Saturday , November 28 2020
Home / EconoSpeak / Project Perjury

Project Perjury

Summary:
The Washington Post has a story about the Erie, Pennsylvania postal worker who claimed to not have not recanted his fantasy about overhearing a conspiracy to backdate ballots. For some unknown reason Project Veritas thinks the audiotape of the postal worker's interview with investigators from the Post Office Inspector General's proves the opposite of what it does. There is no coercion in the interview. The investigators repeatedly advise Hopkins of his right to not speak to them and his right to have a lawyer present. And in no uncertain terms, he recants his affidavit story, even claiming he didn't read what the Project Veritas lawyers had written for him to sign.[embedded content]Of course the MAGA cultists commenting on the Youtube audio are aghast that an investigator would ask a

Topics:
Sandwichman considers the following as important:

This could be interesting, too:

Mike Norman writes A –> B –> C, Does A imply C? — Scott Sumner

Lars Pålsson Syll writes Diego Maradona (1960-2020)

Mike Norman writes US and Western Europe abstains on Nazism at the UN! — Manlio Dinucci

Mike Norman writes Hyper-Patriarchal Saudi Arabia equates mild Feminism with Terrorism, as Sen. Murphy calls on Biden to review ties with Kingdom — Juan Cole

The Washington Post has a story about the Erie, Pennsylvania postal worker who claimed to not have not recanted his fantasy about overhearing a conspiracy to backdate ballots. For some unknown reason Project Veritas thinks the audiotape of the postal worker's interview with investigators from the Post Office Inspector General's proves the opposite of what it does. There is no coercion in the interview. The investigators repeatedly advise Hopkins of his right to not speak to them and his right to have a lawyer present. And in no uncertain terms, he recants his affidavit story, even claiming he didn't read what the Project Veritas lawyers had written for him to sign.


Of course the MAGA cultists commenting on the Youtube audio are aghast that an investigator would ask a courageous whistleblower questions in a way that makes him think twice about what he had sworn to in an affidavit. I would copy and paste the Washington Post article here but I don't want to violate copywrite. I'm sure it will show up in comments.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *