“THE FACT IS, IT DIDN’T HAVE TO BE SCANNED”
by Sharon Rondeau
The probe, launched in August 2011 and concluded in December 2016, found “probable cause” to believe the image, posted at whitehouse.gov on April 27, 2011, to be a “computer-generated forgery.” The conclusion was announced at an initial press conference on March 1, 2012 by lead investigator Mike Zullo, who was working under the authority of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office (MCSO). At the same time, Zullo revealed that an analysis of Obama’s purported Selective Service registration form found it, too, to be a forgery.
At two successive pressers over the life of the investigation, Zullo revealed additional details demonstrating that the “probable cause” standard had been overcome by the evidence. At a third and final press conference on December 15, 2016, he reported that two forensic analysts, working independently and without knowledge of the other, reached similar conclusions to his own about the birth-certificate image. At that time, Zullo demonstrated by means of a PowerPoint presentation the method by which at least nine items were taken from a real, paper Hawaii birth certificate belonging to Joanna Ah’Nee and digitally copied onto a template which ultimately became the Obama “long-form birth certificate.”
Various media reports misrepresented or totally omitted those revelations.
Since 1995 when he first entered politics, Obama has claimed publicly that he was born in Honolulu, HI on August 4, 1961 to a U.S.-citizen mother and British-citizen father, Barack Hussein Obama of Kenya. He allegedly left Hawaii for Indonesia with his mother at age 6 and returned to Hawaii at age 10. That account contradicts numerous mainstream media articles reporting his birth as having taken place in Kenya or Indonesia or his arrival in Indonesia at age 2 or 4.
Several members of “The Fogbow,” a pro-Obama forum purporting that the long-form birth certificate image is authentic and that Obama was constitutionally-eligible to serve as president, frequently read The Post & Email’s articles about the birth certificate, Obama’s inconsistent life narrative, and the “natural born Citizen” requirement for the president in Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution.
The “Obots,” as they are sometimes called, use screen names which change from time to time and often leave comments attempting to convince readers of the birth-certificate image’s genuineness. As The Post & Email’s “Comment” policy states, comments containing obvious propaganda are not published.
Wednesday’s article generated a number of comments, including one by “Glen Day” which reads:
At the behest of 250 of his constituents, then-Maricopa County, Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio launched an investigation into the matter to clear the president of suspicion. Arpaio assigned his Cold Case Posse to the matter, then under the leadership of Mike Zullo. Arpaio and Zullo expected the birth certificate matter to be cleared up and settled in a few days, but instead, after collecting a lot of evidence (over 5+ years’ worth). In 2016, the CCP finally determined the Obama (PDF) birth certificate was a fake and a forgery put together by a forger(s) via a cut and paste method. It exists only in cyberspace and can only become a paper document when the print button is pushed.
During those 5+ years, the CCP held three press conferences inviting the news media to view the evidence and ask probing questions of Zullo regarding that evidence. But the media was just not interested. Probing questions might result in convincing answers and the media big shots weren’t about to let the public hear that. But as is so typical of these scalawags, they preferred to question the motive and character of Zullo and Arpaio rather than the facts and evidence.
In response, “Earlington Smith,” quoting Day, wrote:
“It exists only in cyberspace and can only become a paper document when the print button is pushed.”
He then added:
That is not what Zullo said. Zullo said the quantization tables matched other PDFs created by the White House on a Xerox 7655. Therefore there was a paper document that was scanned on a Xerox 7655 to create the birth certificate PDF.
In 2013, “Obots” claimed that a Xerox “WorkCentre” 7655 copier could produce the birth-certificate image exactly as it appears online, a claim Zullo has continuously refuted.
On Friday, The Post & Email reached out to Zullo for comment on Smith’s statement, and Zullo responded:
Obviously, there had to be paper documents that things were taken from, but that birth certificate displayed was never a paper document. It is a creation done digitally that could only become paper once you press the button to print it. It’s a nice try, but it’s not reality. The reality is it wouldn’t matter how many different documents; that document does not exist. It resides in cyberspace because it was created in cyberspace. The quantization tables don’t mean anything and have nothing to do with the creation of the document. The quantization tables mean it was printed out of a 7655. That doesn’t matter. The 7655 can only print something that was created and then printed out. So the chain of creation of a digital document ultimately culminates in it being printed onto paper. Prior to it being printed onto paper, it is digital.
The fact that he’s saying there was a paper document that was scanned doesn’t matter. The fact is, it didn’t have to be scanned. There was a paper document created when they falsified the birth certificate. They created it digitally and printed it on paper. The end result of what you see was a fabrication that can only be transferred to paper by the use of printing it from a scanner. That’s all it is: taking a PDF file and printing it.
People will throw red herrings out there. You don’t even have to worry about a quant table; just look at all those items that were pulled over from Ah’Nee. That should settle the matter right there.
Looking for all of your news in one place? Try Whatfinger, your one-stop aggregator of news, opinion and everything else.