Is "teabonics" fake?

[Kasz216]

Final-Fan said:

It's more like he was showed the back of the card and said "I want to see the receipt", and the guy was like "I've got it in my house but I don't feel like digging it out just for you". 

And I know that's the full audio -- sorry for the confusion -- the lawsuit had a transcript that cut off like a third of the way into the audio.  And having it all there in front of us helps immensely IMO, instead of having to listen to it over and over again if we want to check anything. 

And no, reasonable doubt vs. proof goes the other way around, thank you very much.  I don't even think it's reasonable doubt when the supposed admission was corrected immediately and there is no other evidence whatsoever that the mother was in Kenya ever in her life up till then and years after if ever. 

"No, not present there. The present with me here was tonight. Not present so she can leave. No she was here in Kenya while he, uh, her son, the little Obama, was marrying in America. And, uh, he be present if it was in America there, why are they for, they go, they go, they go to some place, then the present isn't here sir, he was born there in America." 
This is admittedly a very strange way to put it, and in fact I'm not entirely sure he even said what he intended to say, but it does seem to me that this man genuinely had an idea in his head that made sense to him even if it caused confusion to McRae and us.  Can an explanation this bizarre really be a clever lie? 

P.S.  The Hawaiian birth certificate which we agree is not forged is all the legal proof he needs as far as the presidency is concerned anyway, and as far as drawing conclusions about the actual reality, I think this does not come close to establishing a serious case for them being in Kenya at that time. 

I... just couldn't disagree more.

First off, reasonable doubt vs proof DOESN'T go the other way.

We aren't in a court.   Reasonable doubt goes BOTH ways outside of a courtroom.  Or at least it should.

Reasonable dount is simply that... reasonable doubt.  Said circumstances makes dount reasonable, and non-doubt unreasonable.

 

As for "can the explination be a clever lie?"

Well, yeah, it could be... or a dumb lie that was so dumb it was considered a lie, or it could be in fact that the guy did just misphrase it.

Either way, it's unreasonable to assume any of those without full disclosure of the facts... which we don't have.