Return to Baseball Leftovers

Barry Bonds mistress has "proof" he used steroids

Moderator: Baseball Moderators

Postby Lofunzo » Mon Feb 14, 2005 6:05 pm

lesgrant wrote:
Lofunzo wrote:Lesgrant.......I love the thought and effort that you put into your posts but are you really gonna use Maddog to back up your claims?? :-o :-D


I KNOW!! LOL

I only do it because he's the biggest Bonds fan alive. If he can accept that Bonds used 'roids, then any SF fan or Bonds fan should be able to.


I never knew that he had a personal relationship with Bonds. The rest, I did. I say that because when the discussion turns to what a jerk he is in his personal life, he never says anything.
Image
Lofunzo
Moderator
Moderator

User avatar
ModeratorCafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe RankerEagle EyeHockey ModPick 3 Weekly Winner
Posts: 23082
(Past Year: -616)
Joined: 9 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Central Jersey

Postby CubsFan7724 » Mon Feb 14, 2005 6:29 pm

DK wrote:
lesgrant wrote:All this thread is about is Bonds supporters grasping at straws as the circumstantial evidence piles up.

DK, was it “proven” that Scott Peterson murdered his wife?
Yes.

Did anyone see him do it?
No.

Was there any physical evidence linking him to the crime?
No.

Who was talking about Scott Peterson? I sure wasn't. And you say my defense is ridiculous. After all, murder is equivalent to steroids. ;-7

Grand jury testimony

Which was given out by the SF Chronicle, notorious for Bonds-bashing, citing an unidentified source. Real strong evidence you have there.

postal records that show roids were shipped to him from BALCO

bank records that show Bonds paid for roids shipped from BALCO

These two were subpeonead for, and never found. There is no evidence indicating this that I know of. Feel free to prove me wrong.

eyewitness accounts from his trainer who said he gave it to Bonds

Greg Anderson, right. The guy who has all the credibility of Jose Canseco.

eyewitness accounts from his girlfriend who said Bonds admitted using to recover from injuries quicker, was afraid of how he would look to the fans, her observations of his acne, temper and rapid muscle growth

On the Geraldo Rivera show, promoting a book because she, like Canseco, needs the money.

statistical spike – having never hit 50, he suddenly jacks 70+

Oh, I forgot, it's impossible to have a good season when you get older. Thanks for reminding me.

unnatural muscle growth in Bonds’ late thirties/early forties – sorry but you don’t put muscle on like that on his side of 35 years of age

Again, says you, the health expert. Ever think that the weight training Bonds does might just be a little more rigorous than the average Joe?

I can say that:

Barry Bonds, more likely than not, used steroids during his MLB career.

And I can say that, you still have no evidence. So we're even.

And depending upon the specifics of the grand jury proceedings and the criminal case against BALCO, I’m confident that I’ll be able to say that Barry Bonds used steroids beyond a reasonable doubt. People have been convicted of cocaine trafficking on less than what I’ve listed above. Give me a break.

What, the BS evidence above? I don't think I could be convicted for walking across my street with that evidence.

Beyond that DK, Chris Russo, one of Bonds’ biggest fans in the media (and elsewhere for that matter) has said on the air that he spoke with a friend of his in the Justice Department. According to his friend, they have Bonds “nailed” on everything, including receiving steroids, paying for them, and taking them. He’s just not the center of their investigation. BALCO is.

Russo would NEVER slander his favorite player of all time, Barry Bonds. Why don’t you call WFAN and argue with Bonds’ biggest fan whether or not Bonds used roids?

You mistake me for a person who has ever cared what Russo has to say.

Give it up buddy. You’re one of those people who will only accept some pie in the sky standard of “proof” for this.

What, a failed drug test? Haven't seen one of those. I don't think that's too pie in the sky. ;-7

And I LOVE your rationale for why Bonds wouldn’t sue. How about this one:

In order to sue someone for libel/slander you have to demonstrate that the statements made were false.

It’s very simple. It’s only complicated for people trying twist it around to show that Bonds isn’t on roids.


I LOVE your evidence, which proves nothing.

In case you haven't noticed, I haven't twisted anything. I've waited for evidence.

Got any?

Didn't think so.
Come on, so, the source nailed Giambis testimony because he had that news conference a few days ago basically admitting it, but he just threw in Bonds for good measure? I highly doubt it. You act like unidentified sources have no credibility and you can't believe them. I guess had you been around for Watergate, in which an unidentified source came to the Washington Post (a mainly democratic leaning paper, so they would have a bit of incentive to post against Nixon, just like the SF Chronicle), and then later turned out to be true? I think it is foolish to think the source told the truth about the Giambi testimony but not the Bonds testimony, so I think you are grasping for straws.
CubsFan7724
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Pick 3 Weekly Winner
Posts: 6410
(Past Year: -16)
Joined: 19 Mar 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: AKA 34=Sweetness on FFC

Bonds failed drug test

Postby quicksilver8 » Mon Feb 14, 2005 6:46 pm

Hello,
DK the reason Bonds hasn't failed a drug test yet is because
1) The MLB steroid policy was a joke until just recently.
2) Many of the steroids including the cream and clear were masked or undetectable. How do you think Marion Jones and Lance Armstrong managed not to get caught? Same reason. Now that they know what to test for, players will have to find the next untracable steroid or masking agent.

This thread isn't a court of law. We don't require proof beyond a reasonable doubt or by a preponderance of the evidence. Common sense tells us that Mac, Bonds, Sammy, Giambi and others were users.
quicksilver8
Minor League Mentor
Minor League Mentor

User avatar

Posts: 454
Joined: 7 Jan 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: The Nebuchadnezzar

Postby DK » Mon Feb 14, 2005 6:56 pm

CubsFan7724 wrote:Come on, so, the source nailed Giambis testimony because he had that news conference a few days ago basically admitting it, but he just threw in Bonds for good measure? I highly doubt it. You act like unidentified sources have no credibility and you can't believe them. I guess had you been around for Watergate, in which an unidentified source came to the Washington Post (a mainly democratic leaning paper, so they would have a bit of incentive to post against Nixon, just like the SF Chronicle), and then later turned out to be true? I think it is foolish to think the source told the truth about the Giambi testimony but not the Bonds testimony, so I think you are grasping for straws.


First of all, something I've noticed with your posts: They're all one paragraph.

Secondly, your connection to Watergate is simpy, for lack of a better word, idiotic. So you're saying that if a paper (any paper) who is anti-something cites an unidentified source saying that what they are against did something scandalous, it is fact?

I'm a Democrat. If I say that Bush murdered Michael Jordan's father, does that make it true?

Apparently, if I use an unidentified source. ;-7

Actually, it's not that foolish to believe. Giambi said, "I'm sorry." He never made any mention towards the testimony. He admitted that he was sorry, (for what I don't know, but yes, most likely to his steroid use) and never once made any indication that the testimony was the reason he was sorry.
DK
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle Eye
Posts: 9077
(Past Year: -456)
Joined: 22 Mar 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: on deck

Postby CubsFan7724 » Mon Feb 14, 2005 8:06 pm

DK wrote:
CubsFan7724 wrote:Come on, so, the source nailed Giambis testimony because he had that news conference a few days ago basically admitting it, but he just threw in Bonds for good measure? I highly doubt it. You act like unidentified sources have no credibility and you can't believe them. I guess had you been around for Watergate, in which an unidentified source came to the Washington Post (a mainly democratic leaning paper, so they would have a bit of incentive to post against Nixon, just like the SF Chronicle), and then later turned out to be true? I think it is foolish to think the source told the truth about the Giambi testimony but not the Bonds testimony, so I think you are grasping for straws.


First of all, something I've noticed with your posts: They're all one paragraph.

Secondly, your connection to Watergate is simpy, for lack of a better word, idiotic. So you're saying that if a paper (any paper) who is anti-something cites an unidentified source saying that what they are against did something scandalous, it is fact?

I'm a Democrat. If I say that Bush murdered Michael Jordan's father, does that make it true?

Apparently, if I use an unidentified source. ;-7

Actually, it's not that foolish to believe. Giambi said, "I'm sorry." He never made any mention towards the testimony. He admitted that he was sorry, (for what I don't know, but yes, most likely to his steroid use) and never once made any indication that the testimony was the reason he was sorry.
But why would he admit he was sorry? No testimony, no proof? Oh, unless the testimony is true ;-7 .
CubsFan7724
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Pick 3 Weekly Winner
Posts: 6410
(Past Year: -16)
Joined: 19 Mar 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: AKA 34=Sweetness on FFC

Postby DK » Mon Feb 14, 2005 8:28 pm

CubsFan7724 wrote:
DK wrote:
CubsFan7724 wrote:Come on, so, the source nailed Giambis testimony because he had that news conference a few days ago basically admitting it, but he just threw in Bonds for good measure? I highly doubt it. You act like unidentified sources have no credibility and you can't believe them. I guess had you been around for Watergate, in which an unidentified source came to the Washington Post (a mainly democratic leaning paper, so they would have a bit of incentive to post against Nixon, just like the SF Chronicle), and then later turned out to be true? I think it is foolish to think the source told the truth about the Giambi testimony but not the Bonds testimony, so I think you are grasping for straws.


First of all, something I've noticed with your posts: They're all one paragraph.

Secondly, your connection to Watergate is simpy, for lack of a better word, idiotic. So you're saying that if a paper (any paper) who is anti-something cites an unidentified source saying that what they are against did something scandalous, it is fact?

I'm a Democrat. If I say that Bush murdered Michael Jordan's father, does that make it true?

Apparently, if I use an unidentified source. ;-7

Actually, it's not that foolish to believe. Giambi said, "I'm sorry." He never made any mention towards the testimony. He admitted that he was sorry, (for what I don't know, but yes, most likely to his steroid use) and never once made any indication that the testimony was the reason he was sorry.
But why would he admit he was sorry? No testimony, no proof? Oh, unless the testimony is true ;-7 .


Well, that's why I've tried my best to stay away from talking about the press conference- it's so dodgy and uninformative. That's the problem with talking about it- He could be talking about anything.
DK
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle Eye
Posts: 9077
(Past Year: -456)
Joined: 22 Mar 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: on deck

Postby afromangettindrunk » Mon Feb 14, 2005 8:28 pm

eftda wrote:
If the US knew that a country was to bomb America and didn't do a thing to stop it, would you be more pissed at the other country or at the US Gov't?



there's one particular example that comes to mind...
Image
afromangettindrunk
Minor League Mentor
Minor League Mentor

User avatar

Posts: 804
(Past Year: -4)
Joined: 15 Mar 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Albany, NY

Postby moochman » Tue Feb 15, 2005 2:12 am

afromangettindrunk wrote:
eftda wrote:
If the US knew that a country was to bomb America and didn't do a thing to stop it, would you be more pissed at the other country or at the US Gov't?



there's one particular example that comes to mind...


And it has nothing to do with this thread either.

What I want to know is if this woman is right and Bonds was using steroids to work through an injury then, and the Grand Jury testimony reports are right that he was using the cream and clear then that would be two seperate occasions that he was using steroids. Hmmm.
Image
moochman
Major League Manager
Major League Manager

User avatar
Pick 3 Weekly WinnerSweet 16 SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 1280
(Past Year: -369)
Joined: 20 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Football
Location: First place baby

Postby cmchampa2 » Tue Feb 15, 2005 3:29 am

I think it's been hinted at, but the point is that the cafe is full of fantasy studs, NOT grand jury members during the BALCO case and certainly not anyone that put a needle in Barry's butt. To say that you think Bonds is juiced because he suddenly looks like a tank is fine. To say that you think Bonds is clean because there's a severe lack of evidence is fine. There might only be one person who really knows.

Here's what the rest of us know: A lot of people want to hate Bonds anyway. A lot of people want to love Bonds anyway. There is no damning proof. Performance enhancers can be masked and BALCO can do it. Bonds is ridiculously talented. Peformance enhancers (legal, illegal and somewhere in between) are being used rampantly. We don't know who's using what. Players that are not using say they aren't. Players that are using say they aren't. Players aren't stupid. Some players are putting on more muscle than normal workouts would produce. Some players are capable of putting on more muscle than normal workouts produce.

I'm sure I'm missing a few.
I'm not just the president of the Cornbread Maxwell Fan Club, I'm also the only member.
cmchampa2
College Coach
College Coach


Posts: 134
(Past Year: -58)
Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

PreviousNext

Return to Baseball Leftovers

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests