WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. John McCain ripped Minnesota Republican Rep. Michele Bachmann on Wednesday for suggesting an aide to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is working with the Muslim Brotherhood.
Bachmann and a group of four conservative House Republicans sent a letter in June to the inspector general of the State Department urging an investigation into Huma Abedin’s connections to the Islamist political organization, alleging she shouldn’t have been given security clearance because of former business dealings involving her late father, citing a study by the Center for Security Policy.
Minnesota Democrat Keith Ellison, a Muslim, told Anderson Cooper Tuesday the evidence is “repeated false allegations, just regurgitated nonsense.”
In a blistering Wednesday speech on the Senate floor, McCain, a Republican, didn’t mention Bachmann by name, but called her accusations “attacks” and said they “have no logic, no basis and no merit. And they need to stop now.”
“To say that the accusations made in both documents are not substantiated by the evidence they offer is to be overly polite and diplomatic about it,” he said. “It is far better, and more accurate, to talk straight: These allegations about Huma Abedin, and the report from which they are drawn, are nothing less than an unwarranted and unfounded attack on an honorable citizen, a dedicated American and a loyal public servant.”
Abedin is a top aide to Clinton and the wife of former U.S. Rep. Anthony Weiner. McCain said he came to know her during a trip he took with Clinton when she served in the Senate.
“I had the pleasure of seeing firsthand her hard work and dedicated service on behalf of the former Senator from New York — a service that continues to this day at the Department of State, and bears with it significant personal sacrifice for Huma,” McCain said.
“I hope these ugly and unfortunate attacks on her can be immediately brought to an end and put behind us before any further damage is done to a woman, an American, of genuine patriotism and love of country.”
Bachmann delined to comment on McCain’s speech during floor votes Wednesday afternoon. In a statement, she sidestepped both the speech and the specific Abedin accusations, instead saying that the original letters regarding the Muslim Brotherhood are “unfortunately being distorted.”
“The intention of the letters was to outline the serious national security concerns I had and ask for answers to questions regarding the Muslim Brotherhood and other radical group’s access to top Obama administration officials,” she said.
Bachmann cited the recent White House visit of a self-professed member of an Egyptian terrorist group as the “latest example of the dangerous national security decisions made by the Obama administration.
“I will not be silent as this administration appeases our enemies instead of telling the truth about the threats our country faces,” she said.
Bachmann, along with Reps. Trent Franks, R-Ariz, Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, Thomas Rooney, R-Fla., and Lynn Westmoreland, R-Ga., wrote to the inspectors general of five government agencies in June asking them to investigate the reach of the Muslim Brotherhood in the U.S. government.
Ellison, the first Muslim elected to Congress, asked Bachmann for a more thorough breakdown of the accusations. Bachmann responded with a 16-page letter on Friday, which included her suspicion of Abedin.
Bachmann wrote that Abedin’s long-dead father had founded a Saudi Arabia-based group called the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs that “had the quiet but active support” of the Muslim World League, which “has a longtime history of being closely aligned and partnering with the Muslim Brotherhood.”
In a Wednesday letter back to Bachmann, Ellison called the connection “guilt by association.”
“The primary source of evidence for your serious claims against Ms. Abedin is that her deceased father founded an institute that received unspecified ‘support’ from a man who at one point led an organization that was aligned with the Muslim Brotherhood,” he wrote. “In making this connection, which is five times removed from Ms. Abedin, you engage in guilt by association.”
Hillary Clinton spokesman Philippe Reines called Bachmann’s accusations “nothing but vicious and disgusting lies, and anyone who traffics in them should be ashamed of themselves.
“I would hope that hearing the remarkable statement from someone of Sen. McCain’s stature gives her pause in doing so any further.”
Devin Henry can be reached at dhenry@minnpost.com
This is news?
More crazy lies from Michele Bachmann? Okay, she got her name in the paper again, never mind the cost to an innocent person’s reputation. I am SO sick of Miss Crazy Eyes and her never-ending rants. Can we hope that when she’s defeated in the next election she’ll finally go away?
Two words
Manchurian candidate.
One word
Delusional
She is?
Never play the Queen of Diamonds when she’s aroud.
Your
Kind of Republican them?
More than two words.
Your attack on Senator McCain is ethically degenerate. You know better, but you did it anyway. Why? Because he lost the last election and wouldn’t stoop to gutter level Karl Rove tactics then or now? What’s next from you? Besmirching the honorable lifetime service of a great American like John McCain is disgusting.
John McCain?
Yawn.
By yawn you mean?
Are you yawning because everyone already knows that John McCain is really a liberal lackey? Or are you yawning because you are tired of McCain yet again having to call out those from his own party for their outrageous lies?
This woman continues to be an embarrassment to decent Minnesotans. I can only surmise that one votes for her by ignoring facts, reality, and thinking.
Bachman
I cannot believe the people of the 6th district keep voting this do nothing crazy women into office, Wake up and get rid of this GOP welfare queen
Just a thought
If Keith Ellison spent 1/2 as much time looking after the best interests of his constituents as he does defending the Muslim Bortherhood, maybe North Minneapolis wouldn’t be on track for setting a new record number of homicides. Maybe a three and six year old child wouldn’t have been gunned down.
Maybe not, and of course even if he did, there’s no headlines for him to grab with any of that, but it couldn’t hurt.
Tommy & Michelle
Soon the two of them will blame the Brotherhood for the Northside shootings.
The republican leadership in the House
Have absolutely no concern for his constituents or any desire to help them, and you know it Swift. If you think that Ellison seeks headlines more than Bachmann, you are more delusional than her.
Even republicans can’t stand her.
Bachmann is the spotlight seeking looney tunes that even irritates republicans. Bachmann is a shining example of the detrimental affect of the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision. She is a mouthpiece without a filter, devoid of facts, and supports the fringe element of the republican party.
She’s on a long audition for Fox “News”
And throwing your hat in with the likes of Gohmert just adds to the embarassment.
It sucks but she’s right.
Everyone involved in our government should have a clean slate and there should not be a slight possibility of a threat to our national security. Even though her late father had connections to a possible threat, Abedin has to live with that association as well. I mean, it’s one thing if she wanted to work at a bank but you can’t have any ties to a terrorist organization and work for the U.S. government, even if it wasn’t your fault. That’s just the way it should be.
History lesson
You might want to Google “McCarthyism” . . . . . . .
Google is wonderful, isn’t it Pat?
“Scholars: Joseph McCarthy’s charges ‘now accepted as fact'”
“WASHINGTON — Although Joseph McCarthy was one of the most demonized American politicians of the last century, new information — including half-century-old FBI recordings of Soviet embassy conversations — are showing that McCarthy was right in nearly all his accusations.”
http://www.wnd.com/2000/02/4020/
And this is why cites matter
WND? Next time try for a legitimate source.
Consider the source
You’re citing World Net Daily as proof of . . . anything?
Come clean–you’re just trying to be funny, aren’t you?
Its Not Fox “News”
Though Rep. Bachmann continuously conducts herself like her term is one long audition for the conservative propaganda outfit.
She’s embarrasing, but really, there’s unfortunately a good number of people who believe what she says (putting aside the fact they will never see or read the numerous debunkings and fact-checking of her idiocy). Personally, I’m hoping she runs against Franken to put her loon-bat shenanigans on the national stage and continue to paint the picture of that her party is a parody at this point.
And I can tell you from living in his district, Mr. Swift, that Ellison does a lot for his constituents and its easy using the e-mail and interweb machines to find out just how much. That said, I did the same for Ms. Bachmann and found very little. Except for painting ridiculous conspiracy themes and straight out lying about the President and his party in general.
But that’s what a Fox “News” audition requires.
They’re yawning (or calling McCain the Manchurian candidate)
because, NO ONE is pure enough to represent the current Republican Party. In their eyes, virtually all past Republican leaders/national candidates have been ‘liberal lackeys’. That list would include not just McCain, but Eisenhower, Ford, Reagan, Bob Dole, GHW Bush & G W Bush, etc. There can be no appeasement with perceived political enemies, either within or outside of the country. Of course, those perceptions villianize most everyone else on the planet. Only folks like Santorum and Bachmann qualify to lead the pure Repubs. If Romney loses, he will immediately join the list. Only partisan flame-throwing society-dividing judgmental conspiracy types need apply.
Bachmann and othe GOPers
Bachmann and other GOP legislators are becoming almost Eugene McCarthy like. I have seen anything like it in years.
Eugene McCarthy?
mmmkay
And you’ve never made a typo error?
Or perhaps you pay a copy editor to review all your posts?
You know full well he meant Joe McCarthy (and this time I have NO hesitation about speaking on Mr. Kjer’s behalf).
Maybe the 2000 McCain is back.This is the funny, free-range McCain, the independent who dares speak about and support increased fuel-efficiency standards. The candidate who ran against his party in 2000.
That guy — the interesting one — is back.
She has been associated with our government since 1996, and you think in all that time she has not been thoroughly checked? Rep Bachmann has been hanging out with Frank Gaffney (there is a Communist and a Brotherhood radical under every bush).
For a very interesting read, try Changemakers in which Sen McCain keeps asking his staff, who are these crazies? He was frightened by the thought process of the wing nuts- of course that makes him suspect.
Wasting an opportunity
I question the assumptions behind these aspersions:
– that the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt is necessarily our enemy;
– that this organization is the same ole outfit that Ayman al-Zawahiri belonged to;
– that the Muslim Brotherhood is a monolithic organization across all international boundaries;
– that in our foreign policy, we should have nothing whatsoever to do with it.
It seems to me there is a priceless opportunity here to mend some fences with the worldwide Islamic community by offering some consultations and even joint activity with this instance of the Muslim Brotherhood – i.e., to grow out of demonizing and engage them in a mature dialogue. After all, they did win the election, and our great American ideology calls for self-determination, right?
One problem with demonizing is the excess to which it is all-too-easily taken, leading to ignorance. This same Muslim Brotherhood is committed to alleviating poverty and inequality, it funds and operates hospitals, schools, and programs to help the destitute, programs superior in quality to those the government of Egypt has provided. Its official policy opposes violent means to achieve political ends.
While it’s true there may be some in the Muslim Brotherhood who are off the reservation, so to speak, what organization doesn’t have its outliers? For example, do the ravings of Michelle Bachmann represent the mainstream GOP? Most of the mainstream GOP would like to see her go away, she is such an embarrassment.
It would be very helpful to our country if we began dealing with responsible Muslim organizations on a basis of mutual respect.
The McCarthy-esque rantings of a fool like Michelle Bachmann have nothing to do with the fundamental interests of the United States.
The ridiculous duo strikes again…
Thank you, Dennis and Thomas. I needed a good laugh today. So funny! So ironic! With the right secret words, I’m guessing Huma Abedin will un-holster a love gun and spray rainbows across the 5th District, and force Rep. Ellison to do something! I get it! Funny! Funny! Do another one, Ridiculous Duo!
Civilized discussion
Steve Hoffman wrote:
“More crazy lies from Michele Bachmann?”; “I am SO sick of Miss Crazy Eyes and her never-ending rants.”
Rachel Weisman wrote:
“call out those from his own party for their outrageous lies?”
Logan Foreman wrote:
“If you think that Ellison seeks headlines more than Bachmann, you are more delusional than her.”
Tom Christiansen wrote:
“She is a mouthpiece without a filter, devoid of facts, and supports the fringe element of the republican party.”
Steve Roth wrote:
“I’m hoping she runs against Franken to put her loon-bat shenanigans”
Kenneth Kjer wrote:
“Bachmann and other GOP legislators are becoming almost Eugene McCarthy like.”
Ann Richards wrote:
“He was frightened by the thought process of the wing nuts- of course that makes him suspect.”
Steve Titterud wrote:
“The McCarthy-esque rantings of a fool like Michelle Bachmann”
Very complete summary
A good solid summary of a so called representative who is totally out of control. Good luck getting any accomplishments out of her. There have been zero to date and no reason to expect anything different from her. No chance of her doing anything to move America forward, but maybe that is your goal. If those are the characteristics your are looking for then, in November, Bachmann is your person.
Discussion is a two-way street
It is impossible to have a “civilized discussion” when one side refuses to acknowledge any rational acceptance of a truth greater than themselves. I take your listing of these comments and the Eugene gaffe as a way to attack the validity of the claims. I also notice Swift and Tester don’t really defend Bachmann directly or refute the responses except to make smirky comments. Hardly civilized discussiion.
I think we could turn Bachmann’s logical approach on anybody. We find someone at her church with a distant relative into some shady activity, then we accuse her of supporting that activity because she “sits right next to” their relative every week in church. Then we ask, “..and what kind of person worships a God that supports (fill in the blank).
Exactly!
And that was the greatest peril posed by the slippery slope that was McCarthyism. Bachmann adherents and folks like Mr. Smitty above would do well to heed the lessons of history instead of ignoring it.
I’m sure many here remember the premise of “Six Degrees of Separation” – that anyone on the planet can be linked to anyone else by at most six degrees of separation. What Bachmann is claiming is a “five degree of separation” link (per the McCain article) between Huma Abedin and the Muslim Brotherhood. And then she’s taking it a step farther by claiming some form of insidious influence.
As you said, by that logic, we could indict nearly anyone on the planet for nearly any wild accusatory “guilt by association” charge we cared to drum up.
This whole thing is truly pathetic (and more than a little scary due to the number of people who appear to be taking it seriously).
Let the record show
that I offered a pointed and detailed defense of Bachmann’s position that the moderators saw fit to block.
and an unpointed, non-detailed slam on McCain
just to devalue his defense. Guess what, there are Muslims out there. You will have to try to get along with most of them. Might try incorporating them into the American dream, even if they don’t fit your narrative 100%. Conservatives can’t just wave their magic wands and kill everyone that isn’t exactly like them.
No need to drag even her immediate relatives into this.
We can tie her to the Muslim Brotherhood directly, though her support of the terrorist organization MEK.
All of those quotes…
…are true and factual. Glad to see them all in one place.
And if I had 5 minutes, I could come up with a list just as long, if not longer just from comments by Tester, Swift, and yourself.
Since I’m the one who posted the list
provide your list of my comments that is equal to the barrage of uncivilized ad hominem attacks by the left wing commenters on this site.
Bring it.
Please David…
do take that five minutes. If you can find one instance where I’ve used ad hominum as an argument, I’ll donate $10 to MinnPost.
That, in case you are unfamiliar with the term, does not mean mocking behavior, motivations or comments. Ad hominum is a direct attack upon the person…”Miss Crazy Eyes” is an excellent example.
Yes sir, it’s put up or…well, you know.
Ad Hominum . . . . . .
Didn’t get mentioned until Neal’s post directly above yours.
Once again you’re trying to “change the rules” as the discussion goes along.
Nope – all that was initially mentioned by Neal when posting his list was “Civilized” (and by implication, its converse – “Un-civilized” – which was what Neal appeared to actually be trying to illustrate with his list).
On that basis, David isn’t required to find a list of “ad hominum” comments by you, Neal and Dennis – just “uncivilized” ones.
And I’m going to resist any further comment on his chances of finding those . . . . . . .
Please Thomas . . .
. . . at least trouble yourself to learn what “ad hominem” means before you use such fancy words.
Just so you know: an ad hominem attack is a logical fallacy, combining an attempt at argumentation with the personal attack. Saying that one is sick of “Miss Crazy Eyes and her never-ending rants” is not an ad hominem attack.
Of course, Mr. Krasnoff will doubtless harp on the comment as “uncivil.” He does that, you know.
Just to humor you, Thomas: “Angry Al”
Let’s go, Mr. Galitz.
Provide your list of my comments that is equal to the barrage of uncivilized ad hominem attacks by the left wing commenters on this site.
Angry Al
Yes, I’ve seen and heard that.
I’m not sure that rises to a personal attack; being angry isn’t necessarily a bad thing, and I could provide plenty of examples of where Al has lost his temper. But giving you the leeway to use it as an example, please show us where I’ve used it on MinnPost.
yes, it’s a personal attack. It’s based on a false campaign ad where they present a story told by Franken about Wellstone cheering his son at a cross country meet as an angry rant.
As for your usage of it: http://www.minnpost.com/dc-dispatches/2011/11/klobuchar-infrastructure-bill-fails
I don’t know that story
I believe that Franken earned his “angry” description honestly.
Feb 4, 2010 – Al Franken ripped into White House senior adviser David Axelrod this week … That uncertainty appeared to trigger Franken’s anger http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0210/32561.html
Al Franken lays into David Axelrod over health care bill http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0210/32561.html
Al Franken Angrily Rushes Senator Coleman After Debate newsbusters.org › Blogs › Warner Todd Huston’s blog
Even MinnPost takes note:
“Franken took the extraordinary step of insisting on attacking a witness.”
Franken’s temper tantrums have been documented far and wide. As I said, I’m not sure that’s even seen as a detriment by many of his supporters. Nice try though.
you asked for an example. I provided one.
You can now weasel away, move the goalposts, or choose whatever metaphor for dishonest debate you want.
So glad MinnPost has comment moderation…
Mr. Tester, the moderation has been pretty lenient in putting up some of the things that you and Mr. Swift have posted. And many of my more intemperate comments have been rejected.
I guess we will just have to trust their judgment in these matters.
The MinnPost moderation system is the best in the Twin Cities.
re: moderation
“The MinnPost moderation system is the best in the Twin Cities.”
Just like e-Democracy?
No, Mr. Krasnoff
The rules for posting on E-Democracy.org are quite different.
You might want to have a careful look at them.
link: http://bit.ly/LZgHrR
On the contrary, Mr. Gleason
From personal experience, and you can check my posts at e-Democracy, as well as other posters – anyone who doesn’t fall in line with the progs (i.e. DFL, Green, left wing, et. al) is at the receiving end of selective enforcement of the “rules”, suspended and eventually kicked out.
On the contrary, Mr. Kraznoff?
You asked if MinnPost commenting behavior was the same as E-Democracy and I said no and pointed you to the rules.
Are you complaining that people like yourself, Mr. Tester, and Mr. Swift are being subjected to comment moderation in a different way than the “progs” on MinnPost?
What does E-Democracy have to do with this discussion?
What does E-Democracy have to do with this discussion?
I was making an analogy, given the politics of Minnpost.
A poor analogy, given the facts provided…
If you have a complaint about MinnPost commenting policy being unfair to people like you, Tester, and Swift, please make it, rather than beating about the bush…
I have to wonder how prominent her speaking role will be at the GOP National Convention.
If our government lacked crooks and fools it would not be accurately representative of the people.
Neal
I am standing by my comments- wing-nut was one of the cleaner words the Senator used in inquiring where ‘those people came from’ Read the book – he was increasingly concerned about the level of discourse and unfounded charges and comments toward candidate Obama and others. Are you implying I should have changed McCains words? He discussed his concerns about the fringe of the Republicans with his staff on many occasions.