Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: butterdezillion

I’m confused about what’s been verified?

On SoS Bennett’s verification the items from the request form are not specifically verified and I believe your position is that Dr. Onaka could not verify them. But when I suggested that Klayman request a verification of every box on the BC, you say that Dr. Onaka has already verified them when he said the pdf info matched the original info. So why didn’t he just list those items on Bennett’s verification? And why could he list them on Klayman’s hypothetical verification? Or would Dr. Onaka refuse to verifiy those items on Klayman’s?

BTW: “the TXE in the statement”

Why doesn’t the “TXE” show up on the AP copy? Zooming in it looks like “THE” with some of the ink missing from the stamp or not transferring to the paper.


79 posted on 01/19/2013 12:39:35 PM PST by 4Zoltan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies ]

To: 4Zoltan

There are 2 things that “verified” can mean, as seen in these letters of verification:

1. Verification that a claim is on the record. This is all the MDEC attorneys asked for, and is totally irrelevant because the record itself could be non-valid.

2. Verification that a claim on the record is true. This is what Bennett asked for on the application and what he probably intended to ask for in his letter. But he used the words “from the record” (or something like that; I’m not looking at it right now), which would allow Onaka to interpret to mean he was asking for #1 above.

Onaka NEVER used language saying that any claims were true. The only thing he verified as true was the existence of the record.

If Klayman asked anything to be verified “from the record”, Onaka would interpret it as a #1-type request, and Onaka has already told us that where a field has “information” in the White House image, the record on file also has that same “information”. He can’t define for us what “information” means, so we don’t know if LATE or ALTERED stamps are “information”, or whether blank space is “information”

What he did tell us (by silence) is that the information contained in the White House image is not “identical to” the information in the record filed. The White House image is a forgery.

The TXE is very clear in the AP image. The lines are thicker there - at least twice the thickness of the T and H in other places on that stamp. If that was going to be because there was excess ink on the ink stamp pad, then it would make no sense for there to be too LITTLE ink in that same place.

Why do the hash marks only show up at the edge? Was this supposed to be a scan, a photocopy, or what? Ah, as I look I can see the border of the forged short-form showing through the back. This is apparently a PDF that the AP reporter made from the packet of photocopies that were handed out to the reporters at the press gaggle. We’re supposed to believe that the scanner or copier was set to a dark enough level that the border from a page stapled to the back of the scanned page would show up, but hash-marks on the page itself wouldn’t show up, except at the left side when taken from a supposedly flat BC (on security paper designed to help keep anything from bleeding through from a different piece of paper) lying flat on the scanner/copier. Yeah, right. /s

80 posted on 01/19/2013 8:41:24 PM PST by butterdezillion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson