Let’s Have Some Fun with the 12-09-2019 IG Report

Following is the link to the Inspector General report regarding FISA Abuse and Crossfire Hurricane.


Please click the hyper-link.   Then, use Cntrl-F to open the ‘Find’ search box.   In the  Find search box type:   C o m e y.

No results found?  Same here.

Now, in the Find search box type  C o r n e y.

Results found?  Yep.  My search returned 149 instances.

Now look at the first find which is highlighted in the pdf, it looks like Comey, but apparently it was actually typed Corney.   ???

Thoughts? Comments?  Tech explanations?   LOL.   Reminds me of Comey’s and Nunez’s corn related tweets a few months back.


5 thoughts on “Let’s Have Some Fun with the 12-09-2019 IG Report”

  1. well that’s interesting! I’ve noticed before that in some typed docs when the kerning is tight, the letters ‘rn’ together look like an ‘m’. I guess what this means is that this rendition of the report was scanned from other docs, not hand-typed, and the scanner or transcribing software that re-typed it interpreted the m in Comey as rn.

    And nobody proofread it.

  2. Thanks @Pencilvania.  I could not think of how this could have happened; your explanation makes sense of it for me.    That said, the combination — Corney Comey — remains smile inducing for me.

  3. TempTime:
    Now look at the first find which is highlighted in the pdf, it looks like Comey, but apparently it was actually typed Corney.

    When scanning paper documents and processing them with optical character recognition, one of the most common errors is interpreting “m” as “rn”.  In many fonts, even with a perfectly clean, sharp, and squarely-aligned document there’s only a few pixels difference between the two, and the slightest flaw can tip the recognition software the wrong way.

    When I was producing archival copies of the original Tom Swift novels, I was working from material most of which had been scanned from pulp novels (dating from 1910–1922) or reproductions of them which were often worse.  One of the first things I’d do is to search the text for occurrences of “Torn”, which were almost always due to the scanner’s mis-reading “Tom”.  This won’t be flagged by a spelling checker, which means it went right past people who assume a spelling check will catch most scanning errors.

    That said, I have never seen a document which, when scanned, results in every single “m” being turned into “rn”.  In most cases, it’s a handful of cases among hundreds or thousands of occurrences of the letter.  And so, it’s distinctly odd to see 149 cases of “rn” and not a single “m”.  If this were a consistent scanner error, you’d expect many other “m”s in the document also be mis-scanned the same way.  (I assume they weren’t, or else it would be laughably unreadable.)

    So this is a bit of a mystery.  It’s as if somebody was editing the scanned document, noticed that some instances of “Comey” had been rendered as “Corney”, decided that the latter was correct, and then did a global replace to “correct” the ones which had been properly scanned.  This sounds completely clueless, but then this is the work product of a civil servant: “good enough for government work” as they say.

  4. @johnwalker, thanks.    At a known Q website, the guys have also identified OCR scanning as a possible/likely contributor to the spelling of Comey as Corney,  however as a case of  ‘every’ instance of Comey being misspelled is curious, they are now digging away to determine if  name ‘spelling’ errors exist in other in gov docs, wikileaks, HRC emails, etc.  They are also looking for spelling errors involving other high interest names/words.   It will be interesting in a day or two to see what they find.


Leave a Reply