Replies

Were you really there? If so, how were the people there responding to the evidence that was presented?

The reports I’ve seen - like this one - give no indication that the author was even there, since none of the evidence actually given were mentioned - not even really key things like the experiment with a control document showing that the certifying marks were specifically added to an already-existing document, the National Archive’s microfilm records over 10 years missing just Aug 1-7, 1961, the draft registration’s postal date stamp having to have been forged with a stamp only accessible by law enforcement (or possibly the post office), or the government worker who’s signed an affidavit saying Bill Ayers’ mother introduced Obama to him around 1980 as a “foreign student” that they were helping to get an American education.

Those are critical pieces of evidence, and any report that fails to mention them suggests to me that either the author wasn’t at the press conference or they are selectively editing out the critical information.

I read your thread as well lots of your prior work here..

And you are correct...the reporter of this piece was not there...Hell was not even in Arizona

Here is a report I wrote late yesterday on the Mark Levin thread...

” I was there, forget what one thinks of the issue....this happened......there was press.....cameras and recorders.....a small amount of reporters and a few local network heads and cable folk wired to wi fi talkin back and forth as the story was told

across the street was Joe Supporters w/ signs and flair

opposite corner was the protectors

by the time 3 video was shown and the presenter said it is impossible this document is as reported”
there was no air in the room....to a man and woman everyone knew that crap shown was faked

Even Satan bowed his head and said “ shit “

the rest of it was either....you have an agenda or...what ua gonna do about it Joe

TheWriterTX said on the thread linked below. I am not a graphic tech person whatsoever but from what I’ve read it has indeed been proven a forgery. They are now looking for the forger. And they have a lot more researched stuff that they haven’t mentioned, there is not a bit of doubt about that.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2853861/posts

Investigators now in hunt for forger

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2853799/posts

Unfortunately for Sherriff Arpaio, his Posse investigation wasn’t thorough enough.

A lot has been made of the layers in the PDF. If it was an OCR generated PDF, a scan WOULD have layers. An OCR-generated scan produces layers because it pulls text, allowing documents to be searchable. A lot of businesses and government agencies scan older documents into an OCR program to generate PDFs.

I’m sure that folks who have followed this closely will have far more detail to focus on. I was really hoping for something that would put to end the question about the CT SS#.

If he’s hanging his conclusion on the fact that the PDF has multiple layers, that won’t help. There is a very easy, and not nefarious, reason why.