That's not what you said. You have the proof or you don't. It can be inspected and verified or it can't.
They had "documents" on Bush's service too. We all know what happened with that.
You said "PROOF". Not even the lower standard, "evidence".
When I see the alleged "proof", I will be able to ascertain it's validity.
So far, this story doesn't smell right.
That's a valid reply.
My original thinking is that when Hillary, for instance, claimed the existence of a consipracy, it started at the level of a claim only. In this instance, the left wing conspiracy starts with a document.