The following is from a transcript of an interview between ESPN investigative reporter T.J. Quinn and Rusty Hardin, the attorney for Roger Clemens, conducted on Friday.
The interview will appear on "Outside The Lines" at 9:30 a.m. ET Sunday on ESPN.
T.J. Quinn: Just to actually start off kind of from the beginning. You know, a lot from my own curiosity. How did you first come into contact with Roger Clemens?
Rusty Hardin: About eight days before the Mitchell report came out, a member of the firm of Hendricks & Co. -- the, the firm that represents
T.J. Quinn: His agents.
Rusty Hardin: His agents. One of them got a call from [Brian] McNamee saying that he was trying to reach Roger and he was trying to reach Andy [Pettitte], he wanted to tell him what he had done. And he ran down to this guy -- what he said his summary of what he told the Mitchell people. This guy was very shocked by it. Passed it on to Randy. That would've been Wednesday, eight days before the report came out on the following Thursday. And I got a call from Randy Hendricks. And we all met for the first time on the Friday before the report came out, and then I met Roger on that Sunday for the first time.
T.J. Quinn: On the Sunday
Rusty Hardin: So I'd known him for days when the report came out.
T.J. Quinn: OK. When was the first time you guys discussed the Mitchell report? Was it just in that initial conversation -- had they ever said to you, Randy or Alan [Hendricks] or anybody, ahead of time, "We may want to be in touch with you ?
Rusty Hardin: I wasn't representing Roger at that time; I wasn't representing anybody in baseball. I had no awareness one way or the other, other than a fan reading about the Mitchell report.
T.J. Quinn: Gotcha.
Rusty Hardin: So I had no contact with either the Mitchell people or the union or Randy or anyone about that.
T.J. Quinn: Had you met Roger before?
Rusty Hardin: No. Well, I may have shaken hands with him at some party, but no, I'd -- practically speaking, I'd never met him.
T.J. Quinn: What did you think when you met him? This guy is big in this town.
Rusty Hardin: I liked him. He always looks you straight in the eye. You know, a lot -- a lot of people that you meet that are either a celebrity or something, they talk over your head, they look for the next person to talk to. Roger looks you right in the eye and talks to you. I liked him from the very beginning, but I didn't know him. So we spent the next few days, next few weeks really trying to get to know each other, so
T.J. Quinn: What was that first conversation like?
Rusty Hardin: Well, obviously no attorney's going to tell you what a client said in an attorney-client conversation. But it was us primarily relaying what McNamee contended he had told the Mitchell Commission. And Roger was shocked. He strongly denied it; was really surprised, and -- just as he's been. I mean, from the first moment I have met him, he has never said anything differently privately than he's said publicly. His reaction's always been the same.
T.J. Quinn: Right. At that point, the report still hasn't come out yet. What did you expect from it?
Rusty Hardin: Well, I didn't know. I, quite frankly, to this day -- look, here's part of the problem. How do you question the wisdom of what an icon did? I've admired George Mitchell from afar. I have no reason not to continue to admire him. He's had a wonderful career. He's a man of impeccable integrity according to everybody that knows him. And so my first question was -- is, are they really going to put people's names in this report? People that haven't had any kind of public hearing, haven't had a chance for people to be cross-examined about what they're saying?
So we told Roger that all we knew at this stage was -- is that this is what McNamee has said happened. But we had no idea whether, first of all, the Mitchell people believed him; we had no idea whether what he said would be included in the report; and just as importantly, we had no idea whether actual names were going to be used. I naively thought that what the Mitchell Commission might very well do is do their investigation, come up with people they thought may or may not have used it, and referred that information to baseball for baseball to investigate. I didn't know for sure until that Thursday morning that they were actually going to name names.
T.J. Quinn: Before that -- before you even met with Roger, what did you do as far as figuring out a strategy, trying to find out what McNamee knew or what he had told Mitchell?
Rusty Hardin: We contacted -- we had somebody contact McNamee to see if he'd be willing to meet with represents of, of us. And we had a couple people -- I think it's been in the media accurately that a couple of investigators that work for us went up and interviewed him on the Wednesday before the report came out. It was an interview solely for information gathering. It was an interview solely to try to find out what was McNamee saying happened? There wasn't any attempt to get McNamee to change his story or take it back. It was 'What basically is it that you say happened?' And he relayed his version of what happened. At least his version of what he had told the commission.
T.J. Quinn: And did he have any sense of whether or not Mitchell was going to publish Roger's name and his allegation?
Rusty Hardin: He seemed to think they would. But we still -- and this is one reason that Roger has been quoted as saying he didn't know till the report came out whether he would be in it. And that's -- that's a literally true statement. Because that Wednesday night before it came out, we told him "OK, this is what we understand McNamee is saying happened, but we don't know whether the Mitchell Commission is putting it in their report or whether or not they're going to name names. So we won't know until tomorrow whether it's really going to be in there."
T.J. Quinn: OK, but as you're formulating a strategy for this, how are you proceeding?
Rusty Hardin: Well, I didn't know Roger, OK? And Roger appeared to me to be telling the truth. And he certainly showed all the indicia of somebody who thought he was being falsely accused. But I didn't have any long-term relationship with Roger, and I didn't have a background with him like others who knew him well. And so I wanted to make sure that no matter what came out in the report that we had enough time and took enough time to try to find out what had happened here and how this kind of mistake could be made before we started having him go out and just say a bunch of things.
We always knew that once this report came out, if it was going to name names, there would one day be congressional hearings at the end, there would be a big scream and yell for Roger's scalp. And we wanted to make sure at each stage that we were talking accurately. So we were just trying to find out as much information as we could. I watched it right here in this office just like everybody else did.
T.J. Quinn: When they did release the report, what did you think of it?
Rusty Hardin: How do you say this? I think it leaves a lot to be desired from an investigator's standpoint. I've said many times that I don't think the information about Roger would've made it past Ben Bradlee during Watergate days. I was working in Washington before I went to law school during Watergate, and followed it very closely, and Woodward and Bernstein's experiences. And then you later look at the movie, and there are all these conferences in the editor's office where Bradlee would say periodically "Guys, we can't go with it yet. You don't have it."
I was tremendously disappointed that they issued that report that blasted these people, particularly Roger, the only one I knew anything about, with what on the surface appeared nothing more than McNamee's version. Now, did they have more? I didn't know then; I don't know now. But I was disappointed. Again, though, I didn't know anything. Look, all we ever wanted anybody to do in this thing is start out, give the person being accused the benefit of the doubt and say, 'OK, this sounds really bad. Uh, so let's -- let's see if Roger did or didn't do it.' And go try to find out.
I didn't feel that the Mitchell report and its people had made a good enough effort to vet McNamee's version. And so before they issued a report that would ruin Roger's reputation with a large segment of the public forever -- and that's what we started doing. Once it came out, OK, now, we know George Mitchell is a really good man with -- full of integrity. So how could he sponsor a report that is so at odds with what Roger, who we also know whose reputation is, and who seems so believable to us -- how could they be so at odds?
So that's when we started It wasn't this massive investigative effort. I mean, there's one investigator -- this is a 10-lawyer firm -- we have one investigator that's a full-time member of the firm, and we've got another friend of ours that just retired from the Houston Police Department, and the two of them along with one of the lawyers started going to logical people. T.J., here's what we do. The same thing as a reporter. And this is my frustration with you guys -- and I use it in a great big, general sense. I don't find so far that sportswriters are willing to investigate. They're simply, apparently just reporting. And the frustration with that is, is that all along we've been trying to get people -- OK, don't take my word, don't take Roger's word. Assume for a moment that McNamee tells you these things. Now how do you go to decide whether maybe he's telling the truth? And so much so that you ought to rely on him enough to blast somebody?
Well, who would be logical people to talk to? So, let's go down to St. Petersburg and talk to the police officers that investigated him in 2001 for the sexual assault. And the focus is not, for us, whether he committed the sexual assault or not -- 'cause he ultimately wasn't charged in that, but what was those officers' experience with them as to whether he was a truth teller. And what did they say? 'He lied to us throughout the investigation.' Does that mean he lied to the Mitchell Commission? No. It's just a factor to consider.
So who else should we talk to? How about the head trainer at Toronto, who's not there anymore but was there for like 25 years? What does he say? 'Roger was big when he arrived, he was big when he left, his body never changed. And the Mitchell people -- and I don't believe he used steroids -- we didn't see any indication of it. And, furthermore, what, did the Mitchell people talk to you?' No. Well, now, if you're preparing a report saying this guy was taking steroids during 1998, why wouldn't you talk to the other trainers? And we've since talked to a couple other -- they didn't talk to them at all. Does that mean Roger didn't take steroids? No. But is it a factor to consider? So then we get on a plane and go out to talk to you know, [Jose] Canseco.
T.J. Quinn: Did you go on that trip?
Rusty Hardin: I didn't. One of the lawyers and a couple investigators went. So they go out to talk to Canseco, who hadn't read the report, and say, 'OK, let me read you this portion of the report where McNamee says that around a pool, you guys -- you and Roger sat and talked about steroids.' And they read it to him. He says, 'That's a lie, that didn't happen.' 'How do you know it didn't happen? We're talking about a pool party years ago.' He says, 'Because I only had one and Roger didn't come. And I remember he didn't come because I was upset about it. So it never happened -- that conversation never happened.'
T.J. Quinn: When you first met with Roger
Rusty Hardin: And wait a minute. 'Did the Mitchell people ever call you to verify what McNamee was saying?' Answer: no. Now that's just the first three interviews we conducted.
T.J. Quinn: Right.
Rusty Hardin: Go ahead.
T.J. Quinn: Well, when Roger -- when you first met with Roger, what did he want to do at the time? What was his reaction?
Rusty Hardin: You know, it's a real good question because there has always been a side of him that almost wanted to say 'The hell with all of y'all who believe I would do that to my body, contrary to what I've done and practiced all my career.' He had to come to grips at first with the -- that's why originally it was a denial by me. Well, everybody hammered him. He authorizes a denial through me, and he and his sons go on a prearranged hunting trip for four or five days and he's gone. They're not watching TV; he has no idea the firestorm that's happening back at the mainland.
T.J. Quinn: Yeah, what was happening back at the mainland?
Rusty Hardin: Everybody was going crazy. Everybody in the media. First of all, how dare him not come out? We have a constitutional right if you're accused to have you come out and talk to the media. It's hogwash. And -- but, but in his situation everybody's going crazy. He comes back, and then he -- he settles into the fact -- he says, 'Look, this is my reputation and my future. And so I guess I'm going to have to tell people what happened.' And we say that it didn't happen. And we say, well, let's wait a minute, let us keep investigating so we know what we're doing when we start doing it. And what happened? For 30 days, the most vicious [unintelligible] about him personally and professionally I've ever read. I don't understand the meanness of people's comments about this. I understand people not believing it. We've had other athletes denying then turn out to have used it. I understand that. But I don't understand if a guy has the kind of record he does or history for 25 years, why is everybody so willing to be so incredibly mean in their comments about him? I mean, the e-mails I get, the sports articles I get, the headlines I get, not a single person I would suggest who is written like that would be able to stand up under the kind of criticism he's gotten without just wanting to lash out at the world.
T.J. Quinn: Where do you think that came from?
Rusty Hardin: Well, first of all, I've decided -- perhaps naively, but I've decided that the sports world writing is different than the -- than the regular world writing. Apparently, we have moved the First Amendment to the level that says you have a constitutional right to be as vicious about somebody that you disapprove of as you want, and you have the right to attack them on an incredible personal level.
Now, Roger's not the one saying anything about it, that's just my observation. There may be something about baseball that makes people think that if you somehow are believed to have betrayed the sport, that it is worse than treason to the country. But I will guarantee you in 33 years in public life, I've never seen any individual as across the board vilified on a personal level as this. So there's something kicking around there -- I don't know what it is.
T.J. Quinn: What sort of things did you hear? I mean, it's -- you've got a broad spectrum. You've got -- a lot of these are columnists who are just sharing their opinions. What did you see?
Rusty Hardin: Well, you know, actually if I'd have thought that you were going to ask that question or I was going to volunteer to answer, I'd have probably gotten together sort of an anthology of the articles. I mean, I just remember going through each day the headlines, and
T.J. Quinn: Does anything jump out from what you remember?
Rusty Hardin: Not words or phrases. I mean, it's just across the board. You know, when something like this happens, you start preparing -- or getting, trying to get as many media stories as you can.
T.J. Quinn: Right.
Rusty Hardin: At the end of the day, it's not that Roger really is entitled to be treated differently than anyone else. I'm really applying this kind of attack to anyone. It seemed to be this theory that he was supposed to respond, on the schedule of those who wanted to hear from him rather than those who were advising him and trying to prepare a response. And the fact that people weren't getting what they wanted right away seemed to send him into orbit.
T.J. Quinn: But did you find that even supporters wanted that same reaction from him?
Rusty Hardin: Well, the difference -- sure. I think it's natural to want it. I mean, there's nothing wrong with that. But the point was supporters weren't demanding it. They understood that he was being advised by people who wanted to take a deliberate approach, for instance -- and make sure they knew what they were talking about before they started talking.
Well, let's just assume you're the client and all these things are being said by you, and you tell me you didn't do it. Do I walk out there and let you tell the world all these things that you will later be living with the rest of your life before we look into it and try to get an explanation? The Mitchell report had 20 months. I still don't understand why this instant response had to be made. The Mitchell people had 20 months to look into this thing. If they make allegations about somebody, what's so unreasonable about taking several weeks before everybody starts coming out with a detailed response?
T.J. Quinn: What do you think people are -- what conclusions are they drawing, though, in that -- in that absence of a statement from Roger?
Rusty Hardin: Well, it isn't in the absence of a statement. That's a straw man. Judged on the way people reacted, it wouldn't have made any difference. If he'd come out and said he did it -- the feeling was so strong about the allegation, it wouldn't have changed anything. Has the Mitchell people now offered to withdraw it now that he said he didn't do it? They haven't, all right? I'll give an example. In the Mitchell report, they cite as one of the pieces of evidences in there the Los Angeles Times article of Nov. 1, 2006, which -- wrongly, it turns out -- reported that Roger and Andy had been named in a particular search warrant.
T.J. Quinn: Right.
Rusty Hardin: And that article ran, and that article was included in the Mitchell report. Well, then what happens? Well, a few weeks ago, as you know, a federal magistrate released -- unsealed it, and it turned out the story was totally false. They weren't in there. L.A. Times, you know, prints an apology and that's it. And yet the Mitchell people haven't taken that out. Nobody's come back and said, 'Oops, we shouldn't have had that in the report.' I think that people made up their mind about Roger and they -- it wouldn't have mattered what he said. So, all we're going to do is finish up making these last sets of presentations to Congress if they want, whenever that works out, and then we're going to be through and history will just have to be the judge. But we are going to continue to look into things that we think should've been considered by the Mitchell people that apparently were not.
T.J. Quinn: Well, let's look at McNamee again. When you heard his name at one point, this guy had made accusations about Roger. What were you told about him, and what did Roger ?
Rusty Hardin: Oh, I don't have -- well, I can tell you what Roger thought of him, but I don't want to get into anything about him. I don't think this is the proper forum for that. Basically, Roger had thought he was a very good trainer, he would've considered that they were friends and he was shocked by it. But he didn't have bad things to say about McNamee. And I don't think it moves the ball any for me to do that now. That'll work its way out in other forums.
T.J. Quinn: Well, you've talked about him a great deal, actually. Even just now you brought up he was investigated for possible rape in St. Petersburg, you've talked about his veracity in other places.
Rusty Hardin: About his what?
T.J. Quinn: About his veracity in how he's dealt with a lot of things.
Rusty Hardin: I think all I've said is that McNamee -- several of the things that McNamee said in the report by Canseco, OK, weren't true, according to Canseco. Here's the point is I don't know what's true. I never met Brian McNamee, I've never talked to Brian McNamee. And neither has anybody that has been writing and convicting Roger of all these things. They were willing to do it based on what was said in a report. I don't have any idea what Brian McNamee is like. And what I've said is, is everything that's already in the public forum. There had been public articles about the investigation down there. The police officer that investigated him has made public comments. That's what I'm saying. I don't know anything about Brian McNamee other than what is in the public domain so far.
T.J. Quinn: When you sent the two investigators -- Jim Yarbrough and Billy Belk?
Rusty Hardin: Yes.
T.J. Quinn: When they went down, what was their goal ?
Rusty Hardin: To find out what he said. At that time, find out what he said had happened. We had no idea. We had a short conversation he'd made the week before, and obviously if there is a possibility that there's about to be a report by an American icon that Roger used steroids, we'd like to know as much about that as we can. It was a total informational, gathering information.
T.J. Quinn: When they went down there, was it ?
Rusty Hardin: Up there.
T.J. Quinn: Of course, sorry. We can't get much down from where we are. When they went there to see him, you had said that you'd already talked to Roger, you had -- or at least to the Hendricks brothers. Had you decided then that you believe Roger, that there was no way McNamee was telling the truth?
Rusty Hardin: No. I think it'd be irresponsible for me to do that. I didn't have a relationship with Roger. Roger appeared to be telling me the truth, and he's always told me the same thing. And now if you asked me, I would say, yes, I do believe him. But at that time, I didn't have enough of a basis. And we were trying to find out what had happened. I think it would've been tremendously irresponsible for me as a lawyer to make up my mind within 24 hours and then act on it from there. I think anybody ought to -- and that's my complaint that's happened in general. Everybody made up their mind the day that George Mitchell stood before the cameras and made the announcement. That's my complaint. Everybody should have, in my view, given that the same credence as -- now there's a statement coming from a very respected public official. Now what's the other side? What can we find out and so? And what was the hurry of finding out from the other side in 24 hours?
T.J. Quinn: Did Roger say at that point why he hadn't gone to Mitchell and ?
Rusty Hardin: He's said since. You have to remember
T.J. Quinn: No, right at the time I'm saying.
Rusty Hardin: Did he say when?
T.J. Quinn: When you first talked to him. Had he been approached at that point by Mitchell ?
Rusty Hardin: He personally was never approached, OK? The dealings went back and forth between his agents and, and the union, and the Mitchell people. Roger and his agents always thought when the Mitchell people gave him an opportunity to come down that they were being asked about -- they were going to be asked about the thing that was a year old in the L.A. Times that they already addressed. And so they just declined and said no. As did most baseball players, almost all of them. Roger made very clear, as has Randy Hendricks, if they had known that Brian McNamee was making the kind of allegations he was to the Mitchell Commission, they'd have been there in a heartbeat.
T.J. Quinn: Did they ask what he wanted to talk about?
Rusty Hardin: Yeah, that was the issue. That was what was happening with all these players. Tell us what the basis -- what are the allegations against us? Who's making it, etc., so we can really understand whether we want to come down and talk. That was never told. The Clemens people never had any idea that what the Mitchell people wanted to them about were allegations being made by Brian McNamee. If they had, they'd have been there.
T.J. Quinn: Right. In hindsight, what decision would you have made about having Roger speak out?
Rusty Hardin: I would've never have done it differently. And I also think that it would not have changed anything. I understand everybody saying it would. And I'll be glad to assume the blame if people think it was the wrong thing to do. But it doesn't make sense to me now and didn't then that you would take your client out and have him respond -- no offense -- to the media pound. And everybody [unintelligible] until you've had an opportunity to look into it yourself. And he wouldn't even know what McNamee was saying, so he'd have been out there naked. He'd have gone out and said, 'I didn't do it.' And then everybody had all these questions and he wouldn't have any answer 'cause he wouldn't even know they were issues -- he wouldn't even know when that was. When was that supposed to be?
Keep in mind these allegations are about what he did in '98, in '99 -- I guess '98, 2000, 2001. If he'd have walked out there that first day to answer questions from anybody about things back that far before he even knew what was being said he did, it'd have been crazy. I've said many times -- anytime -- and next time the only way I'd ever consider it is if a client insisted on it so much that you paid my malpractice insurance. Because it would be malpractice for a lawyer to allow him to do that.
T.J. Quinn: What do you think people are looking for? Someone whose mind truly is not made up. When you have accusation like this, what signs are they looking for as they try to make up their mind?
Rusty Hardin: Well, does the accusation make sense in light of the person's history and career? When he looks you in the face, he says he doesn't -- didn't do it, does he appear to be telling the truth? Uh, does what he say make sense? What's the history of the person making the allegation? What motive do they have? Uh, what is their background? What have they said before? Do they have a history of being a truth teller or do they have a history of not being a truth teller? Uh, if the person the allegation's being made about has very strong feelings about why he or she wouldn't do it, does it make sense?
I don't think it's fair to expect anybody on either side of the issue to make up their mind instantly based on what one side or the other does. I have said simply this should've been a reasoning process in which people in the media allowed it to play out in a reasoned way to make an overall assessment. And that's not what's happened.
T.J. Quinn: Well, when someone sat and looked at just the numbers for Roger's career, what conclusions do you think they drew?
Rusty Hardin: Oh, I think, I think they drew incredibly stupid inclusions -- uh, conclusions, if they concluded that somehow you can look at his performance and it fits in. For instance, everybody talks about his, uh, doing it in order to extend his career. Think about it, T.J. The guy is supposed to have taken steroids in '98. In '97, he won the Cy Young. '98, he won the Cy Young. And he won the Cy Young in 2004. Three years -- well, why isn't -- look, these statistics are not conclusive. One of the things we've been looking at is, is his win-loss record. What was his win-loss record that last year with Houston? It wasn't good, right?
T.J. Quinn: Right.
Rusty Hardin: What was his earned run average?
T.J. Quinn: It was -- well, he was [overlapping] I don't remember the number.
Rusty Hardin: It was the best in the league.
T.J. Quinn: [overlapping] I know he also had the worst run support
Rusty Hardin: Right. And it was the best in the league. And so if somebody goes to look at -- at 44 years old or 43 years of age or whatever it was -- 43, I guess, had the best earned run average in the league when nobody is suggesting you're using steroids. And, in fact, when the accuser says "It's been four years since you did" or since he knew anything about it, and he's still training you -- and was Roger supposed to still be using them those last six years when McNamee was training him? All I'm saying is none of these things are definitive.
T.J. Quinn: Right.
Rusty Hardin: But they don't make sense. And when you look back at his career, long before anybody could've suggested steroids, uh, he had -- any pitcher, he has up and downs. The other thing is -- we've now, since, in the last few days, talked to masseuses and trainers who saw him, to put it indelicately, in his barest form on a regular basis. No issue of steroid use, no issue either in the change of his body or anything else. Is that determinative? No. But is it something people ought to have looked at? And shouldn't the Mitchell investigators have talked to those people in reaching their conclusion? That's all I'm saying. I'm not expecting anybody, as I said before, to believe me at face value about any of this. But why isn't everybody checking out all these other things to see if what McNamee is saying makes sense?
T.J. Quinn: Who else did -- was Mitchell relying on ?
Rusty Hardin: [overlapping] I don't know.
T.J. Quinn: Well, he wasn't alone in that room. I mean, he was sitting there -- there were also several prosecutors, investigator for the IRS.
Rusty Hardin: Right.
T.J. Quinn: How do you think they influenced how Mitchell ?
Rusty Hardin: [overlapping] See, I've never -- and I'm not now -- I'm not making any allegation of any improper conduct by either law enforcement in this matter or the Mitchell people. We can only go so far, since we haven't had discovery in a civil case, on what McNamee has told us. I have no idea whether that's the truth. That's why, in our petition, you know, we mentioned the way McNamee described to us the interviews by government. I don't know whether he's accurately stating them or not. I'm not about to say he is or he isn't. If he is to be believed in what he says, his contention was that the government -- when they first started talking to him -- wanted Roger and believed Roger had used him, and that's the way the government defined the truth. And according to him, the first day of his meetings with him, he denied that Roger or these other guys did anything. And then the next day he said he did.
I don't know whether his interpretation is true or not. But look, if the government comes to you -- and I can say this as a prosecutor over 15 years -- if the government believes X is the truth and then tells you that you've got to tell the truth, it doesn't take a rocket science [sic] to figure out how the truth is being defined. Is there anything improper in that? No. There's not. I'm not suggesting that. But if McNamee is trying to stay out of trouble with the federal government and he knows that this particular prosecutor or investigator believes X, and decides to save himself, maybe he gives him X. I don't know that. I don't know whether his version of what happened between the government and the Mitchell people is true. He has Mitchell giving him a hug afterwards. At some of his press interviews, he has said that in that interview what happens is, is that the government simply reads what he had told them in the previous interviews, asks him if that's true. And he has the Mitchell Commission taking a very inactive role in the meeting with him. I don't know what's true. I just simply say those are all things to take into consideration.
T.J. Quinn: Do you have ?
Rusty Hardin: Part of the deal is, is this rush to judgment is incredibly unhealthy for the whole system. I watched this with Arthur Andersen when I represented them, uh, and there was this firestorm just like this. And there were congressional hearings and people sitting in the klieg lights looking like they've just been run over or about to be run over. And at the end of the day, a company of 85,000 will run out of business worldwide, uh, because of this clamber and presumption that what looked bad at first blush had to be, therefore, bad. And so, I, I really -- all I have been saying through this whole thing is why doesn't everybody back up, take a deep breath? There is not this schedule where this has to be decided on a 24-hour basis. We've gotten to demand such immediate answers, T.J., that what everybody says is -- if somebody said you did X, and I demand an answer, response within 24 hours, I don't see why that has to be. Why can't we just calm down, let this play out, both sides be listened to and then make up our mind?
T.J. Quinn: Right. Well, let's go back to McNamee for a second. In your defamation complaint against him, you refer to a conversation where he talked about being in a room with Assistant U.S. Attorney Matt Parrella, Jeff Novitzky, who's the lead investigator from the IRS in the BALCO case. Uh, where did that conversation come from?
Rusty Hardin: [overlapping] It came from what he told us.
T.J. Quinn: That was from meeting with those two guys?
Rusty Hardin: Yes, on that Wednesday.
T.J. Quinn: Was that conversation recorded?
Rusty Hardin: Yes.
T.J. Quinn: Why haven't you released that tape?
Rusty Hardin: Why would I do that?
T.J. Quinn: Well, you released the other
Rusty Hardin: [overlapping] That's all work product of ours. I mean, why would I do it now? I'll tell you why I don't want to, is -- look, it'll always -- all be ultimately discovered within the civil lawsuit. The other side'll get a copy of it in due time. There's no obligation for us to give that to y'all, in all due respect, right now. And the other reason I don't want it out is because the evidence is pretty clear so far. If McNamee's lawyers are to be believed, he hasn't been telling them the truth. Because they have made some suggestions about things. If you'll recall, uh, the suggestion was, is that we tried to get, uh, him to recant. We didn't. And the evidence will show we didn't. Well, that has to be based on things that McNamee's telling them, if they're telling the truth. So I see no reason for us to provide McNamee with an ability to mold his story that he continues to I'm much more comfortable letting him finish talking to the government, let him finish talking to his lawyers, and then both sides get under oath and then see what it says.
T.J. Quinn: OK, but there was a previous conversation that you did. Well, first, after the Mitchell report came out
Rusty Hardin: [overlapping] Wait, you want to know why we did the previous conversation? Don't pass it off like that, T.J.
T.J. Quinn: No, no, no, I'm going back to it.
Rusty Hardin: But let me tell you why it was. You're talking about the press conference that was done?
T.J. Quinn: Right.
Rusty Hardin: Yeah. Well, the reason it was -- the papers -- the paper you used to work for was saying that, uh, we had, uh, tried to cajole, and bribe, and corruptly influence a federal witness. That's the reason it's played.
T.J. Quinn: Who said bribe? Did someone write ?
Rusty Hardin: [overlapping] Bribe may be a strong word. You're right. And I don't even remember the exact words. What the suggestion to go back and look at the articles is, is that they felt that in that conversation we had tried to improperly influence a federal witness.
T.J. Quinn: They being McNamee and his lawyers?
Rusty Hardin: McNamee's lawyers, OK. [overlapping] everybody listen to it and decide.
T.J. Quinn: Once the Mitchell report came out, what were the odds that Brian McNamee was going to try to call Roger?
Rusty Hardin: Oh, we were shocked. Yeah. I mean, I -- that was pretty -- you could've won some money in Vegas on that.
T.J. Quinn: Yeah. What was your first reaction? What'd you say?
Rusty Hardin: You know, there were two different reactions. Roger's reaction was, because he still had feelings -- favorable feelings toward McNamee at that time, or some -- or certainly a [reservoir?] -- was that maybe McNamee was ready to tell him it didn't really happen. All of us's feelings were McNamee was trying to set him up. And so that's the reason the conversation was taped -- exactly so nobody could ever suggest that -- you know, that Roger in that conversation was trying to get McNamee to do anything improper. That was -- that was the reason it was taped.
T.J. Quinn: Why decide to do what you did? Why have him talk at all?
Rusty Hardin: Because the guy who was making the allegations was reaching out. That in itself was so unusual that we had to find out why he was reaching out. Was he reaching out because he changed his mind, he wanted to come clean? Or was he reaching out trying to set Roger up?
T.J. Quinn: Right. What were your concerns about Roger talking to him at all?
Rusty Hardin: Saying anything that could later be construed as Roger trying to improperly influence him. That again is the reason for the tape. And in real -- reality, that's why the tape is so inconclusive in the terms of no fine bright lines. Though Roger more than -- either eight or more times -- says "I just want the truth" and McNamee never says to him "I told the truth." And Roger says several times "I didn't take steroids and I didn't do this." And McNamee never says, "Yes, you did." The fact is, people are right, there is no absolute clear line on there. And the reason is Roger that whole time is sitting there trying to make sure he doesn't say anything that tries to encourage McNamee in an improper way. McNamee's indicating he'll do anything. "Roger, I'll do anything. What do you want me to do?" And that just scares Roger to death, 'cause after -- 'cause he didn't know what he can say and what he can't say. He just keeps saying, "I want you to tell the truth."
T.J. Quinn: What was the scene? Where were you guys when you got that call?
Rusty Hardin: It was in a, uh, it was in a sort of rec room, a small room or exercise room of Roger's at his house.
T.J. Quinn: In Roger's house, OK. And who was there?
Rusty Hardin: Uh, several lawyers from my office and Roger, uh, and Roger's agent.
T.J. Quinn: OK. And when -- what's going -- was there interaction between all of you while, uh -- while this is happening?
Rusty Hardin: No, we were all listening, because we can't hear what McNamee is saying. We can only hear Roger's end of the conversation. So, you know, we don't know what he's saying. And you notice there's some dead times while McNamee is talking and, and Roger's not saying anything. Well, during that time, we don't know what's happening.
T.J. Quinn: How is Roger reacting during that?
Rusty Hardin: Roger is acting like somebody who wants him to come down and tell the truth, doesn't know how he can suggest it definitively. And yet the whole conversation is really, really weird. He's sitting there; he's been asked to call, uh, from his standpoint, McNamee has raised the specter of McNamee's son who Roger cared a great deal about. And he doesn't really know. It's a very uncertain call. I mean, how do you -- what do you do in that situation?
T.J. Quinn: Right. When you listen to that tape, I mean, Roger said to him, like you said, a number of times "I didn't do this." Or "I want someone to tell the truth" or "Just tell the truth." And he says at another point "Why did you tell them I use steroids?" Why didn't he just say, "Why did you lie to them?" or "Why did you lie and say I used steroids?"
Rusty Hardin: I don't know what difference would it have made? He said -- he said, "I didn't use steroids" and "I just want somebody to tell the truth," and McNamee never contradicted him on either one of those. So, I mean, that is something that I as a lawyer or you as a journalist might like more definitively to be done, but that wasn't the dynamics of the conversation. Roger keeps saying it, waiting -- now, there's no question, once McNamee said he's willing to come down, wants to come down and meet with Roger, if Roger thinks the guy's about to come down and come clean, he doesn't want to do anything that gets the guy all upset where he changes his mind and doesn't do -- if that's what he's going to do.
You've got to remember, Roger, uh, is an incredible baseball player. But he doesn't have any kind of graduate degree on how to do a taped conversation for the first time in his life in such a way that it pleases everybody.
T.J. Quinn: Had you prepped him?
Rusty Hardin: No. What we prepped him on -- not what to say -- what we prepped him on was "You have got to be incredibly careful that you are not trying to offer him anything or make it sound like you're willing to do anything in return for him changing his testimony."
T.J. Quinn: Did you talk at all about somehow getting McNamee to say on that tape "You're right, I lied. That's not the truth"?
Rusty Hardin: No, no. I think any time you try to coach a witness like that -- on a taped conversation with a layperson -- the biggest danger is them doing all the talking and not letting the other person talk. So we explained that to Roger. But, no, we didn't do that.
T.J. Quinn: Right. How do you think -- what do you think of the reaction to that tape after you played it?
Rusty Hardin: It was mixed. And at least -- anything mixed is, is, you know, is an improvement. Because it hadn't been mixed before. You know, part of the deal -- when Roger was in the press conference, he was looking out and he was seeing facially people that had just written some vicious things about him on a regular basis.
T.J. Quinn: Some local people especially.
Rusty Hardin: Yeah, some local people especially. And every time he looked out to take a question, he'd see one of them and it would, you know, sort of inflame him a little bit. And, uh, that explained part of his anger at the press conference. But the real explanation with the anger at his press conference was, is he's had it. He believes that he has said everything he can now and if people don't believe him there's nothing he can do about it. And he doesn't feel like he's just going to keep going around the world talking about it.
T.J. Quinn: Right. When you -- when you first met him, actually, what was -- were you talking to Andy Pettitte as well at the time?
Rusty Hardin: No. We talked to Andy -- we did talk to Andy, but separate from Roger.
T.J. Quinn: OK.
Rusty Hardin: Never talked to him
T.J. Quinn: [overlapping] OK, did you have any thought of representing Andy at that point?
Rusty Hardin: Uh, Andy originally, uh, it might've been possible. But once we understood what Andy's position was, the same lawyer couldn't represent both.
T.J. Quinn: When did you hear Andy's position?
Rusty Hardin: That Sunday.
T.J. Quinn: OK. Had you, had you known Andy at all before that?
Rusty Hardin: No, I didn't know either one of them.
T.J. Quinn: What do you think of Andy's character?
Rusty Hardin: Oh, I think he's a great guy. I think he's very honest, uh, he's a very religious person, he's a refreshingly disarming, uh, totally honest person. I mean, I think, uh -- that's the same way Roger feels. I mean, they're like big brother, little brother is the way Andy has described it to others. He was like Roger's little brother, and Roger felt like his big brother. They're 10 years apart. Uh, Andy is just a superior human being.
T.J. Quinn: That was actually -- when Roger came back here to pitch, part of his thinking was to
Rusty Hardin: [overlapping] Absolutely. He has said that he probably wouldn't have come back here if Andy wasn't here. Yeah. This isn't about between Roger and Andy. They're still very close friends.
T.J. Quinn: What did you think when you heard Andy say, "Yes, this is true"?
Rusty Hardin: You know, I -- obviously, as soon as you hear that, you know that that is going to be something focused on -- people focus on in terms of whether to be Roger. How could it be true that McNamee is lying about Roger but telling the truth about Andy? And I guess the only answer I've always had for that -- come on, isn't it possible for a person to be lying about one thing and telling the truth about the other, and vice versa? One doesn't dispose of the other. Andy and Roger have always said they weren't around each other when any of that was going on. So it's just two different issues.
T.J. Quinn: How do you think -- you say that, and we've heard what Roger's said about the subject, but we haven't heard from Andy. Why do you think that's the case?
Rusty Hardin: That's up to Andy and his lawyers. I mean, they'll do whatever they think is appropriate and best for Andy, and, and we wish him all the luck in the world. I'm sure that if, uh -- I think -- I know this. Andy is always going to tell the truth about whatever he says. Now whether he speaks or whether his lawyers or others think it's better for him to do -- you know, to stay out of this, that's up to them. Um, but I've got to tell you, I think it was tremendously unfair to put Andy in that report. Stop and think about what he has -- what McNamee said he did and what he has conceded publicly he did. He took a substance two out of three days that was neither illegal nor banned.
T.J. Quinn: HGH?
Rusty Hardin: Five days, yeah. If you go on Continental airplane right now, you'll see HGH, you know, advertised in the magazines. My point being is, is that if a guy takes a shot of something two times in a three-day period, five years before, do you really put his name out there in a report that's going to be running across the bottom of ESPN every day for the next two days?
T.J. Quinn: Well, we're talking about a drug that's -- again, it might not be illegal and it's not a banned substance like steroids, but it is very strictly controlled by the FDA. And doctors and people within the FDA will say there's no reason a healthy man of Andy's age would need growth hormone.
Rusty Hardin: OK. OK. So? He did it two out of three days and quit. I mean, where is the sense of balance to that, T.J.? You want me to do that with your life?
T.J. Quinn: [overlapping] Well, what's
Rusty Hardin: [overlapping] No, no, no, stop and think about it. That's incredible. You said it's a heavily controlled substance. You guys have been tremendously unfair to him. That's not something that his career and life should've been judged on. You can draw whatever conclusion You know, people get a penicillin shot and a doctor didn't prescribe it. OK, he shouldn't have gotten it. Is that something that you judge the guy's career for?
T.J. Quinn: Are those the same thing -- penicillin and HGH?
Rusty Hardin: [overlapping] Well, well, no. But is it a controlled substance? Human growth hormone is something that Andy has said that he did. I'm not here to defend Andy. But I've got to tell you, I think the report -- putting him out there in that report was tremendously unfair to him. I don't represent him, I'm not his lawyer or anything. But how y'all think -- "y'all" being anybody that justifies putting that out there -- five years before he got two shots while he was on the disabled list, not to improve his performance. And, in fact, when you go look at the Mitchell report, you'll see that they appropriately point out that human growth hormone is not a performance-enhancing substance.
T.J. Quinn: Who says that?
Rusty Hardin: It's in the Mitchell report.
T.J. Quinn: That is, not defined as one by baseball.
Rusty Hardin: No, period. Not about baseball.
T.J. Quinn: Where does it say that in the report?
Rusty Hardin: Do you have doctors, T.J., that will tell you that what Andy did would have helped his performance? Andy has said that what he did was take a substance that he read and heard might help him heal quick -- more quickly. The Mitchell report itself addresses and says that. So if that is the case, if the guy's motive is not to enhance his performance, not to unnaturally perform, but to speed up the healing process, which the literature says a lot of people contended they did -- I don't know whether it does or not. And he did it two out of three days, five years before. Do you really think it's fair to put him out there in a report that's going to ruin his reputation?
T.J. Quinn: What has the public response been ?
Rusty Hardin: [overlapping] What was your answer? Don't I get to ask any questions?
T.J. Quinn: I didn't -- no. Come interview me at my office. [chuckles]
Rusty Hardin: That's fine, that's fine.
T.J. Quinn: You can ask whatever you like. What was the public reaction to Andy, though?
Rusty Hardin: Well, because Andy conceded it, I think, you know, that he did it. Uh, that it's been a lot more charitable and understandable. Nobody was asking the question I thought. What did he admit to? Was what he did anything that should have been treated the way it was in the public domain? People didn't ask that. And I would say this. That one reason people have piled on Roger here so much is, is he's denied it.
T.J. Quinn: Right.
Rusty Hardin: He might've had a whole different reaction if he'd lied and admitted it. But people wanted him to admit it, and when he didn't, then everybody goes crazy.
T.J. Quinn: Again, one of the things that keeps coming up is these guys spent so much time together. They shared a trainer; they worked out together all the time. And it seems implausible to people that they never would've discussed what one or the other did.
Rusty Hardin: Why? Why would -- why would it be implausible that Andy would never mention to Roger what he did on two out of three days, when he wasn't even with the team -- he's down in Tampa and Roger's off with the team? Why would that be implausible? What in the world ? Are you going to say to me that because two people are -- think about what y'all are doing, T.J. You're melding everybody together and saying because two people are friends, they had to discuss it. There's not two friends in the world that can survive that kind of assumption. This is not a fair standard you're applying. When I say "you," I'm not talking about you personally -- I'm talking about this whole thing. It's the collective you.
So let's see what we've got here. Roger and Andy are good friends, so they must have talked about it. Why must they have talked about it? You're assuming. What if Roger never used them -- what if he's telling the truth? And Andy did in this isolated incident when Roger wasn't even there? So, they're supposed to have talked about that to each other?
Now, the other thing is this thing about people talking about steroids. Think what the Mitchell report talks about. It, it raises conversation to a new level of significance. You and I are talking about steroids right now -- does that mean either one of us used them? I mean, but that's what the Mitchell report says, that these guys were talking about steroids.
T.J. Quinn: Why do you think Mitchell was comfortable enough going with what he did?
Rusty Hardin: I don't know. Again, you know, maybe they -- maybe they have more than we know about, OK? Maybe they have -- I respectfully suggest to you that at the end of the day they don't have credible evidence that Roger used them. But they may have evidence that made them think so. I think what -- the only thing I've been asking people to do is why not reserve the possibility that an icon can be wrong just like you and me? And, and, uh, McNamee is brought to the Mitchell Commission, sponsored by federal agents who obviously believe McNamee. I'm not criticizing them for believing him. Just like I would hope they don't criticize me for believing Roger. But, but the point being is, is that when he comes to Mitchell, he is sponsored by -- obviously credible people. You said an agent, an assistant U.S. Attorney. So, uh, you know, you'd have to ask -- you'd have to ask George Mitchell that question. I know when they gave their press conference, they talked about -- they debated long and hard about what level of proof they would require.
T.J. Quinn: Right.
Rusty Hardin: But I don't know what level of proof that was. I just think that it'd be a sad day in this country if good people couldn't be wrong.
T.J. Quinn: Well, I don't know if anyone's argued that, that good people can't be wrong. But what they're looking at -- well, I don't want to say what people are looking at, I don't know what they're looking at. But you've got a situation where -- well, let me ask you. How did -- when McNamee talked to your guys, how did he describe his interviews with Matt Parrella and Jeff Novitzky?
Rusty Hardin: The way our petition describes them, that's what I'm saying.
T.J. Quinn: Which is how? What does that say?
Rusty Hardin: Well, what he said -- what he said to them was, is that, uh, that Novitzky got furious with him the second day of the interviews because he would not admit that Clemens used steroids. That he was -- he was told that he had -- there were two strikes against him already. One strike was that he was a former cop -- he'd been a police officer for three years -- going to the pen. He could go to the pen as somebody doing drugs. And now he was lying to -- lying to him. And that, that, uh, federal agents got mad and slammed down paper -- threw paper at him. I have no reason to believe one way or the other that's true. I'm just saying that is what McNamee said happened.
T.J. Quinn: Right.
Rusty Hardin: I don't know that that's what happened.
T.J. Quinn: But he said he was pressed. Did he ever tell those two guys "I didn't tell them the truth"?
Rusty Hardin: No. No, he -- he does not tell our investigators a different story than he says he told the government.
T.J. Quinn: Right. Were you aware of any time when Brian McNamee was trying to tell someone before he met with Parrella and Novitzky that Roger Clemens was a steroid user?
Rusty Hardin: No.
T.J. Quinn: Why do you think they were so convinced that Roger was?
Rusty Hardin: I have no idea. You'd have to ask them. And you say so convinced. All I know is, is what McNamee has said.
T.J. Quinn: Right.
Rusty Hardin: I don't know that they were. And part of the problem here, remember, is we know no more than -- in fact, you guys probably know more than we do. We know no more than what's in the Mitchell report. I only know the following: That Roger is, is adamant and totally believable to me that he did not use them; that he never used them, as he has said both publicly on "60 Minutes" and in the press conference; that he would never use them because of what he believed they did to your body; and, and that it was totally contrary to his whole career. Past that, that's all I know.
T.J. Quinn: I mean, for them to pressure McNamee the way that complaint describes, what motive did they have? Why do they want him to say Roger is guilty?
Rusty Hardin: Oh, I can't -- I'm not going to ascribe their motives at all. And I don't even know that -- that it's an accurate recitation. I can only say that that's what McNamee has told us. I can't say that that's an accurate recitation at all.
T.J. Quinn: But we know that Brian McNamee told them that Roger Clemens -- that he gave Roger steroids, right?
Rusty Hardin: Yes. We know that he told -- we know he told the feds that, and then the feds had him go over and tell the Mitchell people that.
T.J. Quinn: Right. So what
Rusty Hardin: [overlapping] I don't think anybody argues with that.
T.J. Quinn: What do you think Brian's motivation is for saying that?
Rusty Hardin: I don't know. And I have steadfastly refused to try to guess. I, uh, I really -- contrary to what you think, I'm not in the business of trying to ascribe his motives or, or criticize him beyond saying that there are demonstrable things he has said that are untrue. Now, that helps you, I think, reach a conclusion as to whether he's telling the truth about steroids. But I'm not inside his mind, I don't know.
T.J. Quinn: Right. You, uh, you were a prosecutor, as you said. A very successful one. You were State Prosecutor of the Year in Texas in 1989. When you are in that position where those guys are and you've got a witness like Brian McNamee, how do you go about dealing with him? Someone who apparently doesn't want to share certain information.
Rusty Hardin: If Brian McNamee came in when I was a prosecutor -- and I think these police officers working with him, I suspect the federal agencies dealt with would say the same thing. If he came in and told us a story that -- that would indicate somebody else had done something wrong, because he first denied it to us and first lied to us, and only admitted it after being told that we believed other and that it would be perjury in our eyes for him to continue to take that position -- and then he changes. Before we ever rely on that information, we'd want to do what any good reporter would do, or what any good editor would require, or what any good law enforcement officer would do. We would then start looking in to try to verify different parts of his story. And if he was telling us, for instance, that somebody used steroids and that's what we were investigating, then we'd want to go talk to everybody else that would have the same opportunity to observe this person, the same opportunity to look -- you know, to talk to this person, observe his body -- to see if, whether -- if any of them could corroborate it. And we would also want to look into his background to see what his history was for telling the truth under pressure.
T.J. Quinn: What -- in that situation where he's being interviewed, where McNamee is being interviewed by Novitzky and Parrella, what is the risk to him if he does not tell them the truth?
Rusty Hardin: First off is who's -- who's deciding what the truth is.
T.J. Quinn: [overlapping] Whatever the truth is. Whatever the truth is.
Rusty Hardin: No, no, no, no, no. Who's going to decide what the truth is in terms of whether he's violated his deal? I think what people are forgetting here is, if the government decides the truth is X, then that becomes the truth from then on in terms of whether you're deciding somebody has lied and therefore should be prosecuted. So, if you're the government and you tell me "I believe the truth is that Roger used steroids" and then you tell me "And if you tell me -- if you don't tell me the truth, you're going to be prosecuted -- then the truth is defined as what the government believes. Is the government doing that maliciously or meanly? No. Could they be wrong? Yeah.
T.J. Quinn: Doesn't Brian McNamee know whether he injected him or not?
Rusty Hardin: Sure, he does.
T.J. Quinn: So at that point, though -- I'm saying if -- if he lies to them, whatever the truth is, what is the risk to him?
Rusty Hardin: He's not lying if they have already defined the truth for him and he tells them what they want to hear, T.J. Look, that's
T.J. Quinn: [overlapping] The truth depends on who's defining it?
Rusty Hardin: Absolutely. That's how you decide what perjury is. You're going to have to prove what the truth is, OK. And then for it to be perjury, you'd have to prove the person intentionally misled the fact finder, or the jury, or the grand jury, or whatever, or the Congress, with the intent to mislead them about a material matter. That's what perjury is. So first you have to determine what the truth is in order to determine whether the person's lied. And if the government is defining the truth is, that Roger used steroids, then anything McNamee says inconsistent with that is potentially perjury in the government's mind. It wouldn't be perjury if you didn't think Roger committed -- used steroids.
T.J. Quinn: But if Roger didn't use steroids and [McNamee] says that he did, that is perjury.
Rusty Hardin: You bet. So why is McNamee asking for immunity now to testify before Congress? Nobody's asking him
T.J. Quinn: Well, Brian McNamee -- Brian McNamee is still at risk for prosecution, isn't he?
Rusty Hardin: No.
T.J. Quinn: Not for perjury. I'm saying for -- this guy has admitted that he was giving steroids to people.
Rusty Hardin: Actually, the short thing is I don't know what his deal with the government is, I haven't seen it, OK?
T.J. Quinn: Right.
Rusty Hardin: My understanding from the media, and I can be wrong, is he has an immunity agreement that says that he won't be prosecuted for what he has told them about this event. OK? So now, uh, why would he need any further immunity? There's nobody -- it doesn't matter that the San Francisco
T.J. Quinn: [overlapping] Is Congress bound to their deal? A deal between the U.S. Attorney's Office in San Francisco and, uh, a potential defendant? I mean, I'm really asking.
Rusty Hardin: Yeah, yeah. Congress -- yeah, Congress can't prosecute him, only the U.S. government can. All Congress can do is recommend him to the Justice Department, and the Justice Department has already apparently -- at least this portion of the U.S. attorney -- has given him immunity agreement.
T.J. Quinn: Right.
Rusty Hardin: The only way Brain McNamee can get in trouble now after having that agreement is to go before Congress and lie. So, why would he want immunity if that's the only ? He doesn't need immunity if he's going to tell the truth.
T.J. Quinn: Well, if he's admitting to giving steroids
Rusty Hardin: He's already got immunity for that.
T.J. Quinn: What if it's outside the scope of that -- of that agreement that they have?
Rusty Hardin: It doesn't make any difference.
T.J. Quinn: If you were his lawyer, would you want immunity?
Rusty Hardin: If I were Brian McNamee's?
T.J. Quinn: Yeah.
Rusty Hardin: Well -- no.
T.J. Quinn: Why not?
Rusty Hardin: Because I'd want to tell the world he's a truth teller. That's what he said, that's what he sponsored. He's claiming that he's telling the truth. So, if Brian McNamee's telling the truth, why shouldn't he be held to the same standard before Congress Roger is? If Roger
T.J. Quinn: [overlapping] Well, having immunity
Rusty Hardin: [overlapping] Now wait a second. What would you guys be saying if Roger asked for immunity?
T.J. Quinn: Is he going to ask for immunity?
Rusty Hardin: Answer my question first. What would you guys be saying?
T.J. Quinn: I can't speak for everybody. I'm sure there are people who would say
Rusty Hardin: [overlapping] He's asking for immunity because he's guilty.
T.J. Quinn: [overlapping] afraid of.
Rusty Hardin: Right, something he's afraid of. So look at, look at the potential unfairness here. Roger, if he asked for immunity -- and he's not going to -- if he asked for immunity, everybody would say, "That means he has something to hide." And yet the guy making the accusations is asking for immunity and nobody's questioning that. Is there something wrong with this picture?
T.J. Quinn: Well, the other guy -- again, you're -- it seems that you're suggesting that Brian McNamee's immunity is based on a fear of perjury. He's also -- again, there are potential charges against him for something else.
Rusty Hardin: What are they?
T.J. Quinn: Distributing steroids.
Rusty Hardin: When did he do it?
T.J. Quinn: Well, he seems to have given a pretty good description of that in the Mitchell report.
Rusty Hardin: Is he within the statute of limitations on it? Is he past it? Do you know?
T.J. Quinn: I don't know the extent
Rusty Hardin: None of us do.
T.J. Quinn: [overlapping] It's a five-year statute, but we don't know what he's said he's done within the past five years.
Rusty Hardin: Right. We don't know who he gave to what, right?
T.J. Quinn: Right.
Rusty Hardin: Well, stop and think, though. Why -- if the government has already given him immunity for those transactions, and I don't know what their deal is, then he doesn't need immunity to tell Congress about them, does he?
T.J. Quinn: Well, if he has immunity, what does that allow him to do in his testimony?
Rusty Hardin: Say whatever the hell he wants and he can't be prosecuted for it. And that's the point.
T.J. Quinn: But he can be prosecuted for perjury.
Rusty Hardin: Well, how is he going to be prosecuted for perjury if he's being sponsored by people who believe -- who are the ones who got him to say that? I mean, you're creating
T.J. Quinn: Isn't that risk still there? If what you say simply is not true, regardless of what the government thinks, then it's not true. And isn't there always
Rusty Hardin: [overlapping] The government is going to decide whether it's true or not. That's my point. Look, think about it. Brian McNamee goes before Congress and he testifies "I lied to the government. Roger did not use steroids."
T.J. Quinn: Right.
Rusty Hardin: Now, is he going to be prosecuted for that, you think?
T.J. Quinn: Well, what are the possible outcomes of that?
Rusty Hardin: [overlapping] Is he? Huh?
T.J. Quinn: Well, by whom is the first question?
Rusty Hardin: The government. The government said Roger did it, didn't they?
T.J. Quinn: Well, what would the government need to prove that Roger did? Wouldn't the government at that point need to prove that Roger did? Again, I'm
Rusty Hardin: No, no, you're right, they would. You're right. Here's all I'm saying. Why does Brian McNamee need -- need immunity to testify before Congress? And why is it fair for -- I don't know about what Congress is going to do, and I'm not about to guess that. But why is it fair for everybody to be saying, "It's OK and logical for Brian McNamee to want -- have immunity, to go make allegations in public against somebody under oath. But it is not fair and it's an indicia of guilt for Roger to do it?" That's just not -- we've turned this whole thing on its head. If McNamee wants to insist that he's telling the truth, then let him go before Congress without immunity and tell the truth. And if he tells the truth before Congress, he doesn't get in trouble with anybody. He doesn't need immunity. That's all I'm saying.
T.J. Quinn: OK, where were we?
Rusty Hardin: I don't remember.
T.J. Quinn: Well, we were talking about -- about perjury, and we were talking about what's at stake. What -- I mean, the consequences for Roger are a little different, you know, when he's speaking to Mike Wallace or to a group of reporters than when he's speaking to Congress. What's the difference?
Rusty Hardin: Well, when he speaks to Congress, he'll be under oath. And with Mike Wallace and others, he wouldn't be under oath. But for him, there's very little difference in the sense that all of them are public appearances in which, uh, you know, he'll agree to answer questions. After a while, we ought to start asking how much is -- is expected of somebody to do to try to clear their name? Sooner or later, it just becomes a matter of deciding whether to believe him or not.
T.J. Quinn: Right. Well, that's part -- what is the endgame? What does someone have to do to clear their name?
Rusty Hardin: You can't. That's the problem. All we -- we always knew that once that report came out and said it, the best we could do was try to level the playing field and address open-minded people who were willing to look at both sides. We knew from the first that there was going to be a large segment that were going to believe it just because it was said. And it didn't matter. It's not unusual for people to have a trial and be found not guilty and people still think they are guilty, that they just got off on a technicality or something.
T.J. Quinn: If 10 percent, 50 percent, 90 percent of the country thinks Roger Clemens is a steroid user, why does that matter to him?
Rusty Hardin: Because he spent 25 years standing for something. Uh, an incredible competitor, a blood and guts competitor, an aggressive but fair competitor, who spent his whole professional life trying to play baseball and live the way he thought it should be. And to have others think differently hurts tremendously. The kids that he always told not to put that stuff in their system, the young players he told not to put that stuff in their system. And they had to give up and they had to work and they had to pay the price. And he is being called a cheater by these allegations, and a guy who took shortcuts. And he knows better than everybody -- and the people who've played with him know better than anybody -- he didn't do that. So he has the natural inclination of wanting to set the record straight. But there are limits as to how far he's going to be willing to go.
T.J. Quinn: Well, you've got the lawsuit.
Rusty Hardin: He's got the lawsuit.
T.J. Quinn: What are your hopes for that?
Rusty Hardin: That one day through discovery and what we -- whether there's a trial or whether discovery establishes it or what -- that we'll develop enough evidence to show why nobody should've ever believed the allegations.
T.J. Quinn: Can you prove through a lawsuit like that that Roger didn't do it?
Rusty Hardin: No, you know, lawsuits -- we can disprove the allegations, we can prove that they were reckless and libelous to have ever made those allegations. But whether we can prove he didn't do it is in the mind of the beholder. And one of the frustrating things, as Roger said in his press conference, "How do you prove a negative?" You and I have a meeting today -- we don't have this camera, we don't have any other witnesses. We walk out and you say one thing happened and I say another thing happened in that meeting. How does either of us disprove it? And, unfortunately -- or prove the other person is wrong? The more sensational the allegations, frequently, the more willing people are to believe it.
And Roger carries the baggage of the fact that there've been some other prominent people, uh, charged with using steroids who first denied it vehemently and then turned out to have done it.
T.J. Quinn: Brian Jones was sentenced today.
Rusty Hardin: I know. And he, and he understands that. But I think what's been disappointing to us is that people weren't willing to wait and weigh all the evidence. That they formed their opinion as soon as the allegation was made. That's what I think is unfair.
T.J. Quinn: And -- this is what I was about to ask you before they changed the tape. Uh, talking again about the prosecutors and what they ask of him. Again, if we're back in Congress in a month and everyone makes their statements under oath, there is a threat of potential congressional perjury for anybody who doesn't speak the truth. If it comes out after that, that Roger did not use steroids, that Brian McNamee lied and knew he was lying, what does that say about the prosecutors?
Rusty Hardin: That they made a mistake. See, here's what -- here's what -- everybody wants to look for good guys and bad guys when these things happen. And that's why I've been so insistent. I am not saying George Mitchell is a bad guy. In fact, he's a very good guy. I'm not saying this prosecutor or this investigator are bad guys. I'm saying they're wrong. And I'm willing to do what the public and others haven't been willing to do, or Roger, I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt of having pure motives. That they believe what they have been acting on and that George Mitchell believed what he acted on. But I'm also trying to say to people "Hey, calm down. Sometimes good people, good public servants make mistakes." If not, we don't need elections anymore, we can just put people in office by acclamation. And just say by virtue of the fact that they are a federal prosecutor or a U.S. Senator, or anyone else, they are always right. They're not. They're human beings just like everyone else.
So if it turns out that at the end of congressional hearings and everything else, people reach the conclusion that we so fervently believe is right, that Roger did not, then that would mean people had made mistakes. But that would be as much as I would want to
T.J. Quinn: It's a big mistake.
Rusty Hardin: It's a horrible mistake. And that's why I don't think these guys' names should have ever been released to begin with. Because the potential for mistake, the potential for relying on questionable evidence with such horrible consequences for the accused person was so high that I do not think they should've ever published these names.
T.J. Quinn: If you were a prosecutor -- if you're in Matt Parrella's shoes, is it enough for Brian McNamee to say, "I injected him on these dates with this stuff" for you to proceed with the case?
Rusty Hardin: If you're the prosecutor?
T.J. Quinn: If you're the -- as a veteran prosecutor.
Rusty Hardin: There wouldn't have been a snowball's chance in hell that there would ever have been a trial or conviction. Because it is too questionable a piece of evidence and, and it's got too much baggage with it -- and you've got these other things that would argue about it not being true. That's the problem. Uh, I think that, uh -- you know, when people talk about perjury -- I've read where the lawyers on the others said say, "I'm walking Roger in the penitentiary." Well, that's "presumpting" that he did what he's accused of. And I don't believe he did. And Roger has tried to tell people the truth, has told people the truth, will continue to tell people the truth, and I'm just asking for the listeners to make up their own mind rather than just because there's been an allegation.
T.J. Quinn: Right. You mentioned the term before -- could you imagine ever looking at -- at a possible case or prosecutorial misconduct in this?
Rusty Hardin: No, certainly not. Not based on anything I know right now. And what do we know? Uh, these guys have been conducting investigations, they have discovered some people that have violated the law. Uh, you know, it would really be pretty hypocritical for me to be making allegations about them with no evidence when I am -- when I am contending that they should never have published Roger's name because they had insufficient and questionable evidence.
T.J. Quinn: What are you doing to find out what they knew -- and what they had in front of them?
Rusty Hardin: We haven't done anything to find out what the federal government knew. 'Cause the federal government hasn't had any role in this thing except sponsor him to Mitchell. We'll be trying as we go through discovery. Uh, we haven't been able to serve McNamee yet.
T.J. Quinn: Still haven't?
Rusty Hardin: Still haven't. Have been trying mightily.
T.J. Quinn: Do you think he's ducking you?
Rusty Hardin: Of course he is. Sure.
T.J. Quinn: Why? I mean, he's -- no one ever completely avoids being served, right?
Rusty Hardin: [chuckles] I don't know. You know, he'll have to answer that question for you. But -- but once the litigation gets started, then we'll have a chance through the discovery process to find out what the Mitchell Commission knew and what they based the decision on. But look, again, we're not talking good guys-bad guys, we're talking about mistaken guys.
T.J. Quinn: Right. Well, one of those guys is Mitchell. That report is a publication. George Mitchell's really the editor of that publication, Major League Baseball is the publisher of that publication. The defamation, libel or slander suits I'm familiar with -- you go after the publisher, maybe the reporter, maybe the editor -- not just the person who gave them the information.
Rusty Hardin: And you know what? That's a great idea, and it may happen one day, but remember what I've been saying -- we ought to wait to do that till we have evidence of what they knew and what they didn't know. What we do know right now is by his own admission to us, McNamee made those allegations. So that's why we focused so far on him. Now if, through the discovery process, we find out that other people potentially are liable for it, then they can be added to the lawsuit. But, again, I don't want to just go sue somebody because they have a deep pocket or because they, you know, possibly could have done something wrong. I don't know what McNamee told the Mitchell Commission, I don't know what they based their conclusion that he was telling them the truth on. And until then, I'm not going to sue them.
T.J. Quinn: Why'd you sue McNamee when you did?
Rusty Hardin: Well, there were -- there were several reasons. The first few weeks, we really hoped maybe that he was going to change his mind. And that's another reason for the phone call. We thought maybe to return his call rather -- when he called us and answered -- we thought maybe this meant that he desperately wanted to talk to Roger. And then in the conversation, he keeps saying "I'll come there, I want to talk to you. I'll do whatever you want." Roger -- probably higher than we -- but Roger thought maybe he was getting ready to admit that he'd been lying.
After that conversation, we still waited to hear back from him as to whether he wanted to do something. And then the next thing we heard was that Sunday afternoon, when I believe it's Newsday published an article, uh, that clearly had to come from McNamee about the conversation having occurred. And that it had happened and it was very emotional. But we thought, we figured once he's talking to the media about it, uh, then this was really an attempted setup and we might as well go forward.
T.J. Quinn: Right. Roger has admitted that he injected -- admitted's probably the wrong word -- it suggests there's something wrong. Roger said that he did
Rusty Hardin: [overlapping] You're making progress. You're making progress. Yeah.
T.J. Quinn: We all learn at our pace. We, uh -- he has said -- Roger's said that he injected him with lidocaine and B-12. How does he know what he injected him with?
Rusty Hardin: Well, he knows what he was told. That's all he knows -- you're absolutely right. Um, on the occasions that it was B-12, Roger remembers it being the color of B-12. And our understanding is if it were something else, it would've been a different color. Uh, he's had B-12 shots. His sister reminded us the other day that his mother was urging him for B-12 shots back in the '80s. So he's a long, long time taking B-12 shots. And that's what it looked to him like.
T.J. Quinn: Right.
Rusty Hardin: And, and he was told that the lidocaine was to be -- and it was not shot in his, his buttocks or anything
T.J. Quinn: His lower back, I think.
Rusty Hardin: His lower back where the pain was.
T.J. Quinn: Right. I mean, Roger talked about, in that "60 Minutes" interview, that he doesn't believe in quick fixes. That's a pretty quick fix.
Rusty Hardin: Oh, he doesn't believe in quick fixes in terms of his career and his -- and being able to achieve and build himself beyond something he wasn't. That that has to be done through hard work. But professional sports, as you know, are full of quick momentary fixes with instant pain that has a very short duration to try to help him go perform. He told the story in "60 Minutes" of Joe Torre wanting to make sure that he wasn't in too much pain to pitch. He wanted a shot to help kill the pain. You know, we don't have to read -- we don't have to watch "The Longest Yard" or many -- many movies to see that being used.
T.J. Quinn: Right. But I mean, there is a risk with that. He's talking about -- he's a guy who cares about his body, obviously, and his career, and --
Rusty Hardin: [overlapping] Well, I don't know that he knew of any risk. I don't think he -- certainly he wasn't thinking of any long-term risk in those situations. I mean, rightly or wrongly, professional athletes -- athletics are full of, of ballplayers trying to take instant painkillers to get them through a game. Is that right or wrong? Others will have to decide that. But there's nothing unusual about that.
T.J. Quinn: Right. What -- what'll Roger say to Congress when he goes before them?
Rusty Hardin: The truth about whatever they ask him. He doesn't [overlapping, unintelligible] the questions. Huh?
T.J. Quinn: There's been -- nothing'll be different about what he's said publicly and ?
Rusty Hardin: No, no, there'll be nothing different about what he said publicly. Now, we haven't talked to them, I want to make clear -- you know, we're just trying to do some scheduling and stuff now. So there's nothing that, that we had an opportunity to line up as to when and where things'll happen.
T.J. Quinn: Is -- people from the committee have said he's probably -- they're trying, I guess, to schedule him to come in Wednesday to talk. Is that going to happen?
Rusty Hardin: I don't know. I don't know what everybody's schedule is and when they want -- and so on. We'll talk to them about it.
T.J. Quinn: That's one of the things I'm sure he'll be asked, or I would assume he would be asked -- is the difference in what he said to Mike Wallace about what he knew would be in the Mitchell report and what was said afterward. I mean, how, how would you characterize ?
Rusty Hardin: [overlapping] Well, the way I did a minute ago. I mean, there's nothing inconsistent with the two as long as you understand what he's saying. What he said to Mike Wallace, he didn't know what would be in the Mitchell report. I specifically sat in this room and told him that that Wednesday night. That's what he means. We knew what McNamee said he had told Mitchell, but we did not know what the Mitchell people were going to put in the report. That's what he was talking about.
T.J. Quinn: It sure sounded at the time like he was saying, "I had no idea what was going to be in there" or even that he was going to be in it. Did Roger ?
Rusty Hardin: Well, I think that's true. We didn't -- see, all we knew, that McNamee had talked to him. We didn't know -- no one from Mitchell had told us -- that he was going to be in the report. I think that's literally true. That is what he said. He didn't -- he knew what -- if he'd been asked, "Did you know what McNamee was saying you did?" by the time the report came out, his answer would've been yes 'cause we found out the day before. But he was asked, "Did you know what was going to be in the Mitchell report?" and he didn't. I didn't. I mean, I'm saying it. I've repeatedly said to him, "Roger, we don't know whether you're actually going to be in there. And we don't know whether what McNamee told them is going to be in there. And we don't know whether you're going to be named. We only know what McNamee has said, and we'll have to wait till tomorrow."
T.J. Quinn: Well, he also talked about the conversation he had with them where Brian's asking him about fishing tackle and using it. Why didn't he mention then that he had -- he had heard indirectly from McNamee
Rusty Hardin: He hadn't at that time.
T.J. Quinn: At that time of that conversation?
Rusty Hardin: About when -- when McNamee was texting? No. At the time that McNamee is asking where -- where is that new fishing tackle and all you got -- is that what you're talking about?
T.J. Quinn: Right.
Rusty Hardin: Yeah. He didn't know that McNamee had talked to the Mitchell Commission at that time. He had no idea.
T.J. Quinn: So that took place before McNamee reached out?
Rusty Hardin: Yeah, Roger I think said five days before the report came out. We checked back, that's not right. Uh, we went back and looked
T.J. Quinn: Looked at his text messages?
Rusty Hardin: Yeah. And the message was before the original call came to Hendricks' people.
T.J. Quinn: OK. You see this congressional hearing taking, it seems, a different tone now that they're taking depositions. What do you draw from that?
Rusty Hardin: I have no idea. We haven't had a chance to sit down with them. We'll try to do that next week and we'll have a much better idea.
T.J. Quinn: Has anyone -- do you know -- well, first off, do you know if anyone ever asked the Hendricks brothers or Roger or anybody for his medical records?
Rusty Hardin: No, I don't know.
T.J. Quinn: Do you anticipate that they will?
Rusty Hardin: I have no idea.
T.J. Quinn: Would he have any problem releasing that to anybody?
Rusty Hardin: I haven't even thought about it. I mean, I make it -- the HIPAA [Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act] regulations are so strong that, uh, what you can disclose, I haven't even begun to think about somebody else's medical records.
T.J. Quinn: Right, but that's -- that came up with a lot of the people Mitchell was, was looking to talk to. 'Cause he was asking them to release their medical records. And that's one of the things they, they tried to get with Barry Bonds in his perjury case.
Rusty Hardin: And he wouldn't do it?
T.J. Quinn: Uh, not to my knowledge.
Rusty Hardin: You know, one thing that always reminds -- always interests me, um, I know through civil litigation that we deal with all the time, I've never found a client that wanted to give his medical records over to the world at large. I, uh, the only people I know that do it are presidents of the United States, and they fought for years not to do it.
T.J. Quinn: Some still argue.
Rusty Hardin: Some still are. [chuckles] Yeah.
T.J. Quinn: What's the best that can come out of those hearings for Roger?
Rusty Hardin: That people will tune in, watch him, listen to him and reach their own independent judgment as to whether they think he's a truth teller.
T.J. Quinn: What do you
Rusty Hardin: I want it to be public.
T.J. Quinn: Where do you think they stand right now -- in their assessment ?
Rusty Hardin: I don't know. I get the sense that the tide is moving a little bit after people watched him at the press conference. But then I see a lot of media reports that are just as critical as ever. Uh, I just don't have -- I don't have a sense. I don't have any polls. I know we get a lot -- he gets a lot of supportive mail from fans. Um, I don't know whether that's the majority of people or not. I just don't have a way of measuring it. But I think, at the end of the day, what I've been hoping through this process -- and, again, I'm the person who has been the one who held this stuff up -- is, is that the vast majority of people want to feel like somebody is being treated fairly. And, and keep an open mind.
So all we can do is hope -- is hope that people have done that, and they'll wait and see, you know, and make their own judgments. If they make their own judgments rather than what they've read in the report, then I'm fine with that.
T.J. Quinn: I think we've got a lot. Is there anything you wanted to hit that we didn't, uh ?
Rusty Hardin: No. You know, uh, I guess -- you know, you guys edit as to what you, uh, you put in there, and we don't have either any control or right about that.
T.J. Quinn: We're going to have to pull six-seven minutes out of that.
Rusty Hardin: That's what I mean. So you're going to have to edit out just about everything we said. I would appreciate it if you figure out a way in there to make sure that, uh -- just how insistent I am that I think he didn't do it, and he should -- people should keep an open mind till they hear everything.
T.J. Quinn: You know, I never asked you -- early on, you said you didn't -- you didn't know what to think. You'd just met the guy. When did you decide he was telling the truth?
Rusty Hardin: That first week. See, he went on a five-day hunting trip, and so we just didn't -- we were really in a way the public was. We didn't have enough information to make up our mind one way or the other. We had the Mitchell report, and that's it. He was gone for five days with his kids hunting, and when he came back that next week, we probably spent a total over different days of about 15 hours with him going over this or that. And at the end of that time, uh, I was very comfortable that, that we could make him available to the world. Then we had the Christmas holidays, and he didn't want to mess with it. He's very, very much a family person. He really didn't want to be tried. That's why we settled on that little, uh, vignette that everybody was so critical about. 'Cause everybody wanted to see him so bad -- they wanted to see his face say it, etc. So we did that, for better or worse. But in reality, he didn't want to mess with it till after the holidays.
T.J. Quinn: What convinced you, though, he was telling the truth?
Rusty Hardin: The same thing that a lot of people reacted to on "60 Minutes." Just looking -- listening to him and seeing what makes sense. And then -- by then, we had the advantage of also having talked to a lot of other people that the Mitchell people should've talked to, who were all telling us one insistent story. They not only never saw any signs of it -- not only did his body never change or so, but it was -- this was the hardest-working ballplayer they can ever remember seeing. Period. And it didn't make sense to them.
T.J. Quinn: But his career did change. I mean, he was
Rusty Hardin: No.
T.J. Quinn: You talk to those scouts about when he was finishing up in Boston, and one after another, they say, "This guy's done."
Rusty Hardin: Back up a moment there. I tell you what. Why don't you wait till next week or so to, to so comfortably Randy and them have been doing a study of his career and stuff -- and see. And, and if you talk about his career being stalled, which year was it stalled, in '96?
T.J. Quinn: It would've been end of '96, right, before he went to Toronto.
Rusty Hardin: He goes to Toronto in '97. Is the contention that -- when McNamee says he started before then. When are people saying he started using them? If McNamee is saying -- and I really didn't realize what you're saying, I have to go back and look at that now. Uh, if McNamee's saying -- when was he supposed to start it? Was he supposed to start it in '95, '94, '92? When did -- when is he supposed to have been using steroids, if McNamee says he had done it before? Uh, and if you look at his 1996 record, did anybody look at what was going on then? Has he started strong every year, or is he starting slow every year? And what standard are people using? I think what you're going to find is they're using the worst standard. They're using win-loss record. And, and, you know, 2005 will tell you why that doesn't make any sense. I mean, I watched him over here at this ballpark, and he pitched his heart out every time and he was losing. And, and he was pitching as well as anybody in the league, and he didn't have a win-loss record reflect that. Does that mean he's pitching worse? I don't think so.
T.J. Quinn: Great. I think we're good.
T.J. Quinn: And he watched "60 Minutes" with him, too.
Rusty Hardin: OK, that's where I got he watched "60 Minutes"
T.J. Quinn: That's right. OK. All right, well, let's
Rusty Hardin: Let me go back to
T.J. Quinn: [overlapping] Yeah. You were talking about his performance in '98. You were saying why was he better then? What about '97?
Rusty Hardin: Yeah, what I was saying was, is that in '98, which McNamee -- it's the first indication McNamee says he ever either discussed steroids or gave him any steroid shots, is supposed to be sometime in '98 according to McNamee in the Mitchell report. And then what he told us in interviews. He has never suggested that he had any indication or knowledge of Roger ever using steroids before that. And yet Roger won the Cy Young in '97, he then won it again in '98. And then Roger -- then he says that the last time he gave Roger steroids was in October or sometime in '01. And yet Roger -- and that he continued to, uh, train Roger. That Roger and he never talked about steroids again after then, and that Roger to his knowledge never used any after that. And then Roger wins the Cy Young in 2004.
The thing that doesn't make sense is, for any of that to have had any effect on Roger's performance, according to McNamee and the things he's said since, is that he was giving four to six shots, as I recall it being, in '98, four to six shots in 2000, four to six shots, best I can tell, in 2001. I think most experts would tell you that the residue of that sure as hell wouldn't be good enough for you to be doing anything in 2004 to win the Cy Young Award. And it's really -- as I understand McNamee most recently in an SI.com article, Roger didn't use it that much. So I don't even understand the point he's now making. But the one thing I do know is, is that Roger had outstanding years before McNamee says he first gave him, and he had outstanding years after McNamee says he quit doing it. And that's just a factor for people to consider.
T.J. Quinn: And we're right back to where we were with that tape, which is -- well, what does it tell you? What does a good year or a bad year say to prove or disprove what a guy did?
Rusty Hardin: You know what happens? That's right. And that's a very good point. And in the world I practice in, a tie goes to the person the allegations are being made against. We don't automatically assume somebody has done something bad just because you can't be sure. It's supposed to work the other way. Before we start punishing someone and their reputation, we ought to be very careful and be sure about it. And that's my complaint about this whole process.
T.J. Quinn: I think we're good with that.