'Hardball with Chris Matthews' for Tuesday, October 20, 2009
updated 11:02 a.m. ET, Wed., Oct . 21, 2009
Let‘s play HARDBALL.
Good evening. I‘m Chris Matthews in Washington. Leading off tonight:
Armed and ready. They‘re called the Oath Keepers. They‘re current and former law enforcement officers who pledge to disobey orders they believe are illegal, saying they‘re preventing cities from becoming concentration camps. Well, at the top of the show tonight, we‘re going to hear the founder of that group but also the head of the Southern Poverty Law Center, who opposes them.
we start with the Oath Keepers, who are they and what is—what they are and what they say they are all about. Stewart Rhodes if the founder of the Oath Keepers, and Mark Potok is with the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Stewart, let me run through a couple of the things you say that your group will not obey orders to do. Let‘s take a look at that. We have the list here. You will not impose martial law or state of emergency on any state. You will not invade or subjugate any state, I guess of the union, that asserts its sovereignty. You will blockade—you will not blockade American cities, turning them into giant concentration camps. And you will assist or support the use of any foreign troops—you won‘t do that or obey orders to do that on U.S. soil.
Do you guys have the current firepower to stand up against the federal government if you people are ordered to do those things?
STEWART RHODES, FOUNDER, “OATH KEEPERS”: Well, it‘s not the point. It‘s not the point of firepower. It‘s the obligation all of us have who have sworn an oath to support and defend the Constitution. And so what we‘re calling on active duty military and police to do is to simply stand down and to refuse to comply with (INAUDIBLE) unlawful orders.
MATTHEWS: All your people in your recruited groups are all people who are potentially armed, is that right?
RHODES: Well, if they‘re active duty police and military, of course.
I mean, if a cop carries a gun...
MATTHEWS: Well, that seems to be the group you‘re going after.
RHODES: Well, sure.
MATTHEWS: It seems to be the group you‘re recruiting.
RHODES: They‘re the ones that will receive unlawful orders. It was at My Lai that the soldiers committed atrocities...
MATTHEWS: OK, let‘s not—let‘s not confuse the issue with My Lai. You have on your list, you will not assert—you will not obey any orders to invade or subjugate any state that asserts its sovereignty. You know, I guess I‘m too normal because when I first read that, sir, I thought you were talking about we wouldn‘t invade Iraq, which is a sovereign country. But you‘re not—you laugh.
RHODES: No, we‘re talking...
MATTHEWS: This is why people think you‘re crazy.
RHODES: We‘re talking about domestic...
MATTHEWS: You laugh. A sovereign state of the United States—in other words, the Civil War would not have been fought if you guys had been around.
RHODES: No, that‘s not the point. Look at article...
MATTHEWS: No, wait a minute, “It‘s not the point”—you say you will not invade any state or subjugate any state that asserts its sovereignty.
RHODES: That‘s right.
MATTHEWS: The Confederacy asserted its sovereignty. What would you have done if you had been in the Union army then?
RHODES: If I‘d been in the Union army then?
MATTHEWS: Yes.
RHODES: Well, we‘re not talking about secession here. We‘re talking about the balance of power between...
MATTHEWS: No, no, no. You say any state...
RHODES: ... the states and the federal government.
MATTHEWS: ... any state that asserts, either through nullification or secession...
RHODES: Yes.
MATTHEWS: ... its sovereignty. What would you do?
RHODES: We‘re not talking about nullification...
MATTHEWS: ... if this Texas governor, this guy Rick Perry...
RHODES: Right.
MATTHEWS: ... he talks about secession. I mean, obviously, he‘s talking loony tune. He doesn‘t, I don‘t think, mean it, but who knows. If he did try to secede and you were in the federal government, what would you do?
RHODES: Well, I think the state has an obligation—has a right to assert its sovereignty. There‘s dual sovereignty in our system. It‘s not one...
MATTHEWS: Does it have a right to secede?
RHODES: If the federal government violates the compact and destroys the Constitution, then there is no Constitution.
MATTHEWS: Give me the circumstances that that would—in other words, I‘ve always wondered, when I listen to your group, about—I want to know about operations. I don‘t care about your philosophy. A lot of people are Libertarian. Ron Paul, I like him in a lot of ways. I agree with him on the Iraq war. I got no problem with the Libertarian philosophy.
What I don‘t like about people who are armed, who are being recruited to stand up in some operation—I want to know when you would call your forces together...
RHODES: No, see, it‘s not about...
MATTHEWS: ... and challenge the authority of the U.S. government.
RHODES: It‘s not about calling...
MATTHEWS: When would you do that?
RHODES: It‘s not calling forces together. It‘s simply saying they‘re not going to comply with orders to violate the rights of the American people. We‘re not talking about asking them to go fight. We‘re saying simply, Don‘t fight.
MATTHEWS: OK, well...
RHODES: Don‘t fight the people.
MATTHEWS: What‘s this concentration camp thing you‘re talking about?
What is this thing about bringing foreign troops into the United States?
What scenarios do you live in?
RHODES: Well, look at the history of the last 20th century. We had the internment of the Japanese-Americans right here on American soil.
MATTHEWS: Yes.
RHODES: And so...
MATTHEWS: Right.
RHODES: ... we don‘t want to see that happen again, do you?
MATTHEWS: Do you foresee concentration camps in this country?
RHODES: It happened once before. It happened to the Japanese-Americans.
MATTHEWS: Do you foresee it?
RHODES: Well, it‘s a possibility. Our goal is—our goal is...
MATTHEWS: Why are you organizing people about the plausibility of concentration camps in this country, of the landing of foreign troops? What foreign troops would be landed in the United States? What are you talking about?
RHODES: This is a historic pattern. This has happened in the past.
MATTHEWS: When?
RHODES: We want to make sure it doesn‘t happen here.
MATTHEWS: When—what...
RHODES: I just gave you...
MATTHEWS: ... do you mean by “foreign troops” in the United States?
Name them. I guess I‘m confused here.
RHODES: Well...
MATTHEWS: Name the foreign troops that are being brought into the United States now, you imagine.
RHODES: Look at the Hessians just in the American revolution were brought here.
MATTHEWS: Yes.
RHODES: You had foreign troops then that were used. It‘s—it‘s—it happens throughout history. Go look at history.
MATTHEWS: So you‘re putting people together on a kind of a war footing, preparing them to be vigilant...
RHODES: It‘s not a...
MATTHEWS: ... to be ready...
RHODES: It‘s not a war...
MATTHEWS: ... to challenge the imposition of foreign troops in this country, the creation of concentration—you know what I think you‘re up to, is creating a mindset, getting—I heard some people the other day talking about “the battle,” We have to keep “the battle” going. You want to have people in a militant environment where they think militantly with this sense of perhaps taking steps at some point against the government or taking—not taking orders or in some way rebelling so that you keep people in a mindset of right-wing thinking so you can achieve some immediate political goal.
And I‘m just wondering what you‘re—getting them to vote right-wing? What are you trying to get people to do in the next year or two, or 10 years, before this Armageddon struggle occurs?
RHODES: We want them to keep their oath, Chris. Chris, the oath is to the Constitution.
MATTHEWS: No, in the short term what are you—look, you don‘t expect the concentration camps to come in the short run, do you?
RHODES: No, I don‘t.
MATTHEWS: OK, do you expect...
RHODES: It‘s a long-term concern.
MATTHEWS: ... foreign troops—do you expect the Hessians to be back in the short run?
RHODES: We are trying to prevent this country from suffering the abuse and the violation of rights that has happened in other countries in recent history.
MATTHEWS: How so?
RHODES: How so? By keeping the oaths to the Constitution. It‘s not to any one man, whether he gives you a thrill up your leg or not. It‘s to the Constitution.
MATTHEWS: Yes. So you believe that we have a possibility in this country of undermining the Constitution under Barack Obama. That‘s what you see coming.
RHODES: Or under a future President Giuliani or anybody else. The abuse of the Constitution didn‘t begin with Obama, and it hasn‘t stopped, unfortunately, either. Bush was violating the Constitution also.
MATTHEWS: How many hours a day do you worry about the Constitution being undermined by Barack Obama—undermined? In other words, your rights being taken away, concentration camps being formed, foreign troops being landed, the black helicopters stopping at a military base near you. How many hours a day do you think about this probability, or even plausibility, sir?
RHODES: Well, I‘m a Constitutional lawyer. I‘ve been thinking about this for many years.
MATTHEWS: No, but how many hours a day do you worry about this actually happening? Seriously. Do you go to bed at night—when you put your head on the pillow at night, are you afraid that at some point in your lifetime, the black helicopters from the U.N. will arrive in the United States and deny American sovereignty? Do you think that‘s probable or possible?
RHODES: I think it‘s possible.
MATTHEWS: Or plausible?
RHODES: I think we‘re concerned about—look at—look at—look at Germany, an advanced civilization, and they fell into a despotism in a dictatorship, a murderous dictatorship in the span of 10 years after an economic collapse. It could happen here. Think it can‘t happen here? Ask the Japanese-Americans whether it can happen here.
MATTHEWS: No (INAUDIBLE) I‘m talking about the meantime. I think what you‘re trying to do is create a state of mind, sir. That‘s why I‘m concerned.
RHODES: Well, you can think whatever you—you can think what you want. I know what my goals are.
MATTHEWS: No, it‘s obvious what you want to do because you‘re getting people to sign up. You‘re getting people who are armed. It‘s—why do you only recruit among police and military and people like that?
RHODES: Because they—because they will be given the orders to abuse your rights. Who else is going to be doing it? If someday, God forbid, there‘s some dictator comes to power in America, who‘s going to get the order? Wouldn‘t you have liked the soldiers in World War II to have refused the orders to round up Japanese-Americans?
MATTHEWS: OK. I guess I‘ve always assumed...
RHODES: No?
MATTHEWS: ... that people knew that every since Nuremberg, obeying orders wasn‘t a legitimate defense.
RHODES: That‘s exactly right.
MATTHEWS: And therefore, I assumed that this wasn‘t necessary, to form a vigilante group like this one or to get people all roused up against their government.
RHODES: Not—no...
MATTHEWS: By the way, I don‘t understand your thinking about the government. Every time we have a debate on this show, it‘s clear that we don‘t have a unified government in this country. We have Democrats on the Hill of the left, of the center. We‘ve got—or the moderate Democrats. We‘ve got conservative Republicans, some moderate Republicans. They fight all the time. And yet you guys in this sort of strange view of the world say there‘s such a thing as “the government” that‘s all unified and working against you. Where does that exist? You worked in Washington. Where is that thing called “the government” you allude to?
MATTHEWS: So you say there are no...
MATTHEWS: I‘m asking! Where is it?
RHODES: What do you mean, where is it?
MATTHEWS: Where is this government that‘s all unified against you, that‘s frightening and is about to deny your rights? Who is this government?
RHODES: Well, Chris...
MATTHEWS: Give me the name of it.
RHODES: ... the Patriot Act was bipartisan. They both voted for it, both sides. And don‘t you think that was an abuse of power and abuse of rights?
MATTHEWS: And yes, and it‘s being debated and argued among people within the political system we have in this country...
RHODES: And that‘s (INAUDIBLE)
MATTHEWS: ... people fighting it and—right, and we don‘t have to have people, armed people out there standing ready to challenge authority.
Anyway, let‘s move on. I want to bring Mark Potok in here and let him argue the case. What is the danger of these guys sitting around and having meetings? I mean, I‘m challenging him because I think it‘s a state of mind. But if they‘re not operational, if they don‘t take arms against the country, what difference does it make if they have this mindset of fear, Mark?
MARK POTOK, SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER: Well, I‘d say a couple things. First off, I‘d point out that Stewart Rhodes just talked about, Well, you know, maybe this could happen someday down the line and this is a sort of theoretical worry that he has, or so he says. The reality is, is that when you look at the Oath Keepers‘ Web site, the core of it is this business about the orders they‘re not going to obey. And it starts out with a preamble, a quote from George Washington, saying, you know, Now is the time or soon comes the time when it will be determined whether we‘re slaves or freed men. Immediately after that, the Oath Keepers Web site says, presumably in Stewart Rhodes‘s words, that that time is near at hand again.
Look, I mean, the bottom line is, is that this is a group that is driven by conspiracy theories about the government, very much like the militia conspiracy theories...
MATTHEWS: What‘s the harm?
POTOK: ... of the ‘90s. You know, they...
MATTHEWS: What‘s the harm in his thinking?
POTOK: ... believe, presumably, that FEMA is out there setting up concentration camps and that kind of thing. I mean, this whole list of things that they‘re not going to do are the very fears that were enunciated by people in the militia movement, some of whom went on to do rather violent things, in one case to attempt to attack Ft. Hood in Texas because they thought foreign nationals were being trained there to suppress American patriots. So it‘s very much the same idea. Look, I mean, I have no...
MATTHEWS: OK, let him respond to that. Let him respond to that.
POTOK: ... beef with someone affirming their...
MATTHEWS: Do you have anybody in your group—have you had any indication, Stewart, that any people have heard your arguments and have become dangerous to our society?
RHODES: Not at all. They‘re police officers and soldiers.
MATTHEWS: What about the birther crowd? Are you connected to the...
POTOK: Chris, if I might...
(CROSSTALK)
MATTHEWS: I want to know one other thing because this fellow that broke into the Holocaust Museum...
(CROSSTALK)
MATTHEWS: No, the other day. It wasn‘t long ago, it was this summer
· broke into the Holocaust Museum and shot the armed guard, he believed he was honoring a cause, which was that Barack Obama shouldn‘t be president because he‘s not a legitimate citizen, a native-born citizen. People do act. McVeigh and those people do act in this way, sir. Stewart, they do act on what they read and hear. You don‘t fear that?
RHODES: Not in our organization at all. And I find it offensive that Potok likes to lump us into with white supremacists. I‘m a quarter Mexican. I come from a family of migrant farm workers from California. And so to (INAUDIBLE) insinuate that I‘m in bed with white supremacists and neo-Nazis, which he has, lumping us all together...
POTOK: Oh, that‘s ridiculous!
RHODES: ... is offensive. Well...
(CROSSTALK)
RHODES: Yes, you have!
POTOK: ... to white supremacists!
RHODES: You said we‘re coalescing, we‘re all coalescing together.
POTOK: And how is that, Mr. Rhodes?
RHODES: Excuse me? You lump us all...
POTOK: How is that?
RHODES: ... in the same bucket.
POTOK: How is that that we‘ve suggested that you‘re white supremacists? That‘s ridiculous.
RHODES: You include—you include us...
POTOK: That‘s ridiculous. You know we haven‘t said that.
RHODES: Yes, you have. You put us in the same bucket.
POTOK: Look, the bottom line about the Oath Keepers is that this is a group of men and women who are in—largely in law enforcement. They are given weapons and they are given authority over the rest of us. And that is well and fine. I‘m all about reaffirming oaths to the Constitution. It‘s a great document, as is the Bill of Rights. However, when people with those powers are animated by dark and utterly false conspiracy theories—they actually mention in the section on the orders they won‘t obey that they fear that the government will be cracking down on militias and calling them right-wing terrorists, and so on.
RHODES: Which you do all the time.
POTOK: So that‘s the real agenda here. They‘re driven by fears that are irrational and have no basis in reality.
RHODES: And what are you driven by?
MATTHEWS: OK, let me—let me—let me stop and let Mr. Stewart...
RHODES: You‘re driven by donations.
MATTHEWS: ... Stewart Rhodes respond. Is your fear—one last word. Is there an imminent fear that our federal government will abandon the Constitution, deny us our rights and even resort to things like concentration camps or disarming the American people in violation of the 2nd Amendment—disarming the people, moving around the country collecting guns—is that a real danger, sir, yes or no?
RHODES: Yes, I think it is.
MATTHEWS: A real danger?
RHODES: Yes, I think it is. Look at the pattern of abuse of executive power and the claimed authority to treat America like a battlefield.
MATTHEWS: You keep changing the subject. What you have in your document says, “will not obey order to disarm the American people.”
RHODES: That‘s right.
MATTHEWS: Well, neither—well, those—do you think these things on your list of fears are imminent and real threats to the American people now—disarm the American people, detain the American people, martial law, concentration camps? Are those real or just scare tactics, sir?
RHODES: Those are real threats throughout society, you bet. Those are real threats throughout history, and our goal...
MATTHEWS: And you fear them?
RHODES: ... is to make sure they don‘t happen.
MATTHEWS: OK.
RHODES: Yes. Wouldn‘t you fear them?
MATTHEWS: OK. Fair enough. Thank you, Stewart Rhodes. Thanks for coming on HARDBALL. I‘m not agreeing with you...
RHODES: Thank you.
MATTHEWS: ... but I‘m agreeing with your right to say anything.
Thank you, Mark Potok, as always, sir.
Coming up: Which political party will gain the most if Wall Street cleans up? Well, “if”? Excuse me. If? They‘re cleaning up. We‘ll ask “New York Times” reporter Andrew Ross Sorkin about the whole question.
You‘re watching HARDBALL, only on MSNBC.
MSNBC.com
