The issue is the BC document that Obama produced. Has an Ph.D. level forensics expert with actual trial experience proven it a fake? That is the issue. So far, all I've seen are some people on this thread claiming that there are all kinds of "experts" who have debunked the document, but yet they can't put their money where their mouth is.
Maybe they might be more comfortable sharing their personal information here after you do the same! ;-)
UNTIL THEN SHUT UP ABOUT IT!
The issue is ... fraud. That’s the only issue I care about. I’m already certain Obama’s not eligible, by not meeting the NBC requirement.
But I also see that as a difficult issue to explain to the public in this age of delusion. But fraud, why that’s something folks still understand.
Why hasn’t Hawaii allowed the kind of expert you like to see involved in this matter into their archives and files? Pretty simple question.
In this famous case, they likely would not put out an opinion without examining the original document. How do inks, paper, age, etc come into play on a photocopy? They could examine the copies of type and typewriting as well as signatures with a microscope, but they could not use other scientific forensic methods to aid their opinions.
Can you tell if a $100 dollar bill is counterfeit by looking at a copy of it on the Internet?
You are asking for a half-a$$ed opinion from an expert who makes their living from their veracity and completeness. Not likely to happen IMO. Maybe you can get Dan Rather's experts—even then they got to touch the documents and wouldn't back Rather...Fake but Accurate/s
Neither can you. Name one forensics expert who was allowed to examine any paper documents and is willing to testify in a court of law that its genuine. Just one will do. Put up or shut up.