If it was proved accurately

It is a hypothetical question. We all realize that he was elected and served. No one REALLY knows if he was FULLY qualified and legitiment for sure. There are still a lot of questions out there. Until something is proved otherwise, I have accepted him as an elected President.

@bigjohndl: I say that question was asked and answered twice by the largest jury in the world the American electorate.

No, I acknowledge the elections and that he was elected. But the electorate has no was of knowing if he was legal to run in the first place. For example; Oklahoma never checked his birth certificate when he filed for the first election, as they had never checked before for anyone. So we take it from those that should know, that he was legitimate to run for President.

Now after all the "birther" movement, and BEFORE he released the birth certificate, Oklahoma asked for prove that he was legitimate to run for the 2nd term. There was quite the story, but then it was dropped real quick when the state was threatened with the loss of Federal funds if they pursed the lawsuit to obtain proof that he was qualified.

Point is, you and I have no way of knowing if he was qualified to run for President. We have to rely on state governments and the federal government to tell us the truth on EVERYTHING.

Like the original question said, "If it was proved accurate". It is a hypothetical question.

@bigjohndl: I for one wouldn't care a wit. As we say in court. Asked and answered.

LOL, if you are quoting from court, then wouldn't you have to have evidence of proof? I thought nothing is fact until it is proved especially in court.

Have a great day! Off for breakfast with the grandchildren.

@bigjohndl: http://www.snopes.com/politics/graphics/birth.jpg