Ignore my #46. I understand your position clearer now.
No you don't I just said I found nothing in post 1 that I didn't agree with. If you disagree then say so. My very first post on this thread stated that his post would bring out hundreds of pages of court decisions and precedent positions all of which would lead no where. Arguing with lawyers is about a sane as trying to argue with a Berkley Communist.
The only hope on this subject is to somehow get the argument into an honest court, to look at the fraudulent documents that have been presented to create the unknown president that we have.
I really don't understand all the support here for the status quo, unless there really is no concern for the preservation of the Republic.