I don't see how that is relevant? If he really did steal that money, it's not his to give.

You can't take someone's money and then not only not give it back, but also give it away.

If stolen via a crypto rugpull, it wasn't his to give to begin with.

  > But for God's sake, don't accuse me of pumping it.

His "apology" would be more effective without including all the whining about accurately describing the sequence of events he voluntarily participated it for personal gain.

This is a sincerely dishonest take to try and avoid responsibility for participating in something deeply unethical and scammy. If this were about evidence in a criminal trial, I would start opining about a poisoned tree.

The sad thing is that it often works.

Just look at how people view Andrew Carnegie now. After his reputation was sullied by his company’s behavior in the Homestead Strike, his philanthropy was done, in-part, to try and restore his reputation.

I don't really see how that makes it ok. I stole your wallet, but I gave the cash to a homeless person!

Donating ill-gotten gains does not legitimize them. This isn't a confusing concept...

Also, it's cryptocurrency. There is literally no burden to prove that this money was donated, or what "charity" even means in this context.

The way he presents this situation as being foisted upon him against his will in that tweet comes across very different than his original disclosure where he made it sound like a positive windfall.

I'm not accusing him of doing anything wrong as he didn't originate the coin, but his original disclosure messaging on the situation was pretty horrible which is why it harmed his reputation.