so what do you need to challenge a computerized copy of a document, does it have full faith and credit? When has the supposed actual document been presented in court?
Lets be sure to cite this fact.
The state of Hawaii has never, repeat never, directly released any record in this matter. Never.
The 2008 COLB magically appeared as a key feature in the ‘Fight The Smears’ blog in June 2008. It was also release simultaneously by multiple politically operative blogs.
Even a representative from Hawaii said of the image and physical paper presented by Fact Check in August of 2008 that ‘we may never know what this an image of.’
So Hawaii has never made a claim of authenticity of that document. Ironically, when the WH released the LFBC image in April of 2011 they also posted a black and white image of the infamous COLB. That image was apparently a browser print of the document from the SNOPES website. The footer information at the bottom of the document shows that. If the 2008 COLB was authentic and in safe keeping why was in not re-presented in some manner? Does that specific ‘state-issued’ document still exist? It seems it would have been kept in safe keeping. So for that document it is simple - just present the ORIGINAL ACTUAL document and have officials from Hawaii authenticate it as authentic along with any type of backup that it was actually issued in 2007. A very simple task. Yet never done.
Fast forward to April 2011. The LFBC posted on the WH website is an Adobe pdf electronic file. It was not released by the state of Hawaii. The director of the Health Department did apparently create a cover letter indicating that something was provided - to attorneys from the White House. Assuming the letter is authentic and factually correct what was given to the WH attorneys has not been confirmed. In fact, Hawaii officials have gone out their way in responses to states in 2012 to avoid confirming the Adobe electronic file is a replication of an actual, authentic state-issued document.
So the first fact is - nothing has ever, ever been released with the unqualified and full support of the state of Hawaii.
No actual state-issued document has ever been presented to a court. Never.
Confirming a document as authentic from a digital image is, as properly noted, imppossible. YOU MUST HAVE THE PHYSICAL ACTUAL DOCUMENT TO VALIDATE IS AUTHENTICITY. But is possible to show that a digital image is not a reproduction of any authentic document. This is not difficult. And it has been done for both the COLB and LFBC. Both are clearly not images of official Hawaii documents.
The anti-fraud mechanisms in most state-issue documents are made to hinder the easy reproduction of copy of ACTUAL DOCUMENT. Features that good state document should have include: a) ‘secure-void’ that show the word ‘void’ when a document is photocopied in a standard copier (btw, no present on Hawaii documents apparently), b) micro lettering to include words in what appears as lines (also not used by Hawaii), c) Detailed borders with very intricate designs that do not reproduce well (used by Hawaii at one time as evidenced by the PeterBoy COLB, but not used now), d) watermarks that do not show via photocopying or scanning (also not used by Hawaii now) and e) embossed seals that - by design - do NOT show up or barely show up when photocopied or scanned (the ‘raised seal’ on Hawaii document is an easy to copy de-embossed pin die.), and f)security paper that has a multi-color, unique background (Hawaii uses cheap, easily available paper with a common background.). For an example of a document that does include some of the features simply see Bobby Jindals BC document. The differences are very apparent.
The Hawaii documents are almost designed for enabling fraud. They simple in their construct and simple to manipulate after they are digitized.
But without the actual document one can not say anything presented is authentic. One MUST have the document. And an actual physical document is never come forward.