Jansing and Co | July 19, 2012
>> congressman, good morning.
>> good morning.
>> michele bachmann says she has sent you evidence about her concerns. what's your reaction to what you got in the mail?
>> she has sent me no evidence. she has sent me a 16-page document full of allegations, rehashed, regurgitated. just stuff from anti-muslim websites. but she's sent me no evidence. she sent me another follow-up letter, no evidence contained there either. but if she has some, i do hope she's forthcoming with it. i hope she does not try to broadcast it for any kind of a political advantage, but gives it to the proper authorities if it is meritorious. but otherwise, i wish she would just stop this mccarthy is tick witch hunt .
>> she got your letter and issued a statement yesterday. i want to read part of it. the letters my colleagues and i sent on june 13 and the follow-up letter i wrote to represent ellison on july 13, are unfortunately being distorted. the intention of the letters was to outline the serious national concerns i had and ask for answers regarding the muslim brotherhood and other radical group's access to top obama administration officials. so are the letters being distorted?
>> no. her letters are being accurately interpreted and if you look at the response of ed rollins and if you look at the statement by senator mccain , it is clear that all sides of the political spectrum , she's being actually well understood and she's trying to claim being distorted so she can not face the consequences of what she did. but the fact is, no, she's being well-understood. her most recent letter to me she seemed to have dropped the huma abedin issue. she's dropped that issue and is on to something else. she's sort of like groping at this point.
>> one of the things she said in this letter is she's concerned about the dangerous national security situation and i will not be silent she wrote as this administration appeases our enemies. but you obviously think this is purely political. what do you think about the timing of it?
>> well, you know, here's what i think about it. i think that if you are a member of the permanent select committee on intelligence , which she is, if you're a lawyer, which she is, then if you have what you believe is real information that poses a threat to the nation, you should give it to the proper authorities and she can get a classified briefing, she does not have to go public trying to tear down the reputation of good people like huma abedin , mohammed madge i and others. the fact is, she's gone public because she -- that is her goal. to get attention for her position, not to really go out after seeking out the national security angle. because, of course, she could do that if that was her real goal.
>> this is a woman who ran for president. she's someone who served with you on the financial services and oversight investigations committee.
>> have you always had a good working relationship with her? what do you think this is about?
>> yeah. i know michele well. i like her. she and i served in the state legislature in minnesota together. i have no personal difficulties with her. i think she's personally charming person. i think what she did is so beyond the pale that she must apologize. i'm not the only one who thinks so. as i said, ed rollins and senator mccain and a whole host of other people. we went through the mccarthy era . it was a bad time for our country. we learned something. i hope that she learns what the rest of us learned, which is that unsupported allegations of disloyalty are out of line.
>> congressman keith ellison , good to have you on the program. thank you so much for making the time.