“His ineligibility was known by the public.”
While I support the MvH definition of NBC, you and I can agree to disagree on what the public understands to be the truth.
100% of the US congress failed to object to the electoral results TWICE demonstrating to the public the belief by congress that any muddy NBC issues (way beyond the ability of the public to comprehend) had been resolved in favor of Barry.
I don’t think it is correct to claim that the de facto rule wouldn’t apply due to the public seeing Barry “present the appearance of being an intruder or usurper.” The majority of the public sees Barry as completely legitimate.
The public thinks Barry was born in the US and they are told by 99% of the legal establishment and courts that that is all that counts.
Therefore any subsequent finding that Barry was actually born outside the US, (in Kenya, for example) would be a new fact previously unknown to the public and the de facto officer doctrine would apply, IMO.
The De facto Officer doctrine applies to any elected official who goes through the proper statutory steps that are required to assume an office.
In the case of a president, that’s gaining a party’s nomination (most of the states’ election laws leave vetting up to the political parties) or collecting enough signatures to be on states’ ballots in the case of an independent; winning a majority of the votes of the Electors; having the Electoral votes certified by Congress and taking the Oath of Office.
At any stage of the process, a candidate’s credentials can be challenged, as Obama’s have been more than 200 times. But none of the challenges has proven successful.
Since no state excluded him from the ballot, Congress sends him bills to sign into law, the Senate confirms his appointments and the Supreme Court has upheld his policy initiatives as constitutional, under the de facto officer doctrine, he is the president.
Impeachment/conviction or resignation are the ways to remove him from office.