The US vs. Bonds

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dickay

if bonds is guilty, and they have evidence which would prove it if not for anderson breaking the law....why are you so against the govt. trying to prosecute someone they know to be guilty?

---

I really don't feel like going through it over, and over, and over again. It's a case of proportion. I don't think what Bonds did warrants years and years and millions and millions of dollars of time and effort. It was all about getting Bonds from the start. The only reason he was called in front of the grand jury to testify is because they wanted to nail him. The government did not need Bonds in anyway to go after BALCO and Greg Anderson, but it was a convenient excuse to get him under oath. Bonds' lie literally had no consequences. It was about himself and whether or not he knowingly used steroids. It obstructed no investigation. If it takes this much time and effort to convict a guy of doing something that literally affected nothing, I'm against it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

I really don't feel like going through it over, and over, and over again. It's a case of proportion. I don't think what Bonds did warrants years and years and millions and millions of dollars of time and effort. It was all about getting Bonds from the start. The only reason he was called in front of the grand jury to testify is because they wanted to nail him. The government did not need Bonds in anyway to go after BALCO and Greg Anderson, but it was a convenient excuse to get him under oath. Bonds' lie literally had no consequences. It was about himself and whether or not he knowingly used steroids. It obstructed no investigation. If it takes this much time and effort to convict a guy of doing something that literally affected nothing, I'm against it.

---

he lied while under oath. allowing that to happen "literally affects" everything. he took an oath and understood the consequences. the govt. apparently has evidence they feel will clearly find him guilty if not for more obstruction and lawlessness from Anderson. I just assume see them both locked up.

I'm a fan of Bonds. have been for years, and the fact he did roids really doesn't change my perception of him. I can't however accept someone lying while under oath merely because some are to weak to follow through with what was started when roadbumps occur. I don't believe the govt. would have gone this far unless they were confident in Bond's guilt.

In the grand scheme, this is such a small issue. I don't know why you take it so personally. there's so much money wasted in so many worst ways by out govt. Ways much worst than trying to convict someone they strongly feel jeopardized the integrity of our court system.

Let me quote someone from BTF, because he said it better than I can.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Why Can't We All Get Along?

But it's a case of proportion. Just as it was the height of insanity to go after Bill Clinton for perjury when the underlying "crime" was nothing but a private sexual affair, it's more than a stretch to criminalize "lying" when Bonds's underlying offense is far more of a private concern of baseball than of society as a whole.

I understand the logic of your position, but as is so often the case, to insist upon pure consistency of logic in each and every case can lead us down some pretty dumbassssed roads. Like the Clinton impeachment farce, and in this case the Bonds trial.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

Let me quote someone from BTF, because he said it better than I can.

---

clinton lied while under oath as well. while i'm not as wacko as some are about how clinton's lack of morals has effected our youth...there is something to be said about an increase amongst our youth in drug use, sex, and teenage pregnancy. All clintons fault?? absolutely not. Did the leader of our country inspiring a national debate on these type of issues contribute? definetly an argument could be made.

regardless, i think it was right to impeach a president who blantantly lies while under oath. I don't think its right for his private life to become such an issue as it was made to be.....but regardless, his actions on the stand were deplorable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dickay

clinton lied while under oath as well. while i'm not as wacko as some are about how clinton's lack of morals has effected our youth...there is something to be said about an increase amongst our youth in drug use, sex, and teenage pregnancy. All clintons fault?? absolutely not. Did the leader of our country inspiring a national debate on these type of issues contribute? definetly an argument could be made.

---

Clinton didn't randomly come out and proclaim "I got a blowjob." It was the media, opposing politicians, etc. that made it into a huge national debate, not Clinton.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

Clinton didn't randomly come out and proclaim "I got a blowjob." It was the media, opposing politicians, etc. that made it into a huge national debate, not Clinton.

---

true, and i said it a persons private life shouldn't have been made such an issue. regardless though, any top political leader, especially the one in arguably the biggest job in the world has to know it's going to be a big issue. and his blatant and sarcastic lying and/or legal maneuvers (depends on what the meaning of is is) while under oath were appalling.