“So if Ann was never married to Barack then she was guilty of swearing to fraudulent data on the BC.”
Stanley Ann cannot be held criminally liable for fraudulently placing the name of the man the INS believed was a bigamist on her hospital BC for Barry (if indeed she did) if she did not know of the marriage to Kezia at the time of the birth.
A bigamous marriage is a nullity so HI statutes would not recognize the marriage, if it were ever litigated and proved to have been bigamous, IMO. In that case SADO would have been legally single at the time of the birth for citizenship purposes, IMO.
IMO, there is no legitimate HI BC because Barry was most likely born in Kenya, shown by the internal Kenyan government docs obtained by Corsi showing evidence that his BC was stolen from the Kenyan files...and Rahm’s mystery trip to Kenya in December 2008!
Same here.
So what you believe, then, is that Obama’s people are going to say SAD was single - even though she had the HI documents proving she married BHO - because he had hidden the fact that he was already married to Kezia. They would thus try to get rid of the NBC angle by saying BHO has no LEGAL claim on BHO II’s citizenship because Britain didn’t give citizenship to bastards.
But that still doesn’t get rid of the birth-place problem, and the birth-place problem is why Obama can’t show any authentic documentation of his Hawaii birth.
I’m glad that these challenges address both issues.
Whether or not it applies directly to Obama, we do need a clear, unrefutable ruling on the definition of NBC.
And I don’t think anybody doubts that we need to get to the bottom of what records Obama does or doesn’t have, and the laws that have or haven’t been violated to cover up the facts about Obama’s documentation and past.
In short, Obama’s eligibility needs to finally be legally determined - in both matters of law and matters of fact.