Your ironclad presuppositions, which you wear like blinders, permit you the option of drawing no other conclusion. However, Abercrombie’s concomitant statement backs Evan’s claim to a T. As I pointed out, Abercrombie did NOT say, “I’m told the BC is in the vital records files, exactly where it should be.” He said he was told there was actually something written in the archives. As has been pointed out, that something would not have been a BC.
[And before your Obot talking points kick in, Abercrombie’s stated goal was to lay the BC controversy permanently to rest. So if he’d been told the BC was definitely where it should have been, he’d have said so.]
If Evans says he only misspoke in one interview but you have solid evidence that it was a higher number, then he’s lying, right? Or are my presuppositions at work again?