First, I’ve met Jim Graves. He’s friendly enough but he isn’t the substantive candidate that’s needed to defeat Michele Bachmann. His latest statement on Michele’s Muslim Brotherhood flap isn’t substantive or accurate. Here’s the text of his statement:

Michele Bachmann just won’t stop.

Even after fellow Republicans have condemned her ruthless attacks, accurately comparing her to Sen. Joe McCarthy, she’s taking her dangerous witch-hunt to a new level.

She outrageously insists that people like Huma Abedin and Rep. Keith Ellison are part of a scheme to overthrow the government and institute Sharia law.

The evidence? Sixteen pages of Rep. Bachmann’s conjectures and wild conspiracy theories.

This isn’t the first time Rep. Bachmann has used these vicious and intolerant tactics to build her celebrity by appealing to the radical fringe. But let’s make it the last.

Sign up here to demand that Michele Bachmann end her McCarthy-style attacks and wild conspiracies.

First, Graves crossed the line when he said that Michele thinks “Huma Abedin and Rep. Keith Ellison are part of a scheme to overthrow the government and institute Sharia law.” That’s an outright lie. She’s never made that type of statement.

What Michele did, along with Reps. Tom Rooney, Lynn Westmoreland, Trent Franks and Louie Gohmert, was send “letters to the Inspectors General of the State Department, the Department of Justice, Homeland Security, Department of Defense and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence asking for investigations into the influence of the Muslim Brotherhood in these agencies.”

Since sending out those letters, Michele’s said on radio that she’s worried about the influence the Muslim Brotherhood might have on US foreign policy. In this Examiner article, I quoted Andrew McCarthy’s article to show how substantive and accurate Michele’s information is. Here’s one of the things Mr. McCarthy said:

Ms. Abedin’s father, the late Syed Z. Abedin, was an Indian-born Islamic academic who founded the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs in Saudi Arabia. That institute was backed by the Muslim World League. As the Hudson Institute’s Zeyno Baran relates, the MWL was started by the Saudi government in 1962 “with Brotherhood members in key leadership positions.” It has served as the principal vehicle for the propagation of Islamic supremacism by the Saudis and the Brotherhood.

That’s significant because of MWL’s connections with terrorist families:

MWL promotes Wahhabism, the extremist form of Islam practiced in Saudi Arabia. In the 1980s, the League’s Pakistan office was run by Mohammed Jamal Khalifa, a senior member of the Muslim Brotherhood and brother-in-law of Osama bin Laden.

Is Mr. Graves suggesting that we shouldn’t investigate a person whose father had ties to bin Laden’s family? I wouldn’t presume that this automatically proves that Ms. Abedin is a Muslim Brotherhood plant but I’d expect the government to investigate Ms. Abedin thoroughly. In fact, according to Mr. McCarthy, that connection alone might disqualify Ms. Abedin from getting a security clearance:

No criminal behavior need be shown to deny a security clearance; access to classified information is not a right, and reasonable fear of “divided loyalties” is more than sufficient for a clearance to be denied.

That’s been the policy for security clearances for at least 25 years.

Mr. Graves titled this statement “Witch Hunt”, supposedly to add dramatic effect where it doesn’t exist. Mr. Graves, if Michele is on a witch hunt, how is it that there’s this much substance to her claims? It isn’t just Ms. Abedin’s late father who had ties to radical Islam:

Dr. Abedin has led the International Islamic Committee for Woman and Child (IICWC), an Islamist organization that hews to the positions of Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the Brotherhood’s leading sharia jurist. Like Brotherhood entities, the IICWC defends such practices as female genital mutilation and child marriage, which find support in Islamic law and scripture.

Huma Abedin’s father had connections with the bin Laden family. Her mother is a important part of an organization whose ideology would fit right in with the pre-9/11 Taliban in Afghanistan. Why would anyone think that she’d be worth investigating before giving a security clearance?

Seriously, if this is the witch hunt that Mr. Graves argues it is, why is Michele finding so many disturbing facts about a woman with a high level security clearance?

If this is the best attack Mr. Graves can muster against Michele, he’d best start writing his concession speech because that statement is crap that a lowly blogger like myself will blast to smithereens.

One last thing that’s worth noting. Andrew McCarthy isn’t some wet-behind-the-ears apprentice when it comes to terrorism. Mr. McCarthy was the lead prosecutor who convicted the Blind Sheikh of masterminding the first attack on the World Trade Center.

If Mr. Graves wants to attack Michele, he’ll have to prove Mr. McCarthy wrong. Frankly, I don’t see that happening.

The Sixth District needs a representative who isn’t an apprentice, someone who won’t need on-the-job-training in national security matters. That disqualifies Mr. Graves.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

One Response to “Jim Graves attacks Michele Bachmann”

  • John N says:

    I don’t see how anyone can trust what Bachmann has to say anymore. Were you not there during the early stages of Republican presidential nomination process? Who is following this idiot. I don’t see how any other candidates could be worse. At least anyone replacing Bachmann will not have a big ego (yet).

Leave a Reply