“I would think that before the election primary would be the best. and even right before the general election.”
In my opinion as a (retired) Certified Fraud Examiner (CFE) Zullo made the case before the election “beyond a reasonable” doubt that the crime of forgery had been committed (sufficient for a grand jury indictment).
Arpaio has been very conservative with his claims.
First he claimed “probable cause” of forgery.
Second he claimed “beyond a reasonable doubt” there is forgery.
Third (currently being set up by Zullo using Carl Gallups to create media buzz for an impending revelation) Arpaio is now claiming “beyond ALL doubt” there was forgery.
As a true LEO channeling his inner “Joe Friday” Apaio has stuck to “just the facts, Ma’am” and NEVER claimed that Obama himself personally constructed the forged BC. Arpaio has never claimed evidence of that although the implications for Barry are obvious.
So even though is SEEMS like this new claim is just another in a long series of equally failed duds, I view each of the three above claims (assuming the third new claim is as conclusive as claimed) to have been proper and sequentially significant.
The problem has always been with the MSM and GOP-e and Congress and SCOTUS hiding under the covers from the political chaos domestically and internationally should Barry be revealed to have personally forged his ID documents regardless what he was hiding with that forgery (birth location?...paternity?)
How is it possible to prove a paper document is forged by examining an electronic copy of it?