Until clear indisbutable evidence is found, none of the above are known for sure. There is evidence that 0bama Sr was in the US much earlier than the accepted date, which would highly jeopardize the Kezia marriage, and other evidence as well - one point being that only Mark, Ruth's son, could prove that he was 0bama's son for inheritance purposes. There is more that clouds this as well. Also, the issue of how legal a tribal marriages was in the eyes of either Kenya under British rule or HI is unknown, and if he was actually married to Kezia, what if any formalties were used? Maybe it was merely shacking up, if it happened at all, which is not known until proved.
I would also posit that the reason the NBC issues has not gained traction with courts or Congress is not because it is not worthy of traction, but because so many judges and Congressmembers are either traitors or gutless disgusting cowards or otherwise complicit. It doesn't mean the NBC issue is not worthy of legal consideration.
There is a hearsay comment in just one newspaper article (1963 IIRC) reporting that BHO Sr. had not been in Kenya for 7 years. From what I have seen _all_ other sources show BHO Sr. arriving in HI from Kenya in 1959 and having been married to Kezia.
The comment about Mark's son being the only one to have been able to prove he was BHO’s son came from liar Obama’s book, Dreams, which was probably written by Ayers and may have been intended to provide cover to make Obama’s marriage to Dunham legitimate. Some attribute the Mark comment in Dreams to Obama, but IIRC it was actually Kezia’s daughter who said it to Obama in Dreams, but after Cashill's analysis I consider Dreams to be completely unreliable.