So why do you suppose there wasn’t a single poster on FR conversant with the Vattel definition until after Obama’s election? If this was what so many NOW claim they were taught in school? Where are the textbooks they were taught from that advance this definition?
And the citizen qualification discussed in Article one is inclusive of all three types of US citizen mentioned in the Constitution. It is not its own category. As should be obvious.
First of all I don’t believe that your comment about Vattel is anywhere close to reality as to what is taught about the framing of the Constitution and I can’t say that there are many who claim to know about Vattel from school days who are involved in the eligibility matter today. It was Obama who generated the public scrutiny of eligibility. I have years of paper documents taken off the web including FR. My short/quick reference pile has a FR posting dated July 26,2009 as to Obama’s eligibility. There are earlier documents from other sources. As to references to Vattel on FR, I refer you to a posting on October 04,2009 ‘Obama’s certificate of live birth data wasn’t “Accepted” it was only filed’. So the issue of/with Vattel goes back at least before the last election. As to your opinion that the ‘citizen’ noted in ‘Article one’ includes the “natural born citizen” noted in Article II is just not consistent as to the Founders in Their writings as to defining specific intentions for the new Nation.