Continuing to operate a high volume sorting machine is too expensive? What's so expensive about it? The electricity?
Sorting the mail by hand is the more economic solution??!?
I guess those peon postal carriers just don't understand high finance.
Are you OK with the USPS reorganization before the election?
- Thread starter Trigeek
- Start date
Sorting the mail by hand is the more economic solution??!?
I guess those peon postal carriers just don't understand high finance.
There are probably scenarios where it is more economical to do it by hand. You'd have to ask the last postmaster general how she came to the conclusion though.
Ok, ill walk you through it. Remember about 5 years ago when they moved regional sorting from Lincoln to Omaha? Well all of those machines they had in lincoln were handling a much lower volume at that point so it didn't make sense to run them for local sorting, so they were a bigger expense to operate than was worth it when the bundles had to be hand sorted anyway. Now imagine that level of volume drop, but nationally because people are using the USPS less and less. There are places that they have completely removed the machines and gone to hand sorting, there are others were they relocated the machines, and others where they have been replaced by new machines, sometimes with reclaimed parts from the old machines to save money. This isnt a conspiracy, its the USPS trying to adapt to a changing market and avoid needing to be bailed out by the taxpayers.
I read quite a bit of the Mueller report. Most of it was them guessing that something may have happened but they had no actual evidence of it happening. As prosecutors, their job was to find any evidence they could and attempt to compose a chargeable narrative. So they will view every piece of evidence in the light most favorable to forming a case. Then Mueller wrote a report composed of all of that information written in a way that is most favorable to the “prosecution.” He has a lot of very experienced smart people and it would be surprising if they couldn't make even the thinnest evidence look compelling.
People spun up on the exoneration statement, but that was never his job nor was it ever his goal nor would he ever have released a report exonerating the President. That’s just not how it works, Mueller knows that isn’t how it works, and releases that statement for the media impact because he knows most people have no clue.
Most prosecutors just release a simple statement saying they did not find enough evidence to charge. Mueller wrote a huge report saying that but then said he’s sure there’s something there he couldn’t find even though he conducted the most extensive investigation in the history of the country.
Regardless, we’ve only seen one side of the story; one interpretation of the events and evidence. It’s impossible to be certain either way based upon the one-sided report.
It is certain, however, that anything solid would’ve been charged, traditions or not. And not just a bunch of process crimes and token indictments against faceless Russians that will never set foot in a US court. Real charges against campaign personnel and even the President.
Last edited:
One-sided? Mueller -- you know, the man in charge of the investigation -- is a Republican for crying out loud.
It is certain??!? For someone who 'read quite a bit' about the report, this take shows how clueless you really are.
Attorney General, Bill Barr, specifically stated that the President of the United States could not be charged by the DOJ, regardless of how solid the evidence was.
Both Mueller and Barr have reiterated the DOJ's policy on numerous occasions.
DOJ Policy: Can't Charge a Sitting President
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
OT: War in Israel 🇮🇱, Iran launches attack on Israel- Latest: KnightDiver21
-
-
-
-
