Oh, wow. I thought she had the doc in the photo, secured.She only had a color copy??
Oh, this is bad. She got punk’d bad.
By requesting the court lend assistance in verifying or refuting the document image she had been sent? Her motion was neutral, and did not claim the document in the image was genuine.
No, she didn't get 'punk'd' any more than we did, because we were attempting to verify or refute the document in the image ourselves.
Someone had some 'fun', but we did not state the document in the image was definitely correct and genuine any more than she did--we were trying to ascertain whether it was genuine or not.
Someone has declared a victory they did not attain, maybe to try and get propagands value from it.
The 'Tet Offensive' propaganda comes to mind, where the MSM declared "victory" for the North Vietnamese when they got wiped out of every provincial capital in the South by our troops.
The 'victory' was sheer propaganda--and that is what we have to be cautious of this time, propaganda used to declare us all as having 'lost' somehow.
The bottom line?
We still don't have diddley squat for documentation on Obama, and they have proved how easy it is to make fake document images, which only strengthens the case for revealing all the original documents.