The Constitution forbids a President elect who “failed to qualify” from ever having the presidential powers - which are given to the VP elect.
It’s not supposed to be an “if he’s later found to be ineligible” situation. It’s supposed to be “if he hasn’t proven himself eligible by Jan 20th he is never even GIVEN the keys to the car; the VP elect gets them”.
He failed to qualify. He was not lawfully certified as the winner of the electoral vote, and he has no legally-valid documents proving he is both old enough to be president and a natural born US citizen. The BC that would prove his age (which he’s been using for documentation his whole life) does not prove he is a natural born US citizen because it is not from the US. The BC he has from the US is not legally valid because it is amended and (almost certainly also) late.
If a criminal defendant is being tried for conduct that was made criminal by a statute that was passed by Congress in 1931 and signed into law by President Herbert Hoover, can he force the prosecution to prove that Hoover had each of the constitutional qualifications (e.g., natural born citizen, age, residency, etc.)? If the trial judge rules that the prosecutor doesn’t have to prove these facts and the jury convicts the defendant, is the conviction valid even though we don’t know whether the statute was signed into law by a legitimate president?
Obama WAS “given the keys.” Biden is not acting as POTUS. Obama was sworn in and is acting as POTUS. It’s not complicated.
Everything you offered regarding his documentation is pure speculation. None of it has been reviewed or verified by a governing authority. It may be accurate. It may not. Until you can prove it in a court of law, it has no force.