Replies

If that was a verification that what Obama posted is actually what they gave his lawyer, then why did Deputy AG Jill Nagamine tell Mike Zullo that he’s not authorized to receive a verification of that very thing? The public in general is authorized to receive a verification but not Mike Zullo? Explain what law says that.

Their own actions tell us point-blank that what they’ve got on their website for public consumption is NOT a verification that what Obama posted is genuine. They claim that information is not publicly discloseable - not even to law enforcement.

Furthermore, they know darn good and well that an electronic image can’t be “certified”. There is no electronic image that even CAN be a “certified copy”, since a certified copy requires a “raised seal”. It can be a scan of a “certified copy” - but then they didn’t say that, did they? Probably because they know this is not a copy or scan of what they sent him. (And the forensic evidence says the same thing: a scan of a certified copy would not allow Onaka’s certification to be individually moved around on the page, edited, etc. That is a blatant result of cut-and-paste.)

Which is why, when asked point-blank by Mike Zullo, they said he isn’t authorized to be told whether Obama’s posted image is of the BC they sent him. And why when asked point-blank by Ken Bennett who they acknowledged WAS eligible to receive a verification, their response indicated that what Obama posted is NOT a “true and accurate representation of the original record on file”.