Trump may pardon Jack Johnson

Lol, enjoy substituting your own personal fiction for reality.

Sure thing.

Enjoy blabbing about worker cooperatives and labor organization despite not understanding anything about them, and feigning outrage over the immorality of the Military Industrial Complex while you work for the second biggest defense contractor in the country.
 
I read his crime was taking a white woman across state lines? If so, pardon is fine.


So either that isn't true or the govt doesn't want to pardon every black guy that got fucked over. It's a long list. I ain't got time for that.
 
You're reductively characterizing the issue. Also, pardons are used all the time even if, by the letter of the law, the conviction was proper. It's not like they are only used for questionable findings of fact: in fact, that's a fairly small portion of pardons.

This was a law that was applied very selectively and was very clearly used as a proxy for punishing a much-maligned black man for being with a white woman. Also, that prostitute later became his wife.
jack-johnson-and-wife-lucille-cameron-1922-photo-print-3.jpg



It’s been forever since I heard this (like high school music class), didn’t they get chuck berry on this same shit?

It’s pretty clear that there’s some selective enforcement going on there...



Meanwhile, congress uses our tax dollars to pay off their sexual assault lawsuits...
 
Last edited:
Sure thing.

Enjoy blabbing about worker cooperatives and labor organization despite not understanding anything about them, and feigning outrage over the immorality of the Military Industrial Complex while you work for the second biggest defense contractor in the country.

Dude you are so fucking fake.

You post this shit about communism, like you are sympathetic to it, talk like you respect Chomsky and Zinn, and then tell everyone how the Russian-trump narrative is real.

GTFO you fake little bitch.

To any mod that has something to say, or a yellow card for me for calling Trotsky and homer bitches. If my personal attack isn't allowed, then neither should theirs, but unlike some posters, I'm not a snitch bitch.
 
I read his crime was taking a white woman across state lines? If so, pardon is fine.


So either that isn't true or the govt doesn't want to pardon every black guy that got fucked over. It's a long list. I ain't got time for that.

Ha! Luv the new avatar.
 
This is obviously just symbolic, but it would be in my opinion a very powerful and worthwhile gesture by Trump, who is himself a combat sports fan and patron of the boxing profession.

This is something that I am absolutely sure that President Obama wanted to do, but could not because of the optics of him pardoning a black man so long after his death, and how it might be construed as racially divisive, racial activism, playing the race card, etc.

Meanwhile, for a Trump presidency that clearly wants to properly tailor its message in what former social norms it wants to bring back and what norms it wants to leave in the past, I think this is a powerful nod to the fact that his platform isn't to bring back racial hatred and discrimination.



http://fortune.com/2018/04/22/donald-trump-jack-johnson-sylvester-stallone/

Obama would only pardon someone who could help him in someway.

Lol, enjoy substituting your own personal fiction for reality.

I reject your reality and substitute my own

Dude you are so fucking fake.

You post this shit about communism, like you are sympathetic to it, talk like you respect Chomsky and Zinn, and then tell everyone how the Russian-trump narrative is real.

GTFO you fake little bitch.

To any mod that has something to say, or a yellow card for me for calling Trotsky and homer bitches. If my personal attack isn't allowed, then neither should theirs, but unlike some posters, I'm not a snitch bitch.

You should run for mod on this platform.
 
Dude you are so fucking fake.

You post this shit about communism, like you are sympathetic to it, talk like you respect Chomsky and Zinn, and then tell everyone how the Russian-trump narrative is real.

GTFO you fake little bitch.

To any mod that has something to say, or a yellow card for me for calling Trotsky and homer bitches. If my personal attack isn't allowed, then neither should theirs, but unlike some posters, I'm not a snitch bitch.
<SelenaWow>

This is kind of embarrassing for you. But I won't return your "bitch" insults, except as to say exactly what is proven by this post: you're an immature kid who is on an uninformed faux-radical kick because it makes you feel cool. And being called out on not knowing what you're talking about, or being blatantly hypocritical, sets you into a tizzy.
 
<SelenaWow>

This is kind of embarrassing for you.

Post some more gifs like your buddy rational poster and homer.

Like your regular posting it is a bunch of flash, and no substance. Or atleast the substance that is there, isn't consistent.

So do you have multiple personalities or are you a fake?

I ask because being sympathetic to communism, respecting Chomsky and Zinn, and believing the Russia-Trump BS is not consistent.
 
Post some more gifs like your buddy rational poster and homer.

Like your regular posting it is a bunch of flash, and no substance. Or atleast the substance that is there, isn't consistent.

So do you have multiple personalities or are you a fake?

I ask because being sympathetic to communism, respecting Chomsky and Zinn, and believing the Russia-Trump BS is not consistent.

What are you ranting about now?
 
What are you ranting about now?

Simple. Do you not believe Chomsky when he says the Russia-Trump thing is BS?

Because your posting says you don't.

You have been in the Russia-Trump threads defending that shit for quite some time.

Weird that someone with the name Trotsky, wouldn't know that we were the aggressors for most of the cold war, and would so easily fall for the new rebranded version of russophobia.
 
Simple. Do you not believe Chomsky when he says the Russia-Trump thing is BS?

He didn't say that. He said Russian interference was probably true, Trump's collusion was possible, but that the latter wasn't a big deal. I more or less agree with that (not that I or any leftist necessarily needs to agree with any person, just because they're famous and a figurehead that defines some supposedly rigid ideological line to hipsters).


Because your posting says you don't.

You have been in the Russia-Trump threads defending that shit for quite some time.

Weird that someone with the name Trotsky, wouldn't know that we were the aggressors for most of the cold war, and would so easily fall for the new rebranded version of russophobia.

Believe it or not, some people are capable of independently reviewing information, instead of insisting on a narrative because a similar one happened in the past.

Just like I didn't refuse to believe 9/11 was by jihadists just because I'm aware of Operation Northwoods. It's harder making individual judgments instead of gobbling up dogma, but that's life.
 
He didn't say that. He said Russian interference was probably true, Trump's collusion was possible, but that the latter wasn't a big deal. I more or less agree with that (not that I or any leftist necessarily needs to agree with any person, just because they're famous and a figurehead that defines some supposedly rigid ideological line to hipsters).




Believe it or not, some people are capable of independently reviewing information, instead of insisting on a narrative because a similar one happened in the past.

Just like I didn't refuse to believe 9/11 was by jihadists just because I'm aware of Operation Northwoods. It's harder making individual judgments instead of gobbling up dogma, but that's life.

BS.

If you agree with what chomsky said, then you are a hypocrite, and a fake for supporting the political theater, and witch hunt that is the Russia investigation.

Didn't you say you work in law?

Do you believe in the rule of law, or is it a political tool to you?
 
Are you a black civil rights activist of the early 1900s? No? You're demonizing a black man for being individualistic and therefore "hedonistic," somehow saying that Trump would only pardon him for being a fellow hedonist. You're deriding a black man in a racist society for wanting to earn the respect and acceptance of white elites, instead of blaming racism in the first place. And, again, I somehow doubt you would say the same about rich guys from poor white communities like Mark Cuban.

Also, LOL @ me being a tribalist, while I praise a member of the other side for doing something decent, and you spew out racist talking points.

"Racist talking points"... You've got to be fucking kidding. You are like an alt right SJW strawman come to life in this post.

Hey, I think Conor McGregor is a modern-day, hedonistic POS too. And he's just the first guy that comes to mind. (Or am I not allowed to say that because I'm not Irish?!)

And your defending Trump due to his willingness to consider a pardon for Johnson, a black man, is no proof of your lack of tribalism. If anything, given your stated, radical political leanings, it is further evidence of it.

Imagine all the youth centers Johnson could have built and all the black owned farms and businesses he could have invested in if he hadn't opted to spend his incredible (for the time) wealth on new cars and clothes and hookers and booze and poker games.

Johnson was a great boxer but a morally bankrupt, socially irresponsible member of his race and, more importantly, of the human family.
 
BS.

If you agree with what chomsky said, then you are a hypocrite, and a fake for supporting the political theater, and witch hunt that is the Russia investigation.

Didn't you say you work in law?

Do you believe in the rule of law, or is it a political tool to you?

You're hysterical and incoherent.

Log off, lick your wounds, and come back when you're less emotional. And know that there are worse things than being a hobbyist or a hypocrite.
 
You're hysterical and incoherent.

Log off, lick your wounds, and come back when you're less emotional. And know that there are worse things than being a hobbyist or a hypocrite.


Naw, I'm good.

The difference is that you aren't willing to defend you own BS, or your BS attacks.

Where I am willing to debate both.

What industry do I work in?

Oops I guess that question kind of blows a hole in you and Homers very strange attack you have engaged in.

If I understood why you guys came at me like that, this might not be a fued, but considering how random and aggressive that attack was, you can look forward to plenty more of these interactions in the future, and I promise you I won't be looking to tuck tail and move on.
 
If i were the descendants of Johnson I would refuse. It would be purely political and I wouldnt want that racist using Johnsons name for political gain.
 
"Racist talking points"... You've got to be fucking kidding. You are like an alt right SJW strawman come to life in this post.

Hey, I think Conor McGregor is a modern-day, hedonistic POS too. And he's just the first guy that comes to mind. (Or am I not allowed to say that because I'm not Irish?!)

And your defending Trump due to his willingness to consider a pardon for Johnson, a black man, is no proof of your lack of tribalism. If anything, given your stated, radical political leanings, it is further evidence of it.

Imagine all the youth centers Johnson could have built and all the black owned farms and businesses he could have invested in if he hadn't opted to spend his incredible (for the time) wealth on new cars and clothes and hookers and booze and poker games.

Johnson was a great boxer but a morally bankrupt, socially irresponsible member of his race and, more importantly, of the human family.

I think it's a bit over the top to call him a piece of shit, just because he did what 90% of people would have done, if they were in his position.

We applaud selflessness but we shouldn't necessarily expect it. Especially from a guy who fought other people for a living. All things considered, he could have been a lot worse.

The problem for him, like with anybody who becomes a "first" of anything, whether it's the first woman, first human, first whatever, is that there are certain expectations put on your shoulders, to be a "model representative", to push a movement forward which will improve everybody else's condition. But Jack Johnson was not that guy. He was all about himself, and that is, truthfully, the only reason he was ever where he was at. If he had considered the feelings of his fellow men, he would've been dragged down. That's the harsh reality of it. A lot of black boxers at that time got stuck on fighting each other, taking "care" of each other, financially. Johnson preferred to fight white men, because that's where the real money was at.

Only a man such as Jack Johnson could've come out "on top" despite all of the things potentially holding him back. He didn't let anyone hold him down, not white people, not black people, not anybody. He lived, and succeeded, purely based on his own merits, his own strength, wits and determination. For better, or worse.

Being an individual and living out the "American dream", isn't always without its problems.
 
Last edited:
I'll never understand why this wasn't done long ago
 
Back
Top