This is the point where I bring each area of "probable cause" we have developed, in each of the areas we have investigated, and analyze them against legal standards. These standards include concepts such as "res gestae" (or spontaneous declaration), "one lie allows rejection of all assertions or statements", "reputation in the community", and "probable cause (including cumulative and emergency or priority)". Remember these are legal standards, accepted for admittance and consideration in courts within the United States.
I am not using or considering slick spin and talking points here. I am not talking about covering, with assertions of no legal or honest standing or consequence, damaging evidence and information a candidate does not want to address or forbids to be considered. I am talking about developing a position using acceptable legal positions of sufficient legal weight to determine a vote for POTUS.
I am placing the information and application into a mix to consider a choice between a wish of a person and the survival of a free America. The sufficiency of chance to be taken is weighed against a probability measurement. It takes very little to vote in favor of America over anyone's wish. It takes a great deal of certainty to vote for a person contesting the survival of America.
The results of the investigation are even more dramatic than just stated. I have found that there is little, to no, reason, and no real gain, to vote for Obama. I have found that the sufficiency of legally allowable considerations demand a vote for anyone but Obama, and that he is a very high risk choice for the continuing freedoms of America. Obama is absolutely a risk to great to take.
If you disagree with my conclusion, you need to read the book to see how I am wrong. If you don't read the book, but just attack, you'll be embarrassed, If you are open to voting for someone other than Obama, and want to know if my "probable cause" is convincing to you, then you need to read the book. That will allow you to see if I'm right, and will also allow you to defend your position with facts set in a legal matrix.