Obama Citizenship

WND: Keyes: ?He Has Something to Hide? on Motion to Quash

By Phil

WordNetDaily reported yesterday that former Ambassador Dr. Alan Keyes, a Plaintiff in Keyes v. Bowen and Keyes v. Obama, alleges that the President has “something to hide” as a result of attorneys for the defense making a motion to quash a subpoena requesting certain documentation from the President’s days at Occidental College:

“It confirms the common sense suspicion that he won’t act forthrightly in this matter because he has something to hide,” Keyes wrote on his blogafter WND reported the warning about “sanctions” was raised by Obama’s defense lawyers.

The onetime U.S. ambassador explained on his posting that those raising questions over Obama’s elibigility ? so far ? have simply been ignored by courts.

[In response to commenter "jbjd," Dr. Keyes said] “In effect, the courts are refusing the admit plaintiffs on this matter into the courtroom, thereby denying them justice,” he wrote. “Madison wrote, ‘Justice is the end of government. It is the end of civil society. It will be pursued either until it be obtained or until liberty be lost in the pursuit.’”

“The denial of justice is thus a despotic act that violates the basis not only of just government, but of civil society itself,” Keyes wrote.

Obama voluntarily placed himself in the position of being asked to provide his information, he said.

“Given the Constitutional requirement, the only fact citizens need to justify their suit is the fact that Obama ran for president. He asked to be chosen, and therefore must answer the eligibility question,” Keyes wrote,

“In the final analysis if the courts refuse to respect the Constitution, they are not the judges of their own action. The people must ultimately decide. Which is why I and others will use every outlet to inform them of the injustice being done not just to individuals but to the sovereign people as a whole,” Keyes said. …

The Keyes case is being handled largely by Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation, but others playing a key role in the legal actions include Orly Taitz of California as well as Philip Berg, both of whom already have had their arguments rejected as not worthy of hearing by the U.S. Supreme Court.

In a commentary on the dispute, Keyes wrote that the suggestion of sanctions “confirms Obama’s ruthless determination to destroy anyone who continues to seek the information the Constitution requires.

“Why should they demand penalties against citizens who are simply seeking the enforcement of the Supreme Law of the Land? It is simply because their persistence runs contrary to the will of a supposedly popular demagogue? This smacks of tyrannical arrogance. That Obama thus signals his intent to bring financial ruin on those who won’t accept his cover-up of the circumstances of his birth is a tactical escalation,” Keyes said.

“As one of the targets of this escalation, I need no more convincing proof of the ruthless disposition so far successfully masked by his empty rhetoric of hope and change. Obviously he means to offer hope only to those willing to surrender their most basic rights. To any who insist on questioning his actions, he offers the drastic change of ruin and destruction. So be it. We shall be among those who learn firsthand the meaning of the sacrifices made by the Founders of our free republic, as they pledged and gave up their lives, their fortunes and the world’s esteem,” Keyes said.

What remains to be seen is whether or not the motion to quash will be granted, as some have commented on my blog alleging that the subpoena was improperly transmitted to the college. Further, we will have to wait and see if the threat of monetary sanctions against the Plaintiff — as alleged in email communications between the two sides — will come to fruition.

This is the first time that an eligibility case has successfully progressed to the point of issuing a subpoena and the receiving party explicitly stating their willingness to submit to the request, barring the move to quash, where such a move is an option on the part of the defense to exercise.

A current listing of eligibility lawsuits can be found here.

Update: Here is what’s being sought in the above-referenced subpoena:

3. The records to be produced are described as follows: Academic and housing records of Barack Hussein Obama, including but not limited to approximately two years from September 1979 to June 1981

-Phil

Full post as published by The Right Side of Life on February 17, 2009 (boomark / email).