Per Greenperson: “Not a university in WA. Washington State University. But she didn’t go there; she went to the University of Washington. Two different schools. If we’re going to hew to the accuracy of these INS documents, then either they are true or they are not.”
A serious forensic investigator is concerned with whether a contemporaneous document is authentic, not whether all of the in formation in it is accurate. The person who prepared the document could be reporting incorrect information for any number of reasons.
Contrary to what you stated I did not use quotes and deliberately said a university in WA knowing that it was the wrong university relative to where she IS documented to have gone. You have not in any way called into question the authenticity of the FOIA INS doc by observing this discrepancy between the INS file note and what she did.
It is entirely reasonable for getting the particular WA university wrong to have been an honest mistake or it is possible that at the time she WAS intending to attend WA State, not U of WA. People get the “U. of (fill in the state)” vs. “(fill in the state U.” wrong all of the time in the numerous states where such confusion can arise. I went to one such university myself.
Per Greenperson: “SAD’s passport files are contradictory, missing, or locked away.”
IMO, SAD’s passport file is complete except for the “missing” pre-1966 record of either a renewal and/or initial application. Yes there are wrong dates and the mystery Soebarkah cross-out, but absolutely nothing that indicates ANY forgery of the FIOA passport records which are verifiable and available to anyone...except the “destroyed” ones, of course.
All of the information in the “non-destroyed” passport records confirms that Stanley Ann IS Barry's mom.
As all can see, there is a pile of verifiable evidence (evidence that could be subjected to court-ordered discovery if necessary)
Except all Courts evade discovery
supporting only Stanley Ann
Stop. Stanley is not a girls name, it's silly, it's ridiculous, it's insulting to the USA
as Barry's mom and ZERO evidence of any kind available to support the Mal-Val narrative.
How about their faces?
Per Greenperson: “Not a university in WA. Washington State University. But she didn’t go there; she went to the University of Washington. Two different schools. If we’re going to hew to the accuracy of these INS documents, then either they are true or they are not.”
She never went anywhere near a WA University.
A serious forensic investigator is concerned with whether a contemporaneous document is authentic, not whether all of the in formation in it is accurate. The person who prepared the document could be reporting incorrect information for any number of reasons.
Any authentic document would be nice.
It is entirely reasonable for getting the particular WA university wrong to have been an honest mistake or it is possible that at the time she WAS intending to attend WA State, not U of WA. People get the “U. of (fill in the state)” vs. “(fill in the state U.” wrong all of the time in the numerous states where such confusion can arise. I went to one such university myself.
Mistakes by the boatload
Per Greenperson: “SAD’s passport files are contradictory, missing, or locked away.”
IMO, SAD’s passport file is complete except for the “missing” pre-1966 record of either a renewal and/or initial application. Yes there are wrong dates and the mystery Soebarkah cross-out, but absolutely nothing that indicates ANY forgery of the FIOA passport records which are verifiable and available to anyone...except the “destroyed” ones, of course.
All of the information in the “non-destroyed” passport records confirms that Stanley Ann IS Barry's mom.
Ha Ha, the information they left supports their lie? How stupid you are.
As all can see, there is a pile of verifiable evidence (evidence that could be subjected to court-ordered discovery if necessary)
Except all Courts evade discovery
supporting only Stanley Ann
Stop. Stanley is not a girls name, it's silly, it's ridiculous, it's insulting to the USA
as Barry's mom and ZERO evidence of any kind available to support the Mal-Val narrative.
How about their faces?
Per Greenperson: “Not a university in WA. Washington State University. But she didn’t go there; she went to the University of Washington. Two different schools. If we’re going to hew to the accuracy of these INS documents, then either they are true or they are not.”
She never went anywhere near a WA University.
A serious forensic investigator is concerned with whether a contemporaneous document is authentic, not whether all of the in formation in it is accurate. The person who prepared the document could be reporting incorrect information for any number of reasons.
Any authentic document would be nice.
It is entirely reasonable for getting the particular WA university wrong to have been an honest mistake or it is possible that at the time she WAS intending to attend WA State, not U of WA. People get the “U. of (fill in the state)” vs. “(fill in the state U.” wrong all of the time in the numerous states where such confusion can arise. I went to one such university myself.
Mistakes by the boatload
Per Greenperson: “SAD’s passport files are contradictory, missing, or locked away.”
IMO, SAD’s passport file is complete except for the “missing” pre-1966 record of either a renewal and/or initial application. Yes there are wrong dates and the mystery Soebarkah cross-out, but absolutely nothing that indicates ANY forgery of the FIOA passport records which are verifiable and available to anyone...except the “destroyed” ones, of course.
All of the information in the “non-destroyed” passport records confirms that Stanley Ann IS Barry's mom.
Ha Ha, the information they left supports their lie? How stupid you are.
Per Greenperson: “Not a university in WA. Washington State University. But she didn’t go there; she went to the University of Washington. Two different schools. If we’re going to hew to the accuracy of these INS documents, then either they are true or they are not.”
A serious forensic investigator is concerned with whether a contemporaneous document is authentic, not whether all of the in formation in it is accurate. The person who prepared the document could be reporting incorrect information for any number of reasons.
******
Exactly, and yet you use these “documents” as “evidence” that you say supports that she’s the mother and yet you ignore anything they say that doesn’t fit.
I was pointing out what the records said instead of how you inaccurately characterized what they said. Why would you say “a university in Washington” instead of accurately quoting what the records said?
Why do you infer that what I say is intended to “question the authenticity” of the documents? I’m talking about what these digital images say and what they do not say. You use them as evidence to prove that SAD is the mother, but because there are so many discrepancies, what they do say shows that there are very many problems with the official narrative that Obama wants people to believe.