Another USPS employee report election fraud

Another USPS postal worker came out yesterday, claiming that he and 30 of his colleagues were instructed by USPS managers to discard Trump mail-in ballots and retain Biden´s only. This new USPS witness works in the Philly suburb of Elkins Park, see the Project Veritas interview below or by clicking the link:

New USPS Whistleblower in Philly suburb Elkins Park Details Orders To Stop Delivering Pro-Trump Mail

This is the second postal worker to come out, that I´m aware of, and according to him about 30 of his colleagues got the same orders. Do you believe he´s a hero for coming out, or don´t you believe it ever happened? What is the long-term consequence for the American people´s trust of the USPS - could this even be the end of USPS as we know it? And if so, should the USPS be privatized to get it out the control of corrupt politicians?

-MM

No, ''more postal workers'' do not claim to have received these instructions. One does. One already did and this one joins him.

This one says that thirty more got the same message. HE SAYS

So here is how I look at it. What stupid supervisor would give orders like this? Orders to at least 30 4postal workers to engage in this kind of fraud. How stupid could that boss be huh?

Don't postal workers have a strong union? Do they not have representatives from the unions to go to with grievances? Wouldn't at least more than one or two go to their union or to a local paper or to anywhere else with this info? Can't we assume that if roughly half the vote in that area went to Biden and half to Trump, that half the workers as well would be pro Trump?

a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

I believe the first one has come out and said it was a hoax or something to that effect.

Here is the thing. There is a million-dollar reward for anyone that can provide meaningful info/evidence of substantial voter fraud. Veritas was offering 25K. This guy says he is doing it to be patriotic or whatever but if that was the case he should be going to the authorities. So if he was credible he could be both a hero and rich.

What reason is there to remain hidden? Not to keep a job because there is a million bucks to blow the lid off. Veritas isn't known for being the bastion of journalism either.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

I might not understand you correctly, or perhaps I was unclear, but this is the second postal worker that Project Veritas has on their witness list.

-MM

a reply to: Grimpachi

There are always rewards being put out to help with crime investigations, the US government does this all the time. These witnesses will be scrutinized in court, so any lier will be exposed there.

-MM

a reply to: Grimpachi

It was reported he recanted but then he himself says he didn't and that the story of him recanting is false.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

you know who does this?

the type of person who berates me, and my religion, for not voting for bidden AND i did not vote for Trump either.
but they told me, thats not good enough, and im a 'racist trump supporter' for not voting 'their' way.

thats the level of psychosis the leftists are at these days.

and thats the level of skumbaggetry who would tell people 'nah, its just our neighborhood, throw away those ballots...'

a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

Or, this guy will not come forward and this is yet another ploy by Veritas to get clicks or stir up unrest. For all we know the "witness" is the cameraman.

The first postal worker they interviewed has recanted his story and said he made it up.

Postal worker recanted allegations of ballot tampering, officials say
USPS ‘Whistleblower’ Told Agents Project Veritas Penned His Ballot-Tampering Claim

When he was asked if he wanted to stick with his claim about ballot-tampering, Hopkins said, “At this point? No.” He said his allegation had stemmed from “assumptions” he made after overhearing tidbits of staffers’ conversations in the mail facility. Hopkins told investigators not only that his affidavit was written by Project Veritas but that he wasn’t even entirely sure of what the group had included in it because he was in “so much shock I wasn’t paying that much attention to what they were telling me.” A spokesman for Project Veritas acknowledged having a hand in the affidavit but insisted that the “affidavit was drafted with Mr. Hopkins’ input and requested revisions,” according to the Post.

a reply to: Grimpachi

The first postal worker has not recanted his claim of fraud, that is fake news - here the postal worker himself saying it is fake news that the New York Post says he´s recanted:



The courts will have to decide what is true and what are lies I guess.

-MM

a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

One postal worker would be , one postal worker.
Two postal workers would not be more postal workerS, it would be ''one more postal worker.''
It would take at least two more postal workers added to the first postal worker to make the claim of more postal workers true. And again, we have no word from the rest of the postal workers, only the one postal worker.

To repeat.

One postal worker is one postal worker
Another postal worker, a second postal worker would be ''another'' postal worker, not ''more postal workers''

Besides that, any thoughts on just why none of the other 30 or so postal workers and not come forth or at least gone to their union reps?

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

I believe the first one has come out and said it was a hoax or something to that effect.

No. Richard Hopkins did not recant. The Special Agent from the USPS Inspector General's office tried to get Hopkins to "water down" his sworn affidavit, but Hopkins stands by it.

Hopkins' statement: twitter.com...

Secretly recorded USPS Special Agent: twitter.com...

a reply to: carewemust

First he said he did, and then he said he didn't. Then he said he did again.
This guy is spoiled goods as far as sworn testimony goes, any lawyer would tear him apart. All they would have to do is read this article.

www.washingtonpost.com...

a reply to: dantanna Who are you talking about here. Someone you know? Or is it someone here or elsewhere on line? Facebook maybe? If this person or persons are familiar to you , why do you hang out with them in the first place.

And when you say ''they'' and ''their'', are you talking about just one person, or is it more than that.
And how many have there been that have called you those things. Enough to believe that what few may have said such stupid things to you, it's enough to assume that that small sampling is enough to extrapolate out to the entire set of ''leftsists'' in this country?

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

I think I have "another" now, it might have said "more" at first but I think I edited it earlier, sorry about that.

Besides that, any thoughts on just why none of the other 30 or so postal workers and not come forth or at least gone to their union reps?

We´ll see what happens in court once they get prosecuted if not some of them will admit to assist committing election fraud, or else they will get jailed for a long time. There were two women who accidentally did voter fraud that was sentenced to 5 years in 2018 - imagine how long the 30 postal workers will get if they try to lie about participating to voter fraud in the courts - it´s better for them to tell the truth rather than lie and get a prison sentence.

-MM

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: carewemust

First he said he did, and then he said he didn't. Then he said he did again.
This guy is spoiled goods as far as sworn testimony goes, any lawyer would tear him apart. All they would have to do is read this article.

www.washingtonpost.com...

You can´t trust the New York Post story imo, they´ll probably get sued and only then will they admit that it was fake news - just like CNN had to admit fake news with the kid they called a racist a couple of years ago. The New York Post has no evidence of him recanting, no interview, no signed legal document recanting his claim - nothing.

-MM

Not if they are minority and the boss was also peer pressure a reply to: TerryMcGuire

a reply to: MerkabaMeditation
Thanks for that Merk. As to the rest I agree, I will wait for these allegations to be made and acted upon in court.

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: carewemust

First he said he did, and then he said he didn't. Then he said he did again.
This guy is spoiled goods as far as sworn testimony goes, any lawyer would tear him apart. All they would have to do is read this article.

www.washingtonpost.com...

He never recanted. The Washington Post fabricated the whole story. Unless you choose to believe their "anonymous sources" over his word.

a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

When an agent from the U.S. Postal Service Office of Inspector General asked Hopkins if he stood by his sworn statement that a supervisor “was backdating ballots” mailed after Election Day, Hopkins answered: “At this point? No.”

Regardless of what media outlet reported this, are those words in quotes his actual words? They were put in quoataion marks and if there was no proof that they were his real remarks yet the Post wrongfully claimed he had, he would have a strong lawsuit against them.

saying he had made “assumptions” based on overheard snippets of conversation, according to an audio recording of the interview posted online Wednesday by activists who have championed his cause.

Again, the quotes around the word ''assumptions'' mean that he himself said he assumed what he had heard in conversation

In court, wouldn't that be what they call ''hearsay'' evidence? Is that allowed in court now?

a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

Hopkins originally said that he heard his supervisors talking about backdating ballots and then he changed his story "recanted" to say he heard them talking and assumed they were talking about backdating.

The recording of him is on youtube. Hopkins recorded it.

Veritas posted it but pay attention to the recording because there are sections that it seems like Veritas has blanked out.