Spring Training tix go on sale

January

17

This entry was posted on Thursday, January 17th, 2008 at 2:50 pm by John Delcos.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
 Print This Post |

12 Responses to “Spring Training tix go on sale”

1. dave January 18th, 2008 at 10:38 am

   The good news is we have our commissioner to lead us to 20 more years of steroids as the good old buys re-upped him.

2. dave January 18th, 2008 at 10:52 am

   Hey John. Why is there a yankee article under the mets page ?

3. dave January 18th, 2008 at 10:53 am

   Hey John!

   Why is there a Yankee article under the Mets page?

4. Annie Savoy January 18th, 2008 at 10:59 am

   Dave – I had that feeling about Selig, too and now we have this Clemens move – doesn’t he know that Clinton WAS IMPEACHED despite the DC Lawyer?

   “Roger Clemens has hired a Washington lawyer who specializes in Congressional investigations.”
   by DUFF WILSON
   Published by the New York Times January 18, 2008

   Roger Clemens has bolstered his legal team, hiring a powerhouse Washington lawyer, Lanny A. Breuer, who represented former President Bill Clinton during his impeachment hearings as well as numerous corporations that were the subject of Congressional investigations.

   Rusty Hardin, Clemens’s Houston lawyer, said late Thursday that he had recruited Breuer to be his client’s “local counsel” in Washington because of his expertise.
   “We’d talked to him, and we’d just been waiting a day or two to check out conflicts,” Hardin said. “He had no conflicts.”

   Clemens, who has won seven Cy Young awards but now finds his legacy in jeopardy, is facing a Congressional investigation as the result of his challenge to the Mitchell report released last Dec. 13. The report, produced by former Senator George J. Mitchell, examined the connections between baseball and performance-enhancing drugs, and linked about 90 current and former players, including Clemens, to such drugs.

   Breuer responded to an e-mail message Thursday night and confirmed he had been retained by Clemens. “This is correct,” he wrote. “This just happened.”

   Asked to comment on Clemens’s situation, Breuer wrote, “I’m honored to be joining Rusty Hardin in representing one of the greatest pitchers and athletes in history.”

   Breuer, a former assistant district attorney in Manhattan, is a partner in the Washington law firm of Covington and Burling and is a co-chairman of its white-collar defense and investigations practice group.

   As a special White House counsel, he helped represent Clinton from 1997 to 1999 during independent-counsel and Congressional investigations, and the impeachment hearings.

   Breuer specializes in Congressional investigations. He has represented the University of California in an investigation of Los Alamos National Laboratory, Moody’s Investor Service in the wake of Enron’s collapse, and Halliburton/KBR in a hearing conducted by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

   That committee now wants to hear what Clemens has to say under oath about the accusations in the Mitchell report made by his former trainer, Brian McNamee. Clemens contends the accusations are false.

   Richard D. Emery, a lawyer for McNamee, said of Breuer in a telephone interview, “We welcome a rational voice entering the case on behalf of Clemens, and I would expect a marked and clear change in strategy quickly in order to protect his client from the obvious pitfalls of lying under oath or to federal officials.”

   Emery added that the first thing Breuer should do “is find out all the facts and adopt a strategy consistent with them, which would mean Roger Clemens would not testify. But we shall see how he proceeds.”

   Lanny J. Davis, another prominent Washington lawyer, who worked with Breuer as White House counsel for Clinton, said bringing in Breuer was an excellent decision by Hardin and Clemens.

   “I can’t think of a better lawyer in Washington to represent Mr. Clemens or anybody that needs help in the Congress or in the public arena than Lanny Breuer,” Davis said in a telephone interview. Davis, who said he had been following news reports about Clemens, said: “I think Mr. Clemens has to be transparent and tell the truth, and I think that’s what Lanny Breuer is all about. I hope he told the truth to ‘60 Minutes,’ but if he didn’t, then he’s got to do it in front of Congress, and I think there’s no one better than Lanny Breuer to do that job.”

   Davis said he had found Clemens believable in his recent “60 Minutes” interview with Mike Wallace, in which Clemens acknowledged taking injections of vitamin B12 and the painkiller lidocaine from McNamee, but denied that McNamee injected him with steroids and human growth hormone, as McNamee told Mitchell’s investigators.

   “But he’s going to have a much tougher set of cross-examiners than Mike Wallace was that night, to say the least,” Davis added in reference to Clemens’s House committee hearing, scheduled for Feb. 13. “And as a former prosecutor and great litigator, Lanny will guide him on how to respond to tough cross-examination.”

   Also on Thursday, the F.B.I. opened a preliminary investigation into statements that shortstop Miguel Tejada made to staff members of the same House committee in August 2005 in which he denied using steroids or knowing of other players who had used or talked about them.

   The House committee had asked the Department of Justice to investigate Tejada after the Mitchell report contradicted denials that Tejada had made to its staff members.

   Tejada had been interviewed in connection with a perjury investigation of Rafael Palmeiro, who had testified to the committee in March 2005 that he never used steroids. Not long afterward, Palmeiro tested positive.

   Making false statements in a government matter is a felony punishable by up to five years in prison and a $10,000 fine. Palmeiro was never charged with perjury because the panel could not prove he had taken steroids before his testimony. Now Tejada is under scrutiny.

   In an interview published Thursday in Listin Diario, a Dominican newspaper, Tejada said he was “clean.”

   “My mind is calm, I feel good, without worries, because I know that my years in the big leagues have been done in a clean way,” he said.

   The House committee is trying to set dates to interview Clemens; his former Yankees teammates Andy Pettitte and Chuck Knoblauch; McNamee; and Kirk Radomski, a confessed steroids dealer with baseball players as clients. All are being asked to testify at the Feb. 13 hearing.

5. dave January 18th, 2008 at 11:11 am

   Annie,

   I read that yesterday. It certainly seems as if Clemens has something to hide else he would not pay for such a hi priced and washington specific lawyer.

   Also on the Selig front a senator complained about how 122 players claim to have ADD so they can take these banned substances and Selig and Fehr just shrugged.

   At least the owners and players are getting rich. who cares about the actual product when the sheep keep eating the garbage you shell out?

6. Annie Savoy January 18th, 2008 at 1:02 pm

   Dave –

   I followed the previous hearings in 2005 and there is a difference this time – the Congress is fed up with the increase in steroids and the attempts by MLB to cover it all up. I’m sure that’s why Selig got an extension – no explanations about this mess to a new guy. I’d like to see more MLB owners, managers and coaches testify – they were the enablers in my opinion.

   For the Congress, the main point – aside from the players taking illegal steroids/drugs – is the thousands of children who are emulating their baseball heros by taking illegal drugs to ‘bulk up’, get college scholarships and pro contracts. I’m sure many parents are writing to their Congressmen/women to insist that something be done. Rep. Tom Davis of Virginia – the ranking Minority Member, says that the Congress will act.

   Miguel Tiegada of Baltimore Orioles is now being investigated by the FBI concerning steroids. When I watched the hearing on Tuesday, I was surprised and pleased about how serious the Congressional committee was – and because of the anti trust situation with MLB and the Congress, they have every right to force MLB to take action or they can change the way MLB does business.

   Both Selig and Fehr, seemed to be very casual about their roles in the steroid mess, and at one point when Fehr said to Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton, the DC rep. – “I don’t think you understand the legal issue” she stared at him and replied “young man, don’t talk to me like that, I taught Labor Law at Georgetown University”. It was a moment to remember.

   Roger better listen to his new lawyer and shut up. However, even that lawyer couldn’t keep Clinton from being impeached.

   I know a lot of ‘fans’ think this is no big deal, but believe me (Poli.Sci Major) it really is and all of us who love the game should pay attention.

7. dave January 18th, 2008 at 3:43 pm

   Annie-

   I think the issue is very easy for a politician to get behind in an election year. They get to protect an american institution from itself and they get a bonus in that they get to stand up for family as you point out in protecting kids from their heroes who have no business being put in this position.

   The anti-trust thing is a very big stick they can use. The Tejada thing was just a simple case of perjury – just like Bonds. At the end of the day I expect Clemens to plead the 5th. I don’t think he wants to go to jail to protect his status as a sure fire hall of famer.

8. Annie Savoy January 18th, 2008 at 3:57 pm

   Dave –

   You’re right it’s Motherhood and apple pie to the House members who are really running for election almost all the time.

   My Congressman here in CT-5 lives in my neighborhood and we have actually discussed issues and policy at the local Stop & Shop. He’s a Red Sox fan, but is passionate about baseball and is the newest member of the Oversight Committee. His name is Christopher Murphy and before running for Congress was a practicing lawyer.

   I think it was expected that after 2005 there would be some progress in reducing the drug abuse, but when it escalated and the ADD stuff rose in such numbers, I think this Committee decided to play hardball.

9. sloppy January 18th, 2008 at 5:57 pm

   I’m not taking sides in the Clemens thing but from my past with DOJ and indirectly working with guys who did Congressional hearings, Clemens and anyone else going before Congress should have as much professional assist as he/she can get, especially when its on a subject that gets these guys headlines. If McGwire had good Counsel (I’m not sure if he had any Counsel, he never would have been prepped to answer as badly as he did.

   PS: Concerning Clinton who was mentioned above, he didn’t testify in his impeachment hearings, his case was totally political,99% of the votes were along party lines, and he wasn’t convicted and the PR campaign raised his popularity tremendously his last 2 years.

   This lawyer is “the best that money can buy” and Clemens can afford to pay the best.

10. Annie Savoy January 19th, 2008 at 8:44 am

    Sloppy –

    Perhaps I could persuade you to be on the side of baseball with this quote from Grantland Rice:

    “When the One Great Scorer comes to mark against your name, he’ll write not that you won or lost, but how you played the game.”

11. sloppy January 19th, 2008 at 9:42 am

    Annie: From my career I’m on the side of justice. If the man is not guilty I’m on his side, if he’s guilty, I hope they get him. Unfortunately, with 24/7 garbage news coverage and instant analysis on everything, nobody is innocent until proven guilty anymore. And that will be this country’s downfall someday. Annie you/me really don’t know how he played the game yet. We certainly have our opinions and suspicisons, but proof to convict? Not yet. Let the process reach its conclusion. I had plenty of cases where we were positive we had our man, only to find out we had the wrong guy. And that always sucked.

12. Annie Savoy January 19th, 2008 at 10:48 am

    Sloppy –

    Thanks for always writing posts worth reading.

    I know I have a preconcieved notion about Clemens and is it based on his treatment of people in general, not just his work on the field. He may be or was an extraordinary athlete, but his persona stinks.

    I thought that this second hearing had a bit of a tougher tone – Tom Davis’ opening remarks were sharp and explicit and as I’ve said, they are playing hardball this time. MLB was poorly prepared – again – perhaps foolishly expecting exalted treatment, not just the law. Didn’t they ever see the Godfather – about friends and enemies? Eleanor Holmes Norton scored an ace against Donald Fehr with her remark about Georgetown Law School- and he should have known that – obviously they never checked the backgrounds of the Reps.

    So, I’ll tear myself away from MSNBC/All Politics where I need to be watching/taking notes about the caucuses and primaries and watch these hearings again perhaps more carefully.

    Note: I have never once regretted abandoning UConn Law School for some winters at Hialeah.

Leave a Reply