Absolutely nothing.
I remember a lawyer telling me “there are no surprises in Court.”
Not true.
A plaintiff makes allegations in a complaint. Court rules dictate the complaint is to be processed as if the allegations made are true. Before the defendant is required to answer the complaint with a denial, the defendant can move the Court to dismiss for lack of standing, lack of jurisdiction, etc.
If the Court won’t dismiss, then discovery begins. In discovery, primary evidence is obtained from witnesses who have possession of the evidence or direct knowledge. A secondary witness has indirect evidence or knowledge; such as, a video tape of a naturalization ceremony where Obama can be seen swearing a loyalty oath to obtain U.S. Citizenship. Secondary evidence is ignored by the Court until its time for a rebuttal witness. A rebuttal witness will only testify and have their evidence examined if the primary witnesses testify the evidence does not exist or cannot be found. In Obama’s case, he could testify under oath a Certificate of Naturalization does not exist or can’t be found.
To ensure rebuttal witnesses are not harassed or intimidated, a rebuttal witness does not have to be named and have their evidence examined until the day of the trial. The only reason Obots and ConcernedFreepers want the rebuttal evidence before trial is to discredit it so Obama and his DHS Secretary can lie about Obama’s naturalization in 1983.
The evidence will be exposed when an plaintiff files a complaint against Obama and he lies about his Certificate of Naturalization issued to him in 1983. Evidence of Obama’s naturalization in 1983 will not be made publicly available for Obots and ConcernedFreepers to discredit, dismiss, or harass so Obama can continue to lie about his ineligibility.