(a)Your factual assumption is based on some secret writing on Hawaii's certification, that no one but you and one or two other people in the country seem to be able to read. Every court and election official who has read Hawaii's certification reads it as saying that Obama was born in Hawaii.
(b)You also ignore the point, which has been made countless times by judges, that the Constitution does not require a President to submit a birth certificate. I will re-ask you the question I asked you several times previously, and which you have never answered: what "established birth facts" did President Lincoln have? Or Teddy Roosevelt? Or William Howard Taft?
Osama Bin Laden wouldn’t have to submit a BC either, but if the dems nominated him would he be Constitutionally qualified?
Given what a reasonable person can know about Osama Bin Laden, would there be any LEGAL responsibility for a SOS putting Osama Bin Laden on the WA ballot, given that WA statute requires the person to be qualified?
If a WA judge or Supreme Court justice received an affidavit describing law enforcement’s criminal investigation based on probable cause for forgery of documents that Osama Bin Laden had put forth as proof of his eligibility, and the judge was required by WA statute to order Bin Laden to desist from the unlawful activity.... would that judge or Supreme Court justice have any LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY for refusing to do so?
“...that the Constitution does not require a President to submit a birth certificate.”
True but never the less Obama DID offer his birth certificate and in a very public way. His bad.