APM REPORTS?
All right friends let’s take a closer look of who APM Reports is:
This is after 10 seconds of internet search:
These are APM Reports 2/28/2022 headlines.
A child able to read would quickly come to the conclusion on how “far leftist” this company is. Do you want me to do another search and find out how much money they have given to the dems?
You are so predictable. Zuckerberg and others gave money to be used to help election workers have the process of the elections run smoother.
You believe the boxes were unsupervised and thus you you are buying into the idea the election was stolen. You didnt like the results and you want them changed, at any cost. Got it.
Do you have proof drop boxes (to paraphrase Iverson…we are talking about drop boxes…not ballots man) were un supervised and tampered with?
Because if you do, it would be a first. Accusations are not proof…you need proof for it to be true.
Courts them, courts them you wrote. Give us one clear article that he has done so. Partial articles or opinions are not valid. The entire article/speech please. Thank you for offering to do so.
We’ve all seen the videos of Trump doing/saying many of those things.
And a Defendant’s own statements are ALWAYS admissible in court. They are an exception to the hearsay rule.
Look 'em up on youtube if you don’t believe me.
And it’s a fact that he’s never renounced either Spencer or Kessler by name, and has never publicly told Kessler to take off the MAGA hats that he and so many of his racist and white supremacist followers wear at their rallies.
Innuendos are not admissible. The court wants facts and full speeches. What are you waiting for?
Why uhlaw97 do you bring up the High School student example?
Don’t you forget that cnn had to reach a deal settlement with him? It has been reported that he won over $50M’s in damages.
The court is still waiting.
Answer: no one is discussing a high school student except you.
Nice deflect!
We’re discussing the statements that I mentioned above.
And yes, Trump made them. And yes, they ARE admissible. Anything the Defendant said is admissible at trial unless either a) privileged (these aren’t), or b) more prejudicial than probative.
These statements are far more probative on the issue of Trump’s racism.
You can’t even answer a simple law question regarding Trump. You are giving us nothing as far as full Trump speeches. Why don’t you?
Oh we have a pretty good idea.
I like to use his own daughter being married to an Hassidic Jew.
Why?
Because none of the anti Trump media reports it when they push that Trump is a terrible racist.
uhlaw97 how can you be a racist if your daughter is married to a Jew?
Answer this simple question.
Who is the racist?