Of course, genuine anger doesn't have to be genuine anger at being defamed. It could be genuine anger at being caught/betrayed.

I'm not saying that's what I believe; I'm just pointing out that Clemens being able to summon up a bucketful of righteous fury hardly proves anything.

Many have been saying that Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens will be forever linked. But, I think it's necessary to compare the two, and their reactions to charges made against them. With Bonds? You get anger, but that's it. No real denial, no real desire to clear his name. One would expect more if he were truly innocent. One might expect more than just anger, but lawsuits, press conferences, willingness to testify before congress if need be...Clemens' response.
I'm not saying Clemens is innocent, but I think it is reasonable to be tempted to believe Clemens, and equally reasonable to hold Bonds in contempt. Can't wait to see how it shakes out!

Listening to McNamee asking "what do you want me to do" repeatedly, I'm remembering the scene in Godfather, or GII maybe, where Pentangali commits sucide in the tub knowing his family will be taken care of. What was in the email? Is he trying to get Clemens to say he wants McNamee to refute his testimony and go to jail?

I heard it, and I'm puzzled at how someone could think it was evidence of Clemens' guilt. It's certainly not exculpatory, but the whole thing was very odd and very jarring, gripping, upsetting.

To me the strangest thing is this. Toward the end of the tape, McNamee keeps asking Roger, "What do you want me to do? Tell me what you want me to do." And Roger never says, "I want you to tell the truth." Never. It's the obvious thing to say, and given that Roger knows that it's on tape it seems like the most self-serving thing to say. And on other parts of the tape he says, several times, "I just need someone to come up and tell the truth." But he never answers McNamee's question by asking him to tell the truth.
Very strange. I can't think of any explanation, either on the assumption that he's innocent or on the assumption that he's guilty. My hunch is that his lawyer told him never to answer that question, but I can't see why...

Interesting, I was composing that long paragraph while t ball was sending essentially the same thing in much more laconic form.
Yeah, maybe McNamee knew the call was recorded and was trying to get Roger to tell him to lie? And maybe Roger knew this? But why not just say, "I want you to come up and tell the truth, Brian." Why not?

There is no doubt in my mind that this conversation was recorded on both sides of the phone line. The Feds recorded it on McNamee's side and the reason McNamee kept asking Clemens "what do you want me to do" with the background of McNamee's family (his son's health) and financial problems is that the Feds were trying to get Roger to commit witness tampering by offering some sort of assistance to McNamee in exchange for McNamee changing his testimony. Clemens and his lawyers saw thru this very amature ruse, refussed to bit, used the converstation to deny, and recorded it too to protect themselves for this effort by the Feds.

giantsrainman has it right.

clemens could be charged with numerous violations if he told mcnamee what to say to the feds.

by the way, you heard mcnamee say he's broke - how the hell has he been paying a team of lawyers since last June?

ask his attorneys how much they are being paid. clemens can drop a million easy and force mcnamee to fold if he takes his time with discovery, etc.

Ah, that's it. Thanks to giantsrainman and rmt. Roger has been warned against telling McNamee what he wants him to do, and quite possibly McNamee is deliberately suborning witness tampering.

I agree, too, that the issue of Roger being able to spend McNamee into oblivion was very salient in the phone call. And McNamee sounds almost suicidal. Unless it's an act, it's hard to believe he can fight Clemens for months.