So where does the Constitution outline what candidates have to do to prove their natural-born citizenship requirements?
There is no reason why there should be any outline of what a natural born citizen is in the constitution, the framers understood the concept well enough that they were not afraid of a pretender sneaking into the office of the presidency.
What has happened her is treason on a scale that it boggles the mind, not only was a fraud allowed to run for office but the entire party that he represented was perfectly willing to allow him to lie his way into office because they knew they didn't have anyone else to run and win.
And since they did not define it in the Constitution then it's left to the courts and Congress to define it. And their definition differs from Vattel's.
What has happened her is treason on a scale that it boggles the mind, not only was a fraud allowed to run for office but the entire party that he represented was perfectly willing to allow him to lie his way into office because they knew they didn't have anyone else to run and win.
Oh come on. Treason? Have you not read Article III, Section 3? Obama may be guilty of fraud or misrepresentation or any number of other crimes but not treason. Not as the Constitution defines it.