“As the situation exists right now : no specific legal requirement to submit actual documentation for proof of eligibility, as well as allowing him to legally control all access to the necessary evidence ( birth records ), -means a candidate is being allowed to take the law into his own hands. Individuals are being allowed to exploit the system. The system is compromised.”
That’s the reason that ‘he’s not *legally* required to show actual proof of eligibility’ argument is flawed.
EXCELLENT!
The Problem is how to put the ‘horse’ back in the born ofter our ‘leaders’ allowed it to wander?
Someone opened that ‘barn door’ from the outside.
Others turned their heads.
STE=Q
PS:
THE PEOPLE HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW WHAT’S GOING ON!
STE=Q
Actually, it isn't "flawed", it's not true. See post 156 where I show the language plainly stated in the Constitution that REQUIRES that the President elect show proof of eligibility to Congress BEFORE being allowed to be named President. No proof, no Presidency.