Bonds Indicted [guilty on 1/4] [wrist whacked!]


A place for the discussion of all things not closely related to the sport and its competitive side. (as always, locked for the duration of major international championship)

Postby bad hammy » Thu Nov 15, 2007 5:32 pm

While out at lunch the race card mentioned by callers on the sports radio show was the disparate treatment of Bonds vs. McGwire. The talks show hosts were having none of that . . .
bad hammy
 
Posts: 10880
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby gh » Thu Nov 15, 2007 5:58 pm

Leaving the office I turned on local sportstalk; major local station (which is also host for the Giants). First caller was in mid-rant when I tuned in; lamenting how the legal persecution is always the high-profile people, cuz they're easy targets. Concluded his rant with, "If I end up on that jury, I'm voting not guilty no matter what the evidence says."

Next two callers (both of whom sounded well-educated, well-reason guys, not JoeSix grunting stereotypes) both went on at lenght about selective persecution and said they'd probably vote not guilty as well, although the final guy say he hated to betray the system that way.

I know I'd feel like crap if I were in a position where I had to selectively punish somebody like that, but if you can't keep the legal system operating based on the evidence, we're in a pretty scary position as a society. (Not that this probably any different than it ever was; just don't think people would be so open about it in the past.)
gh
 
Posts: 46313
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Postby mcgato » Thu Nov 15, 2007 6:09 pm

gh wrote:I know I'd feel like crap if I were in a position where I had to selectively punish somebody like that, but if you can't keep the legal system operating based on the evidence, we're in a pretty scary position as a society. (Not that this probably any different than it ever was; just don't think people would be so open about it in the past.)

Interesting comment from the editor of TFN, who some claim took a blind eye to the drug problems within the sport, to the ultimate detriment of the sport.

Post yanked in three, two, ....
mcgato
 
Posts: 1605
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Hoboken

Postby guru » Thu Nov 15, 2007 6:11 pm

guru
 
Posts: 10266
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Strava, racking KOMs https://tinyurl.com/qf2ntch

Postby tafnut » Thu Nov 15, 2007 6:17 pm

gh wrote:I know I'd feel like crap if I were in a position where I had to selectively punish somebody like that

I'd feel pretty good about putting him away if I'm on the jury and I have good evidence he's guilty. Selectivity has nothing to do with it. Guilt does.
tafnut
 
Posts: 26684
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Lost at C (-minus)

Postby guru » Thu Nov 15, 2007 6:24 pm

Here's the thing - he had full immunity from prosecution due to anything he said in the grand jury room(if it was the truth), and he lied anyway.
guru
 
Posts: 10266
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Strava, racking KOMs https://tinyurl.com/qf2ntch

Postby 26mi235 » Thu Nov 15, 2007 6:58 pm

gh wrote:
26mi235 wrote:
gh wrote:
paulthefan wrote:...nonsense, this whole idea that people are so biased on an issue that they will not be fair is unfounded. There are many americans that are convinced that he is a baseball cheat (no the only one of course) but would be completely fair in weighing the evidence for guilt regarding the charges. Folks are by and large profoundly fair and open minded.


If you lived here and listened to talk radio you'd perhaps feel slightly different. Bonds enjoys godlike status among a lot of the faithful.

But realize I'm not saying that "most" locals think he's innocent. All I'm suggesting is that it's just a mere 8.3% of his peers (i.e., 1 in 12) believing in his innocence is all that's required to set him free. I'm thinking that'll be an easy sell.


It is a little different than that. The 8% number is the 'ex post' number but your commentary is treating is as the 'ex ante' one. Specifically, both sides get challenges and I will guess that they have some ability to detect those with an opinion that might cause problems. However, I do not know the number of challenges etc.


You're throwing in decimal points where none are needed. The important fact is that it's only going to take 1 juror to make him innocent, not a majority.


It only takes one juror: 8% of what, of 12 that get on the jury. However, there is a selection process that takes you down from the jury pool into the set of 12 selected jurors. If one in 12 of those in the pool of 96 (total of 8) are the ones that do acquittal and you can identify them with 50% probability and get to challenge 10 jurors, then you can remove about 5 of them, so now the reduced population is 3 out of 86 or 3 of 76 because the other side removes 10 zero probability candidates. 3/76 < 1/12.

It is not quite as simple but you get the idea.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16315
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Postby gh » Thu Nov 15, 2007 7:28 pm

mcgato wrote:....
Interesting comment from the editor of TFN, who some claim took a blind eye to the drug problems within the sport, to the ultimate detriment of the sport.

Post yanked in three, two, ....


I have no apologies for taking the prudent (i.e., not ruin the company, or trash reputations with no legal evidence) course the magazine did (and will continue to do). There's a huge difference between that and discharging one's duties as a juror. I'd probably cast a guilty verdict against my own mother if it came to it.
gh
 
Posts: 46313
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Postby eldrick » Thu Nov 15, 2007 7:49 pm

mcgato wrote:
gh wrote:I know I'd feel like crap if I were in a position where I had to selectively punish somebody like that, but if you can't keep the legal system operating based on the evidence, we're in a pretty scary position as a society. (Not that this probably any different than it ever was; just don't think people would be so open about it in the past.)

Interesting comment from the editor of TFN, who some claim took a blind eye to the drug problems within the sport, to the ultimate detriment of the sport


eh ???

his job is not that of dick pound

an editorial of how well/bad, pound is doing his job sounds appropriate enough, but in the end it's pound's job to do

it was also pretty damn admirable that the editor didn't wade in armed to the gills when marion got her leaked "a" +ve test last year, allowing all the "yahoos" to die a painful, watery death when she got cleared on "b"

i didn't see any of those yahoos apologise after to an innocent athlete
eldrick
 
Posts: 14147
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: 19th hole st andrews

Postby mcgato » Thu Nov 15, 2007 7:57 pm

gh wrote:I have no apologies ...

I appreciate the reply and not yanking the post. I'm not in the business, but I kind of understand the conflicting forces surrounding these issues. I'll save the battle for another day.
mcgato
 
Posts: 1605
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Hoboken

Postby gh » Thu Nov 15, 2007 8:15 pm

eldrick wrote:
mcgato wrote:
gh wrote:I know I'd feel like crap if I were in a position where I had to selectively punish somebody like that, but if you can't keep the legal system operating based on the evidence, we're in a pretty scary position as a society. (Not that this probably any different than it ever was; just don't think people would be so open about it in the past.)

Interesting comment from the editor of TFN, who some claim took a blind eye to the drug problems within the sport, to the ultimate detriment of the sport


eh ???

his job is not that of dick pound

an editorial of how well/bad, pound is doing his job sounds appropriate enough, but in the end it's pound's job to do

it was also pretty damn admirable that the editor didn't wade in armed to the gills when marion got her leaked "a" +ve test last year, allowing all the "yahoos" to die a painful, watery death when she got cleared on "b"

i didn't see any of those yahoos apologise after to an innocent athlete


McGato's complaints, I'm sure, relate not to anything current, but to those who think that back 20-30 years ago, the Flojo era, for example, T&FN should have somehow waded in and blown the lid off everything. Blowing lids (if we could have done it) would have been good for neither us nor the sport as a whole. We serve many masters.

The bottom line, as Peter Ueberroth so derisively referred to us once, is "Track & Field News? That's nothing but a fan magazine." Long may we so remain.
gh
 
Posts: 46313
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Bonds & Race

Postby bijanc » Thu Nov 15, 2007 9:31 pm

McGwire/Bonds is like comparing apples and oranges. McGwire admitted using creatine (which was then not on any MLB list). McGwire isn't under tax fraud investiagtion. McGwire broke a single season record, not baseball's all-time and arguably most hallowed. McGwire's trainer didn't serve time rather than sing to the feds.

McGwire came into the game as a large, beefy home run hitter- he didn't go from hitting 39 and 46 to 73 overnight. McGwire, while no saint, isn't disrespectful enough to believe sports fans are so gullible as to think he can't distinguish flaxseed oil from "the clear", or that those who make a living from their physical skills don't know what they're putting inside their bodies.

BCB
bijanc
 
Posts: 1414
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby jazzcyclist » Thu Nov 15, 2007 10:00 pm

mcgato wrote:
gh wrote:I know I'd feel like crap if I were in a position where I had to selectively punish somebody like that, but if you can't keep the legal system operating based on the evidence, we're in a pretty scary position as a society. (Not that this probably any different than it ever was; just don't think people would be so open about it in the past.)

Interesting comment from the editor of TFN, who some claim took a blind eye to the drug problems within the sport, to the ultimate detriment of the sport.

Post yanked in three, two, ....

I can't fault anyone that chooses not to bite the hand that feeds him/her. Would a personal injury lawyer complain about frivolous lawsuits? Would an oil company executive complain about high gas prices? Would Dick Vitale ever speculate, on air, about college basketball players point shaving?
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby jazzcyclist » Thu Nov 15, 2007 10:05 pm

gh wrote:I don't see where there's a race card to play in this one.

I agree with you (see above comment). I was merely stating reality. Let me put it this way: if the G-men had gone after Oprah Winfrey instead of Martha Stewart for the same petty offense, 98% of Blacks would have thought that it was racially motivated.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Bonds & Race

Postby jazzcyclist » Thu Nov 15, 2007 10:20 pm

bijanc wrote:McGwire/Bonds is like comparing apples and oranges. McGwire admitted using creatine (which was then not on any MLB list). McGwire isn't under tax fraud investiagtion. McGwire broke a single season record, not baseball's all-time and arguably most hallowed. McGwire's trainer didn't serve time rather than sing to the feds.

McGwire came into the game as a large, beefy home run hitter- he didn't go from hitting 39 and 46 to 73 overnight. McGwire, while no saint, isn't disrespectful enough to believe sports fans are so gullible as to think he can't distinguish flaxseed oil from "the clear", or that those who make a living from their physical skills don't know what they're putting inside their bodies.

BCB

McGuire got caught using androstenedione, not creatine. Pre-steroid era, McGuire hit 49 home runs in his best year and Bonds hit 46 in his best. The rest of the stuff that you mention, like trainers, taxes and single season vs career is irrelevant.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

McBonds

Postby bijanc » Thu Nov 15, 2007 10:36 pm

jc:


"Andro" wasn't on the banned list either, when McGwire broke Maris' single-season record. Greg Anderson does matter (or he wouldn't have been indicted). Taxes matter too- they were part of an overall suspicion regarding Bonds, his finances, his integrity, and his purchases.

McGwire was one of baseball's "Bash Brothers" before he and Sosa chased Maris. His best season was not 49 big flies, before the record year he had already posted numbers of 49 jacks (as a rookie), 42 in 1992 in only 139 games, 52 in 1996, and 58 in 1997. Thus his assault on Maris' mark was not anomalous. Bonds hit 25 hrs. in his first 150-g season (after hitting only 16 homers in 413 AB the year before), and followed that up w/ consecutive years of 19,33, 25 and 34. Not exactly Cecil Fielder, Albert Belle, or A-Rod digits. Thus, he aroused more suspicion than nearly any non- T & F athlete in the U.S.

BCB
bijanc
 
Posts: 1414
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: McBonds

Postby jazzcyclist » Thu Nov 15, 2007 11:50 pm

bijanc wrote:jc:


"Andro" wasn't on the banned list either, when McGwire broke Maris' single-season record. Greg Anderson does matter (or he wouldn't have been indicted). Taxes matter too- they were part of an overall suspicion regarding Bonds, his finances, his integrity, and his purchases.

McGwire was one of baseball's "Bash Brothers" before he and Sosa chased Maris. His best season was not 49 big flies, before the record year he had already posted numbers of 49 jacks (as a rookie), 42 in 1992 in only 139 games, 52 in 1996, and 58 in 1997. Thus his assault on Maris' mark was not anomalous. Bonds hit 25 hrs. in his first 150-g season (after hitting only 16 homers in 413 AB the year before), and followed that up w/ consecutive years of 19,33, 25 and 34. Not exactly Cecil Fielder, Albert Belle, or A-Rod digits. Thus, he aroused more suspicion than nearly any non- T & F athlete in the U.S.

BCB

Based on the everything I've read and heard, the steroid era was wide open by 1996. I'll concede that I believe that Bonds used illegal PED's, though I have no proof. Do you really believe that McGuire didn't use illegal PED's?
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

McGwire

Postby bijanc » Fri Nov 16, 2007 3:13 am

jazzcyclist wrote:

"...McGuire (sic) got caught using androstenedione..."

My point, jc, is that the indictment is not racist. I didn't say McGwire didn't use a PED, I said (as McGwire insisted at the time) that it was not on baseball's banned list in 1998. The nature of what McGwire did doesn't make the charges against or investigation of Bonds racist (not saying jc said they do- my reference was back to a previous post that said the race card will be played, and another that said some sports talk radio callers, and ESPN's Stephen A. Smith already played "it").

BCB
bijanc
 
Posts: 1414
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby MJD » Fri Nov 16, 2007 4:39 am

eldrick wrote:it was also pretty damn admirable that the editor didn't wade in armed to the gills when marion got her leaked "a" +ve test last year, allowing all the "yahoos" to die a painful, watery death when she got cleared on "b"

i didn't see any of those yahoos apologise after to an innocent athlete


Quick tip. Marion is not the best example to make that point with.
MJD
 
Posts: 13402
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Postby paulthefan » Fri Nov 16, 2007 5:37 am

gh wrote:I know I'd feel like crap if I were in a position where I had to selectively punish somebody like that, but if you can't keep the legal system operating based on the evidence, we're in a pretty scary position as a society. (Not that this probably any different than it ever was; just don't think people would be so open about it in the past.)


You are starting to sound a little like paulthefan, this is scary. Thumbing through the channels last night I counted better than 1/2 of the content void of any socially useful function (sports are considered socially useful). Seems the american appetite for adolescent buffoonery reaches new lows with the passing of every year.
paulthefan
 
Posts: 5034
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Location, Location.

Postby tandfman » Fri Nov 16, 2007 6:13 am

paulthefan wrote:Seems the american appetite for adolescent buffoonery reaches new lows with the passing of every year.

And the fact that you get older, and thus more removed from your own adolescence, with the passing of every year has nothing to do with this perception, right? :)
tandfman
 
Posts: 15041
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Postby Jacksf » Fri Nov 16, 2007 6:20 am

Bonds is a cheat, a liar, a racist, and a total asshole.
Let him go down.
Jacksf
 
Posts: 1684
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby MJD » Fri Nov 16, 2007 6:21 am

tandfman wrote:
paulthefan wrote:Seems the american appetite for adolescent buffoonery reaches new lows with the passing of every year.

And the fact that you get older, and thus more removed from your own adolescence, with the passing of every year has nothing to do with this perception, right? :)




Some truths are self-evident. Wearing your pants half way down your legs, for example. Has nothing to do with being an old fogie to appreciate the fact that it is just wrong.
MJD
 
Posts: 13402
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Postby jazzcyclist » Fri Nov 16, 2007 6:36 am

Jacksf wrote:Bonds is a cheat, a liar, a racist, and a total asshole.
Let him go down.

I knew the race card would be played on this thread eventually, but I didn't expect it to be thrown in that direction. You sound like you have some type of personal beef with Bonds. What did he do to you?
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby MJD » Fri Nov 16, 2007 6:43 am

I have no particular beef with the guy but that pretty well sums it up for me. I would actually add a few more adjectives. If the good people of the Bay area are going to actually let the dude walk...ah..I won't say it.
MJD
 
Posts: 13402
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Postby tandfman » Fri Nov 16, 2007 6:46 am

MJD wrote:
tandfman wrote:
paulthefan wrote:Seems the american appetite for adolescent buffoonery reaches new lows with the passing of every year.

And the fact that you get older, and thus more removed from your own adolescence, with the passing of every year has nothing to do with this perception, right? :)

Some truths are self-evident. Wearing your pants half way down your legs, for example. Has nothing to do with being an old fogie to appreciate the fact that it is just wrong.

I think paulthefan's comment related to the content of tv shows, not fashions.
tandfman
 
Posts: 15041
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Postby MJD » Fri Nov 16, 2007 6:52 am

I understand that but it doesn't change my point.
MJD
 
Posts: 13402
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Postby Daisy » Fri Nov 16, 2007 6:55 am

tandfman wrote:
MJD wrote:
tandfman wrote:
paulthefan wrote:Seems the american appetite for adolescent buffoonery reaches new lows with the passing of every year.

And the fact that you get older, and thus more removed from your own adolescence, with the passing of every year has nothing to do with this perception, right? :)

Some truths are self-evident. Wearing your pants half way down your legs, for example. Has nothing to do with being an old fogie to appreciate the fact that it is just wrong.

I think paulthefan's comment related to the content of tv shows, not fashions.

There is a distinction?
Daisy
 
Posts: 13153
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby guru » Fri Nov 16, 2007 6:56 am

MJD wrote:I have no particular beef with the guy but that pretty well sums it up for me. I would actually add a few more adjectives. If the good people of the Bay area are going to actually let the dude walk...ah..I won't say it.


I really think people here are underestimating the good people in the bay area. Lawyers are pretty good at seating impartial juries, and when push comes to shove people in that position take it seriously and follow the evidence, especially in a federal trial.
guru
 
Posts: 10266
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Strava, racking KOMs https://tinyurl.com/qf2ntch

Postby gh » Fri Nov 16, 2007 6:59 am

For more coverage than I imagine anyone would want to wade through, go to the SF Chronicle's home page this morning

www.sfgate.com

I'd recommend the Gwen Knapp piece as the best "entertainment value" and isn't all that long.

Her lead:

<<It's too late for an asterisk. It's never too late for the truth.
Barry Bonds took the all-time home-run record this summer because no one could stop him, not the government, not Major League Baseball, not the fans at road games with their heated lungs and pointed signs. The former king bowed to the new one, and the president of the United States called with congratulations. That show is over. There is no rewind button.

Now, four years in the making, a new show begins,....>>
gh
 
Posts: 46313
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Postby MJD » Fri Nov 16, 2007 7:04 am

gh wrote:That show is over. There is no rewind button.


I have read some say that that isn't necessarily an accurate statement. You can't rewind BJ's race in 1988 either. Still took it away from him. Look what they are doing to Marion.
MJD
 
Posts: 13402
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Postby jazzcyclist » Fri Nov 16, 2007 7:17 am

MJD wrote:
gh wrote:That show is over. There is no rewind button.


I have read some say that that isn't necessarily an accurate statement. You can't rewind BJ's race in 1988 either. Still took it away from him.

Unless someone can prove Bonds was using PED's after MLB instituted its current PED policy, I don't see how he can get the Ben Johnson treatment. Instead, he'll get the Flo-Jo treatment. Furthermore, MLB hasn't expunged the performances of Rafeal Palmeiro and other players who've tested positive since they started testing for PED's. Speaking of Palmeiro, why haven't the G-men indicted him for his perjury before congress? :?
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby MJD » Fri Nov 16, 2007 7:20 am

I am just telling you what I am reading. Maybe the fact that it is such an important record might mean they will do something about it.
MJD
 
Posts: 13402
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Postby gh » Fri Nov 16, 2007 7:25 am

MJD wrote:
gh wrote:That show is over. There is no rewind button.


I have read some say that that isn't necessarily an accurate statement. You can't rewind BJ's race in 1988 either. Still took it away from him. Look what they are doing to Marion.


Neither of them belonged to a powerful union.
gh
 
Posts: 46313
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Why Bonds and not Others?

Postby bijanc » Fri Nov 16, 2007 7:29 am

a poster asked:

"...Speaking of Palmeiro, why haven't the G-men indicted him for his perjury before congress?..."


The federal government, as most of you know, was investigating the Bay Area Lab Cooperative under suspicion of money laundering, and to some extent, illegal drug sale. During the course of the investigation, records of ties to or BACLO purchases by certain athletes surfaced, Bonds among them. Some, like Bonds and Giambi, were offered immunity if they told the grand jury the truth about their relationship with the company. The gov't says Bonds lied to the GJ 19 times. Palmeiro was not subpoenaed.

BCB
bijanc
 
Posts: 1414
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby jazzcyclist » Fri Nov 16, 2007 7:32 am

MJD wrote:I am just telling you what I am reading. Maybe the fact that it is such an important record might mean they will do something about it.

If MLB selectively expunges the performances of Bonds and no one else, it will open up a can of worms.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby paulthefan » Fri Nov 16, 2007 7:36 am

MJD wrote:
tandfman wrote:
paulthefan wrote:Seems the american appetite for adolescent buffoonery reaches new lows with the passing of every year.

And the fact that you get older, and thus more removed from your own adolescence, with the passing of every year has nothing to do with this perception, right? :)

Some truths are self-evident. Wearing your pants half way down your legs, for example. Has nothing to do with being an old fogie to appreciate the fact that it is just wrong.


I really dont think it is the fact that I am getting older.
There must be alot of people in the country that are completely uneducated and uncultured yet have enough money that there is a significant market to get their attention with assinine content. I dont think I remember this kind of trash on the airwaves in the 60s. It is frightening.... This observations has nothing to do with Barry Bonds who probably feels just as I do.
paulthefan
 
Posts: 5034
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Location, Location.

Postby guru » Fri Nov 16, 2007 7:38 am

jazzcyclist wrote:
MJD wrote:I am just telling you what I am reading. Maybe the fact that it is such an important record might mean they will do something about it.

If MLB selectively expunges the performances of Bonds and no one else, it will open up a can of worms.



Not if there is solid date documentation regarding usage.
guru
 
Posts: 10266
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Strava, racking KOMs https://tinyurl.com/qf2ntch

Postby MJD » Fri Nov 16, 2007 7:38 am

gh wrote:Neither of them belonged to a powerful union.


I understand what you are saying but I wonder if this kind of situation is actually in their collective agreement(I realize it doesn't matter-just wondering.
MJD
 
Posts: 13402
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: Why Bonds and not Others?

Postby jazzcyclist » Fri Nov 16, 2007 7:40 am

bijanc wrote:a poster asked:

"...Speaking of Palmeiro, why haven't the G-men indicted him for his perjury before congress?..."


The federal government, as most of you know, was investigating the Bay Area Lab Cooperative under suspicion of money laundering, and to some extent, illegal drug sale. During the course of the investigation, records of ties to or BACLO purchases by certain athletes surfaced, Bonds among them. Some, like Bonds and Giambi, were offered immunity if they told the grand jury the truth about their relationship with the company. The gov't says Bonds lied to the GJ 19 times. Palmeiro was not subpoenaed.

BCB

I understand the difference between Bonds and Giambi. It's the same as the difference between Scooter Libby and Richard Armitage. But that still doesn't change the fact that Palmeiro perjured himself on national TV and the Feds are ignoring it, which demonstrates the selective nature of federal prosecutors.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests