[LorenC]

Additionally, I have repeatedly said that I post the legal opinion of attorneys practicing in the federal courts system.

What attorneys? You haven't offered any names that I see in your post about the Natural-Born Citizen cases (where you said you were quoting an attorney), and my attempts to Google the portions of your previous post that appeared to be commentary (as opposed to quoted portions of the cases) turned up nada.

Lots of attorneys, good and bad, are licensed to practice in the federal system. The requirements are essentially 1) be a licensed attorney, and 2) get a couple of other licensed attorneys to sign your admission form, 3) pay the admissions fee, and 4) take the oath. There's no more merit involved in being licensed to practice in the federal system than in being licensed in any state's bar; just more money.

So who are the attorneys whose opinions you're relying on?

[Beckwith]

So who are the attorneys whose opinions you're relying on?

I completely agree that given any two attorneys, you'll likely get two opinions. However, I choose to accept the written opinion of attorneys -- more than one -- rather than dreaming up my own.

Reading and interpreting the law requires training that I don't have and I'm smart enough to recognize my limitations -- unlike many on this forum, who are more interested in doing a brain dump and polishing their egos -- oh, and arguing endlessly, instead of improving their understanding of these issues.

I don't care if you disagree with my counselor's opinions. You have every right to do so. I post the information I have because I have it. It has evolved over a period of two years. You can take it or leave it -- it doesn't matter to me, but I'm not going to argue with people about it -- simple as that.

As far as the names of the attorneys I correspond with -- it's none of your damned business.