[APS] Who is funding newly-incorporated APE

[Anonymous]

Can someone explain to me the relationship between APE and the lawsuit that was filed a bit ago trying to compel APS to hold in person instruction? A lot of my opinion about APE and its right-wing roots stems from what I saw on the Twitter feed (relating to January 6) of one of the men pursuing that lawsuit. If he and his efforts are not part of APE, I would be interested in knowing that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me the relationship between APE and the lawsuit that was filed a bit ago trying to compel APS to hold in person instruction? A lot of my opinion about APE and its right-wing roots stems from what I saw on the Twitter feed (relating to January 6) of one of the men pursuing that lawsuit. If he and his efforts are not part of APE, I would be interested in knowing that.

This was covered extensively at the time. The man who filed the lawsuit is/was a member of APE, but APE specifically declined to participate in or support the lawsuit, in part because much of APE’s leadership specifically disagreed with his lawsuit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All of us at APE know who the 2 primary people are who are spreading misinformation about APE. They’ve been discussed on this board repeatedly.

We’re glad to see that we just live daily in their heads rent-free, while our 1,000+ members and huge core team go about our work. And thank you for continuing to bring attention to our organization - it just gets us more members.

Even people who aren’t in APE know who you’re talking about. Most people think they’re batshit at this point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me the relationship between APE and the lawsuit that was filed a bit ago trying to compel APS to hold in person instruction? A lot of my opinion about APE and its right-wing roots stems from what I saw on the Twitter feed (relating to January 6) of one of the men pursuing that lawsuit. If he and his efforts are not part of APE, I would be interested in knowing that.

This was covered extensively at the time. The man who filed the lawsuit is/was a member of APE, but APE specifically declined to participate in or support the lawsuit, in part because much of APE’s leadership specifically disagreed with his lawsuit.

On his Twitter feed, he talked about “giving quarter” to what turned out to be insurrectionists. Kind of dark stuff in retrospect. Even if APE didn’t support the lawsuit, the guy left a very lasting impression that spills over to APE.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me the relationship between APE and the lawsuit that was filed a bit ago trying to compel APS to hold in person instruction? A lot of my opinion about APE and its right-wing roots stems from what I saw on the Twitter feed (relating to January 6) of one of the men pursuing that lawsuit. If he and his efforts are not part of APE, I would be interested in knowing that.

This was covered extensively at the time. The man who filed the lawsuit is/was a member of APE, but APE specifically declined to participate in or support the lawsuit, in part because much of APE’s leadership specifically disagreed with his lawsuit.

On his Twitter feed, he talked about “giving quarter” to what turned out to be insurrectionists. Kind of dark stuff in retrospect. Even if APE didn’t support the lawsuit, the guy left a very lasting impression that spills over to APE.

Only because of people like you who promote a false narrative to smear people who have different opinion from you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me the relationship between APE and the lawsuit that was filed a bit ago trying to compel APS to hold in person instruction? A lot of my opinion about APE and its right-wing roots stems from what I saw on the Twitter feed (relating to January 6) of one of the men pursuing that lawsuit. If he and his efforts are not part of APE, I would be interested in knowing that.

This was covered extensively at the time. The man who filed the lawsuit is/was a member of APE, but APE specifically declined to participate in or support the lawsuit, in part because much of APE’s leadership specifically disagreed with his lawsuit.

On his Twitter feed, he talked about “giving quarter” to what turned out to be insurrectionists. Kind of dark stuff in retrospect. Even if APE didn’t support the lawsuit, the guy left a very lasting impression that spills over to APE.

Only because of people like you who promote a false narrative to smear people who have different opinion from you.

My opinion was formed based upon his public Twitter account and his vocal support of APE. My opinion is definitely different than those seeking to “give quarter” to those responsible for the events of Jan. 6. Sometimes the loudest member of a group can impact public perception of that group.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me the relationship between APE and the lawsuit that was filed a bit ago trying to compel APS to hold in person instruction? A lot of my opinion about APE and its right-wing roots stems from what I saw on the Twitter feed (relating to January 6) of one of the men pursuing that lawsuit. If he and his efforts are not part of APE, I would be interested in knowing that.

This was covered extensively at the time. The man who filed the lawsuit is/was a member of APE, but APE specifically declined to participate in or support the lawsuit, in part because much of APE’s leadership specifically disagreed with his lawsuit.

On his Twitter feed, he talked about “giving quarter” to what turned out to be insurrectionists. Kind of dark stuff in retrospect. Even if APE didn’t support the lawsuit, the guy left a very lasting impression that spills over to APE.

Only because of people like you who promote a false narrative to smear people who have different opinion from you.

My opinion was formed based upon his public Twitter account and his vocal support of APE. My opinion is definitely different than those seeking to “give quarter” to those responsible for the events of Jan. 6. Sometimes the loudest member of a group can impact public perception of that group.

It’s unfortunate you lack the critical thinking skills to distinguish between an organization and the separate activities of a single non-leadership member. There’s no point is discussing the merits with you because you will simply make stuff up and parrot off-topic hyper partisan talking points.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me the relationship between APE and the lawsuit that was filed a bit ago trying to compel APS to hold in person instruction? A lot of my opinion about APE and its right-wing roots stems from what I saw on the Twitter feed (relating to January 6) of one of the men pursuing that lawsuit. If he and his efforts are not part of APE, I would be interested in knowing that.

This was covered extensively at the time. The man who filed the lawsuit is/was a member of APE, but APE specifically declined to participate in or support the lawsuit, in part because much of APE’s leadership specifically disagreed with his lawsuit.

On his Twitter feed, he talked about “giving quarter” to what turned out to be insurrectionists. Kind of dark stuff in retrospect. Even if APE didn’t support the lawsuit, the guy left a very lasting impression that spills over to APE.

Only because of people like you who promote a false narrative to smear people who have different opinion from you.

My opinion was formed based upon his public Twitter account and his vocal support of APE. My opinion is definitely different than those seeking to “give quarter” to those responsible for the events of Jan. 6. Sometimes the loudest member of a group can impact public perception of that group.

It’s unfortunate you lack the critical thinking skills to distinguish between an organization and the separate activities of a single non-leadership member. There’s no point is discussing the merits with you because you will simply make stuff up and parrot off-topic hyper partisan talking points.

LOL - so disappointed to miss an opportunity to discuss the merits of APE.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me the relationship between APE and the lawsuit that was filed a bit ago trying to compel APS to hold in person instruction? A lot of my opinion about APE and its right-wing roots stems from what I saw on the Twitter feed (relating to January 6) of one of the men pursuing that lawsuit. If he and his efforts are not part of APE, I would be interested in knowing that.

This was covered extensively at the time. The man who filed the lawsuit is/was a member of APE, but APE specifically declined to participate in or support the lawsuit, in part because much of APE’s leadership specifically disagreed with his lawsuit.

On his Twitter feed, he talked about “giving quarter” to what turned out to be insurrectionists. Kind of dark stuff in retrospect. Even if APE didn’t support the lawsuit, the guy left a very lasting impression that spills over to APE.

Only because of people like you who promote a false narrative to smear people who have different opinion from you.

My opinion was formed based upon his public Twitter account and his vocal support of APE. My opinion is definitely different than those seeking to “give quarter” to those responsible for the events of Jan. 6. Sometimes the loudest member of a group can impact public perception of that group.

It’s unfortunate you lack the critical thinking skills to distinguish between an organization and the separate activities of a single non-leadership member. There’s no point is discussing the merits with you because you will simply make stuff up and parrot off-topic hyper partisan talking points.

DP. What did the PP say that was “made up”?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me the relationship between APE and the lawsuit that was filed a bit ago trying to compel APS to hold in person instruction? A lot of my opinion about APE and its right-wing roots stems from what I saw on the Twitter feed (relating to January 6) of one of the men pursuing that lawsuit. If he and his efforts are not part of APE, I would be interested in knowing that.

This was covered extensively at the time. The man who filed the lawsuit is/was a member of APE, but APE specifically declined to participate in or support the lawsuit, in part because much of APE’s leadership specifically disagreed with his lawsuit.

On his Twitter feed, he talked about “giving quarter” to what turned out to be insurrectionists. Kind of dark stuff in retrospect. Even if APE didn’t support the lawsuit, the guy left a very lasting impression that spills over to APE.

As in he would “give quarter” of any money potentially received from APS?

[Anonymous]

Wasn’t the lawsuit guy the person who did all of the signs?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me the relationship between APE and the lawsuit that was filed a bit ago trying to compel APS to hold in person instruction? A lot of my opinion about APE and its right-wing roots stems from what I saw on the Twitter feed (relating to January 6) of one of the men pursuing that lawsuit. If he and his efforts are not part of APE, I would be interested in knowing that.

This was covered extensively at the time. The man who filed the lawsuit is/was a member of APE, but APE specifically declined to participate in or support the lawsuit, in part because much of APE’s leadership specifically disagreed with his lawsuit.

On his Twitter feed, he talked about “giving quarter” to what turned out to be insurrectionists. Kind of dark stuff in retrospect. Even if APE didn’t support the lawsuit, the guy left a very lasting impression that spills over to APE.

As in he would “give quarter” of any money potentially received from APS?

LOL, no. Go back and read.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me the relationship between APE and the lawsuit that was filed a bit ago trying to compel APS to hold in person instruction? A lot of my opinion about APE and its right-wing roots stems from what I saw on the Twitter feed (relating to January 6) of one of the men pursuing that lawsuit. If he and his efforts are not part of APE, I would be interested in knowing that.

This was covered extensively at the time. The man who filed the lawsuit is/was a member of APE, but APE specifically declined to participate in or support the lawsuit, in part because much of APE’s leadership specifically disagreed with his lawsuit.

On his Twitter feed, he talked about “giving quarter” to what turned out to be insurrectionists. Kind of dark stuff in retrospect. Even if APE didn’t support the lawsuit, the guy left a very lasting impression that spills over to APE.

Only because of people like you who promote a false narrative to smear people who have different opinion from you.

My opinion was formed based upon his public Twitter account and his vocal support of APE. My opinion is definitely different than those seeking to “give quarter” to those responsible for the events of Jan. 6. Sometimes the loudest member of a group can impact public perception of that group.

It’s unfortunate you lack the critical thinking skills to distinguish between an organization and the separate activities of a single non-leadership member. There’s no point is discussing the merits with you because you will simply make stuff up and parrot off-topic hyper partisan talking points.

DP. What did the PP say that was “made up”?

The made up part was attributing to APE activities that not only did not come from APE but which APE specifically disavowed. Apparently they know they can’t win the argument on the merits so they need to mislead and deflect. Smart Restart is nothing more than a handful of crazies with too much time on their hands. Perhaps they all need to get real jobs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wasn’t the lawsuit guy the person who did all of the signs?

Do you have a basis for saying that or is it rank speculation? I’m not in APE so I don’t know the answer, so I would like to know the source for your claim.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain to me the relationship between APE and the lawsuit that was filed a bit ago trying to compel APS to hold in person instruction? A lot of my opinion about APE and its right-wing roots stems from what I saw on the Twitter feed (relating to January 6) of one of the men pursuing that lawsuit. If he and his efforts are not part of APE, I would be interested in knowing that.

This was covered extensively at the time. The man who filed the lawsuit is/was a member of APE, but APE specifically declined to participate in or support the lawsuit, in part because much of APE’s leadership specifically disagreed with his lawsuit.

On his Twitter feed, he talked about “giving quarter” to what turned out to be insurrectionists. Kind of dark stuff in retrospect. Even if APE didn’t support the lawsuit, the guy left a very lasting impression that spills over to APE.

Only because of people like you who promote a false narrative to smear people who have different opinion from you.

My opinion was formed based upon his public Twitter account and his vocal support of APE. My opinion is definitely different than those seeking to “give quarter” to those responsible for the events of Jan. 6. Sometimes the loudest member of a group can impact public perception of that group.

It’s unfortunate you lack the critical thinking skills to distinguish between an organization and the separate activities of a single non-leadership member. There’s no point is discussing the merits with you because you will simply make stuff up and parrot off-topic hyper partisan talking points.

DP. What did the PP say that was “made up”?

The made up part was attributing to APE activities that not only did not come from APE but which APE specifically disavowed. Apparently they know they can’t win the argument on the merits so they need to mislead and deflect. Smart Restart is nothing more than a handful of crazies with too much time on their hands. Perhaps they all need to get real jobs.

Where exactly did PP attribute activities to APE? I don’t see that above.