>Because he is defined as a civilian Commander in Chief. He is, by definition a civilian, not a member of the military.
Where in the Constitution does it say that? The Constitution I have reads:
“The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States [...]”
Nothing there about him being a *CIVILIAN* at all.
>As for the Constitutional right to be President, I would guess that where it says that anyone who is a natural born citizen of the United States and has attained the age of 35 is eligible to hold the office.
I would say that is quite correct.
>He is the elected President of the United States, until and unless he has been proven to be otherwise ineligible. Since Congress has already ruled on is eligiblity, the point is moot.
It is not moot, especially since we have indications of members of congress commuting fraud on this issue: namely Nancy Pelosi’s affidavit. Furthermore, a “ruling” by congress would do nothing to impact the eligibility of people born before it’s ruling: The Constitution expressly prohibits ex post facto laws. Furthermore, Congress only has power over defining the “rule[s] of immigration and naturalization” *NOT* for defining what a “Natural Born Citizen” is.