Replies

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k0sQroiCYNc

THE EMBASSY: Keyes and Obama (Part One)

I have tried to do my best to transcribe what Dr. Keyes said in this interview for those of you who cannot view the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k0sQroiCYNc

In Part One of this interview, he shares with Molotov Mitchell why the Constitution still matters, the potential ramifications of defying it and if doing so could justify revolution.

Transcript:

Dr. Keyes: “If a president is actually exercising his power on a basis that contradicts what the Constitution said is the ground and framework for eligibility, then he's not president.”

Interviewer: “Well, it is a tremendous honor to spend some time with you, Dr. Keyes. It's great to have you. I wanted to sit down with you and ask you about what you've been up to lately, specifically in relationship to President-Elect; or should I even call him “President-Elect Barack Obama”? Maybe you could tell me a little bit about your case and the federal election committee. What is going on there?"

Dr. Keyes: “Well, I was approached awhile ago about the issue. It had actually come up in the course of the campaign season, as I recall. Where some folks had gone to court to try to seek verification that Barack Obama met the eligibility requirement that is in the Constitution. That is, to say, that he is a natural born citizen of the United States. Um, and the courts as I recall, dismissed it on the ground of standing. They didn't address the issue itself, but said that the people who were bringing the suits didn't have standing to push for a look at his birth certificate.”

“So I was approached because I had been on the ballots in a number of states in the general election, and I think the folks who were trying to pursue this to the point where you actually got the information, were trying to ascertain whether they could find somebody that they would say had standing. And, as I understood it, the issue of standing for these judges turned on the notion that you had to be damaged in particular; in other words, you had to be able to argue that if this wasn't handled properly, you would be damaged.”

Interviewer: “Right”

Dr. Keyes: “This is ironic, isn't it?”

Interviewer: “Yes”

Dr. Keyes: “Here we have the Constitution of the United States. It starts out with the words, “We The People”. But if you're just a citizen who is part of “the people” you can't do anything to make sure that the Constitution is observed and for some reason, these silly courts assume that if the Constitution of the United States is destroyed, in its authority, meaning to say if it's ignored and undermined, that doesn't damage you. This is really weird.”“But anyway, so I became part of these suits. And I have to be very clear, some people may or may not have some objective in all of this that has to do with Barack Obama. Ah, I think that's incidental. The key question in my mind is simply that the Constitution must be respected and it must be seen to be respected because otherwise the legitimacy of the government that comes entirely from that Constitution, and from nothing else, will be destroyed, and we'll be in a very bad situation as a nation.

Interviewer: “Now that's very strong language to say that the Constitution would be destroyed. What, what makes you use that particular language? Is it really that serious?

Dr. Keyes: “Because the Constitution has to represent in essence a general consensus among the people about how we shall go about our business. So that it's clear that everyone has agreed on the rules of the game. That's what allows for the peaceful transition of power in America. So that even when you lose an election, you can be in the minority, you can be 30, 40, sometimes it's even been 48 and 49 percent, close to half the people who say, “no, I don't want this guy”. But the reason you go home at night and say it's o.k. is because our allegiance is to the Constitution. We've all agreed that that's how it's to be done, if that's been respected, then we accept the outcome.”

“That's not true everywhere. That's not true in countries where people will see an outcome go against them and take to the streets. See an outcome go against them and the military will start coos and all of this stuff. No, we don't do that in America because we have allegiance to the Constitution that represents our permanent will for justice. If you start saying that that can be amended now by a temporary whim of the majority, because every majority we have in any given election is changeable, it could be this way or that way. Then, we no longer have agreement on the rules of the game and one of the chief prerequisites of our peace is gone. Right? And, under ordinary circumstances you can go this way and that, but if the language is clear, if the requirement is plain, and you ignore it, then you're basically saying that the Constitution doesn't matter anymore.”

Interviewer: “And what happens if someone does say the Constitution doesn't matter anymore? What if, in fact, Barack Obama is ineligible yet he flouts the system and is sworn in. What does that mean for the Constitution in America?

Dr. Keyes: “Well, if Barack Obama is not president, in accordance with the Constitution which provides the general grant of authority for the whole government of the United States and everything about it...right? If by, if the Constitution contradicts his authority, says no, you can't have that authority, and he takes it anyway, by what authority does he govern? What is the basis for his claiming that his use of executive power is legitimate?

Interviewer: “Well, I know he would sell it as, “I am serving the will of the people”.

Dr. Keyes: “Right. But the will of the people in America, just be itself, is not the source of the government's authority. The source of the government's authority is the permanent will of the people expressed in the Constitution. Put the Constitution aside, and you've got one group of people saying one thing, and another group of people saying another, and who's to decide between them?”

“What usually decides between them historically is war, force, conflict, turbulence. Barack Obama appoints some judge and somebody standing before that judge and they say, “I challenge your authority because you've been appointed by someone who's not President of the United States according to the Constitution.” He issues orders to the military people. A soldier thinks that this is a bad order and he says, “no, I don't want to obey that order because it's coming from someone who is not Commander-in-Chief, according to the Constitution of the United States”. “And, and people say, “well, ah ah..it's not gonna happen”.....well, it has already happened, that private soldiers have challenged the authority of a sitting president. Michael New (sp?) was famous for refusing to wear a UN armband at the behest of President Clinton. Now, I argued, by the way, with respect to that, that Michael New should obey the President, because his authority is clear in the Constitution. But if a President is actually exercising his power on a basis that contradicts what the Constitution said is the ground and framework for eligibility, then he's not President. And you've got a conflict that's impossible to resolve under the Constitution itself. Because the Constitution says he's not president and somebody else is trying to say he is president, how can you work that out under the Constitution?

Interviewer: “How can you work that out?”

Dr. Keyes: “You can't. And some people misunderstand. They think that one swears allegiance to the United States of America. No, no, no, you don't. When you take the oath of office, you don't swear to protect the United States of America. You don't swear to uphold the country or a nation. You swear to uphold, protect, defend the Constitution of the United States. You take a specific oath to respect the Constitution. Interviewer: “From enemies foreign and domestic.”

Dr. Keyes: “And domestic. So, if you've taken that oath and you're faced with a situation where something is happening that is plainly in contradiction of the Constitution, then your oath says you can't go along with that. And I think it is irresponsible of leaders in this country, from the Supreme Court, whoever it might be, to act as if it's o.k. to put the entire nation in that situation. I think it's dereliction of duty if they do that. Especially considering that what is required in this case is simple. It's easy.” “ When I went into the foreign service, one of the things, you have to go through all kinds of checks and stuff, but one of the things that is required is that you have to obtain an actual copy of your, of the vault copy of your birth certificate. Correct? It cost twelve dollars and fifty cents. I think in Hawaii they told me this. You can actually as a private citizen you can throw down the twelve dollars and fifty cents and you can get a copy of your birth certificate. That's the fee they charge.”

Interviewer: “The running fee in Hawaii.”

Dr. Keyes: “That's the running fee in Hawaii. Instead, as I understand it, they have spent upwards of a million dollars trying to keep people from asking the question. Why? Look, people have been arguing, they said that, “well, I saw such and such on a website.” It was a digitized image on somebody’s website, alright...that people were supposedly saying...and that wasn't even a digitized image of the original. The, uh, people in Obama’s campaign and others who support him have said that this evidence is there, it's good, let's get on with it. And you look at them and say, “ok,where is it? Let's look at it.” And they say, “no, take my word for it.” “Well, if someone told you that they owned a piece of property. That were you going to buy from them. And, and you said, “well fine, let me see the deed.” “Oh, I can get it, it's right over there and I can get it anytime, and I tell you it's good and it's valid.” And you said, “let me see the deed.” And they said, “well don't worry about it. I'm telling you it's a good deed. I've looked at it myself, it's great.” The third or fourth time they didn't just go and get the deed wouldn't you start to be a little suspicious, that maybe...

Interviewer: “Or they bring you a picture of the deed or...”

Dr. Keyes: “Sold a bill of goods. I think that commonsense prevails in most transactions ought certainly to prevail when it comes to upholding the authority of the Constitution, making clear that its terms are being respected, and making that clear in such a way that we can get on with the orderly business of our country.”

Interviewer: “If indeed, Barack Obama is ineligible, is there a line at which people do take to the streets? Is there a line at which people...you did mention that there would be struggle, uh, potentially..and this, you can't settle it constitutionally. There's a lot of people, especially veterans and things like that, that have been saying we are supposed to defend the Constitution. What do you think about that? Is there a line?

Dr. Keyes: “First of all...there's a line, of course there's a line. You see that line referred to in the Declaration of Independence. That at some point, when rights are trampled upon and when liberty is being destroyed, you must stand in defense of it. So, without doubt, in the heritage of this country there is a line and there are graves that mark that line. They are the graves of all our patriot dead. They are the graves of the people who went into battle in order to make sure that the Constitution of the United States would be preserved; that the liberty it represents would survive. So, of course there's a line. And we've come up to that line, and we have fought on that line, and many good people have died on that line, and their families have grieved for them and missed them, and still do it to this day.

“So, without doubt, there's a line. Um, I think that that line in this particular case depends on something that is well within the reach of all right-minded and patriotic Americans who care about the country and the Constitution. It's simple. It does not require that we go anywhere near that line. It simply requires that we take a look to make sure that eligibility has been established under the Constitition. That's all. It's a simple thing. And frankly I don't know that it requires...I don't see why it requires all this discussion. I'm at a loss and have been for quite some time to figure out why there is so much resistance to this question.”