Barry Bonds Indicted

[malonetd]

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
…
[/quote]

I am really confused as to how how you still completely miss the point on this.

Juicing pitchers have protected Hank’s record. More hitters would have broken the record or will break the record in the future if not for juiced pitchers. I don’t know how to state this any more plainly.

[quote]
Why are you claiming that certain pitchers have used steroids in the past when you can’t prove that they have?[/quote]

I don’t need to prove it. There have already been pitchers that have failed baseball’s steroid testing. And these juiced up pitchers have denied Bonds and other sluggers more home runs. And, in turn, have protected Aaron’s record.

[rainjack]

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
rainjack wrote:
Mick28 wrote:
Dr.PowerClean wrote:
Did MLB violate some federal law? Dysfunctional leadership is not a crime.

But using illegal drugs is a crime. And trafficking those drugs is also a crime.

And of course lying under oath is a crime.

Should the government ignore all of this just because it’s baseball?

Read the law. Possession and distribution without a license is a felony drug charge. Taking them is not a felony drug charge.

Tell me again where the government has a seat at this table?

Are you suggesting that MLB is engaged in illegal drug trafficking? If not - why mention it? IF you believe it is - then why is Bonds the center of attention? Are you implying that Bonds is now a drug dealer?

I think it’s pretty obvious that someone suspected that Bonds was using steroids. An investigation ensues to see if he was using to find out where he got them, if he got them. And who sold them to him.

They also apparently thought that there has been a problem in baseball for quite a while and wanted to get to the bottom of it, or at the very least scare the shit out of anyone who is using.

Does the government have a right to enforce the law?

Yea…sorry…but it does.
[/quote]

Just answer the questions that were asked. Your tangential approach is getting old.

Using is a violation of league rules - not the law. Possession is a violation of the law. You cannot prove one has possession of drugs because he is “suspected” of using. He has never even tested positive on a drug test.

The government has the duty to enforce the LAW - not fucking suspicion of using steroids. BALCO is busted - regardless of Bonds’ testimony Now they are going after Bonds’ for alleged perjury and obstruction charges. They are within their rights to do this - But please show me where suspicion is enough to arrest? Even a drunk driver has to fail several field tests before there is enough evidence to haul him in.

Bonds has not even been afforded that.

Now once again, try answering the questions asked of you instead of inventing ones you would prefer to answer.

[rainjack]

[quote]malonetd wrote:
I don’t need to prove it. There have already been pitchers that have failed baseball’s steroid testing. And these juiced up pitchers have denied Bonds and other sluggers more home runs. And, in turn, have protected Aaron’s record.[/quote]

I have told Mick before - but he doesn’t seem to think facts mean much - but of all the players suspended from baseball for testing positive for performance enhancing drugs - 54% of them have been pitchers.

Mick continually ignores the fact that over half of the juicers that have been caught are hurlers.

[malonetd]

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
malonetd wrote:
Mick28 wrote:
…

I am really confused as to how how you still completely miss the point on this.

Juicing pitchers have protected Hank’s record. More hitters would have broken the record or will break the record in the future if not for juiced pitchers. I don’t know how to state this any more plainly.

And I don’t know how you’re missing this:

YOU HAVE NO PROOF THAT ANY PITCHER WAS IS OR WAS JUICED.

Just like I have no proof that Bonds was juicing.

I don’t need to prove it. There have already been pitchers that have failed baseball’s steroid testing. And these juiced up pitchers have denied Bonds and other sluggers more home runs. And, in turn, have protected Aaron’s record.

At this point I’d like an article or some sort of evidence to back up this assertion. Sorry, but I don’t recall this huge group of juiced up Pitchers that have come forward.

Were they in Bonds league?

Was it every Pitcher who pitched to Bonds?

Who were they?

How many were they?

Also, I don’t see the justification either way.

[/quote]

Are you even reading what I’m writing? You can’t possibly be this lost or confused. And what do juicing steroids and Aaron’s record have to do with Bonds? It has nothing to do with Bonds.

Read this next sentence very closely.

Hank Aaron’s record was protected by juicing pitchers facing non-using sluggers. This has nothing to with Bonds. It has to do with every other hitter who was denied home runs because of the unfair edge the pitcher was given. Get it?

Oh, and do you even watch baseball? Because you seem pretty lost if you can’t recall even one pitcher caught juicing. We can start with Jason Grimsley:

Documents | The Smoking Gun

[rainjack]

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
rainjack wrote:

Your tangential approach is getting old.

And so far your groundless defense of Bonds is getting old.

Would you encourage everyone to break the rules, or just those suspected of steroid use and those accused of perjury?[/quote]

What rules has be broken? Name one.

The government certainly has probably cause to move forward with an investigation based upon other accounts of steroid use in baseball.

Investigation of what? Steroid usage is not a crime. It is a violation of rules. How hard is that for you to understand?

[quote]
It took several post but I’m glad you finally agree with me.[/quote]

Go back and count how many times I have said this. This proves you rarely read what I write.

I have not once addressed “suspicion” in any of my posts. But as long as we’re on the topic, you’re wrong on that.

I think it’s pretty obvious that someone suspected that Bonds was using steroids. An investigation ensues to see if he was using to find out where he got them, if he got them. And who sold them to him.

I am, huh? Did you not write the above words? This proves you don’t even read what you wrote - much less actually read my posts before posting.

Under the law “reasonable suspicion” is indeed enough to arrest. Furthermore for your own edification, the person who is stopped for alleged drunk driving can indeed be arrested without a breathalyzer test and without the standard field tests if the officer at the scene believes him to be intoxicated from his own trained observation skills. Or as the law puts it, “based upon articulable facts and inferences, that a reasonable officer (or citizen) could reasonably believe a person has been engaged in criminal activity.” Or as in your example, drunk driving.

Bonds is not even afforded that. How does one have “reasonable suspicion” about activity that is not even a crime?

Just admit Bonds is being made the scapegoat here simply because it is convenient to shit on a gy that is already unpopular.

[rainjack]

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
rainjack wrote:

I have told Mick before - but he doesn’t seem to think facts mean much -

In maloneteds case he was saying that those pitchers were actually pitching to Bonds (and Bonds rivals). Therefore, denying the great slugger even more HR’s. All I want to know is who are they and how many times did they pitch to Bonds (and Bonds HR rivals). For your “facts” to be relevant I think we’d need to determine these things.
[/quote]

Doesn’t necessarily have to be Bonds they are pitching to. Like you said, it could be Arod, Junior, Bonds, McGuire, Sosa, or any of the other prolific hitters in the league during the “steroid era”.

But if that’s the case - you would need to prove that Bonds was actually taking AAS. No one has even come close to proving it.

Then you would need to figure out if the AAS actually increased Bonds’ chances of hitting HR’s. I took a bottle of tren to the batting cage last spring. Oddly enough - I went 32-48, and the tren never took the bat off its shoulder.

You want others to so all the proving and, conversely, want us to just believe your words at face value.

[malonetd]

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
Okay…very good, that’s one. Now who are all the others that have denied these home runs to Bonds and Bonds rivals?

[/quote]

This is retarded. It’s obvious you don’t follow baseball, understand the game, or know what you’re talking about. This discussion is worthless.

[malonetd]

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
malonetd wrote:
Mick28 wrote:
Okay…very good, that’s one. Now who are all the others that have denied these home runs to Bonds and Bonds rivals?

This is retarded. It’s obvious you don’t follow baseball, understand the game, or know what you’re talking about. This discussion is worthless.

Look, I’m not the one who made the claim that Hank Aarons record was protected by juicing pitchers facing non-using sluggers.

You did.

All I’m asking you to do is substantiate this claim with some sort of evidence. Reputable articles with names and dates will do fine.

If you cannot do this it is not me who does not know what he is talking about.

[/quote]

IF YOU FOLLOWED BASEBALL YOU WOULD KNOW MANY PITCHERS HAVE FAILED RANDOM DRUG TESTING!!!

You said you can’t recall one – JUST ONE!! – pitcher that got caught juicing. That alone shows your ignorance of baseball. I’m not wasting my time debating with someone who doesn’t know the subject matter.

[rainjack]

[quote]Mick28 wrote:

Did I mention that Bonds has broken any rules above?

I did imply that is a suspect involving steroid use and that he was accused of perjury.

That’s pretty much it.[/quote]

I see you left off all your quotes implying that Bonds was a cheater and that he took advantage of Aaron by using steroids -

Pick a fucking side. You keep worming back and forth between Bonds is a juicer/cheater, and saying you never said suxh a thing.

[quote]But there are grounds to investigate possession and selling based upon the usage.

How difficult is that for you to understand?[/quote]

Conti was found guilty. What else is there to investigate? Especially 4 years after the fact.

Can you say witch hunt?

Wow…you’re confused, “reasonable suspicion” is a legal term. Someone “suspecting” another is using is something else entirely.

Go back and read. Damn - you just won’t do it. You used the word “suspect” - I even showed it to you, and you are now saying that suspected and suspicion are not even related?

The more you post the deeper the hole you dig. You have several people on here thinking you are an idiot

Read the above definition again. I know you want to split hairs over this but it’s not working. “If” Bonds was using steroids then he somehow put them in his body…or his trainer did…Either way, if there is a “reasonable suspicion” (legal definition) based upon the facts an investigation can certainly move forward.

Show me where injecting steroids is a crime. I’ll wait. I’d prefer a link, or some sort of citation. Reasonable suspicion of what? Tell me where the gov’t has a right to enter baseball rule enforcement when they don’t even have a fucking positive drug test. And how, exactly, does the investigation move forward? Conti has already been caught.

[rainjack]

[quote]Mick28 wrote:
rainjack wrote:

Doesn’t necessarily have to be Bonds they are pitching to. Like you said, it could be Arod, Junior, Bonds, McGuire, Sosa, or any of the other prolific hitters in the league during the “steroid era”. You want others to so all the proving and, conversely, want us to just believe your words at face value.

In order for the “everyone was on…pitchers too” defense to work you are the one who must come up with the proof in order to substantiate your point, that being that many others (especially pitchers) were using.

You made the claim, you show me the evidence.
[/quote]

But you don’t have to prove that Bonds “took advantage of Aaron”.

You can’t prove common sense. If over half the player being suspended for juicing are pitchers, and you can’t connect the dots - well…no amount of proof is going to flip that particular light on in your head.

[rainjack]

[quote]Mick28 wrote:

It’s funny, I ask for proof that the pitchers were juicing and you give me a broad answer about suspensions. And this from a man who steadfastly claims that “Bonds is innocent until proven guilty”.[/quote]

Dude - they were caught and suspended by MLB. What suspicion are we dealing with here? Your inability to actually read is astounding, if not old.

[quote]Well I agree with you, he is. And I also think that the pitchers in question deserve that same right, don’t you?

Time to answer my question.[/quote]

I did. You just can’t seem to grasp the fact that I cited an ESPN analyst saying that 54% of the players suspended for steroid use are pitchers.

This is not suspicion. These are people who have been caught and punished.

You want to know how many? Start looking it up yourself. I gave you proof.

Get busy and let me know exactly how many pitchers were proven to be juicing on a regular basis. Let’s see how relevant this is.

Regular basis has dick to do with this discussion. They were caught and suspended - one time user, or habitual juice monkey.

What you seem to be missing - and have been missing since you started in on this - is that Bonds has never been caught - has never failed any drug test. You say that he is cheating Aaron.

The fact that more pitchers than hitters have been caught and suspended (notice - this is not a suspicion - but actual rules violations) for steroid usage is proof enough for those that actually have a fucking clue about the game to know that this affects hitters, and by extension protects Aaron’s record.

Funny that it’s only Aaron’s record that needs protecting - not Maris’. Which is also more proof of Bonds being singled out.

Your argument is crumbling. Or, should I say it continues to crumble.

Are you trying to convince me, or yourself?