That is the problem. No one does.
And that problem will be the subject of a Justice Conference at SCOTUS
There is no direct public evidence one way or the other.
And we know why there is none. It has been removed from public scrutiny by Obama.
So which assumption is more logical.
1)That Obama was indeed born in the USA ( if so why obscure it? We live in a democratic Republic which requires that such information be before the public, even if the news media and a few Obama campaign lurkers do not think so.)
2) Or that he was not born in the USA ( logically makes sense , and indeed is more probative.)
If you have a pro Obama axe to grind, I have no problem with that.
But you will not have your way in no reply silence on this list my good man, whatever machinations of logic you might apply.
Have a nice this weekend and may your turkey taste good next weekend. I know mine will for it will be consumed with the gusto of genuine freedom.
I have no genuine evidence that Bush, Clinton or Reagan were either.
If you have a pro Obama axe to grind, I have no problem with that.
Not pro-Obama but anti-moonbat. It's kind of a hobby of mine.