I can make no statements about what is or is not on file in HI, and if those are or are not legal/certified/whatever. I’ll leave that to the professionals in those fields.
My field is desktop publishing. So that’s why I waded into this issue originally. The WH-released BC has layers and very odd discrepancies like anti-aliased/multicolor text together with sharp black text—which absolutely points to some kind of alteration of the scan. There’s no way those two kinds of text should be appearing together without some kind of digital manipulation.
However—it hasn’t been proven to my satisfaction that said manipulation was human in origin. If, as it sure seems, the Optimize PDF function can do these kinds of things all by itself, then there’s an innocent explanation here that needs to be taken into account before everyone (including me) screams “forgery!”
You are still assuming that *someone* cut and pasted digital data. I am not there yet. Particularly since, from this Photoshop user’s perspective, if this was a forgery it was done so HIDEOUSLY badly that I have trouble believing the WH would be that stupid. Craven, yes. But not that stupid.
Busted again! That's absolutely true. However, I think that I am merely "cutting to the chase!"
Rationale: My the hell wouldn't they just copy the damn thing, certify it, and FEDEX it on over? Why the hell send a lawyer @$200/hr.(+) all the way to Honolulu to pick up an Abstract?
What I have been trying to push on the site is that, IMNSVHO, there is sufficient reason for any State AG to throw the boy off the ballot in his state, forcing this to court so we can get to the bottom of this business. As it is now, we can't even get a court to look! To me, the trick is to make Obama the PLAINTIFF. Not the DEFENDENT. No questions about "standing" there!
I have no idea who this guy is, what he is, where he's from ... that ain't right.