The Constitution is the law....it mandates the requirements to be POTUS....logic dictates that the burden of proof lies with zero in this case.....we do not need new laws....can you follow that?
And oh yeah, LOL
You said — “The Constitution is the law....it mandates the requirements to be POTUS....logic dictates that the burden of proof lies with zero in this case.....we do not need new laws....can you follow that?”
I don’t see that the “proof” is required, only that he’s qualified. Now, if he and the party and the voting public all say that they agree with him, in that he said he was qualified — that pretty well answers it.
What this last election with Obama has shown is that it’s the *process* that is defective and wrong. That’s why the process must be corrected.
I don’t know why you can’t see that one...., that *yes* in this case of vetting a candidate, we do, indeed, need a law to that effect.