Xerox Theory Consistent with Ivan Zatkovich Report

Ivan Zatkovich

Now that we are certain that the PDF file containing an image of President Obama’s long form birth certificate was produced by first scanning the original on a Xerox WorkCentre then rotating and printing the file to PDF on a Mac PC it is instructive to look at what a real forensic document examiner had to say in a report filed just a few days after the document was released. This document has been labeled a “100% forgery” by Mike Zullo and the Cold Case Posse.

So what is the truth? For example, how does the “Xerox theory” stack up against Ivan Zatkovich’s report?

Ivan Zatkovich was one of the forensic document examiners that WND hired immediately after the release of the long form birth certificate on April 27,  2011. WND did not publish his report but instead cherry picked selected quotes to make it appear as if Mr. Zatkovich might have supported claims that the document was forged. The report was referenced in an article written by Bob Unruh on May 1, 2011 titled “Online ‘Birth Certificate’ Document Was Changed” but was not linked.

Following publication of the WND article Kevin Davidson, aka Doctor Conspiracy, contacted Mr. Zatkovich about his analysis. Because he felt that his findings were not being portrayed accurately by WND Mr. Zatkovich emailed a complete copy of his report to Kevin and published it on his company web site where it is still available today Analysis of Obama Birth Certificate PDF. Mr Zatkovich told Dr. Conspiracy that he did not think WND accurately excerpted from his report. See WND document expert says: not quite accurate

Methodology

I compared the Xerox Workcentre 7535 test findings with the Zatkovich report in detail. For comparison I used a file created by scan a color printout of the LFBC PDF that was scanned on a Xerox 7535 WorkCentre and the opened and printed to PDF on a Mac PC.

Metadata

First Zatkovich examined the Metadata for the LFBC PDF using Adobe Acrobat Pro.

… The software application that created the PDF document is Preview, a graphics and PDF utility included with the Mac OX X operating system. The version of Preview used is included with Mac OS X 10.6.7. It is possible that the document was created by some other application at an earlier date and then opened and saved from Preview causing new meta data to be stored in the document. The probability of this is at best 50/50.

The metadata analysis is pretty straightforward. You can use several different tools to examine the metadata. The metadata of our test file is consistent with what Mr. Zatkovich found. The producer is Mac OS X 10.8.3 Quartz PDF and the creator is Preview. Zatkovich certainly doesn’t rule out the possibility that the file was created in another application and then opened and saved in Preview causing new metadata. I think his 50/50 comment is another was of saying he did not know. Now we know. The document was created originally by the scanning software in a Xerox WorkCentre by scanning a paper document.  Remember that Zatkovich had at most a couple of days to examine the file and produce a report.

Content Elements

This is what Zatkovich said:

These are two common file formats. TIFF images are usually produced by scanning software used with scanner devices. PNG is a newer format used by graphics programs that store in graphics data a more efficient format producing smaller files than TIFF files. The two image types appearing in the meta data is consistent with the fact that the PDF document contains layers where small chunks of image are overlaid on the larger background image containing the form and security paper background. What caused those layers to exist is unknown. One commenter at a prominent website said that the layers were caused by “optimizing the PDF.” I know of no PDF optimization process that creates layers in the output PDF file.

Again nothing that Mr. Zatkovich said is contradicted by the “Xerox” theory. I believe Zatkovich would have written the final sentence a little differently had he known more about MRC compression and how it is used in modern office centers. There is no doubt that the Xerox WorkCentre line creates multilayer PDF files. More on that in a minute. As shown below the Xerox 7535 scan exhibits exactly the same file format types when the 7535 scan metadata is viewed in Illustrator:

Xerox 7535 meta

File Creation and the Layers

Zatkovich made a very important observation about the file creation.

Because the internal creation and modification dates are the same, it can be concluded that the file was created in one session, not created and then modified with the overlays at a later time. This does not preclude the possibility that the scanning and overlays were prepared separately and merged together in this single session.

He was hedging his words a bit here but what he said was that there is no evidence that layers were created separately at different times and merged. The 7535 PDF shows the same creation date for all the layers as well. That is because they were created during the Preview print to PDF operation.

Zatkovich then discussed the individual layers that he found from analyzing the PDF. He made this statement about the layers:

When a paper document is scanned on a scanner and saved as a PDF file it normally contains only a single layer of graphical information. The PDF that appears on the White House website however, contains multiple layers of graphical information. Multiple layers usually appear in a document like this when it is being edited or modified in some fashion….

It is possible to take a single layer PDF and inadvertently create multiple layers, without changing the image in any fashion. But that does not appear to be the case here. The multiple layers in the PDF document are a result of changes made to the image. It is not known of all the changes that may have been made, several changes are identifiable.

This statement is true when one is referring to most dedicated desktop scanners. However, this does not apply to modern multifunction high end office machines like the Xerox WorkCentre with built-in compression algorithms. MRC compression breaks apart the image vigorously into multiple layers and applies compression individually to those layers to reduce the size of the completed file.

Zatkovich said that the existence of layers in itself was not evidence that the contents of the document had been changed. He gave the possible scenario of someone trying to enhance the clarity of the document. That is one of the things MRC does. It separates text-like objects into a layer that is maintained at twice the resolution of the background image layer for readability. So it was not a person “enhancing the appearance of the image” it was a machine doing exactly that.

More on Layers

Zatkovich correctly identified that the LFBC PDF file consisted of a background layer plus  a number of overlays with text and other mostly grey or black objects. He also figured out that the “overlay layers” were at a higher resolution than the background layer. The Xerox 7535 scan follows exactly the same pattern. The background (green) layer is stored at 150 ppi and the foreground masks (overlays) are at 300 ppi. Xerox employs this scheme because it is more important that the text in the foreground layers be readable than the background layer which is often just a color or a photo. The file size is made smaller by using lossy JPEG compression to save the image at a lower resolution. There are no conflicts at all between the Zatkovich overview of the layers and those seen in the WorkCentre 7535 scan.

Let me explain a bit about “lossy” and lossless compression schemes. It refers to the fact that in some types of compression no information is lost and in some schemes it is lost. For example if you are down sampling an image to go from 600 ppi (pixels per inch) to 300 ppi then blocks of  adjacent pixels get averaged together and the individual pixel info is lost forever. In reality it is more complex than this simple explanation but suffice it to say that lossy compression allows you to shrink a picture file by a huge amount and still recognize that it is a photo of your cute kitten being cute without being able to count Kitty’s hairs. .

Other types of file compression do not cause information to be lost. Everyone has used Zip files. They shrink file size for downloading and emailing but an exact copy of the file can be reconstructed by using a decoder. Binary files like executable files can only be compressed suing lossless compression schemes.

The Xerox Workcentres use both types of compression.

Let’s compare the more important layers from the LFBC in the Zatkovich report with the Xerox 7535 scan.

First is the background layer:

LFBC Xerox 7535 HiResPrint

Xerox WorkCentre 7535 Scan to PDF

LFBC PDF

 Text layer:

LFBC PDF

LFBC Xerox 7535 HiResPrint

Xerox WorkCentre 7535 Scan to PDF

Signature stamp:

LFBC PDF

LFBC Xerox 7535 HiResPrint

Xerox WorkCentre 7535 Scan to PDF

 

 

 

Date stamp:

LFBC

LFBC Xerox 7535 HiResPrint

Xerox WorkCentre 7535 Scan to PDF

 

 

 

 

It is plainly visible that the four main “layers” in the two documents are very similar. The color of the background is slightly different as would be expected when comparing a scanned, compressed, printed copy to an original. Printers rarely render hues exactly. The white “ghosts” where text was lifted is visible in both backgrounds. The signature stamp was not quite cleanly lifted in the Xerox 7535 scan but this is easily explained because of the imperfect duplication of a process that included scanning, compression and printing.

Conclusion

Mr. Zatkovich concludes his report:

The following is a summary of my analysis:

1. The Hawaii Department of Health stated that they have a record of the birth certificate of Barak Obama.

2. A certificate was produced by the State of Hawaii and copied onto green safety paper, as per normal procedure.

3. The ‘Green copy’ was then scanned, presumably by the White House, to produce a PDF document.

4. The PDF document was then modified in some fashion (e.g. layers, white halo).

All of the modifications to the PDF document that can be identified are consistent with someone enhancing the legibility of the document. It is possible that in addition to enhancing the legibility of the document that the content of the document was also changed. There is no specific evidence of how or why that content would have been changed, but the evidence clearly indicates that the document was changed.

The changes that Zatkovich identified are all consistent with the effects of the scanning and compression process occurring within the Xerox Workcentre. I have presented a convincing case that every anomaly that Mr. Zatkovich identified in his report issued on April 29, 2011 can be explained by a very simple work flow process:

  1. Someone scanned on a Xerox Workcentre one of the original certified copies of the LFBC obtained from the Hawaii DOH. They emailed themselves a copy. They rotated the copy to the right orientation in Preview on a Mac.
  2. They printed the rotated image to a PDF file.
  3. That file was published at WhiteHouse.gov.

It will discuss the Xerox theory and how it stacks up against the Cold Case Posse “expert” reports in future articles.

thatMerriam-Webster: that definition: the person, thing, or idea indicated, mentioned, or understood from the situation.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Birth Certificate, Conspiracy Theories, World Net Daily and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

57 Responses to Xerox Theory Consistent with Ivan Zatkovich Report

  1. when was the last time you spoke to ivan RC ? I spoke with him a couple of days after the 4/27/11 release. he dropped out rather suddenly. you all realize this comes down to verifying what copier was used that day and who used it. when I call the white house, and I will soon, they should be eager to provide those specifics. i’m glad at least you mentioned, “enhancement. i’m still wondering why he dropped out so succinctly. scott e.

    [RC: Fixed typo per Scott]

    • I emailed Mr. Zatkovich and he has not replied. I can think of valid reasons why he would choose not to get involved. He was hired by WND to do a very quick study of the LFBC and produced a report that was immediately twisted by Bob Unruh at WND. That might have left a bad taste in his mouth on the matter. Reputable experts like Mr. Zatkovich make $150 per hour and usually a lot more. Why should he volunteer his valuable time to enter a very politically charged controversy again?

      To his credit he sent a copy to Doc C and Ivan published it on his own web site. If he wishes to leave a comment here I would welcome that. I do not plan to try to contact him any more.

      Edit to add:

      By the way, if you look at what happened with Zatkovich’s report and WND you will see why I am skeptical about Reed Hayes report until it is released.

    • Scott said

      you all realize this comes down to verifying what copier was used that day and who used it.

      No it doesn’t come down to that. That is an idiotic condition to set. What it comes down to is that that there never was any real evidence of forgery in the first place. The Xerox work flow answers all the stupid questions that people like Doug Vogt, Mara Zebest, Mark Gillar, and Garrett Papit brought up.

      The forgery skeptic community has been consistent since the early days after the crackpot forgery theories first appeared in saying that the anomalies were the result of a compression/file size optimization process. It was inevitable that someone with the tools and skill would figure out the details.

      Go ahead and call the White House. I am sure they will treat you like every other crackpot.

      • see, this is a good example of fluff RC. why would it be difficult or inappropriate somehow, or an “idiotic condition”. you guys think you can trick us with a shiny coin the way Obama has with all of you. we’re not stopping, and you can’t end this… sorry man, that’s not the way this country works.

        • incidentally, I have spoken to the white house press office many times, they have been nothing but courteous and respectful and polite. my website name opens doors, so maybe I have a separate advantage in that, but they know what I do. obviously they’re not going to “help” me, but they are always gracious, we would expect no less. I doubt they’ll just tell me about the copiers used that day. but maybe foia would be appropriate in this instance. as I said at PF the service records are tangible, if those records are sealed, that would ring the suspicion bell rather loudly, don’t you think ??

        • I was kidding Scottie. Gees. Of course they will treat you politely. They are professionals. They will only snicker after you hang up.

          If you want to submit a FOIA knock yourself out. I suspect that the brand of copiers used in the WHite House might fall under an exemption but I don’t care enough to look.

          Every FOIA request to date has hurt the Birther cause. Remember the one where the state department investigator checked into the young Obama when Ann emigrated back to the US and concluded he was born in Hawaii?

        • ok, thanks. I see no reason not to pursue the issue and the evidence. thanks for fixing my typo RC.

        • Northland10 says:

          Well, if they sealed records for the copiers, they did a poor job. The GSA shows, for fiscal year 2010, around 20 various contracts between Xerox and the Executive Office of the President for leasing, maintenance and various other copier services. The Press Office wouldn’t be that much help to you anyway, Scott, since they are just the users and don’t look that closely at what they are using. The department who placed them there is likely the Office of Administration.

          And here are the contracts, if the link works. They are not as specific on actual type but that would be the detail stuff that is worked out within the main contract.

          https://www.fpds.gov/ezsearch/search.do?indexName=awardfull&templateName=1.4.4&s=FPDSNG.COM&q=xerox++CONTRACT_FISCAL_YEAR%3A%222010%22++CONTRACTING_AGENCY_NAME%3A%22EXECUTIVE+OFFICE+OF+THE+PRESIDENT%22

  2. “I will discuss the Xerox theory and how it stacks up against the Cold Case Posse “expert” reports in future articles.”

    It would be great if someone could get Zatkovich to comment on the Xerox Workcenter work flow evidence. How sweet it would be if he were to state that the scenario that NBC, RC and Doc have explored adequately and conclusively explains all the “anomalies.”

    • after ivan sent me his initial report, we had a few more exchanges, then he sort of (mysteriously dropped out). my last exchange was around the end of may, when he wrote “I guess there’s really nothing to it after all, we should focus on more important things troubling this country”.

      but here’s some stuff I found in those email archives. tell me what you think. how it stacks up today, two and a half years later.
      *******

      But more specifically, it was created using Apple Preview on a Mac OS X 10.6.7 system and the PDF encoder was “Mac OS X 10.6.7 Quartz PDFContext.”
      *****
      The birth certificate PDF contains one image (a color JPEG) and eight bitmasks (PNGs). The main image is PDF object ID 7 0 (ID #7, revision 0) and is 1652×1276. This image includes all the colored components of the image minus everything that is completely black (mostly black text).
      ****
      The largest bitmask is ID 9 0 and is 1454×1819. When the image is rendered, it is rotated 90-degrees (1819×1454) and masks out the text in the JPEG image.
      The smaller bitmasks were automatically segmented 1) in order to reduce space, and 2) to account for the compression algorithms identifying colors other than completely black.

      does this all point to Xerox ??

      I still believe in my heart that someone did something to curtail Ivan’s analysis/continuation. just a conspiracy theory though, but it was a dramatic turnaround, in my humble opinion. haven’t heard from him since, so like you I stopped trying a year or so ago. why do you think he doesn’t want to discuss further. i’m sure we could find the money somewhere. same for john woodman I suppose, if it’s just a question of dough. I believe in honest pay for honest work.

      so, please let me ask again, when was the last time you emailed or spoke with zatkovich ?
      does he know now that you are using his work to make your case ?? he did say the pdf was “enhanced”.. right ?

      also why did you bail out of PF ? was it the stoors thing ? we are all looking forward to the hayes report.

      • Scott wrote

        But more specifically, it was created using Apple Preview on a Mac OS X 10.6.7 system and the PDF encoder was “Mac OS X 10.6.7 Quartz PDFContext.”
        *****
        The birth certificate PDF contains one image (a color JPEG) and eight bitmasks (PNGs). The main image is PDF object ID 7 0 (ID #7, revision 0) and is 1652×1276. This image includes all the colored components of the image minus everything that is completely black (mostly black text).
        ****
        The largest bitmask is ID 9 0 and is 1454×1819. When the image is rendered, it is rotated 90-degrees (1819×1454) and masks out the text in the JPEG image.
        The smaller bitmasks were automatically segmented 1) in order to reduce space, and 2) to account for the compression algorithms identifying colors other than completely black.

        does this all point to Xerox ??

        Yes, absolutely. You can read the details on NBC’s blog.

        I emailed Ivan Zatkovich last week to let him know was was looking at his report and how it compares with new findings. Since he said he has no desire to get involved I do not plan to contact him any further. I did a critique of his work based on the latest evidence. using selected quotations. That falls under fair use.

        His report stands up very well especial since it was prepared in a very short time after the release of the LFBC. At first that looks remarkable but most of his report was detailing what he saw when he examined the file in Adobe Pro. That wouldn’t have taken that long. I might quibble with one or two things. He states: ” It is possible that the document was created by some other application at an earlier date and then opened and saved from Preview causing new meta data to be stored in the document. The probability of this is at best 50/50.” I would have just said “I don’t know” or “I cannot determine.” That is a small point,

        If he wishes to comment here he can.

        Yes, I know he used the word “enhanced”. I don’t think he concluded that enhancement was a sign that the information was changed in any way. MRC does “enhance” text and other objects by storing them at twice the resolution of the background image and converting all the pixels to one color.

      • also why did you bail out of PF ? was it the stoors thing ? we are all looking forward to the hayes report.

        There hasn’t been anything worth commenting on at PF and I prefer Coors to Stoors.

    • that would be great, but I think that boat has sailed….like john woodman, he’s bailed way out for some reason.. RC and I have both tried. I do find it interesting that he won’t respond back to youbots either..
      so we’ll just keep searching… all roads lead to that secret-vault-in-Hawaii, which I will bet has better security than ft. knox right now, until some natural or man caused disaster renders the BC missing or illegible. but by definition they would have to destroy other people’s BC’s in the process. unless of course Obama’s is the only one in that book damaged by the fire flood earthquake (wouldn’t surprise me at all), or perhaps some terrorists were just taking a walk one night and decided to kill some birth records….. What difference does it make, at this point ?

      I predict they’ll find a way, to wish the original magically into the cornfield… effectively ending the BC controversy…but there’s so much more.
      what difference does it make ?? have you got a minute, or a couple of days ??

  3. Jim says:

    Another wonderfully useless debunking of the “Cold-Cocked Posse”. Knocked them right out. Some of you folks have entirely way too much time on your hands! 😆

  4. John says:

    RC describe the printing process you used in your experiment.

    • Sure, I opened up a copy of the LFBC file from the White House in Adobe Reader, clicked on the print button, and printed it to a high quality color laser printer at maximum dpi.

      I then scanned that copy to a PDF file email attachment using the default settings on a WorkCentre 7535. I sent the results to someone with a Mac to open and resave the file in Preview since I do not have a Mac.

      One difference is that NBC is certain the LFBC was scanned upside down on a WorkCentre 7655 and then opened and rotated right side up in Preview. That was the reason for the Preview step in the first place. That rotation and resave changed the Meta Data.

      I sent NBC an upside down scan on the 7535 for him to use in further research as he wishes.

    • By the way. John, did you notice that I was open and answered your question in detail? I noticed you then ran over to ran over to ORYR and to Free Republic to use the information I gave you to claim we were using a “flawed” process? When have you ever seen that kind of openness from Zullo? You thought I wouldn’t notice that didn’t you John?

  5. John says:

    If that is the process you and NBC took, then your findings are most likely flawed and unreliable. The CCP was more careful in the printing process to fully replicate a true scanning of the Hawaii birth certificate. Doing a direct print even to safety paper is probably no good. You have to as the CCP did seperate the PDF from green background first and then print it. I would imagine because the CCP was attempting duplicate the exact process the Hawaii DOH took to create the birth certificate. Simply printing the PDF, the green background is not “real” but a construction. Further both the date stamp and signature stamps are not “real” either. By stripping away the green background first and then printing to green safety paper and then applying the date stamp insures that the green background and date stamp are treated as “real” constructions not as “computer generated” constructions. You want to make sure the MRC scanning technology duplicates a the birth certificate as much possible rather than a printed out computer constructed representation.

    • More “cargo cult” science from John.

      You don’t seem to understand that the fact that the results are so close to the “real” PDF by using a less than perfect copy is more compelling as evidence than creating a document as you suggest or using a completely different birth certificate.

      Using a different stamp is actually not reliable either. How do you know the ink color and density would match?

      You really just do not know what you are talking about John.

      • Jim says:

        Reality Check says: “You really just do not know what you are talking about John.”

        Neither does the CCP, which makes it even sadder that John would listen to them.

        • I asked John at NBC’s blog to name one PDF related anomaly that is not adequately explained by the Xerox to Preview workflow process. His only comeback to that was to talk about “African” vs. “Negro” in the race field. Of course that has nothing to do with the PDF and has been explained many times.

        • Maybe John is the lead technical adviser to the CCP? I could believe it. 😆

  6. John says:

    That’s why I believe Miki’s birth certificate and her friends are so important. Those birth certificates are “real” birth certificates. All the element are “real”, the green safety paper, the stamp, the ink, the lines. By merely printing out Obama’s PDF, the green background is now a “computer generated” construction as are the stamps and everything else. Trying to scan that VS. trying to scan a “real” birth certificate with “real” elements are sure to some pretty wild results. That’s why the CCP took the extra step in making sure that Green safety paper and stamp were “real” instead of “computer generated” for purposes of the scanning process.

    • Yes, but there is no, zero, nada evidence that the CCP used a Xerox WorkCentre in their testing. Otherwise they would have not made the statement that no compression algorithm would generate multiple one bit monochrome layers. It doesn’t matter what document you use if you are not using the right hardware as you found out with your own test.

      Actually there is evidence that Garrett Papit could not get a document to scan on a Xerox Workcentre but that video was made long after the CCP supplemental report was issued.

    • Jim says:

      John says: “That’s why the CCP took the extra step in making sure that Green safety paper and stamp were “real” instead of “computer generated” for purposes of the scanning process.”

      John, let me say right off the bat, any scan, image, etc. you see on the web is “computer generated”. When you scan an item and export it, it is a computer generation. Software created by humans is what allows you to look at images on the web. Different software works differently and using different scanners, with their own translation software will react differently and the reader/editor you use will show differences. That’s why there is so many different proprietary software around, each company creates their own so they don’t have to pay a commission and maintenance to use some other company’s software in their products. NOTHING done by the CCP proves any kind of forgery, all they’ve done is analyze how the SOFTWARE handles the underlying image. All that NBC has done is duplicate how the software handles it. All the CCP’s hot air is a joke, and would be laughed out of court under the cross-examination of a real computer/graphics expert. If you were to try to pull this stunt on my Computer Science professors, you’d be flunked and laughed out of class. It’s not only ridiculous, it’s stupid.

    • Ran Talbott says:

      “Trying to scan that VS. trying to scan a ‘real’ birth certificate with ‘real’ elements are sure to some pretty wild results”
      In a word: no. It’s _sure_ to produce results that differ somewhat in detail, and it _might_ produce “wild” results. But the results of the tests so far indicate that that probability is low.

      • John does not understand or more likely chooses not to understand that once you have demonstrated in principle that the Cold Case Posse claims of forgery can be the result of a simple everyday work process then it does not matter what document is used.

        For example, the CCP said no scanner or optimization process with MRC compression would ever produce a PDF with a background 8 bit image and multiple 1 bit masking layers. That statement is clearly false. We have seen not one but now many documents that prove that statement to be false.

        My favorite is Mike Zullo standing up there showing how you could move the date and the signature stamp around and saying that shows the document is a forgery. I can do exactly the same thing on the WorkCentre 7535 scan.

  7. hi RC.. expect the unexpected. just like tavis smiley does… good luck amigo. we’re down to the finish….cheers… scott e. WashingtonAmerica.Com

  8. Here is a another piece of evidence. Northland10 looked on the General Services Administration web site and found 20 contracts listed with Xerox to supply and maintain office equipment for the Executive Office of the President for Fiscal Year 2010, GSA Xerox Contracts 2010 and 19 for 2011.

    So we have independent evidence that Xerox equipment was used in the White House.

    • this is compelling and the kind of thing I hope to see. I suppose records can be noodled, so I would like to see this brought forth during an inquisition hearing. the man is innocent until proven guilty. any allegations or evidence has to hold up under scrutiny. this goes for both sides. why did this take so long to emerge ? does the accusing side (my side) concur ? but I feel like we’re getting closer. to me this makes the story more interesting, than less.

      • I like that they are all from the office of the president (executive), that’s pretty specific….
        I notice mc lean… interesting, I assume that’s Virginia… or a diet burger at the local Mcdonalds… but this is good research, and it’s empirical if it’s bona fide. I like that. next, were other brands used as well. was it ever copied at all. did the document originate as paper is the big question. when can we see the match to end this zany tale.

        have you been working on the draft registration at all ?? I would like to see some more regs with a two digit stamp from that same batch. then we’ll really be doing something… anything to prove things one way or another always help move the ball down the field .cheers.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McLean,_Virginia

        • The draft registration card is a complete non-issue since the Selective Service told Joe Arpaio it agreed with their records.

          I have a funny story about McLean, Virginia. A friend of mine had an interview with the CIA years ago. They told him when he arrived at the airport in DC to catch a limo and just tell the driver you want to go to McLean, Va and nothing else. When he told the driver that the driver laughed and said “Ok, you mean the CIA?”.

        • Dr. Ken says:

          What’s your issue with McLean, VA Scott? It’s the vendor city with Xerox being the vendor. Xerox has offices in McLean as do a lot of other large corporations. So another birther claim nipped in the butt. How about no Scott? You don’t get to make demands for 5 years you guys have been pushing debunked lie after lie and all it adds up to is you not liking the President. Not a single thing you’ve ever pushed has been true. I’m sure you’ve been shown other documents that have two digit cancellation stamps and that didn’t change your mind then either. The fact is the registration came direct from Selective Service and was released to a birther through a Freedom of Information Act request back in 2008. The document wasn’t something Obama released publicly. Selective Service says its legit, you have no actual argument here.

      • Northland10 says:

        um.. nobody bothered to look? I only checked out of silly curiosity after you made some comment a few days back about asking the press office (who likely would not even pay attention to the make and model of the nearby multi-function device).

        • this is moving toward “getting into the building” that day (virtual recounting) 4/27/11

          after we identify all the equipment, then i’d like to know the names (including interns) in the office that day. government employees.

          this is day to day business, that shouldn’t be classified, paid for by the taxpayers, whom also own the building… see where i’m going with this ? and, i’d like to hear more from savannah. I don’t know if les was in the pool that day. I love anything to do with the pressroom. silly curiosity … I suppose. and I think the draft registration is highly significant. you guys probably won’t agree.

        • Jim says:

          scott e: “after we identify all the equipment, then i’d like to know the names (including interns) in the office that day. government employees.”

          Let’s see Scott, on one side we have an investigation that makes the 3 stooges look like well-trained FBI agents. An investigation that has been caught lying, fabricating evidence, and shown to be totally incompetent in examining forensic evidence. On the other side, we have State officials, newspaper announcements, and total consistency on the President’s place and time of birth. Instead of asking for WH volunteer names, shouldn’t you be asking the CCP more questions about their work? They’re the ones who have been caught committing fraud, not the President or anyone on his staff.

  9. Dr. Ken says:

    Then after that Scott would like their home addresses and their mother’s maiden names. After he gets all that he wants to know what they had to eat for lunch that day. When that’s resolved he needs to know who the power company was that powered the Executive office of the President. Then he wants a line item bill of Kwh used for that time period. Then he’d like to know the amount of power that was used by the Xerox machine so that he can see that it was in use during that day.

    Ah yes the delusional mind of Scotty don’t.

    • it’s our government. should be a transparent process Kenny-BabyDoc.

      • Northland10 says:

        You want them to be transparent about every mundane detail but documenting all that stuff takes resources. I can think of a great deal better uses for our tax dollars than creating an available database of the type of office chairs that were used in the Executive Office Building in 2009. I want our civil servants doing useful things not documenting miscellaneous stuff for somebody who just wants to be difficult. Transparency was intended toward policy making and things like no-bid contracts, not office equipment leases. What happened to fiscal responsibility?

        I seriously doubt the concern about transparency. There is a huge wealth of data available about the governments operation available online, right down to the salaries of the staff of the Executive Office of the President. Like others before you, you show faux outrage at transparency because you fail your responsibility to see if they already provide it. It is not the government job to hand feed you every detail because you are too lazy to look it up. I want my taxes to go do real work, not pay for lazy Birther whims. Isn’t this fiscal responsibility?

        Just look at Orly. She does Freedom of Information Act requests for debt calculation information even though that is available from Treasury Direct and the Bureau of Public Debt. She is wasting tax dollars for her narcissism. It’s about fiscal responsibility.

        The work of being eternally vigilant rests solely on the citizen. We must always do our homework first. Stop waiting for a government handout, Scott.

      • How did the visit to UConn go?

      • Dr. Ken says:

        What does showing documents that you’ve asked from no previous president have to do with having a transparent administration? Sounds like you have different standards based on who is in office. Why is that Scotty?

        • your portended assessment of my standards is irrelevant Kramer. what has transpired with past presidents, also irrelevant. we have but one “president” now. that’s all.

        • Dr. Ken says:

          As usual Scotty when asked direct questions you can’t answer. Sorry but it is completely relevant as it shows you have ulterior motives for why you only hold Obama up to this always changing level of scrutiny when you ignored other Presidents. So once again Scotty is a coward who can’t answer questions. So I’ll ask you again Scotty: What does showing documents that you’ve asked from no previous president have to do with having a transparent administration? Sounds like you have different standards based on who is in office. Why is that Scotty?

  10. Pingback: We Accept Your Challenge Mr. Zullo | RC Radio Blog

  11. Pingback: Driving the final nail into the Cold Case Posse “investigation” coffin–Part I | RC Radio Blog

Leave a Reply (Please see the RC Radio Blog comment policy). Your first comment will be moderated

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s