If it seems like people pay a lot of attention to one Senate candidate, Michigan Democrat Abdul El-Sayed, it’s because voters nationwide should treat him like he’s on the ballot.
What do I mean by that? Well, as our Jack DeVine recently argued, “The Michigan Democrat represents the radical socialist positions increasingly held by Democrats across the country.” He added, “Imagine that your ballot is a referendum on socialism — an abrupt switch from the free enterprise and capitalism that has served us so well for 250 years to the democratic socialism espoused by the rapidly ascendant Democratic Socialists of America (DSA).”
Exactly.
But don’t take our word for it. Ask Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who said, “If Abdul can win in Michigan, anybody can win anywhere.”
That’s why President Donald Trump stumped for Mike Rogers in Michigan on Sunday, saying things about El-Sayed that the Leftmedia contorted into “Islamophobia.”
The Leftmedia did that after 9/11, too, twisting the fact that 19 Islamofascist radicals killed nearly 3,000 Americans into a story about the backlash against all the peaceful Muslims. In last night’s headline, The New York Times trumpeted, “In Islamophobic Rant, Trump Seeks to Stir Republican Base in Michigan.”
There’s no question Trump used edgy rhetoric. That’s, you know, kind of his thing. “If Abdul and the Democrats win,” the president warned, “they will open the floodgates and invite hordes of jihadis to our shores, creating a nightmare of violence and terror until you cannot even have a Christmas.”
The Times “news” story quoted that before delving into the kind of obnoxious editorializing for which it has become famous:
Mr. Trump called Dr. El-Sayed, whose family immigrated from Egypt, a “jihadist Muslim Brotherhood member,” a baseless claim. He then contrasted Dr. El-Sayed, a Muslim who was born in the United States, with his Republican opponent, Mike Rogers, who is white and also born in the United States.
Calling Donald Trump a fascist is a baseless claim, but that doesn’t stop anyone on the Left — including the Times on Friday — from routinely comparing him to Adolf Hitler.
By contrast, calling El-Sayed a “jihadist Muslim Brotherhood member” is an arguable assertion. Thanks to actual journalism by reporters not at The New York Times, we know El-Sayed’s connections to the Muslim Brotherhood are all too real, even if he finally and exasperatedly answered a reporter, “I clearly disavow” the movement after weeks of refusing to do so. Democrats always say whatever they need to in order to hide who they are.
Besides, this is the same Abdulrahman El-Sayed who wrote publicly in support of the Muslim Brotherhood in 2011 and publicly signed a letter in 2012 to back Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood.
Also, while a student at the University of Michigan, El-Sayed was president of the Muslim Students Association, founded by the Muslim Brotherhood. How do I know? The New York Times reported it — conspicuously leaving out the Brotherhood connection.
Instead of talking about any of that, the Times obsesses over Trump’s word “member” to discredit the ideological alarm that El-Sayed is a fellow traveler with the Brotherhood.
Furthermore, being born in the United States does not automatically make a person a defender of American Liberty. That’s part of the outrage over the Supreme Court’s decision on birthright citizenship.
Trump wasn’t done.
“Anyone with that record of support for jihadists would be screened and unable to get a seat on an airplane. They certainly should not give him a seat in the United States Senate,” he argued. “He would be the only senator that will have to go through a metal detector before he’s allowed to go into the Senate.”
That line is partly meant for laughs, but it’s mostly meant as a real warning about the radical red-green alliance threatening American Liberty.
Before the rally, Trump took to Truth Social to make a similar case: “Abdulrahman Mohamed El-Sayed wants our Country to go to Sharia Law.” That, combined with the Left’s push for socialism, would be unbelievably destructive to our nation.
Yet the Times wants you to think that “Trump’s message in Michigan seemed aimed at overtly stoking a fear of Muslims.” Is the Times arguing there’s no difference between Muslims and radical left-wing sharia Muslims?
“I don’t understand the national press,” said Mike Rogers. “They have to work and twist themselves in knots not to understand Abdul’s relationship with the thinking of the Muslim Brotherhood.”
El-Sayed constantly wraps himself in the Constitution, even though his ideology is antithetical to it. In fact, he wants to pack the Supreme Court and abolish the Second Amendment. Also, he defends and advocates for sharia on a personal level, but that’s the rub — sharia is not just personal; it’s whole of life and government.
He disingenuously treats questions about his Muslim Brotherhood associations like opposition to John F. Kennedy over questions about his Catholicism. But one thing’s for sure — he’s no JFK. A second thing is also sure — critiquing the ideology and formative influences of a candidate for U.S. Senate is not “Islamophobia.” It’s what all Americans should do of every candidate for office.
