Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Anthony Levandowski Pardoned

trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 996 posts

Re: Anthony Levandowski Pardoned

#301

Post by evgeniysharapov »

0goel0 wrote: post #274
bluelu wrote: post #96

According to https://techcrunch.com/2021/01/19/former-google-engineer-ant... "Instead, Alsup sentenced Lewandowski to 18 months, but delayed his prison time until the pandemic was under control. Levandowski also agreed to pay $756,499.22 in restitution to Waymo and a fine of $95,000." So he didn't even spend a single minute in prison. Wow

This is by design. White collar crime is rarely prosecuted and convicted. https://www.huffpost.com/highline/article/white-collar-crime...

In this case though he was prosecuted and convicted.

Re: Anthony Levandowski Pardoned

#302

Post by sjg007 »

mikeryan wrote: post #297
hulitu wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Levandowski but not Snowden or Assange. Sigh. Snowden and Assange have no value in the market economy. Lewandowski, on the other side, has some interesting skills

He’s radioactive though.

He will probably start a company.

Re: Anthony Levandowski Pardoned

#303

Post by 0goel0 »

evgeniysharapov wrote: post #301
0goel0 wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is by design. White collar crime is rarely prosecuted and convicted. https://www.huffpost.com/highline/article/white-collar-crime...

In this case though he was prosecuted and convicted.

I know. I'm saying that the friction to conviction is high enough.

Re: Anthony Levandowski Pardoned

#305

Post by orblivion »

saalweachter wrote: post #287
ric2b wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

As much as I disagree with some pardons, I think the negative effects of looping in Congress would outweigh the positive. Sometimes pardons are politically unpopular even when they are right or justly merciful. Pardoning someone who embarrassed the government, for instance -- I can easily imagine a majority of Congress choosing to deny Chelsea Manning's commutation. It's a bit of a parallel to the "better a hundred g…

What if the president pardoned literally... everybody. I wonder what would happen. Maybe he got drunk and wrote something down and handed it to somebody. It's such a simple action, nobody can stop it, he can't take it back when he comes to his senses. Would the system even respond to it? Would they just open all the federal prisons?

Re: Anthony Levandowski Pardoned

#306

Post by prepend »

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.

I had to read the Scarlet Letter in high school. Hester Prynn had to live with the outcome of saying whatever it was. It was literally puritanical to make her wear a red “A.” as the outcome of her speech (v-a-v extramarital sex).

I think the point isn’t that speech should have no impact, but that the response to speech should be proportional and what proportional means. The Puritans in Hawthorne’s novel thought that making someone a pariah was a proportional response. They were wrong, I think.

But the lesson, I think, is not that we should be more precise in meting out moral judgement, but that we should judge less.

Re: Anthony Levandowski Pardoned

#307

Post by eplanit »

contemporary343 wrote: post #10

This is all so hilariously corrupt. I'm not sure I can even muster anger for this, just laughter. (I'll reserve the anger for the pandemic and this administration's callous, frankly criminal handling of it). (So Levandowski and Jared are going to launch a venture fund soon, right?)

It was criminal to enable pharma to fast track development of vaccines, in half the most optimistic forecasts of how long that would take? It was criminal to invoke the defense production act to make ventilators -- far more than we needed? Building those field hospitals (that were never needed)... the ships?

That's my kind of criminal, if so.

Re: Anthony Levandowski Pardoned

#308

Post by epage »

saalweachter wrote: post #287
ric2b wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

As much as I disagree with some pardons, I think the negative effects of looping in Congress would outweigh the positive. Sometimes pardons are politically unpopular even when they are right or justly merciful. Pardoning someone who embarrassed the government, for instance -- I can easily imagine a majority of Congress choosing to deny Chelsea Manning's commutation. It's a bit of a parallel to the "better a hundred g…

Maybe it should require a supermajority, like it does to override a veto. That way its only in more extreme cases that congress can interfere.

Re: Anthony Levandowski Pardoned

#310

Post by jimbokun »

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?

> Not to "both sides" this too much

So not "both siding" too little or too much, but both siding a just right amount?

Post reply on HN