He is very light on documentation unless there are other docs that we are not seeing here.
Everything he is saying is probably true but at the level he is at it should be a lot more apparent than it is. He needs a lot more accompaning data. Just a guess.
You said — “Everything he is saying is probably true but at the level he is at it should be a lot more apparent than it is. He needs a lot more accompaning data. Just a guess.”
It’s a lot more than more data. But, before I say anything about that..., first, Berg just wants “standing” right now, and then he’ll go back to the lower court to have it heard (and see what the result will be from that lower court).
Now, the Supreme Court is not going to consider the “evidence” on Obama that Berg is presenting, because this evidence has not be looked at and agreed upon by a court that it is valid evidence. That would have to be determined first, before the Supreme Court could ever consider it.
So, it has to go back to the lower court — first — before the Supreme Court can ever consider any of the documentation on whether Obama is qualified.
However, by the time that process winds its way through the entire system... Obama will be President and then I’m sure the Supreme Court will say that the removal of a President (if that’s the “action” that they’re asked to take, and there has to be “some remedy” asked for, I would think) is in the hands of the Congress. And also, it’s in the hands of Congress to appoint a Special Prosecutor, if they find need of *verifying* the data on Obama, as to whether he’s qualified or not....