General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsUSPS illegally gave confidential document to Paul Ryan's Super-PAC in deal to end investigation.
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/9/1/1792648/-White-House-delays-Senate-USPS-hearing-after-USPS-gave-Dem-candidate-s-SF86-to-GOP-oppo-research-grp-------------
Summary:
Step 1: There is a Senate hearing on the practices of USPS and Amazon.
Step 2: USPS delivers a confidential document with sensitive information about a democratic candidate to Paul Ryan's Super-PAC. An unredacted document this Super-PAC had no right to obtain with a FOIA.
Step 3: The report and the next hearing have been postponed indefinitely.
Baitball Blogger
(46,757 posts)Chamber and Rotary Club, using these organizagtions to network in ways that undermine policy and fairness?
Pachamama
(16,887 posts)I feel like I am missing something here and was even confused the first time last week when on Rachel Maddow she was talking about this and interviewed the person whose info was released. She didn't work for the USPS from what I understand. So how is it that the USPS handles this info?
Phoenix61
(17,019 posts)Delmette2.0
(4,169 posts)I smell a set up. Even if the set up is against Amazon, the Post Office will lose. They have that huge prepaid retirement fund someone wants to get their hands on.
Phoenix61
(17,019 posts)USPS would only have to verify the information she put down concerning her employment with USPS. If she applied for a position with USPS after all her other jobs, then the manager would only be told that she passed the background and security clearance criteria.
If USPS or any government agency always received a copy of potential and former employees then what is the point of calling the process confidential?