I'm not very trusting, perhaps you are. Either way, many things in life require proof up front, but you say not the president's citizenship? Popularity is proof enough for the president's eligibility is what you seem to be saying.
Yet the world we live in demands more.
I know and can verify the chain of ownership with a notarized document to where the septic tank is buried going back to the beginning and you can't even verify obama's claims to American citizenship beyond whatever is mother could convey to him.
Not only that, obama himself claimed to be Kenyan, so who should we believe?
Remember, this is the guy who commands the military and sends us and our children to fight and die, speaks for us all around the world and signs the treaties and the laws that govern us.
Whether you like or trust him or not, wouldn't it be nice if everyone could see his paperwork?
What's he hiding?
You can't tell me or anyone else with legal certainty who he is or what his actual nationality might really be.
And...you...are okay with that?
The law permits a person to testify competently as to where and when he was born even though everyone knows that the witness cannot possibly remember having been there. So, if some court were to ignore its lack of any constitutional role in the presidential selection process and were to hold a trial, Obama would competently testify that he was born in Hawaii. Birth records and those newspaper articles would be submitted to support his claim.
Are you telling me that the other side has no admissible evidence to prove that he was born in Kenya or somewhere outside the United States? Not one witness to his birth somewhere outside the United States will be called as a witness? And, you wonder about the outcome of such a trial?
Please, at least find some evidence. Or, forget it. Find another case.
The law permits a person to testify competently as to where and when he was born even though everyone knows that the witness cannot possibly remember having been there. So, if some court were to ignore its lack of any constitutional role in the presidential selection process and were to hold a trial, Obama would competently testify that he was born in Hawaii. Birth records and those newspaper articles would be submitted to support his claim.
Are you telling me that the other side has no admissible evidence to prove that he was born in Kenya or somewhere outside the United States? Not one witness to his birth somewhere outside the United States will be called as a witness? And, you wonder about the outcome of such a trial?
Please, at least find some evidence. Or, forget it. Find another case.
The law permits a person to testify competently as to where and when he was born even though everyone knows that the witness cannot possibly remember having been there. So, if some court were to ignore its lack of any constitutional role in the presidential selection process and were to hold a trial, Obama would competently testify that he was born in Hawaii. Birth records and those newspaper articles would be submitted to support his claim.
Are you telling me that the other side has no admissible evidence to prove that he was born in Kenya or somewhere outside the United States? Not one witness to his birth somewhere outside the United States will be called as a witness? And, you wonder about the outcome of such a trial?
Please, at least find some evidence. Or, forget it. Find another case.