Given that you seem to be incorrect on the second part, the rest of your statement falls apart. You seem to have a severe misunderstanding of math, 97% of donat

Given that you seem to be incorrect on the second part, the rest of your statement falls apart. You seem to have a severe misunderstanding of math, 97% of donations went to Democrats. Not 97% of employees donated to Democrats. If you can do basic napkin math, this means if you had one leader, manager or whatever be a particularly prolific donator they could crowd out the entire company in terms of donations. This has zero actual bearing on how much influence the company as a whole has, unless you want to argue that it's illegal for private individuals to ever donate to a political party under fear of biasing their company. Though given that you've made this mistaken point multiple times now I don't think you actually care and are just pushing a narrative here.