LoL. You are always consistently wrong. We're still waiting for the Obama or his lawyers to cite that Supreme Court case that makes Obama NBC. Don't hold your breath.
Care to bet?
I'm not going to take a bet when the judiciary has been nothing but collective cowards on this issue. They never push Obama or his OBot lawyers to prove their cases but dismiss on technicalities, although, the Klayman case may be a different story. As the OBot lawyers cannot seem to follow a simple order to cite "authority" that Obama is a natural born citizen. You may have noticed, if you're truthful with yourself, that the courts have not truthfully weighed in if Obama is a natural born citizen. They do nothing but evade.
And no, as usual again, Gray's opinion in Wong Kim Ark never ever bestowed Ark as a natural born citizen but only a citizen.
“LoL. You are always consistently wrong.”
Actually, I’ve been right on 100% of my predictions.
“You may have noticed, if you’re truthful with yourself, that the courts have not truthfully weighed in if Obama is a natural born citizen. They do nothing but evade.”
You mean like this court opinion from Indiana:
“Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance
provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the
United States are “natural born Citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of
the citizenship of their parents. Just as a person “born within the British dominions [was]
a natural-born British subject” at the time of the framing of the U.S. Constitution, so too
were those “born in the allegiance of the United States [] natural-born citizens.”
Or this one from Georgia:
“For the purposes of this analysis, this Court considered that President BarackObama was born in the United States. Therefore, as discussed in Arkeny, he became a citizen at birth and is a natural born citizen.”