U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) and four other House colleagues are making things uncomfortable for an Obama administration that has a decided tolerance for Islamists. In doing so, Bachmann and company have raised two important questions. First, they want to know how Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s top aide, deputy chief of staff Huma Abedin, got security clearance, despite having relatives with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. Second, they would like an investigation conducted regarding the “potential Muslim Brotherhood infiltration” of the Obama administration. For their efforts, they were challenged by Muslim Congressman Keith Ellison (D-MN). Ms. Bachmann’s response, detailing her concerns and those of her colleagues, reveals the extent to which this administration has been tainted–or quite possibly corrupted–by Islamist influences.
The story begins on June 13, when Bachmann, and four other members of the House, Reps. Trent Franks (R-AZ), Louie Gohmert (R-TX), Thomas Rooney (R-FL) and Lynn Westmoreland (R-GA) sent five separate letters to five separate Inspectors General. The letters expressed concerns about Muslim Brotherhood infiltration of the government in general, and Huma Abedin’s familial connections with the Muslim Brotherhood in particular.
Abedin’s associations are quite relevant. Last year, in an investigation initiated by Walid Phares, the names of 63 leaders who belonged to the Muslim Sisterhood, essentially a female version of the Muslim Brotherhood, were revealed. One of them turned out to be Ms. Abedin’s mother, Saleha. Another was Najla Ali Mahmoud, wife of Egypt’s recently-elected president, Mohamed Morsi. Both women are members of the group’s Guidance Bureau. Furthermore, Abedin’s brother, Hassan, has had relationships with terrorist Omar Naseef, founder of the Rabita Trust, which funded Islamic militants in Kashmir, as well as terrorist supporter and rabid anti-Semite Shiekh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi.
Based on familial associations alone, it does not appear unreasonable to wonder how Ms. Abedin could have the kind of security clearance that gives her unrestricted access to Secretary of State Clinton. But the story takes an even more curious turn, due to the fact that Ms. Abedin is married to former U.S. Congressman Anthony Weiner, who was forced to resign in disgrace after he got caught in a sexting scandal last year. Phares asks why practicing Muslim Huma wasn’t disowned by her family for marrying a Jewish person — or why Huma hasn’t disavowed the views expressed by the Sisterhood. Phares expresses the possibility that Abedin is practicing Muruna, a technique of deception that allows Muslims to go to extreme lengths (even marrying a non-Muslim) to further the cause of Islam. Bachmann’s inquiry addressed Abedin’s relationships, her access to Clinton, and the State Department actions “that have been enormously favorable to the Muslim Brotherhood and its interests.”
Enter Congressman Ellison. On July 13th, he sent a letter to his five colleagues “to gather more information on the allegations you made” regarding Abedin, as well as those levied against “Brotherhood operatives” within the government, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) and Muslim Advocates. Ellison implies that the sole source of Bachmann’s allegations is the “MuslimBrotherhoodinAmerica.com, a Web site created by Frank Gaffney of the Center for Security Policy (CSP).”
Ellison contends that Gaffney has been “widely discredited” and said he “has a long history of making unsubstantiated anti-Muslim allegations.” He finishes his letter with a request for “a full accounting of the sources you used to make the serious allegations against the individuals and organizations in your letters. If there is not credible, substantial evidence for your allegations, I sincerely hope that you will publically (sic) clear their names.”
Ms. Bachmann was more than happy to reply — and her 16-page letter containing 59 separate footnotes completely undercuts Ellison’s implication that Gaffney was her only source. “I do note that the facts we presented in the Inspector General request letters are based on information presented by U.S. Government officials in court documents, court evidence, correspondence and briefings with Congress and public statements, in addition to known media reporting,” Bachmann writes. “These letters were far from sole-sourced as you maintain in your letter.”