So making a point of Constitutional history by reference to actual Constitutional historians is a "faulty assumption?" Just when I think you can't get any sillier, you manage to top yourself.
Face it, there is NO ONE writing around the time of the Constitution or later who says "the clause 'or a citizen at the time of adoption of the Constitution' was added later in the Convention when it suddenly dawned on someone that "natural born citizen" by itself made Washington and everyone else who matter ineligible." Wow, what a 'Holy S**t' moment that must have been. But in your silly mind, it seems that's how you picture it.
You will carry on your ranting without me I expect.