Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

[ QUOTE ]

Too bad I didn't write it, RedBean did.

[/ QUOTE ]

Also funny considering how if you're quoting it for truth, your actions sure disagreed... You responded to me enough just so that you could flame me but you still ignored what isn't even my point originally -- it's REDBEAN's. His post. His argument. And I'm noticing that you ignored it and calling you out on it and will keep calling you out on it until you respond. You not responding just shows that he was right -- not that there's any doubt here -- and whatever excuse you can come up for not answering it doesn't fly because, again, you were arguing against RedBean and not mine, and so conveniently decided not to respond to HIS point. ^^

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

Are you talking to me, Vyse? Your posts are confusing and respond to your own posts. I believe I have responded to everything RedBean addressed to me at one point or another. If you are writing to me, please respond to me -- or just let me guess so you can criticize me and call me an idiot later because I can't figure out what is going on in that cloudy little mind of yours.

Wile I am here:
I know that Thay3r challenged me on the existence of proof of steroid use. (You see how I make it clear that I am respond to something Thay3r wrote, Vyse?) In response to that, I would point to the list in the first appendix to <u>Game of Shadows</u> as a starting point. There is more in subsequent articles and disclosures. If there was only one document or one person, I would be far less confidence. The mountain of proof of use, from related and unrelated sources, leads to my very strong opinion that Bonds used steroids.

In court, Bonds will seek to prove that he did not lie about knowing what he was taking -- and he might succeed. I will be interested to see whether he tries to prove what he doesn't need to prove -- that he did not use steroids AND was not given steroids without his knowledge. He probably won't do that and thus, even if he is acquitted, many questions will likely remain open.

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

[ QUOTE ]
In response to that, I would point to the list in the first appendix to Game of Shadows as a starting point

[/ QUOTE ]

why would a book that the Pulitzer committee basically said was hearsay and not able to be looked at as factual have any real value

is the Pulitzer committee in on the conspiracy too?

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In response to that, I would point to the list in the first appendix to Game of Shadows as a starting point

[/ QUOTE ]

why would a book that the Pulitzer committee basically said was hearsay and not able to be looked at as factual have any real value

is the Pulitzer committee in on the conspiracy too?

[/ QUOTE ]

What is with people and the way they make crap up and distort reality? Is that really the only way they can debate these issues?

The Pulitzer committee decided that the series of articles that preceded the book would not be a finalist for the award in whatever year that was. I don't think they ever said why -- but it was likely because of the controversy over the exposure of grand jury testimony and the inability to confirm it. This is the first time I have heard the word hearsay used (and since that is a courtroom rule of evidence thrown around in conversation by those who don't understand it, I don't believe the Pulitzer committee would use it). I have read in blogs that the committee found the earlier articles were "unsubstantiated" but (1) I could only find blogs that said that, (2) it was prior to the publication of the book and (3) has nothing to do with the appendix to the book which was not yet published and not submitted to the Pulitzer committee.

But nice try.

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

[ QUOTE ]
Bean,
How can you honestly believe that Barry Bonds never took steroids? I mean if you want to say it's a witchhunt, that's fine. If you want to say it's unfair how he's being singled out w/ what McGwire and Sosa and Canseco and Palmeiro have done, that's fine. But how the hell can you honestly think he has never juiced? I'm not trying to goad you or flame you, I'm just curious.

[/ QUOTE ]


I'm pretty sure he's never actually said that before

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

arod mvp

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In response to that, I would point to the list in the first appendix to Game of Shadows as a starting point

[/ QUOTE ]

why would a book that the Pulitzer committee basically said was hearsay and not able to be looked at as factual have any real value

is the Pulitzer committee in on the conspiracy too?

[/ QUOTE ]

Likely full of black people imo.

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

[ QUOTE ]
Are you talking to me, Vyse?

[/ QUOTE ]

Dude, can you follow simple conversational exchanges?

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
BINGO! As could be expected, RedBean completely misrepresents the situation. This was no trap to put Bonds in jail.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe I didn't explain it well.....but the trap went like this:

If Bonds admits steroid use, they leak the testimony and destroy him in public opinion.
If Bonds denies the steroid use, they prosecute him for perjury.
They offer him immunity so he can't plead the fifth, and if he refuses to answer questions a la McGwire, they put him in jail for contempt.


[/ QUOTE ]

So if he did lie he did it because he cares sooooo much about his public image he would risk jail time to preserve it? Is that what you mean?

Re: Barry Bonds indicted
 

barry thrives under pressure, hell be back and beter than ever