Did Zullo lie again trying to cover up lie?

I’ve beaten the fake race code issue to death here on the blog with articles like:

• Code “9”: the Cold Case Posse’s big lie Cold Case Posse video fraud: it gets worse
• Indicting Sheriff Joe and the Cold Case Posse
• Cold Case Posse: backed into a corner
• Race tabulations in Hawaii–1961

I’ve proven that the Race Codes that Zullo presented as 1961 codes were not really 1961 codes, and they weren’t used in Hawaii.

I want to revisit the cover-up and perhaps give a little insight into Mike Zullo’s essential dishonesty when representing his investigation to the birthers. So first, let’s go back to that 2nd official press conference in 2012 with Sheriff Arpaio Mike Zullo. Here is a screen shot from the video presented by Mike Zullo, referring to a “1961 vital statistics instruction manual”.

The video showed a one-page screen shot from a 1968 manual available on the Internet, instead of the real 1961 manual they claimed to have, but which was not readily available at that time. The screen shot itself came by way of a birther blog. The source of the manual could be determined by matching marks and dust spots on the image.

It appears that all Zullo had was a screen shot, that he could not verify, from some birther source. Subsequently, Zullo tried various diversions to get out of the dilemma, such as the smoke screen of a 1960 manual (the race codes are the same for 1960-61).

Now let’s fast forward to 2014. Zullo continues to be embarrassed by this fake race code table from the video, evidenced by him trying to recover from the event. Zullo tells a story that might have a grain of truth in it. Here’s the story as told by Zullo to Carl Gallups on October 4, 2014:

Zullo: “And for two feverish days Jerry Corsi sent his associate who this woman stayed in the lobby of the CDC for eight hours a day for two days trying to get the answer to this question. On the third day, it was about two and a half hours I believe before the press conference was going to go, at that point in time the “9” code issue was not going to be in it. As fate would have it, Attorney Larry Klayman happened to be in Phoenix so he stopped in wanted to say hello to the sheriff. Larry Klayman, Larry Klayman’s associate, Sheriff Arpaio, myself and Jerry Corsi were all in the conference room when the phone rang from the woman from the CDC. And I have her information, who she is and she’s not a clerk. She’s a highly educated individual. Jerry put her on speaker phone. I remember Jerry sitting there with his fingers crossed. And she confirmed for us that what we were saying and requesting, what the number 9 meant was in fact what it was. He asked her to repeat it. ‘Are you saying this 9 in this box yada-yada-yada means X?’ And she said, ‘Yes.’”

Basically Zullo admits not having a manual but rather some other source of information that had to be verified. If he had a manual, then there would have been no need for verification (and if he had a manual he would have known the screen shot was a fake). Zullo lied about the source of his information, trying to make it seem more official than it was. This is the key lie of Mike Zullo and the Cold Case Posse—representing that they are competent and that they are conducting a real law-enforcement-style investigation, when they are neither.

Let’s assume that everything in Zullo’s 2nd story is true. What does it tell us? Some unnamed “Corsi associate” (“Corsi associate” could basically be anybody who contacted Corsi) called Mike Zullo and put someone on the phone who said something that Zullo took for confirmation. Zullo had no way of knowing that the person he heard on the phone was from the CDC, and the wording of the statement suggests that Zullo didn’t even know her name.

But even if it really was someone from the CDC, Mike Zullo never tells us what she really said! Look it again:

And she confirmed for us that what we were saying and requesting, what the number 9 meant was in fact what it was. He asked her to repeat it. ‘Are you saying this 9 in this box yada-yada-yada means X?’ And she said, ‘Yes.’”

Yada-yada-yada? Didn’t our crack investigator take any notes?