It looks to me like...(and I don’t have a handle on it like butter has, bless her...) if there are no penalties for making an untrue or outright false declaration, there’s no impediment to doing so.
The signature is placed on the document purely on the basis of the honour of the signatory.
And in the absence of a penalty, recource to a false declaration in this instance should be sought in the Constitiution. Is that right?
Where the requirement for legibility is somewhat loosley defined, if at all, because ‘natural born citizen’ is able to be interpreted, and different sides of the political spectrum find it convenient to interprete this situation to their own advantage.
And his sponsors must have been perfectly aware of the loophole.
That’s why DREAMS was written. To give him a family and a background.
Unlike us, the people who foisted him onto the public, didn’t wait to find all this out the hard way (as butter did) THEY KNEW ABOUT THE LOOPHOLE BEFOREHAND.
It’s too late is it, to require the identity of a candidate to be firmly established before he or she is able to stand for elected office?
Because it seems to me (I’m an Australian) it’s not only his place and date of birth no one knows, what is also missing is any knowledge of who both his parents were/are.
Look at it this way. The question wouldn’t apply to Romney because you would easily be able to establish where and when he attended schools or college. There would be photographs of him with his parents and extended family, I daresay if one asked for it, he could show you photographs of himself with his mother and grandmother when he was a baby. Unlike zero, whose family album doesn’t start until he’s over two years of age.
In short, all the normal things one would expect to find OF A KNOWN INDENTITY, Mitt Romney would be able to show you.
ALL OF WHICH ARE MISSING FROM THE ZERO BACKGROUND.
I’ll keep repeating myself although it makes a lot of freepers angry and has caused my comments to be very unwelcome. The primary question shouldn’t ever have been if he is/was eligible. It was always an empty question WHILE NO ONE KNOWS WHO HIS PARENTS ARE/WERE OF WHERE HE CAME FROM.
With nothing more than a forged birth certificate, you don’t know what his name was at birth.
Exactly. We know NOTHING about who this guy is. He could be anybody, from anywhere, born to anybody. We’ve seen no official, legal-quality documentation of ANYTHING. The only thing we really know is that it’s not normal for somebody who supposedly had a routine hospital birth in the United States of America in 1961 to have no legal-quality documentation of that birth. The non-validity of the record is itself basically proof that the claims on it cannot be true.
And we’ve been shown no legal-quality evidence of any other legal birth facts either. So we have nowhere to even begin - and never will until we are allowed to dig into all the records and figure out the paper trail on this guy’s life.