A simple motion to dismiss is only the first step for the defense and citing the "factcheck".org address to a jpg document passed off as genuine is not skilled at all. Those "skilled" lawyers should present that Obama COLB to the court, now that might be impressive.
It is my understanding that the Hi officials has stated that they have a bc on file has anyone wrote the Hi officials and asked if there is a accepted bc on file ?
Getting away with it is. They did cite all sorts of case law to back up their position, so maybe they will.
The thing that confuses me is this: The photos on factcheck appear to me to at least show a genuine Hawaiian certification document. (I don't buy the forgery arguments.) But why wouldn't Obama's lawyers be given a copy of it. Perhaps they would have to show it to the judge in open court to make their point, whereas they are hoping to arrange a dismissal without a hearing.