Maybe all she’ll be shown will be the COLB since there isn’t any BC. Someway, somehow, the WH will stall anything.
Wouldn’t it be fantastic if he gets so much blame for the debt “crisis” that even liberals start calling him a Kenyan? Never happen but it would be fantastic.
Take Back AMERICA!
FUBO GTFO 2012 !
she should go back to filling cavities, maybe she was actually good at that
From what I've seen of her work so far, we need a better dentist working this case.
Still...a Russian dentist/American lawyer taking down the usurper POTUS who's not even a NBC would be SWEET!
The website acts as if there is still real paper document in a vault. That is unlikely. The documents were likely long ago digitized into digital image library.
It is the digitized image that should be examined - and a source image from the library should be made available.
Also, the supporting records need to validated. This game of photoshopped images needs to come to an end. Full disclosure of all supporting records is required. Included in that is when the 2007 COLB was issued.
Finally, affidavits attesting to the records needs to be signed by all Hawaii officials involved. They need to sign that the images, records, documents, etc. are 100% authentic. Name, date and notarized.
“there is always the chance that Taitz will be allowed to see the document.”
Like there’s a chance that I’ll be boxing’s next heavyweight champion of the world.
That said, the point of the article is that if even if Taitz gets access to the original, she needs a competent forensic document examiner, not just some folks who worked in printing. The one legitimate expert Taitz has been citing is Sandra R. Lines, and what Lines said was that to make a determination she’d need the original document. Great. If Taitz thinks she has a valid command to produce the document, hire Lines to do what she does.
Lines is expert in examining physical documents. The only plausible expert in forensic image analysis that I’ve seen comment on the eligibility evidence is Neal Krawetz, who debunked fake expert “Ron Polarik”. P turned out to non-expert, and in this case liar, Ronald Polland. Dr. Krawetz had published on forensic image analysis before Obama’s eligibility was an issue.
The rest is a clown act. What work on forensic analysis can all these other “experts” cite, from before they decided to turn their talents to President Obama’s birth certificate? Near as I can tell — and if I’m wrong please cite — there is none. They are pretending to be experts at forensic analysis on their first try at forensic analysis. I don’t get that. How can one be an expert at doing what he or she has never yet done?
Sandra R. Lines and Neal Krawetz have legitimate claims to expertise; they had published on forensic analysis before they stated their opinions on the issue here. The rest is nonsense.
Any word on what happened today?