[mlo]

"There seems to be probable cause. His father was a British citizen and that may make him unqualified. There are allegations that he wasn't born on US soil and false documents posted by his campaign. I would think that would constitute probaly cause."

Don't you watch TV? :-)

"Probable Cause" is what police need in certain circumstances in order to gather evidence. It isn't what courts use to decide to have a trial.

"The primary case is that we have a constitutional requirement and it is clear from the failure of the parties, secretaries of state, congress and courts to do their duty to uphold the constitution that the issue needs to be addressed to ensure that the person in office actually meets the qualification."

That's not a legal argument, it's a political one. Again, don't expect the courts to address your concern.

[nufsed]

I was advocating his arrest for election fraud and holding a public office after lying about being qualified. And a subsequent criminal court case.

Actually I was showing two different ways he could be held to prove his qualifications. Upholding the constitution is not a legal issue, it's a political one? You truly are on the wrong side and are a part of the problem.

Since you're so interested in the truth, please post your letter to the WH asking him to open his records. Or are you just here to throw hurdles in our path toward finding the truth?

We did this dance before, much longer. If you don't believe in upholding the constitution or the courts, the secretaries of state, the congress responsibility to do so, I'm out, again. If you do believe it, you can think of more than one way for this to be resolved; as many of us have. Toodles, for now.