Talking out your ass. He didn't embellish anything, by Veritas's insistence or not. That's just what the agents were trying to convince him he did, and either you've got a peanut brain and fell for it or you've got a dog in this race against his account/witness to push that idea.
These nobody agents were gunning for him in the same way they usually do with interrogation but dirty. They had him sign a conclusion before anything really started, then got into slowly sneaking in doubt for him to question himself while pressing the magnitude of the situation to make him anxious enough to believe it, that he may not have told the whole truth, namely by embellishment.
"I am trying to twist you a little bit" is not something professionals say during a proper interrogation, though.
"I am not scaring you, but I am scaring you" is also totally moronic for an interrogator to say.
Hence why the "coercion" claim, properly applied or not, and why I say you're talking out your ass trying to pretend this was just a typical interrogation.
There was no union rep present, either, and no real mention of a lawyer--though the latter is Hopkins' fault for not realizing that, whether it's officially Feds or not,
never ever agree to a "sit down" without a lawyer. Also don't sign anything. He got the recording but come on, it's basic.
Now was it "coercion"? Depends on what "coercion" would be defined as in legal speak, not the dictionary, like "assault" and "battery" and "disorderly"
(ie "assault" can be a shove or a threatening remark whereas "battery" can be a punch or a total beat down, and "disorderly conduct" can be drunken violence or simply not sitting on the sidewalk fast enough by the cop's estimation, the differences between Murder and Manslaughter with the varied degrees between them (Murder 1, 2, 3, Manslaughter 2, etc.) Legal speak is a whole other language made to be rigid yet malliable).
They were very sneaky and calculated in their manipulation not only of Hopkins but his words because they had an agenda and it was not to discern the truth. Again, anyone would realize this 20min into the 2hr audio unless they have peanut brains.
It's all tactics, like most interrogation that's not constricted by lawyers, but it's dirty with ts that "Promise me you won't talk to anybody" and "I'm trying to twist you". Whether or not this was illegal I don't know. Doesn't seem like it, but that "twist" remark would be enough to ruin the whole thing in other circumstances. You can't just say that as an interrogator and not get railed in court by a lawyer. I don't know anything about USPS agent interrogations, though. Honestly I'd have just left once I knew--before following anyone anywhere--that they weren't FBI.
Main takeaway, though, is that there was NO RETRACTION. Hopkins did not retract or recant his testimony, unlike what the mainstream media is pressing. He was talked into making whatever amendments they could wring from the stone, but that's not retraction. At best the media can lie and say he didn't have his story straight, but to continually claim retraction is wholly unfounded.
