Final Report on the AP Documents and the Muscatine PDF

Our friend Hermitian has made some fascinating claims about the Muscatine PDF, such as that it was created by Applewhite (because that’s what the author tag states) or that it was created before the AP released its own PDF. A careful analysis rejects such scenarios and provides us with a more logical and supportable workflow. Let’s first share what we know: Scott Applewhite was present at the briefing and the President’s statements on April 27, 2011 as supported by the set of photographs he took that day. One of the assets, marked DCSA103 or ID 110427018673, was sent to the AP office where it was imported into a PDF and made available to the public. The same assets were also provide to subscribers to the AP photo streams. The Muscatine Editor picked up the JPEG and imported it into Photoshow, cropped the image, resampled it, and removed the bluish hue and saved it as an PDF forgetting to clear the ‘Preserve Photoshop Editing capabilities and Embed Page Thumbnails. All the times line up quite nicely: Note that the times are in daylight time: So -4:00 = EDT and -5:00 = CDT

(1) IPTC tag

Time Created                    : 08:53:21+00:00

(2) PDF metadata

Modify Date                     : 2011:04:27 09:29:01-04:00 Create Date                     : 2011:04:27 09:28:48-04:00

(3) PDF Metadata

Create Date                     : 2011:04:27 09:00:38-05:00 (10:00:38 EDT) Metadata Date                 : 2011:04:27 09:01:39-05:00

So what happened? The Muscatine Journal obtained the AP JPEG and imported it into a Photoshop CS2 application. They cropped it, adjusted the color balance to correct for the bluish hue, and resampled it. The embedded tags clearly reveal the original source (DCSA103), as does the time tag…

Importing the AP JPEG into Photoshop and saving it as a PDF shows Applewhite as the Author, which is what confused Hermitian into arguing that Applewhite had somehow created the document.

When saving the PDF, the Muscatine editor forgot to turn off the option to remove the editing capabilities of Photoshop, which explains why the PDF is so large. When opening the PDF in Photoshop, you recover the 200x200ppi document, which was downsampled to 120×120 PPI in the PDF. And all lines up quite nicely. What apparently confused Hermitian is the author tag in the Muscatine PDF.

Of course, a quick experiment would have resolved this. So we have a consistent and logical workflow that contradicts Hermitian’s claims. So what is a scientist to do but to conclude the hypothesis to be falsified?

Some relevant postings include:

Hermitian and Applewhite’s JPEG

And the postings tagged Muscatine

Update: There are three images in the Muscatine PDF, a thumbnail, a 120 ppi DCTDecode encoded JPEG and a 200 ppi image (1739×2071)

Enjoy…

19 thoughts on “Final Report on the AP Documents and the Muscatine PDF

  1. The CCP should take these documents (JPGs and PDFs) and the White House PDF and run them through complex computer forensic software that most sheriff offices possess. If these documents were actually manufactured as alleged, forensic software might be able retrieve data to support this even if the data has been erased or overwritten. I know the Zullo revealed that they found evidence of Photoshop and Illustrator used on the White House PDF. Perhaps this may have found using forensic software.

  2. I know the Zullo revealed that they found evidence of Photoshop and Illustrator used on the White House PDF. Perhaps this may have found using forensic software.

    Yes, Zullo also believed that these artifacts could not have been created in a workflow. We know how well he did there.

    If they really had access to ‘complex computer forensic software’ then why did they focus on Illustrator… ROTFL…

    And how come they missed such an obvious candidate… A Xerox WorkCentre…

    It’s not the tools you have available, it’s what you can do with them that matters.

    John is still hoping that the CCP is going to do their homework or better, finally address my findings… I am looking forward to that time in history…

  3. PS: There is no evidence that either application ever touched the Whitehouse PDF…

    So I’d love to hear more about this ‘evidence’…

  4. The “ace in the hole” remains and always will be the original, long form, vault edition Certificate of Live Birth in hard copy form. That document can be inspected under Hawaii Revised Statute 338-18 (b) by court order.

  5. The “ace in the hole” remains and always will be the original, long form, vault edition Certificate of Live Birth in hard copy form. That document can be inspected under Hawaii Revised Statute 338-18 (b) by court order.

    But that requires a bit more than just hopes that this will show something different than the prima facie evidence…

    Time to go back to sunahara’s law suit and understand if there is a right to inspect the vault document…

  6. Yes, as I had expected HRS 338-18 is not helpful as it prohibits the DOH from allowing inspection or releasing a certified copy.

    §338-18 Disclosure of records. (a) To protect the integrity of vital statistics records, to ensure their proper use, and to ensure the efficient and proper administration of the vital statistics system, it shall be unlawful for any person to permit inspection of, or to disclose information contained in vital statistics records, or to copy or issue a copy of all or part of any such record, except as authorized by this part or by rules adopted by the department of health.

    (b) The department shall not permit inspection of public health statistics records, or issue a certified copy of any such record or part thereof, unless it is satisfied that the applicant has a direct and tangible interest in the record. The following persons shall be considered to have a direct and tangible interest in a public health statistics record:

    There is no requirement that the DOH allows for inspection. This is what the DOH argued in Court.

  7. like shooting fish in a barrel.

    From the PDF “4db82608b486f.pdf” METADATA…

    photoshop:Source AP photoshop:Source
    photoshop:Country USA photoshop:Country
    photoshop:Credit AP photoshop:Credit
    photoshop:City Washington photoshop:City
    photoshop:CaptionWriter JSA RCL**DC** photoshop:CaptionWriter
    photoshop:DateCreated 2011-04-27 photoshop:DateCreated
    photoshop:TransmissionReference DCSA103 photoshop:TransmissionReference
    photoshop:State DC photoshop:State
    photoshop:Urgency 5 photoshop:Urgency
    photoshop:Instructions HANDOUT IMAGE PROVIDED BY THE WHITE HOUSE photoshop:Instructions
    photoshop:Category A photoshop:Category
    photoshop:AuthorsPosition STF photoshop:AuthorsPosition
    photoshop:ColorMode 3 photoshop:ColorMode
    photoshop:ICCProfile QCT RGB settings photoshop:ICCProfile
    dc:format application/vnd.adobe.photoshop dc:format

    DCSA103 is the transmission record. Hence the transmission was recorded by Photoshop CS2 at AP. Had the Muscatine Journal personnel created the document with Photoshop CS2 (as NBC claims) then there would have been no need for a transmission. Certainly no need for a transmission with the AP DCSA103 as the reference.

    Also why would the Muscatine Journal go to all of this trouble just to remove the pal-Blue background. After all, the reporter’s handout copies had the pale-blue Background and copies of these were posted by news outlets at many internet sites. Also the Muscatine Journal would have posted the image ASAP.

    And finally, there is absolutely zero evidence within the document indicating that the Muscatine Journal staff even opened the PDF. If the Muscatine Journal had created the PDF, there would be credits or other ID labels to indicate that they had done so.

  8. NBC says:

    September 1, 2013 at 20:08

    “There is no requirement that the DOH allows for inspection. This is what the DOH argued in Court.”

    Except under Chapter 8B [NBC: Hermitian cannot read]

    PUBLIC HEALTH REGULATIONS
    Department of Health, State of Hawaii
    Chapter 8B
    VITAL STATISTICS REGISTRATION AND RECORDS

    2. CERTIFIED COPIES AND DISCLOSURE OF RECORDS
    2.1 Access to Vital Records

    C. Individuals
    Upon written request and proper identification, the state registrar or local
    registrar of a registration district (county) may permit an individual to
    examine a certificate for the purpose of verifying an entry or correcting
    an error; provided that the individual is eligible to receive such informa-
    tion as described in Paragraphs 2.5 through 2.9 herein.

    Duncan Sunahara was eligible under Paragraphs 2.5 through 2.9 herein.

    Nagamine argued that even though the HDOH regulations permitted inspection of original vital records, Fuddy had the discretion to not allow it.

    These regulations are still current even though they haven’t been revised since June 29, 1976.

  9. NBC says:

    September 1, 2013 at 20:03

    “The “ace in the hole” remains and always will be the original, long form, vault edition Certificate of Live Birth in hard copy form. That document can be inspected under Hawaii Revised Statute 338-18 (b) by court order.

    “But that requires a bit more than just hopes that this will show something different than the prima facie evidence…

    “Time to go back to sunahara’s law suit and understand if there is a right to inspect the vault document…

    Sunahara clearly has the right to inspect his sisters original vital records under Hawaii statutes and HDOH regulations.

    Hawaii and the HDOH are just stonewalling to protect their alteration of Virginia Sunaha’s BC number.

  10. “…complex computer forensic software…”

    You keep using those words. I don’t think it means what you think it means.

  11. Sunahara clearly has the right to inspect his sisters original vital records under Hawaii statutes and HDOH regulations.

    Hawaii and the HDOH are just stonewalling to protect their alteration of Virginia Sunaha’s BC number.

    And the evidence for that is?… The Court also agreed with the DOH that the statutes does not say this. Of course Hermitian is not really constrained by reality

  12. Did you miss the part may permit. The court agreed with the interpretation.

    Duncan received the certificate for inspection and correction.

    How desperate our birthers are…

  13. Upon written request and proper identification, the state registrar or local
    registrar of a registration district (county) may permit an individual to
    examine a certificate for the purpose of verifying an entry or correcting
    an error; provided that the individual is eligible to receive such informa-
    tion as described in Paragraphs 2.5 through 2.9 herein.

    So a certificate, not the original vital records.

  14. Her is the same for a pdf created by importing the AP JPEG into Photoshop and saving as PDF

    <photoshop:CaptionWriter>JSA RCL**DC**</photoshop:CaptionWriter>
    <photoshop:Instructions>HANDOUT IMAGE PROVIDED BY THE WHITE HOUSE</photoshop:Instructions>
    <photoshop:AuthorsPosition>STF</photoshop:AuthorsPosition>
    <photoshop:Credit>AP</photoshop:Credit>
    <photoshop:Source>AP</photoshop:Source>
    <photoshop:City>Washington</photoshop:City>
    <photoshop:State>DC</photoshop:State>
    <photoshop:Country>USA</photoshop:Country>
    <photoshop:TransmissionReference>DCSA103</photoshop:TransmissionReference>
    <photoshop:Category>A</photoshop:Category>
    <photoshop:ColorMode>3</photoshop:ColorMode>
    
    <pdf:Producer>Adobe Photoshop for Macintosh -- Image Conversion Plug-in</pdf:Producer>
    

    Indeed, shooting fish in a barrel, you walked straight into this one..

    Why did Hermitian not perform the simple experiment that would have helped him strengthen his hypothesis? Instead he walked straight into this one, eyes open… I had even informed him as to what I had done…

    Fascinating how easy it is to rebut our friend… We love you H…

  15. See here for the latest experiment contradicting our friend’s claims.

    I love fishing… It’s all about the right bait and lure

  16. Hermitian:Duncan Sunahara was eligible under Paragraphs 2.5 through 2.9 herein.

    Exactly which one? And eligible to what?… May permit… Oh my oh my, basic reading comprehension…

  17. Oh, now this is hilarious! way back in June 2011, back when birfers were first being educated as to what metadata even was, I posted some early musings on the workflow that produced the WH LFBC PDF over at Doc’s. One of my key points was that some software retains object-specific metadata, and some doesn’t. Of particular contrast is the difference in using apps that are related (i.e., from the same developer), versus disparate software and/or on different platforms/OS’s. I made a comparison between one of Zebest’s PDFs and the WH PDF. Zebest’s layout was created in InDesign, using elements processed with Illustrator and Photoshop; all of the markup was retained in the final, Adobe-produced PDF. (It’s as if all Adobe software plays together well, as if it were … a “creative suite”😉 )

    Knowing full well the danger in providing good info to nutjobs, I suggested it was clear that Preview doesn’t retain metadata. Either that, or someone intentionally removed it from the WH PDF. This was back when WND was writing stories about PDF madness discussions at Doc’s and Amazon. They picked up on “Preview erases metadata” (as in, don’t tell me it wasn’t Photoshop’s, because … Preview erases metadata) and it’s been birfer gospel since.

    Now, we have Herms, tripped up over what he wishes had always been in the WH PDF: Adobe metadata! He doesn’t know what it does/doesn’t indicate!

    Keee-rist.

    As for who made what … if Applewhite was responsible for the image from Muscatine, IA, Muscatine would have gotten it off the wire. The same image would have been published all over the place. Soooo….why is it only on the Muscatine site, Herms?😛

  18. As for who made what … if Applewhite was responsible for the image from Muscatine, IA, Muscatine would have gotten it off the wire. The same image would have been published all over the place. Soooo….why is it only on the Muscatine site, Herms?

    Do not ask such intelligent questions… You are really confusing our poor friend. He is convinced that Applewhite created the Muscatine PDF because he did not understand what happens when you import a jpeg into photoshop and save it as PDF.

    Will he ever admit that he was wrong?…

  19. Hermitian wrote:Duncan Sunahara was eligible under Paragraphs 2.5 through 2.9 herein.

    And his lawyer made that argument in court.

    And the judge decided that he was wrong.

Comments are closed.