Posted by kermit on 1/26/2022 2:12:00 PM (view original):
Mitch will no doubt express concern about nominating a new justice when there are midterm elections approaching. "LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE".

So frigging true but the son of a mitch won’t be able to hijack this one.

Posted by wylie715 on 1/26/2022 2:38:00 PM (view original):

Posted by lostnfound74 on 1/26/2022 12:52:00 AM (view original):
Can we move this to Baseball????

Oh, I'm sorry. Does reading about a sport on a sports simulation website really bother you that much? If so, just don't read those posts.

Kudo This is not the place for sports regularly but something like this is different.

Posted by wylie715 on 1/26/2022 2:36:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Jetson21 on 1/26/2022 12:29:00 AM (view original):
Bonds and clemens were proven in court. They got out of criminal mess by getting jurors to believe they did not knowingly do it but they did it. That was the case for Bonds im sure of that .I forgot what happened with Clemens maybe they impeached the trainer who testified against him.

None of the writers who vote for them believe thst they were not on steroids and the the elite ones.
They say they vote for them for the prior careers.

If you look back at my posts you won't find me saying anywhere that Bonds and Clemens were innocent. They weren't. All I said was that if you won't let them in the Hall, you shouldn't let anyone who has a hint of steroid use (Bagwell, Ortiz...) in.

Zero hint or smoke for Ortiz.
Lots and lots af smoke for Bagwell with players and teammates talking.

BTW - this issue lives on because there are rotating veteran era committees and the one that Bonds and Clemens and Schilling ( who I would vote for )
vote in December 2022 and again in either 2025 or 2026. I think it is every 3 years.
All 3 could make the ballot - I think it has 25 players.
Again need 75%.
Dick Allen will probably finally get in.
The other 3 will up for grabs and it will be interesting
again. Personally I see Schilling getting in especially with his very gracious congratulations to Ortiz.

There is a must read article in Time Magazine Detailing how the Republican Party could conceivably block the Supreme Court nomination.It involves an 11-11 tie in the judiciary committee and then another 60 vote requirement to get the nomination through because of special sharing of power rules.
There could be another round of needing to change the rules and once again mansion and cinema will be at the center of controversy.

Of the Red 11 there are plenty of the worst - Cruz and Hawley and some others. The current Lindsey Graham will do what Trump tells him..
Maybe the only 2 that could advance the nomination are Ben Sasse and Chuck Grassley. Best chance with Ben Sasse.

And the frontrunner could have recusal issues on Trump document cases.

Posted by Jetson21 on 1/26/2022 3:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 1/26/2022 2:36:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Jetson21 on 1/26/2022 12:29:00 AM (view original):
Bonds and clemens were proven in court. They got out of criminal mess by getting jurors to believe they did not knowingly do it but they did it. That was the case for Bonds im sure of that .I forgot what happened with Clemens maybe they impeached the trainer who testified against him.

None of the writers who vote for them believe thst they were not on steroids and the the elite ones.
They say they vote for them for the prior careers.

If you look back at my posts you won't find me saying anywhere that Bonds and Clemens were innocent. They weren't. All I said was that if you won't let them in the Hall, you shouldn't let anyone who has a hint of steroid use (Bagwell, Ortiz...) in.

Zero hint or smoke for Ortiz.
Lots and lots af smoke for Bagwell with players and teammates talking.

how is Ortiz being named on a list of failed tests zero hint or smoke//

the fact that Schilling, Clemens, Bonds are not in when Harold Baines is in is a travesty. Steroids or not, those 3 are more deserving than Baines. Nothing against Baines...a very good consistent player, but HofF????

Posted by wylie715 on 1/26/2022 5:38:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Jetson21 on 1/26/2022 3:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 1/26/2022 2:36:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Jetson21 on 1/26/2022 12:29:00 AM (view original):
Bonds and clemens were proven in court. They got out of criminal mess by getting jurors to believe they did not knowingly do it but they did it. That was the case for Bonds im sure of that .I forgot what happened with Clemens maybe they impeached the trainer who testified against him.

None of the writers who vote for them believe thst they were not on steroids and the the elite ones.
They say they vote for them for the prior careers.

If you look back at my posts you won't find me saying anywhere that Bonds and Clemens were innocent. They weren't. All I said was that if you won't let them in the Hall, you shouldn't let anyone who has a hint of steroid use (Bagwell, Ortiz...) in.

Zero hint or smoke for Ortiz.
Lots and lots af smoke for Bagwell with players and teammates talking.

how is Ortiz being named on a list of failed tests zero hint or smoke//

4.reasons.

1. that was a year of early testing and scores of guys had positive tests from over the counter supplements you could get at GNC and he never had a positive test for anything after that.
2. 2003 was his first full season and it was improvement but average. His career started in Boston where under tutelage he became a much better hitter.
3. His body form never changed from minor leagues and his whole career.
4. Nobody in baseball ever thought he was on steroids and associated drugs. There was not even a rumor.

as to #1 Bonds and Clemens never had positive tests either. Either it doesn't mean anything for any of them, or it means something for all of them.
as to #2, he improved a hell of a lot when he got to Boston.
as to #3 everyone's body reaccts differently to drugs and we don't really know is his body ever changed. We just know it didn't appear to change from what we could see.
as to #4, his name was on the list of players who failed tests.That's more than a rumor.

It really doesn't matter. Neither of us has a vote for the Hall of Fame, and you aren't going to change my mind just as I won't change yours. We cann just agree to disagree.

Bonds tested positive for steroids in 2000. And there was more evidence later that he tested positive after that for steroids and hgh and amphetamines 2001 - 2006. There were no penalties until 2004 for the steroids.
And later he admitted it all in a friggin federal court room.
What more do you need.
He also tested positive for amphetamines in 1996.

Again I would not even care for if Ortiz used in 2003 and never again. He was tested extensively.
And you are wrong about body change and lack of fat from anabolic steroids and hch etc.

Clemens own trainer testified in federal court how he gave him steroids and he kept a syringe that had absolute dna evidence of clemens on if.

It is case closed on their use.

The fact that we don’t vote is irrelevant to having a discussion.

Posted by kermit on 1/26/2022 2:12:00 PM (view original):
Mitch will no doubt express concern about nominating a new justice when there are midterm elections approaching. "LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE".

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/01/mitch-mcconnell-stephen-breyer-supreme-court

Actual headline:

MITCH MCCONNELL IS ONE WEEK AWAY FROM CLAIMING BIDEN CAN’T PUT SOMEONE ON THE SUPREME COURT THE SAME YEAR HE STARTED RE-WATCHING THE ORIGINAL GOSSIP GIRL

another actual headline