- Thread starter
- #1
200lbhockeyplayer
Active member
- Aug 10, 2008
- 11,049
- 2
Okay, so now that McNamee is in Washington and the gathering stage for the Clemens perjury case is in full swing...who burned the public more?
Most recent discussion I have heard has claimed that the case against Clemens is more cut and dry due to the widely publicized statements Clemens made under oath, along with the claims made by Radomski and McNamee. Credible or not, McNamee's claims certainly have been validated on all accounts with the exception of Clemens himself admitting.
Bonds obviously has had a long drawn out case while the Feds have been building their case, and resubmitting for corrections, etc. But Bonds was always sort of the "bad guy" in the public's eye, yet Clemens portrayed the seemingly perfect family guy, competitor and "good guy" to many.
So, who burned the public more?
Most recent discussion I have heard has claimed that the case against Clemens is more cut and dry due to the widely publicized statements Clemens made under oath, along with the claims made by Radomski and McNamee. Credible or not, McNamee's claims certainly have been validated on all accounts with the exception of Clemens himself admitting.
Bonds obviously has had a long drawn out case while the Feds have been building their case, and resubmitting for corrections, etc. But Bonds was always sort of the "bad guy" in the public's eye, yet Clemens portrayed the seemingly perfect family guy, competitor and "good guy" to many.
So, who burned the public more?