[counterpunch]

Not true.
If you do an OCR scan, it converts to a document, as opposed to making an image.

But this is fairly new technology. It would mean the documents still exist..
So where are they..

Hey, wait a minute.
That's why the DNC is now going to flot this theory. That's why they had that hack Knox come out and claim that she tryped documents with the same content.

They are going to try a "do over" on the forged docs.
Look out for it.

[January24th]

I've used OCR software extensively about 10 years ago, and found it to be more trouble than it was worth. The slightest thing would cause it to chage a "g" to a "5" and other such craziness. It was maddening!

OCR may be a possibility, but it wouldn't explain the crumple marks on the pdf. Keep up, folks!!

[VadeRetro]

If you do an OCR scan, it converts to a document, as opposed to making an image.

Doesn't account for the signature. A fake is a fake.

[Diva Betsy Ross]

I agree with you in technical concept - however - any theory on how the OCR did such a fine job copying the handwritten signitures? How about superscripts?

Did the lying Democrap make even the slightest attempt to prove this thoery?

These Democrats are buffoons.

Diva's Husband