This is part two in a multi-part series where I will examine various aspects of the United States Congress’ attempt to grasp the drug and steroid testing policies of WWE and TNA.

-In Tuesday’s editorial, I analyzed the letter written by Henry Waxman as he exited the Oversight Committee. Waxman made a few valid points, but I took him to task for appearing very unknowledgeable of the situation of steroid testing in professional wrestling. Toward the end of the blog, I foreshadowed today’s entry by pointing out the fact that Vince McMahon acts very immaturely in the media outside of WWE. His behavior is actually embarrassing and he does not represent WWE in a positive way when he acts like a spoiled baby in public appearances.

Today, I will discuss Vince’s interview with the Oversight Committee on December 14, 2007. I must note that Vince was not obligated to appear and did so voluntarily. However, the forthrightness he showed in agreeing to appear was immediately dashed because of his brash, abrupt, rude, and “play dumb” attitude. His lead attorney, Jerry McDevitt, acted like a complete jerk as well.

First of all, it quickly became annoying every time Vince claimed he did not understand the questions being asked or said things like, “I do not know where you are going with this.” After Vince’s horrible display of dialing a telephone during the Million Dollar Mania giveaways on Raw, I figured he was out of touch and despite being a great business, he probably was not the sharpest knife in the drawer.

However, for Vince McMahon to pretend he does not know everything going on in his company is ridiculous. Jason Powell and I have discussed Vince’s short term memory on Dot Net Weekly, but come on. Vince’s display was ridiculous, pathetic, and at times humorous. You wonder sometimes if the guy has an ounce of class in his body. In fact, when asked why he pays for rehabilitation programs for former wrestling employees, he responded with, “Two words: public relations.” It almost makes you wonder if he has the annual Tribute to the Troops because he knows the show will make him a public relations darling.

McDevitt’s behavior is exactly what people are referring to when they talk adversely about lawyers. He was combative, threatening, and horribly inappropriate with his rebuttals. Granted, and I alluded to this yesterday, some of the questions asked were chalked full of naivety and lack of knowledge, but they (the Committee) were just doing their jobs. Vince kept referring to the questioning as a “witch hunt,” which was obviously the furthest thing from the truth.

Off of the top of my head and even after some extensive thinking, I cannot think of or imagine someone in the same position as Vince acting this way if he or she was in the same situation. One has to wonder if Vince was simply putting on a show, or were the two of them (Vince and Jerry) overly defensive because they knew they could be in trouble? Guilty people almost always act guilty by being overly defensive. Had I been on that committee, I would not have felt very good at all about the information given by McMahon and McDevitt.

Vince played dumb when asked about steroids, and even refused to answer the questions regarding his own steroid use. If you are not guilty of something, you would have no problem answering “no” to a question. By not answering and becoming combative, you make yourself look horribly guilty. If O.J. Simpson really did not lop off the heads of his ex-wife and her friend, he would have been happy to be the first person on the stand. Innocent people will argue their innocence until they are blue in the face. Guilty people either get loud and defensive, or quite. Vince did the former on that day and once again, he did not do himself any favors.

If you have not already, please feel free to read the first part of the editorial series. Thank you for reading and stay tuned for part three.

RECOMMEND THIS ARTICLE: