Anthony Levandowski Pardoned

Post by pygy_ » Wed, Jan 20, 2021, 2:20 PM UTC

hairofadog wrote: post #199

pygy_ wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you read "inflammable", you can often, from the context, determine whether it means flammable or not. Sometimes you can't. The same applies to the OK sign. Flashing it surrounded by notorious racists after the 4chan hoax leaves no doubt about the intended meaning. Also, given that's it's now been coopted by nazis, you may want to be careful when flashing it if you want to avoid embarrassing ambiguities, yes. It…

I’m not disagreeing with your larger point, but FYI “inflammable” always means “easily catches fire” and never anything else.

Post by hehehaha » Wed, Jan 20, 2021, 2:24 PM UTC

slg wrote: post #4

>This pardon is strongly supported by James Ramsey, Peter Thiel, Miles Ehrlich, Amy Craig, Michael Ovitz, Palmer Luckey, Ryan Petersen, Ken Goldberg, Mike Jensen, Nate Schimmel, Trae Stephens, Blake Masters, and James Proud, among others. I guess it pays to have rich friends.

Post by unishark » Wed, Jan 20, 2021, 2:28 PM UTC

jmull wrote: post #251

JeremyNT wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to "both sides" this too much, because I do feel like there's a new, special level of corruption and self-dealing on display with this administration, but it's not uncommon for these guys to use pardons for personal gain or the benefits of their friends. For a little context and flavor, remember that Clinton pardoned some real winners on his last day too, including some guy who paid $200k to Hillary Clinton's bro…

> Not to "both sides" What do you think you just did?

Post by saalweachter » Wed, Jan 20, 2021, 2:34 PM UTC

ric2b wrote: post #216

WalterBright wrote: post #111

It's important to note the reason the President has the power to pardon anyone for any reason is it's one of the checks and balances, the Constitution is full of them. It's meant as a check to blunt overzealous prosecutions. Note that the President does not have the corresponding power to convict anyone. An interesting set of pardons was when Andrew Johnson pardoned all the rebels in the Confederacy, including Jeffer…

> it's one of the checks and balances On the judicial, so it would be great if it was also subject to Congressional approval. It would still fulfill its purpose.

Post by flippinburgers » Wed, Jan 20, 2021, 2:37 PM UTC

Loughla wrote: post #260

flippinburgers wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Supposed dog whistles and the extreme desire to immediately label people based on innocuous gestures/words is the new norm within certain parts of the puritanical left. I never thought I would see the day. It is shocking that what was once the bastion of liberal thought and open-mindedness has become this hyper-judgemental, crucify-all-that-don't-bow-to-our-will movement. Gems of the left: Do you want to be on the wr…

Okay, I'll bite. >Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences! How is that false? You can say what you want, outside of threats and the like, but you also get to live with the outcome of saying whatever it is. I don't see how that's puritanical. It's a statement of fact. I can tell my boss to go f** himself. I can also get fired for doing that.