4 ms·
"Specific" would involve some sort of detail about what these abuses were, or when they happened, or something beyond just "previous abuses of the US Postal Ins
by wat10000 1mo ago
"Specific" would involve some sort of detail about what these abuses were, or when they happened, or something beyond just "previous abuses of the US Postal Inspections Bureau."
- thataccount 1mo ago[flagged]
- wat10000 1mo agoThe fun thing about being extremely vague is that it's inherently unsearchable. I can do a search and find reports of USPIS abuses, but I have no idea if they're the ones you're referring to or not, because you didn't say what you were referring to. And I'm not about to spend a bunch of time trying to work out which ones you meant and how they might connect to voting by mail when you can't be bothered to give even the slightest bit of information.
- thataccount 1mo ago[flagged]
- doc_ick 1mo agoAll right Mike Lindell calm down
- muwtyhg 1mo agoHow does the article you linked support your point that mail-in voting is abused or rife with fraud?
- thataccount 1mo ago>How does the article you linked support your point that mail-in voting is abused or rife with fraud? The absence of outrage on one issue concerning the Postal Service, and the presence of it for another. How come you couldn't understand that point?
- muwtyhg 1mo ago> How come you couldn't understand that point? Because you're vague-posting continually. > The absence of outrage on one issue concerning the Postal Service, and the presence of it for another. I don't see how the "absence of outrage" over a completely separate issue in any way proves your point about mail-in voting being abused.