Hearsay recollections from HS classmates 50 years after the fact as recorded by MSM reporters keen on preserving the “Dreams” narrative and weaving those “memories” into that fake narrative would be inadmissible for sound reasons and have been refuted by actual verifiable documentary evidence.
Link?
No one is hiding Stanley Ann’s HI transcript.
Really? Show it to us then.
Stuart Lau confirmed Stanley Ann Dunham’s UH attendance in an official e-mail to Corsi published in his book.
Really? It's an exact copy of the letter sent to Kidd. So what's your point?
The HI state AG (a total Obot who doubtless hates Corsi) could go after Corsi if the Lau e-mail purporting to be from a state official was forged.
Do you really think he will?
That e-mail confirms Stanley Ann Dunham attending UH in the fall of 1960 and then returning in the spring of 1963. This dovetails perfectly with the UW transcripts also issues by WA state officials.
FACT: there is nothing from Lau that verifies that she attended the University of Washington and/or that the University of Hawaii accepted any credits from them.
The UW transcript explicitly confirmts the Lau memo and includes course detail from UH that Lau didn’t release.
Impossible, the Lau memo is dated July 27, 2009 and the UW transcript was dated Feb 13, 2009.
There is NO MYSTERY regarding how long it took her to graduate whatsoever in terms of coursework.
Nonsense again. Your drama queen BFF is the one stating, over and over again, that it would have been impossible for her to graduate in Hawaii without any credits from Washington.
There is no evidence of any transcript forgery...
Actually there has been.
...and HI and WA Obot AGs would just love to legally crucify Corsi it they could, but they haven’t.
You seem to be the only one that continues to imply that Corsi would have been the one forging the documents.
“You seem to be the only one that continues to imply that Corsi would have been the one forging the documents.”
I did no such thing and I have already answered all of your argumentative, insincere “questions” (based on false straw-men) in your content-free comment. I don’t appreciate you putting words into my mouth and distorting the record.
At least we agree 100% about the 1973 tax code! See, we CAN play nice, as Jim Robinson just suggested.