Will anyone hold Jimmy Carter to account for his hugs-for-Hamas sabotage? Bloggers have watched and waited for several days for signs of life in Washington. And it looks like someone woke up: GOP Rep. Sue Myrick issued a press release earlier today calling for his passport to be revoked (hat tip – WZ):
Today, Rep. Sue Myrick (NC-9) called on Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to revoke former President Jimmy Carter’s passport. This is in response to the former President traveling to Syria to meet with Hamas, an organization officially designated by the United States as a Foreign Terrorist Organization.
“Former President Carter has acted in contradiction of international agreements to isolate Hamas. He has acted in defiance of both United States policy and international policy. His actions reward terrorists, lend support, and provide legitimacy to their belief that violence will eventually get them what they want,” said Rep. Myrick.
After Hamas won the 2006 Palestinian parliamentary elections the Quartet (US, UN, EU and Russia) called on Hamas to renounce terror, recognize Israel and recognize the previous agreements between the Palestinian Authority and Israel as they seek an agreement to make peace. Hamas has categorically rejected these three conditions for more than two years.
Congress granted the Secretary of State the power to grant and verify passports. In 1981, the United States Supreme Court held in the case of Haig v. Agee that the Secretary of State has the implied power to revoke passports as well (453 U.S. 280).
If not that, how about a one-way ticket to Syria? That would do just fine, wouldn’t it?
On another front, GOP Rep. Joe Knollenberg is calling for taxpayer funding to be withdrawn from Carter’s academic organization:
A U.S. lawmaker introduced legislation Wednesday to strip former President Jimmy Carter’s Georgia-based scholarly institution of taxpayer support because of Carter’s plans to meet with the top leaders of the Palestinian terror group Hamas.
And a second lawmaker presented a non-binding resolution that would urge former presidents from “freelance diplomacy” in direct response to Carter’s visit.
Carter is set to set to meet Thursday with Mahmoud Zahar, a top Hamas leader with control over militants in the Gaza Strip, and he met Tuesday with a high-ranked Hamas politician.
But the heaviest criticism for Carter is coming over a planned meeting on Friday with Hamas’ exiled leader Khaled Meshal.
“America must speak with one voice against our terrorist enemies,” Rep. Joe Knollenberg, R-Mich., said in a statement from his office. “It sends a fundamentally troubling message when an American dignitary is engaged in dialogue with terrorists. My legislation will make sure that taxpayer dollars are not being used to support discussions or negotiations with terrorist groups.”
Knollenberg said the Carter Center has received about $19 million in taxpayer funds since 2001. He named his bill the Coordinated American Response to Extreme Radicals Act — or CARTER Act, for short. The Carter Center is housed at Emory University in Atlanta.
Chickens coming home to roost, as they say.
Meanwhile, via The Forward, some Dems worry about the Carter factor at the Democrat National Convention this summer. More havoc to be wrought on the anarchy-filled agenda in Denver. It’s the can’t-miss moonbat-a-palooza of the year:
Former president Jimmy Carter’s controversial peace mission to the Middle East this week, which included high-profile visits with top leaders of the Islamist militant group Hamas, is causing some liberal observers to worry that the elder statesman may create headaches for the party at its nominating convention in Denver.
With the presidential campaign raising the stakes for Democrats this year, several party insiders told the Forward that finding the right role for the former president — a Nobel laureate who brokered the first Israeli-Arab peace accord three decades ago — at the August parley would likely require delicate maneuvering.
“I would say publicly dissing a former president of your party is a tricky and somewhat unpleasant thing to do,” said one Democratic campaign official. “My guess is if it came down to it, people would try to give him the respect that’s appropriate to a former president, without giving him a platform to say things that are difficult for the party or the nominee.”
The current dust-up is not the first time that Carter has complicated the political fortunes of fellow Democrats with his outspoken political activism. Two years ago, on the eve of mid-term elections in which his party regained control of Congress, the former president prepared to publish a controversial book, titled “Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid,” which placed the bulk of the blame on Israel for its continuing conflict with the Palestinians. The book’s release provided considerable fodder to the GOP — the Republican Jewish Coalition placed advertisements featuring Carter in Jewish newspapers across the country — and consternation for the Democratic leaders, who publicly condemned the book.
“The Republicans would love to see Carter at the convention giving a speech,” said veteran Democratic political consultant Hank Sheinkopf. “If he has a role at the convention, you can rest assured that it will wind up on film, in a television commercial or on YouTube, as a weapon against Democrats.”