[EnderWiggins]

"You mean THIS one?"

That's the one.

"UNLESS you'd like to make a case to support their Reliability "

I don't have to. The "Full Faith and Credit" clause of the US Constitution, US State Department regulations, and the Federal Rules of Evidence have already done that.

The ball is not in your court to contradict the COLB with evidence that is at least as reliable. That shouldn't be hard if it really is as unreliable as you seem to believe.

[parsifal]

FWIW, they have a good answer to your questions. Here's their Exhibit I. I am not sure a Court would accept it or give it much weight, but I look for them to rely heavily upon it:

[BP2]

I don't have to. The "Full Faith and Credit" clause of the US Constitution, US State Department regulations, and the Federal Rules of Evidence have already done that.

WOW.

The FFC, USCON, the State Dept and the FRE cover the "chain of evidence" of a COLB given BY partisan hacks TO partisan hack to verify the Eligibility of the POTUS??!

Do any of those references say anything about "reliable evidence"?

PLEASE school me, Wiggy ...