- BOO HOO, So What. That vote is the right of those who vote and again no one is entitled to induction by right so what rights are being deprived? Perhaps enough voters just have serious doubts and the reality is that Bonds, Clemens and McGwire are the ones who created those doubts.

3. Wow, what school playground argument did you just come from? What difference does it make what his OBP was last year. If none of the 30 teams want to pay a 44 year-old who likely cannot juice anymore a huge some of money to maybe have the top OBP this year with no guarantee that it will help them with the WS, that is every bit their right to do so- deal with it. What part of there is good reason for all 30 teams to just take a pass and avoid Bonds is not understood here?

4. Maybe apples and oranges but it was used to show how absolutely ridiculous your original statement was that stared this whole thread. Because a guy had a great career, in any sport, it is supposed to excuse him from being prosecuted and makes him above the law? How silly and dangerous an idea is that? Again, if you think the law of perjury of obstruction of justice are some kind of joke crimes that shouldn't exist and everyone should be free to lie under oath and obstruct a criminal investigation, then argue that premise. Of course murder is worse then what Bonds (May) have done but if that premise excuses other crimes then why have law and order, just have anarchy. If everyone was allowed to just blatantly lie under oath simply because they just cannot admit that 73 HRs was not on shear talent alone, well the whole justice system wouldn't even have a chance of working. Maybe a fine ballplayer but also maybe someone who also committed crimes as well. Why not let a jury decide instead of making meaningless blanket statements about "with hunts" and wasted money with zero evidence to back it up.

5. Oh wow, you really convinced me a lot to come around to your side with that argument. That nasty government. They had nothing better to do and were bored so they decided to make up a bunch of false charges against Bonds out of thin air and go through all this time, effort, and expense. Yeah right, now tell me another fairy tale.

[Old Sweater]

Selig hinted that punishments have been handed down to team executives in connection with the Mitchell Report on the use of performance-enhancing drugs in baseball, coming in the form of community service.

“I have stated, and it’s sort of been misunderstood, anybody who has been disciplined is doing a lot of community service,” Selig said. “And I think most people involved believe that was their discipline. But there’s nothing new.”


http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=ap-owners&prov=ap&type=lgns


Not named and community service. How nice of Selig to take care of his own.

[Wade8813]

Good ol' Boys Club keeping one of the sweetest swings ever from a job. Just looking around the forums here shows that this argument doesn't hold up. Lots of people (fans) commented on whether or not they wanted Bonds on their team. Most of them said no, they did not. Some said no under any circumstances, because they feel he's too much of a 'clubhouse cancer'. Some said no because he's old by baseball standards, and they feel without PEDs, his performance will tank. Some said no, because he was requesting a HUGE salary. Is BBF a part of the "Good ol' Boy's Club" too?

I do.

1/It's a witch hunt of future HOF'ers. Ask Mark McGwire about not receiving a harsh punishment and he hasn't tested hot, nor has he admitted squat and still he hasn't received more then 26% votes by the BBWAA. So, MLB has decided that it hates future HoFers? Why, just for being future HoFers? What about Ripken? He was a future HoFer at the same time. Do you think they attempted to discredit him too?

2/It is a big waste of tax payers money. HOF'ers are being singled out for cheap press and a false front for MLB and Congress.Again, why would MLB have a vendetta against future HoFers?

3/Explain #3 to Bonds face to face if you have the nuts. The guy had the top OBP in the NL last year. And he's also known for not getting along with teammates, he's old by baseball standards, most people believe that he's a lying cheater, it's quite possible his numbers will go way down (if he was cheating and stops), and he was asking for a large contract.

Gov Jesse Ventura admitted to PED use a couple of weeks ago on the Tim McCarver show. What do you want Congress to do, prosecute him for lying when he admitted he used?

Don't know about his point but mine would be I didn't follow Joe Citizen during their career. I do know if I had a relative singled out in a witch hunt where the governing body allowed the use of PED's then turned on them as soon as they broke records, while they was putting butts in the seats, I'd be screaming from the top of my lungs.

Put Selig and the owners in front of Congress and ask them under oath "Did you know players was using PED's and could you have done more about it since 1970?" Heck, MLB didn't even ban amphetamines until 2006 even though it is an illegal street drug. Phtt!!!! Again, I really don't think MLB has a vendetta against future HoF players.

That said, I do agree with your point that it's quite possible that MLB has been covering it up. HOWEVER, this doesn't mean MLB is now targeting these players - it means they would probably continue to cover it up, if they had a chance.

[NickU]

Ole Sweater says...

3. Wow, what school playground argument did you just come from? What difference does it make what his OBP was last year. If none of the 30 teams want to pay a 44 year-old who likely cannot juice anymore a huge some of money to maybe have the top OBP this year with no guarantee that it will help them with the WS, that is every bit their right to do so- deal with it. What part of there is good reason for all 30 teams to just take a pass and avoid Bonds is not understood here?


I usually respect everything you say, but this is the stupidest thing I've ever read here. Are you seirous? Isn't baseball all about, uhhhh, getting on base? I just always came from the school of thought that getting on base is one of the most important things in baseball. A guy that gets on base more times than anyone else has inordinate value, in my opinion. Or maybe your from the Joe Morgan school of thought that 'clogging up the bases' is a bad thing?

Oh, and wouldn't having the guy with the highest OBP in the league give you a better chance to win than a guy with an average OBP? Because wouldn't that mean you would have the most oppurtunities to score out of his hole than anyone else? So having more chances to score would give you a better shot at winning the World Series, right? I could be wrong here, but on my playground that's how we tend to view the issue of OBP.

[BoweryBoys]

Thanks for the comment on respect. I do believe that we can all disagree in a civil manner with respect so I'm not at all offended by your opinion in number three. In fact on the surface it looks stupid but perhaps I didn't make my self clear.

My point is that he is one player who yes had the top OBP last season. (I don;t know and don't care how much of that top OBP was due to the Bonds mystique and some pitchers still thinking at 43 he is the same 73 HR guy they better walk)
However, best OBP or not and even with 28 HRs, the man is going to be 44 years old this season and if still playing it would be much harder for him to use any chemicals to ward of the game's and age's aches and pains, and use them to help stay constantly productive. After all, he is turning 44 and it is quite possible to believe that he did extend his career and productivity in the past by use of chemicals. Not saying whether he did or not but good reason to believe if he did they sure did help him get to a position at 43 of having the best OBP.

Along with that is that no matter what he has accomplished he does not have a WS ring. Is that his fault?- of course not but it does tend to show that just one man, top OBP or not, does not suddenly mean some team is a shoe in for a WS. To me that is relevant in Bonds case because of his advanced age and all the baggage that comes with him. So stupid or not, I stand by my original statement that I don't blame any of the 30 clubs for wanting nothing to do with a 44 year-old that there is good reason to believe will not produce to the same level that he did 4-6 years ago, even last year there is no guarantees, since it will be harder to possibly juice.

As for my "playground" comment, that was in response to someone's earlier comment about my having the nuts to say what I thought to Bond's face. Wow, how childish and silly a statement for a mature grown man to make. Last I looked we were all adults here and not kids arguing like children on the after school playground. What is Bonds gonna do if anyone says anything negative to his face, beat the person up? Yeah right. Whether he really is a jerk or not, last I looked he is a mature grown man and mature grown men don't go around beating people up. If they did, or he did, it would just add a rightful assault charge and possible battery charge to his legal problems and I'm sure Bonds is mature and smart enough to know that. My comment was because I was so shocked at what an immature comment that poster made.

[KCGHOST]

Boys, there's one thing we should have all learned by now. You cannot have a rational conversationalist with a Bonds Apologist.

[Gregory Pratt]

How someone could be so indignant for Bonds/Clemens yet have the Babe as his icon is beyond rational comprehension.

[Old Sweater]

How someone could be so indignant for Bonds/Clemens yet have the Babe as his icon is beyond rational comprehension.

Go pet your white bunny. Or is it a pet rat?

[Gregory Pratt]

What the hell is that supposed to mean?
If you're going to let me have it, go for the gold.

[Old Sweater]

Boys, there's one thing we should have all learned by now. You cannot have a rational conversationalist with a Bonds Apologist.

Or the internet saints.

[Gregory Pratt]

I am an Internet saint just as much as I am a real-life saint. In neither life have I molested a troubled girl or taken shortcuts to reach the pinnacle of my profession only to lie to the entire world about it and continue to lie about it. Nor will I ever bring such dishonor and disgrace.

[Old Sweater]

I leap tall buildings in a single bound.

[Gregory Pratt]

I look at your icon and read your quote and think you must be someone playing a game, enjoying the irony, because surely no one can be as... blase as you are being on this subject with your profile, but I suppose such contradictions are what the Internet was created for, right?

[NickU]

Thanks for the comment on respect. I do believe that we can all disagree in a civil manner with respect so I'm not at all offended by your opinion in number three. In fact on the surface it looks stupid but perhaps I didn't make my self clear.

My point is that he is one player who yes had the top OBP last season. (I don;t know and don't care how much of that top OBP was due to the Bonds mystique and some pitchers still thinking at 43 he is the same 73 HR guy they better walk)
However, best OBP or not and even with 28 HRs, the man is going to be 44 years old this season and if still playing it would be much harder for him to use any chemicals to ward of the game's and age's aches and pains, and use them to help stay constantly productive. After all, he is turning 44 and it is quite possible to believe that he did extend his career and productivity in the past by use of chemicals. Not saying whether he did or not but good reason to believe if he did they sure did help him get to a position at 43 of having the best OBP.

Along with that is that no matter what he has accomplished he does not have a WS ring. Is that his fault?- of course not but it does tend to show that just one man, top OBP or not, does not suddenly mean some team is a shoe in for a WS. To me that is relevant in Bonds case because of his advanced age and all the baggage that comes with him. So stupid or not, I stand by my original statement that I don't blame any of the 30 clubs for wanting nothing to do with a 44 year-old that there is good reason to believe will not produce to the same level that he did 4-6 years ago, even last year there is no guarantees, since it will be harder to possibly juice.

As for my "playground" comment, that was in response to someone's earlier comment about my having the nuts to say what I thought to Bond's face. Wow, how childish and silly a statement for a mature grown man to make. Last I looked we were all adults here and not kids arguing like children on the after school playground. What is Bonds gonna do if anyone says anything negative to his face, beat the person up? Yeah right. Whether he really is a jerk or not, last I looked he is a mature grown man and mature grown men don't go around beating people up. If they did, or he did, it would just add a rightful assault charge and possible battery charge to his legal problems and I'm sure Bonds is mature and smart enough to know that. My comment was because I was so shocked at what an immature comment that poster made.


Again, I understand what you are saying here, and again I respect your opinion, but I personally disagree, and I think it's going to remain that way. There's no denying that Bonds has a great eye, and personally, I'm inclined to believe that Bonds either A.) would have stopped juicing after all the stuff happened with the book, the hearings, etc. not because of the Mitchell Report or B.) Never stopped at all. So with that line of thinking I would expect Barry to be close to what he was last season. The way you see it, is that Bonds would have been juicing all along and just suddenly stopped now because of the Mitchell backlash, which I think is a possibility, but I don't buy it. That's probably why our opinions differ. I'm not saying that by placing Bonds on a team that all of the sudden he would transform them in the WS contender, but if you put him on a contender they get a whole lot better.

[efin98]

I leap tall buildings in a single bound.

That's signature material...:applaud:

[NickU]

I look at your icon and read your quote and think you must be someone playing a game, enjoying the irony, because surely no one can be as... blase as you are being on this subject with your profile, but I suppose such contradictions are what the Internet was created for, right?

That's the thing that has me laughing too. This is the same guy that was up in arms over Billy Crystal taking a few cuts in Spring Training, yet he's here presenting this argument with such passion.

[Gregory Pratt]

I am glad to see that we are in agreement.

[Old Sweater]

I look at your icon and read your quote and think you must be someone playing a game, enjoying the irony, because surely no one can be as... blase as you are being on this subject with your profile, but I suppose such contradictions are what the Internet was created for, right?

I ain't the one claiming to be a saint and all the while scorning a man with nothing but hearsay from a rat. That is as far from a saint as one can be. Saints forgive and haters hate. You are nothing but a hater.

[Old Sweater]

I am glad to see that we are in agreement.

You going to let Nick pet your white bunny at the Hating Saints Clubhouse?

[Gregory Pratt]

You never answered the question about Andy Pettitte. I wonder if you can read. Is that the problem here? It would certainly explain a lot, especially with regard to the quote.

[Wade8813]

I ain't the one claiming to be a saint and all the while scorning a man with nothing but hearsay from a rat. There's more than just "hearsay from a rat".

Bonds:
* First hand witness account from his alleged former girlfriend, supposedly with audio tapes backing her up

* Alleged first hand witness account from Jose Canseco - who comes across as a rat, but has shown to be a bit more credible than some originally believed

* His own admission that he used two substances, albeit without knowing what they were

* He was listed in the Mitchell report

* His sudden and dramatic increase in performance at an age when almost everyone else in the history of the game experiences a decline

Clemens
* First hand witness account from Andy Pettitte

* First hand witness account from his former trainer - you can call his trainer a rat, but you can't call it hearsay.

* Hearsay accounts from Canseco

* He was listed in the Mitchell report

* Other first hand accounts of possible misconduct not related to baseball, but still reflecting poorly on his character.