My understanding is that Obama had British citizenship at birth. He's even made this statement on his own website. It's also been claimed that because he never affirmed his British citizenship upon his 18th birthday, that it automatically expired.
I've read also that claims upon a person's citizenship have no bearing upon their legal citizenship status within the US. If Obama can prove that he was born in Hawaii, he might have legal claim upon American citizenship, but even then, there is doubt about his ability to claim "natural born citizen" status, even if the foregoing is held to be true.
There's so much to learn about this, and so much in the way of quotes and passages from legal opinions, statutes, and the Constitution, that it's hard to retain it all. I just keep reading, and letting it all sink in. Number of times over equals certainty, you know. Keep studying.
The interesting part is that prior to Factcheck.org posting the disclaimer, no one had mentioned Kenyan birth, only the HI COLB forgeries.
Polarik's blog pretty much gives the rundown on the COLB in detail, and explains why the one image posted online is bogus. (they are all from the same scanner/source, apparently).
What the Kenyan disclaimer boils down to is the equivalent of mom calling the 5 year old in for cookies and milk, only to be told that 'he didn't break the glass in the bathroom', even though mom didn't know about that yet. It was an attempt at preemptive absolution posted with no issue to defend, and thus flagged that issue. Is it a planted red herring? I do not know, but it gives another avenue to investigate.
--But it may also be the mistake which indicated another dimension to the issue.
All that is really (most) relevant here is that he must be a natural born US citizen to Constitutionally qualified to be POTUS, the documentation should be provided (by court order, if need be) to prove that status or lack thereof.
If he lacks being a Natural Born Citizen, he is Constitutionally ineligible to be POTUS--all quibbling aside about exactly what that takes to be a Natural Born Citizen.
Donofrio's case, also questioning McCain's status, does two things by so doing.
First, it makes both candidates subject to the same level of Constitutional scrutiny as to eligibility, and second, removes the question of sheer partisan politics or racism, making the whole substantiative issue one of Constitutional eligibility.
Other cases will address the issue as well, if the SCOTUS will hear them.
If he is qualified, he will be sworn in, POTUS, and we go from there.
If not, that will raise another interesting and no doubt controversial set of issues as to who becomes POTUS, whether the election is valid, etc.
There may be violent acts perpetrated by persons unhappy with the outcome, either way. There may be economic problems associated with this as well.
My take on this is that:
1) It would have been much cheaper to release the information than to fight the release, ergo, there must be something disqualifying in the information. Merely embarassing would be just that, merely embarasssing. Obama has the popular vote and committed electors should he qualify, and, embarassment aside, would be POTUS. He should be able to handle that.
The entire presumptive push to call him "President-elect" well before the Electoral College has met, as well as the myriad trinkets and "commemorative' items being produced, not to mention the entirely fanciful "Office of the President-Elect" (which has no basis in law, Constitutional or otherwise), are all designed to increase the popular outcry from those ignorant of the Constitution and electoral process should Obama be disqualified. As such, that might foment unrest.