Skip to content

Jack Clark and Kevin Slaten lash out at the St. Louis sports radio station that fired them

Aug 11, 2013, 1:43 PM EDT

jack clark, kevin slaten

Before we move along to the next chapter of this running drama, let’s review a timeline of events:

  • Jack Clark, a player for the Giants, Cardinals, Red Sox, Padres and Yankees over an 18-year major league career, claims on his CBS Sports 920 radio show in St. Louis that Albert Pujols‘ former trainer used to inject the slugger with steroids. Clark says the trainer, Chris Mihlfeld, offered up this info while Mihlfeld and Clark were both on staff with the Dodgers in the late 1990s.
  • Mihlfeld denies Clark’s story in a statement to HBT: “I haven’t even talked to Jack Clark in close to 10 years. His statements are simply not true. I have known Albert Pujols since he was 18 years old and he would never use illegal drugs in any way. I would bet my life on it and probably drop dead on the spot if I found out he has. … Albert and myself have been accused of doing something we didn’t do.”
  • Pujols threatens legal action against Clark and the CBS Sports 920 ownership, insideSTL Enterprises. Clark and his partner Kevin Slaten are fired from the radio station, which had only been on air a week.
  • Clark stands by his claim that Mihlfeld acknowledged injecting Pujols with steroids.

Slaten is now planning to sue insideSTL, writes Dan Caesar of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch:

Slaten said he got the termination call from insideSTL president Tim McKernan around midnight.

“I said ‘What?,”’ Slaten said. “He said, ‘We have to do what’s in the best interest of the company.’ I said, ‘You tell me how firing me is in the best interest of the company when you and (WGNU boss Burt Kaufman) said (earlier) that I did nothing wrong.”

Slaten said McKernan told him, “‘I know that, but everybody associated with the show has to go.

“I said, ‘Did you fire the producer? Did you fire yourself, you’re the one who paired us, did you fire yourself?’

There’s plenty more inside-radio stuff in that article. Clark is also upset about the sudden firing:

“I’m still trying to get my knife out of my back from the radio station, the way that was handled,” Clark told the Post-Dispatch. “They did not allow us to go ahead and talk about it, talk to callers. They made us lie and say the phones weren’t working.”

McKernan and insideSTL issued this short written statement on Saturday afternoon: “insideSTL Enterprises, LLC and all related companies would like to make clear that Jack Clark is no longer associated with the company.  Mr. Clark was never employed by insideSTL but rather was an independent contractor.  Any opinions, views or statements made by him strictly reflect his own personal views and do not reflect the views of insideSTL.  insideSTL Enterprises, LLC and any related companies have never asserted and do not assert that Albert Pujols has ever used steroids or any other type of performing enhancing drug.”

  1. aaroncurryisbust - Aug 11, 2013 at 1:48 PM

    I can’t wait till PooHoles is caught and this guy is exonerated.

    • flamethrower101 - Aug 11, 2013 at 1:53 PM

      In which case he will angrily lash out again demanding his job back or better say that the station can go **** themselves and that they will crumble without him. Yeah, this story’s just getting started.

    • stlcrdsfn11 - Aug 11, 2013 at 2:05 PM

      Jack Clark has gotten into verbal battles with Tony Gwynn amongst others. You would rather a jerk like him be exonerated than someone who is as charitable and talented as Pujols be found innocent?

      And don’t get me started on Kevin Slaten. The guy was arrested after spitting in the face of someone who fired him at his last job. He has been fired more times than I can count. He is the biggest lowlife around.

      Pujols > Slaten/Clark…and I’m not even that much of a Pujols fan…but he is innocent until proven guilty.

      • heyblueyoustink - Aug 11, 2013 at 2:39 PM

        Pulls is charitable? Impossible, he’s a conservative.

      • historiophiliac - Aug 11, 2013 at 3:01 PM

        blue, there’s a skip in your vinyl.

      • jwbiii - Aug 11, 2013 at 3:23 PM

        On his foundation’s website, there’s a lot of information about fundraising events, but not much about where the money goes.

        Charity Navigator says they run at about 5% efficiency.

      • jdillydawg - Aug 12, 2013 at 12:46 AM

        All the more reason I think Pujols should have just ignored the whole thing. Clark’s rep was already in the crapper, no one took him seriously, but now everyone is wondering, “Hmmm, is Pujols using?” All Pujols did was make people pay attention to the guy.

    • apkyletexas - Aug 11, 2013 at 2:17 PM

      @aaroncurryisbust – >”I can’t wait till Pujols is caught and this guy is exonerated.”

      I can wait – but I won’t be surprised. Of all the guys targeted as roiders, I’ve always been surprised that Mr. Pujols wasn’t front and center. I guess its just being in St. Louis in that midwest television no-man’s land – you just get forgotten about if you aren’t in the middle of a World Series win.

    • dickclydesdale - Aug 12, 2013 at 12:31 AM

      I bet Jack Clark has poopy in his pants, especially when all the bills are due & he still does not have a job.

  2. beefytrout - Aug 11, 2013 at 1:50 PM

    Always cracks me up when some jackass acts like a jackass, then wonders why there are consequences.

    • jimeejohnson - Aug 11, 2013 at 9:21 PM

      You must be a teacher.

  3. stoutfiles - Aug 11, 2013 at 1:53 PM

    If you’re going to make a claim like that, then at least back it up with some tangible proof. You can’t smear someone’s name without proof and not expect there to be problems.

    • spankygreen - Aug 11, 2013 at 5:02 PM

      but if you’re republican, go ahead with the lies anyway. Maybe something will stick.

  4. sfm073 - Aug 11, 2013 at 1:54 PM

    Kevin slaten has been fired from ever job he’s ever had and yet radio stations keep hiring him in St. Louis. He’s a joke.

    • jwbiii - Aug 11, 2013 at 2:05 PM

      Slaten seems like a real winner.

      • jimeejohnson - Aug 11, 2013 at 9:24 PM

        Staten had to pay $13,000 to settle a civil suit related to what he did after getting into an auto accident. What a LOSER and arrogant asshole!

  5. randygnyc - Aug 11, 2013 at 1:56 PM

    InsideSTL was gutless.

    • Reflex - Aug 11, 2013 at 2:19 PM

      Why should the provide a forum for libel and slander? What is gutless about taking a stand for honesty over outrage?

      • historiophiliac - Aug 11, 2013 at 2:50 PM

        Fraidy cats will say anything.

      • Cris E - Aug 11, 2013 at 3:33 PM

        They were only on the air a week.

        They chose Slaten and Clark as hosts despite/because of their track records as a-holes.

        The first rough spot in the road they threw the whole works overboard.

        There’s a lot of money to be made in garbage radio in general and garbage sports in particular. It looks like insideSTL was trying to work in that space and they chickened out at the first sign of trouble.

        On the other hand it’s garbage and they did bail on the plan when it couldn’t get through a full week without stinking the place up. Points for somehow ending up at the right answer.

      • banggbiskit - Aug 12, 2013 at 5:21 AM

        Its only libel and slander if it isnt true. Right?

      • Reflex - Aug 12, 2013 at 2:04 PM

        How can Pujols ever ‘prove’ he never used? Its an impossible request. As a result the burden of proof is on those claiming he did use. And that is why it is a bad idea to make claims about someone publicly that you cannot back up. I hope Pujols does sue, this jackass deserves it.

    • tonyc920 - Aug 11, 2013 at 2:55 PM

      How could you make a remark like that ? The radio station stands to be sued for libel because some on air personality makes an unsubstantiated statement that Pujols was “Juicing”. The man has never tested positive.

      How would you like it if I said on radio or TV that “YOU” are a drug dealer or something like that but I have absolutely no hard proof ? Think before posting !!!

      • dakotah55 - Aug 11, 2013 at 4:26 PM

        Think before posting? You’re new to this whole internet thingy, aren’t you?

      • padraighansen - Aug 12, 2013 at 8:56 AM

        They wouldn’t be sued for Libel, since Slaten / Clark did not write or print the words. If anything, they’d be sued for Slander.

  6. rbj1 - Aug 11, 2013 at 1:57 PM

    These two are doing all they can to make sure they never work in sports radio again.

    • jdillydawg - Aug 12, 2013 at 12:41 AM

      Which is probably why they’ll end up with their own TV show…

      • Cris E - Aug 12, 2013 at 9:00 AM

        They DID end up with their own show. Unsurprisingly, it did not last. Oh well.

  7. tigersfandan - Aug 11, 2013 at 1:58 PM

    Why exactly was Slaten fired? Did he do anything wrong?

    • stlcrdsfn11 - Aug 11, 2013 at 2:08 PM

      He should have never even been hired in the first place. First class jerk who is constantly attacking anyone and everyone.

      • tigersfandan - Aug 11, 2013 at 2:10 PM

        Maybe so, but does that make him responsible for what Jack Clark says?

    • timothynoble41 - Aug 11, 2013 at 2:13 PM

      Guilt by association?

    • historiophiliac - Aug 11, 2013 at 2:59 PM

      He said he always suspected Pujols was a “juicer” and participated in the accusatory talk as well.

      • tigersfandan - Aug 11, 2013 at 3:21 PM

        In that case, fine.

  8. stlcrdsfn11 - Aug 11, 2013 at 2:10 PM

    Tim McKernan’s mistake was not in firing Clark and Slaten, it was in putting them on the air, especially together, in the first place. Disaster waiting to happen. Only took them one day to cause drama.

    • okwhitefalcon - Aug 11, 2013 at 2:25 PM


      It was just a matter of time before one or the other would say something that would get them sued and/or whacked.

      It was a ticking time bomb from the get go, it just exploded sooner than later.

  9. timothynoble41 - Aug 11, 2013 at 2:19 PM

    It would seem that the people in St. Louis would eat this up, considering that Albert bolted on them. I think they fired them to try to separate because of potential legal liabilities.

  10. mantastic54 - Aug 11, 2013 at 2:19 PM

    If Clark claims the trainer told him about this in the late 90s when they were on the dodgers’ staff, doesn’t that make the trainers I haven’t talked to Clark in 10 years alibi seem kind of pointless?

    • paperlions - Aug 11, 2013 at 3:08 PM

      Thirteen years ago, Pujols was a minor league player, his first year as a professional, and spent nearly all year in A or A+ ball.

      So…before Pujols was even a prospect (he actually never was one, he went from a guy no one paid attention to, to ROY in one year), his trainer was talking about shooting him up to Clark? Really? That seem plausible to you?

      • historiophiliac - Aug 11, 2013 at 3:30 PM

        Also, what does it say about Clark if he sat on this inside info for years — that he was part of a cover-up? Is that what he’s saying? He’s a co-conspirator? smh

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Aug 11, 2013 at 6:15 PM

        Also, what does it say about Clark if he sat on this inside info for years — that he was part of a cover-up? Is that what he’s saying? He’s a co-conspirator? smh

        Shocked/not shocked this didn’t get a reply

  11. genericcommenter - Aug 11, 2013 at 2:49 PM

    I think Jack Clark could use some Hydroxycut or something. I believe the current formulation is legal. I don’t know if that kind of stuff still works like it did back in the day when I took it, though- before lack of personal responsibility and hysteria from old people made all the good stuff illegal.

  12. uncledrew22 - Aug 11, 2013 at 2:51 PM

    The he went as far as to say Justin Verlander is on the roids. Jack Clark just kicked his own self in the _ss. Making accusations with no basis.

  13. joerymi - Aug 11, 2013 at 2:52 PM

    I feel like we are missing out on some riveting farting into the microphone.

    Who, besides a 14 year old, would ask “did you fire yourself?”

  14. uncledrew22 - Aug 11, 2013 at 2:52 PM

    Then he went as far as to say Justin Verlander is on the roids. Jack Clark just kicked his own self in the _ss. Making accusations with no basis.

  15. rcali - Aug 11, 2013 at 2:52 PM

    I hope not, but sadly, all the signs are there for Pujols being involved with something. I know, I know, Cards fans, thumbs down. I don’t expect you to think straight on this one.

    • historiophiliac - Aug 11, 2013 at 3:04 PM

      I’m not even a Cards fan and I thumbed you down for that.

    • raysfan1 - Aug 11, 2013 at 3:52 PM

      More pitchers have been caught than sluggers. More skinny contact hitters have been caught than sluggers. More minor leaguers have been caught than major leaguers. One thing they all have in common is that they all do play professional baseball in order to be caught cheating at baseball. Since being a ball player is the only consistent sign, I agree that all the signs are there.

    • Chip Caray's Eyebrows - Aug 11, 2013 at 6:31 PM

      I doubt it’s Cardinals fans who are thumbing you down. In fact, I’d say most of your positive votes came from the mouth-breathing masses that comprise a bulk of Cardinal Nation. Rather, it’s the people who actually ARE thinking straight contributing the negative feedback.

    • crashdavis99 - Aug 12, 2013 at 11:58 AM

      Care to fill us in on the “signs” there Svengali?

  16. fearlessleader - Aug 11, 2013 at 3:03 PM

    As a Cards fan, I have been consumed by adoration of Pujols and consumed by bitterness toward him, depending on the year—but on the steroid issue, all I can say is that I hope he’s never been a juicer; I find him somewhat easier to believe on the subject than certain other players are or would be (and I include other Cardinals); and I’m jaded enough after years of PED stories that I don’t have total confidence in anyone anymore. Straight enough? :)

    • historiophiliac - Aug 11, 2013 at 3:05 PM

      I thought Cards fans were the best in baseball. The ones on here seem curiously un-homery.

      • paperlions - Aug 11, 2013 at 3:12 PM

        Good fans are not homery.

      • fearlessleader - Aug 11, 2013 at 3:19 PM

        Homery? I should say not!

      • historiophiliac - Aug 11, 2013 at 3:27 PM


  17. psunick - Aug 11, 2013 at 3:41 PM

    The station should have known this was inevitable.
    Like CBS, who hired Rush Limbaugh as a pre game football host for his controversial comments. Then, as soon as he makes one, out he goes on his ass.
    Or stations that used to syndicate Howard Stern. The minute Stern made one of his racist, misogynist remarks, they drop the show.
    You bring on two loudmouths like Clark ans Satan…whoops!…I mean, Slaten, and this is what you get.
    Anybody want to bet how quickly yet another St Louis station hires them both?

    • raysfan1 - Aug 11, 2013 at 3:58 PM

      It was ESPN, not CBS, but your point’s the same.

  18. thomas844 - Aug 11, 2013 at 3:58 PM

    Quick firing? Lawsuit by Pujols? For someone who is innocent, people seem to be getting awfully defensive over something that’s not true….

    • paperlions - Aug 11, 2013 at 4:06 PM

      Isn’t that the appropriate time to be defensive? If the accusations were true and generally considered to be true or have some evidentiary basis, there would be no reason to defensive.

      • rickditka - Aug 11, 2013 at 4:38 PM

        You mean no reason other than a tarnished legacy and millions of dollars in endorsements. You usually dont print dumb stuff, Paper.

      • paperlions - Aug 11, 2013 at 4:48 PM

        Uh huh. Please differentiate for me the expected response in your scenario and that of an innocent person. The innocent person does what? Shrugs and says nothing?

      • rickditka - Aug 11, 2013 at 5:24 PM

        The question isnt answered by how someone reacts. Thats just a weird thing to suggest. I see you are invested in this issue and not thinking clearly.

      • paperlions - Aug 11, 2013 at 5:34 PM

        No, I’m not.

        Your entire conclusion and insinuation was based on reactions…so how are you dismissing reactions, now. Be logically consistent, at least. If you think reactions are important, and you must based on your original statement, then how should an innocent person react.

        I am not invested in this situation beyond a sense of fairness. You are demonstrating zero logical consistency, which is actually typical is someone that does have a vested interest (i.e. bias).

      • rickditka - Aug 11, 2013 at 6:01 PM

        I concluded nothing other than that your assertion that his reaction was an indication of his innocence, was misguided. Your additional investment is now tryng to prove me wrong. So, you are making up stuff.
        I have a policy of not fighting with internet re tards. So, youve won this round internet re tard.

      • assassins14 - Aug 11, 2013 at 6:31 PM

        Paper, Paper, Paper!!! You missed the boat on the best possible defense for your pal Albert. The fact that he now sucks is the best evidence that he has realized the error of his past ways. By that I mean he already has a contract that will last him the rest of his playing years; why risk his health any longer by using PED’s? It was long rumored that he would stop using and performing after signing this deal, and I believe that to be the case.

        Sorry Ditka but I must agree with paper that Albert is no longer using, but I could make a case that he owes to the Angels franchise to start again. I do agree with you however, that paper has a vested interest as you can interpret from his comments, and probably did take the short bus to school, but you shouldn’t call people names.

      • paperlions - Aug 11, 2013 at 7:42 PM

        Oh yeah, I completely forgot.

        If a player improves during his career, that is evidence that he started using.

        If a player declines during his career, that is evidence that he was using and he stopped.

        If a player is always great, that is evidence that he always used.

        If a player always sucked, no one cares and just assumes he was so bad that even PEDs couldn’t help him.

      • raysfan1 - Aug 11, 2013 at 8:52 PM

        Paper you forgot two:

        If a player never gets injured, it’s because he took steroids and thus was protected by the anti-inflammatory properties.

        If a player gets injured, it’s because the steroids weakened his tissues.

      • assassins14 - Aug 11, 2013 at 8:54 PM

        Finally he gets it!!! Welcome to baseball in 2014. It’s a sad reality but a reality nonetheless.

      • paperlions - Aug 11, 2013 at 8:57 PM

        Be patient. I’m slow.

      • assassins14 - Aug 11, 2013 at 8:58 PM

        Exhausting!!! Baseball turned its head in reference to steroids, now that they are beginning to address it appropriately we still have fans in denial. Really? Any skeptic opinions of any baseball player is well deserved and there is just isn’t an argument against that.

      • assassins14 - Aug 11, 2013 at 9:01 PM

        Exhausting!!! Baseball turned it’s head in reference to steroids for years and are now starting to address it appropriately and we are going to have fans in denial….Really? Any suspicion of any baseball player is well warranted and there just isn’t an argument against that.

      • spudchukar - Aug 12, 2013 at 10:24 AM

        If you can’t spell retard…well its self evident.

  19. rickditka - Aug 11, 2013 at 4:31 PM

    Of course Albert uses PED’s. At this point, using is the rule not the excepton. To believe otherwise is just foolishness.

    • cur68 - Aug 11, 2013 at 11:45 PM

      WTF? Citation needed, please.

      You have any evidence of this or are you just trolling and citing your opinion as fact?

  20. Kevin Gillman - Aug 11, 2013 at 4:43 PM

    I hope that he does sue Clark, but I have the feeling he won’t. People say that players should sue if they didn’t use, and he threatened to do it, so show us you’re truly offended Albert. Sue the radio station too while you’re at it.

  21. papichulo55 - Aug 11, 2013 at 5:55 PM

    So, here we are, another PED story. I hope that MLB knows that there are some fans out here that is tired of this BS. Some of us didnt buy in to all the hype of the Nineties, with records falling like flies. But we watched, because it was entertaining. And MLB was happy to sell its product. Everybody made money. And MLB should also know that some of us take this 180 degree turn on PED use with a bit of skepticism. MLB doesnt need record breaking performances anymore, time to call in the dogs. So, Mr Commissioner, you really need to lower the volume on this. You hands are too dirty, and you will never have a totally clean game, because there will always be an owner or player willing to cheat to make money. Mr Commissioner, just quietly go about your business, and let me enjoy my baseball without being constantly bombarded with all of this negative hype. Its still just a game, and there are some of us who just want to enjoy it!

  22. surly1n1nd1anapol1s - Aug 11, 2013 at 6:49 PM

    Hmmm, sport talk radio “personalities” are shocked to discover that there are consequences to public statements. But they only had a “take” that is AT BEST circumstantial.

    Good luck “losers” of the employment lottery.

  23. jayquintana - Aug 11, 2013 at 6:49 PM

    Too many athletes turned broadcasters are just spokesmen for their former league. It’s really hard to tell them apart from a PR flack. At least Clark brings it. He’s not afraid to go after anyone.

    Of course, if he just made this up, well… hard to say he shouldn’t get fired. But he says he’s telling the truth. Where’s the evidence he’s not?

    • raysfan1 - Aug 11, 2013 at 8:55 PM

      He’s the one who brought the accusation, so he’s the one who has the burden of proof.

  24. scdocal - Aug 11, 2013 at 7:30 PM

    Who cares? Is this really news? Lotta good baseball going on and this is what we get.

  25. mikemj - Aug 11, 2013 at 10:20 PM

    Notice that the trainer didn’t really contradict what Clark said. “I haven’t talked to Clark in 10 years.” Clark said he was told in the late 90s. “Albert would never use illegal drugs…” That doesn’t mean he wasn’t using PEDs.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. Y. Puig (1851)
  2. D. Span (1847)
  3. G. Springer (1840)
  4. H. Olivera (1819)
  5. C. Sabathia (1792)