emkz:
No!

(1) Atiku began his expedition in murky waters with a fundamentally wrong premise that Tinubu could not have graduated from CSU without a primary and secondary school certificates having left the spaces for those declarations blank on his INEC forms.

(2) With that flawed assumption, Atiku went on his voyage only to realize Tinubu graduated from the university.

(3) He should have left it at that, but no.

(4) The matter shifted to the authenticity of Tinubu's certificate which Chicago State University said third-party vendors can issue replacements.

(5) Even if Atiku has damaging evidence, which he doesn't, you cannot introduce fresh evidence in an appeal at the Supreme Court, except through discretionary powers that the court can accept such.

If Atiku was smart, he should not have wasted money going to the US over a fundamentally flawed assumption. He should have brought the 1999 forms Bola Tinubu used to contest for Lagos guber and used that to establish perjury at the PEPT if the schools Tinubu allegedly declared could not authenticate Tinubu's attendance.

Atiku's case is that of "he whom the gods want to destroy, they first make mad". In this game of political chess, Tinubu outsmarted Atiku.

Atiku needs to dissociate himself immediately from Dele Momodu and Timi Frank. Timi Frank is the primogenitor of the childish talk of Tinubu not graduating from CSU. He lied that EFCC and FBI had letters that Tinubu did not attend CSU. No one else saw the letters apart from Timi Frank. Atiku needs Bukola Saraki, because that guy is really intelligent and could have helped him avoid this mess of fooling himself needlessly.

StOla:


What was wrong ability the SSN?

Stop disgracing yourself.

tishbite42:
What a shame
The Supreme Court is a disgrace

Mynd44:

He has said the facts himself. The so-called forged documents are legal where the person is coming from.

If I have a baby aborted while in the US, you cannot bring a case against me in Nigeria as it is not a crime where it happened.

Plus, the moment the document was taken back to the school to certify it affirms their permission

OGHENAOGIE:
so meaning what

ElSudani:


You have said nothing other than insults and a bunch of nonsensical stuff. A third party is authorized by the university to issue a document that is not part of the official academic records.
Think about that for a minute. Nobody forged anything and Atiku is going to fail again at the Supreme Court.

Mccullum:



IT'S YOU HAVING HEADACH DAY AND NIGHT ON THE VESSEL THAT HAD SAILED.

Twy:


The thing is how do you know the document is forged? The whole process was very legalese and one sided (on Atiku's part). Tinubu has not said his side. What I understand is the certificate he presented was likely obtained in the late 1990's or 2000. Whether it was through a third party or through the institution has not been established nor whether it was done in Tiunbu's home. There is no real smoking gun, because the university admitted he did graduate from their institution. Atiku's side's claim is that the certificate tenderd cannot be the one obtained from 1979, which is likely true but the school's side is that it was likely obtained in the late 1990s and because it was a replacement certificate they have no way of authenticting it because they do not withold copies of replacements certificates(because they are channeled to third party vendors but the request is obtained from their school).
The main mistake Tinubu may have done was claiming the certificate(instead of the degree) was obtained in 1979 instead of saying it was a replacement certificate. (it was obviously a replacement one because the signatures matches the ones used in 1990s) Replacement certificates will have different signatures and wordings to match the currently used certificate of the school when a replacement was made. Tinubu's own was a match to the 1990's certificate issued by the school.

Mynd44:

He has said the facts himself. The so-called forged documents are legal where the person is coming from.

If I have a baby aborted while in the US, you cannot bring a case against me in Nigeria as it is not a crime where it happened.

Plus, the moment the document was taken back to the school to certify it affirms their permission

Mynd44:

He has said the facts himself. The so-called forged documents are legal where the person is coming from.

If I have a baby aborted while in the US, you cannot bring a case against me in Nigeria as it is not a crime where it happened.

Plus, the moment the document was taken back to the school to certify it affirms their permission

Shattuck:
it's ignorant to say it is legal to do a third party replacement, when the school ofiicically can do that for you. Secondly the only reason why US has loose laws about certificate is because often times certificate are not used in official capacity, transcript are rather used, but in Nigeria certificate are used majorly for official purpose, now answers this In America it is legal to use, cultivate and sell marijuana, now if I cultivate marijuana in America and intentionally smuggle it into Nigeria knowing fully well marijuana use and distribution is illegal in Nigeria, and I am being arrested, did I commit a crime in Nigeria? Remember the marijuana is from America and in America marijuana use is legal?

Ayo25:
The institution have affirmed it repeatedly that it contracts certificate replacement jobs to third parties and obviously it is not an illegal thing to do in the US. What is wrong with someone going through legal means to get something? What is being ignorant about that? Or english language is hard for you. The only way does not have to be your way. Everyone does not have to think the same way you think. Legal means are there for everyone to exploit.

Your marijauna example does not apply here. You can try out your example to see first. Go to the US and try and smuggle marijuana to co firm something the court will be there to interprete your actions.

You people should rest please.

Maxymilliano:


https://www.facebook.com/669470853/posts/pfbid032s29GtZ4tqMV1d1DyVr67bGG1ZEdtzxVjsGkknE8ARMinbvgkHLM2phinvWH7RFgl/?mibextid=2JQ9oc

Shattuck:
I'll wait for the supreme court to interpret tinubu's action first if they allow him, then they have no right to hold any one found with marijuana who have been a resident of a nation where it is legal, even if I carry weapon they have no right because in America guns can be purchased by from third party vendors, and btw the whole third party vendors thing, is not just you walking into any cyber cafe to Photoshop document, these vendors are registered entities with authorization and affiliation with the schools. Which vendor did he then use . 2 I doubt if CSU use third party vendors because they offer replacement diploma directly.

Majesty7:


Can you define forge?

Blitzerz:

Go and read the deposition
School disowned the certificate from INEC
Clear

This is not rocket science

poiZon:


Did u go to school?

Twy:

My understanding is that Inec certificate is exhibit 6

Again, I have read it and this is it
And CSU doesn't have a 1979 diploma that
·7· ·contains the same font, CL signatures, and wording
·8· ·apart from the INEC diploma, correct?
·9· · · · A· · Correct.
10· · · · Q· · And CSU doesn't know of any diplomas like the
11· ·INEC diploma having ever been issued, correct?
12· · · · A· · I believe -- that's what we produced in the
13· ·request.· Hold on.· The ones that are like it are CSU
14· ·.8, 9 and 10
15· · · · Q· · CSU 8, 9 and 10 are dated in 1999, correct?
16· · · · A· · You're correct.
17· · · · Q· · Or from the '90s, correct?
18· · · · A· · Yes.
19· · · · Q· · And Exhibit 6 is dated from 1979, correct?
20· · · · A· · It's dated 1979.
21· · · · Q· · So CSU doesn't know of any diplomas dated
22· ·1979 like the INEC diploma that has ever been issued,
23· ·correct?· It is a simple "yes" or "no" answer?
24· · · · A· · Sure.
·1· · · · Q· · That's correct?
·2· · · · A· · Yes.
·3· · · · Q· · And CSU has no basis that the INEC diploma
·4· ·was issued by CCSU, correct?
·5· · · · A· · The student in question graduated from the
·6· ·University in June 22, 1979.· We were not qualified to
·7· ·verify whether this document is authentic, given that
·8· ·it is not in our possession.
·9· · · · Q· · Have you ever seen a diploma purporting to be
10· ·from CSU, but was actually a forgery?
11· · · · A· · Yes.
12· · · · Q· · Are you aware of any entities that create
13· ·such fake diplomas?
14· · · · A· · Yes.
15· · · · Q· · Can you give me some examples of that?
16· · · · A· · I cannot provide a name of an entity that
17· ·does such.· However, you can Google this easily.· There
18· ·are many companies that do this for folks.
19· · · · Q· · And CSU has no record of issuing this INEC
20· ·diploma to President Tinubu in 1979?
21· · · · · · ·MR. HENDERSON:· Objection.· Asked and
22· ·answered.
23· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Correct.
24
·1· ·BY MS. LIU:
·2· · · · Q· · And CSU has no record of issuing the INEC
·3· ·diploma to President Tinubu, correct?
·4· · · · · · ·MR. HENDERSON:· Objection.· Same question
·5· ·answered for a third time.
·6· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Correct.· We do not keep copies
·7· ·of the reorder requests.
·8· · · · Q· · And CSU did not issue either the two diplomas
·9· ·to President Tinubu in 1979, correct?
10· · · · A· · Can you rephrase that?
11· · · · Q· · So CSU did not issue the June 22, 1979
12· ·diploma as well as the June 27, 1979 diploma to
13· ·Mr. Tinubu in 1979?
14· · · · · · ·MR. HENDERSON:· Objection.· Vague. Compound
15· ·question.
16· · · · · · ·MS. LIU:· I kindly ask counsel to refrain
17· ·from making speaking objections.
18· · · · · · ·MR. HENDERSON:· Vague and compound questions
19· ·is anything other than a speaking objection.· Vague
20· ·and compound question is not a speaking objection.
21· · · · · · ·MR. HAYES:· You can answer the question,
22· ·Caleb, if you understand it.
23· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· We issue a diploma to eve


Again, the thing is a replacement diploma will have a different signatures, when the deans and presidents are different. So like I said the whole thing is legelse and largely political but less on factual, hence no real smoking gun. if it is a replacement diploma, i a genuine one at that, it would most likely have different signatures but the date of graduation which is 1979 and the name at graduation should remain. A replacement diploma obtained in 1999 from CSU will be different from a diploma issued in 1979. Atiku's lawyer seems to be claiming the certificate submitted was not issued in 1979, which is likely true and Tinubu know s that. Hence, I believe Tinubu may have information about the diploma and how it was obtained(in the 1990s not in the 1970s). That the diploma was obtained in the late 1990s or 2000 is the only thing clear, the rest are vague and nothing concrete was established because the registart said copies of replacement diplomas are not retained so they cannot say where the diploma came from either through the school, third party or fake. Tinubu's certificate is obviously a replacement one and the school is saying they cannot authenticate it because they do not withold copies. If Tinubu requested a replacement, he may have copies of the letter to request it but silent on it. Tinubu was governor in 1999, he had the ability to easily request a diploma why forge one?

OGHENAOGIE:
no Sir... That's why I need clarification

Maxymilliano:


Unfortunately, technicality will prevail over facts ...

Majesty7:


What has Tinubu as a person got to do with the USD?

DaTruths:


I don't like it when a dumb person quotes me.