Mike Rogers’s 9/11 accusation against Abdul El-Sayed
Mike Rogers attributed a belief about 9/11 to Abdul El-Sayed based on his association with Hasan Piker. El-Sayed rejected that belief and challenged the premise that campaigning together establishes agreement.
Case period:
Published by The Dispute Index editorial teamPublished Updated
Overview
Rogers’s August 5 campaign statement (opens in a new tab) concerns a belief he attributed to El-Sayed, not a quotation spoken by El-Sayed. The statement associated with Hasan Piker must not be reassigned to a different speaker. In his earlier Fox & Friends interview (opens in a new tab), El-Sayed expressly rejected justifying 9/11 while defending his choice of campaign company.
The competing argument concerns whether declining to disavow an ally warrants an adverse inference about political judgment or beliefs. El-Sayed’s August 5 response (opens in a new tab) called the attacks divisive; the campaign’s August 6 explanation is separately attributed to spokesperson Alyssa Brouillet. This is distinct from DI’s cases about Piker’s other statements and El-Sayed’s Temple Israel remarks. The displayed publication date is August 7, 2026. The April interview is earlier context, not a response to the later Rogers statement. Day-only dates do not establish a precise time of day.
Image: El-Sayed testifying before the U.S. Senate HELP Committee in 2024, not during these campaign exchanges. Public-domain U.S. Senate photograph via Wikimedia Commons (opens in a new tab), cropped by Dispute Index.
In an August 5 Pod Save America episode (opens in a new tab), Jon Favreau and Dan Pfeiffer played an NRSC ad that used Piker’s 9/11 remark and analyzed its campaign strategy. Their statements are classified as mixed or conditional assessments of the ad’s construction and possible effectiveness, not as endorsements of the allegation or direct verdicts on Rogers’s separate attribution.
People in this case
Mike RogersDirectly involved
Abdul El-SayedDirectly involved
Hasan PikerDirectly involved
Donald TrumpCommented
Timeline
14 timeline entries on this page. Dates: April 7, 2026 to October 25, 2026
April 2026
Earlier context: El-Sayed rejects justifying 9/11
Before campaigning with Piker, El-Sayed rejects the underlying sentiment while defending appearing with people whose views he does not share.
[01]El-Sayed rejects justifying 9/11 while defending campaigning with Hasan Piker
Original broadcaster’s account and embedded interview. El-Sayed rejects justification of 9/11 and argues that sharing an appearance need not signal agreement. This predates Rogers’s August accusation and is included as relevant context, not presented as a response made afterward.
El-Sayed rejects justifying 9/11 while defending campaigning with Hasan PikerOpening interview quotations about 9/11 and appearing with someone without agreeing; embedded video 6392681742112
August 2026
Rogers issues the accusation; El-Sayed challenges the attacks
Claim
Rogers’s primary-response statement attributes a belief about 9/11 to El-Sayed. El-Sayed’s evening interview attacks his opponents’ framing as divisive.
[02]Mike Rogers
Complete campaign statement. The accusation concerns El-Sayed’s supposed belief; it does not supply a quotation from him endorsing the attacks. Rogers’s campaign subsequently defended the inference by pointing to El-Sayed’s association with Hasan Piker. Other allegations in the release are outside this case.
Mike Rogers’s August 5 statement following the Michigan Senate primary · Mike RogersParagraph beginning with Rogers’s counterterrorism experience and ending with the accusation about America deserving 9/11[03]El-Sayed responds to Rogers’s attacks in his August 5 All In interview
The broadcaster embeds the full August 5 interview and quotes El-Sayed’s response; its accompanying article was published August 6. The YouTube mirror is ZxcOGYPE16w. The broadcaster’s text and PolitiFact corroborate the response and date.
El-Sayed responds to Rogers’s attacks in his August 5 All In interviewOriginal interview embedded at top, dated August 5; paragraphs quoting El-Sayed on division and IslamophobiaRogers’s campaign supplies its rationale
Reaction
Brouillet points to El-Sayed’s reluctance to disavow Piker in an email response documented by PolitiFact the next day.
[04]PolitiFact documents Rogers’s accusation and his campaign’s supporting rationale
Original reporting includes the campaign’s response to a request for its evidence. Brouillet’s statement is a direct quotation from that exchange, not an inference from silence. The report distinguishes El-Sayed’s explicit rejection of justifying 9/11 from his refusal to disavow an ally. We record that distinction without adopting PolitiFact’s rating as the case’s purpose.
PolitiFact documents Rogers’s accusation and his campaign’s supporting rationaleAlyssa Brouillet quotation; linked full April 7 event at 3:12:12; sources identify August 6 campaign email exchangePolitiFact rates Rogers's 9/11 claim Pants on Fire
PolitiFact rated Rogers's statement that El-Sayed believes America deserved 9/11 Pants on Fire, its lowest rating. It said the remark came from Hasan Piker in 2019, not El-Sayed, and cited El-Sayed's April statement that 9/11 was not justified.
[05]PolitiFact: Mike Rogers falsely ties Abdul El-Sayed to Twitch streamer's 9/11 comments
Source excerpt
Of course I don’t think 9/11 was justified. Because you appear with somebody doesn’t mean you agree with him on everything.
PolitiFact fact-check rating Pants on Fire a Rogers claim tying El-Sayed to Piker's 9/11 remark. It quotes El-Sayed's Fox & Friends answer rejecting the remark and the Rogers campaign's reply, including spokesperson Alyssa Brouillet's statement that El-Sayed would not disavow Piker's comments when asked.
PolitiFact: Mike Rogers falsely ties Abdul El-Sayed to Twitch streamer's 9/11 commentsPassages quoting El-Sayed's Fox & Friends interview and the Rogers campaign's responseFactCheck.org calls Rogers's 9/11 claim false
FactCheck.org wrote that Rogers had provided no evidence that El-Sayed believes America deserved 9/11 and called the claim false. It reported that the Rogers campaign had not answered its request for supporting evidence and had told PolitiFact the claim rested on El-Sayed declining to disavow Piker. In an August 11 update, FactCheck.org added that the campaign had since responded, saying El-Sayed refused to disavow Piker's comments at an April 7 campaign event and refused to renounce Piker in an August 5 CNN interview.
[06]FactCheck.org: Rogers Makes False 9/11 Claim About El-Sayed
Source excerpt
I’m not here to disavow people’s views. I’m here to have a conversation about how to get money out of politics, put money back in pockets, and pass Medicare for all.
FactCheck.org article documenting that El-Sayed rejected Piker's 9/11 remark when asked directly, while quoting his April 7 refusal to offer a general disavowal of Piker's views and his August 5 CNN answer declining to renounce Piker. Updated August 11 with the Rogers campaign's response.
FactCheck.org: Rogers Makes False 9/11 Claim About El-SayedPassages on the April 7 campaign event and the August 5 CNN interview
September 2026
Emmer repeats a 9/11-related attack on El-Sayed at the GOP convention
Reaction
Emmer called El-Sayed an “evil man” and tied him to people he said believed Americans deserved the September 11 attacks. The sources document Emmer’s attributed statement and do not establish the allegation about El-Sayed.
[07]Associated Press reports Tom Emmer’s GOP convention remarks about Abdul El-Sayed
Source excerpt
This evil man pals around with people who believe Americans deserved to be attacked on 9/11.
AP reports and quotes Emmer’s GOP convention remarks. The source attributes the statement to Emmer; it does not establish the underlying accusation about El-Sayed.
Associated Press reports Tom Emmer’s GOP convention remarks about Abdul El-SayedParagraph identifying Tom Emmer’s convention remarks about Abdul El-Sayed and Hasan Piker.[08]Audio replay preserving Tom Emmer’s GOP convention remarks
Source excerpt
This evil man pals around with people who believe Americans deserved to be attacked on 9/11.
Audio replay preserving the convention-speech segment used to corroborate the attribution and wording reported by AP. It is a rebroadcast archive, not an official convention recording.
Audio replay preserving Tom Emmer’s GOP convention remarksAudio replay at 2:12:04–2:12:21.Rogers campaign publishes a collection of 9/11-related testimonials
Source release
A September 10 campaign release collected selected statements and linked videos from Jon Turnbull, David Beamer, David and Tricia Nadeau, and Joaquin Guerrero. The videos were issued between September 8 and 10; this event records the compilation's publication, not their recording dates or independent endorsements of every Rogers allegation. No individual video quotation is newly classified here without a full context check. The timestamp is the compilation's verified publication time, not the individual videos' recording times.
[09]Mike Rogers
Original campaign release dated September 10 compiling selected quotations and links to videos published between September 8 and 10. This supports the dated compilation/publication action only. Recording times and full audiovisual context for the individual videos have not been established; the quotations are not being made into separate reaction records. Rejection of the claim that America deserved 9/11 does not by itself establish agreement that El-Sayed personally made or holds that claim. The publication timestamp is the campaign page's, not the individual videos' recording times.
Rogers campaign releases a collection of 9/11-related testimonials · Mike RogersSeptember 10 release with named sections for Jon Turnbull, David Beamer, David and Tricia Nadeau, and Joaquin GuerreroRogers repeats his rationale against El-Sayed in a campaign release
Reaction
A Rogers campaign release published excerpts from a Hannity appearance in which he said El-Sayed could not separate himself from Hasan Piker’s language and alleged that El-Sayed would not disavow Piker. The release restates Rogers’s rationale for his earlier attribution; it does not independently establish El-Sayed’s beliefs or the underlying claims about Piker.
[10]Mike Rogers
Source excerpt
He can’t walk away from this, and he said multiple times that he won’t disavow what [Hasan Piker] said.
Rogers’s campaign release publishes excerpts it attributes to Rogers’s September 16 Hannity appearance. Rogers alleges that El-Sayed is responsible for Piker’s language because of their association and because, Rogers says, El-Sayed would not disavow Piker. The release does not independently establish the underlying descriptions of Piker’s statements, El-Sayed’s views, or the campaign’s other allegations.
Mike Rogers renews criticism of Abdul El-Sayed over Hasan Piker · Mike RogersOpening and sections “On Conman Abdul El-Sayed’s Running Mate Hasan Piker” and “On Conman Abdul El-Sayed Begging for Chuck Schumer’s Money.”Piker tells Axios the U.S. commits more terrorism than al-Qaeda; El-Sayed rejects the comparison
Reaction
In an interview for "The Axios Show" published September 17, Hasan Piker answered "Pound for pound as far as the number of deaths, yes" when asked whether America commits more terrorism than the organization behind the September 11 attacks, and said the United States has "caused tremendous terror all around the world." Abdul El-Sayed, for whom Piker campaigned in Michigan's Democratic Senate primary, said in a statement to Axios that he did not agree and did not give much weight to a social media streamer's statements. The exchange renewed the association at the centre of this case; Axios reported that Republican-aligned groups have spent nearly $3 million targeting El-Sayed over it. Piker's claim and the responses to it are recorded in a separate case.
[11]Axios: "Hasan Piker on 'The Axios Show': America worse than al-Qaeda 'pound for pound'"
Source excerpt
Pound for pound as far as the number of deaths, yes.
Axios write-up of an exclusive interview with Hasan Piker for a new episode of "The Axios Show," datelined Los Angeles and published September 17, 2026. Asked whether America commits more terrorism than the organization behind the September 11 attacks, Piker answered "Pound for pound as far as the number of deaths, yes" and added "We have caused tremendous terror all around the world." The piece's "why it matters" section ties the remarks to Republican attacks in the Michigan Senate race after Democratic nominee Abdul El-Sayed had Piker campaign for him in the primary. The published article is brief; fuller quotation from the same interview is carried in TheWrap's report.
[12]TheWrap: "Hasan Piker Stands by Calling America the 'Top Dog in Terrorism' in Contentious Interview"
Source excerpt
I do not agree with this statement, nor do I give much weight to the statements made by a social media streamer.
TheWrap report of September 17, 2026 carrying fuller quotation from Piker's Axios interview than the Axios article itself, including his citation of a U.S. missile strike on an elementary school in Minab, Iran, and his statement that the analysis "doesn't justify" the September 11 attacks. It also carries Abdul El-Sayed's full statement to Axios rejecting the comparison, and his separate Fox 2 Detroit debate remarks of September 15 on why he engages with Piker. It notes the Associated Press found evidence at least one U.S. missile struck the school, that the Trump administration has not released the Pentagon investigation's findings, and that the death toll remains unknown; the 140 figure is Piker's.
Rogers campaign fundraising email repeats 9/11 accusation against El-Sayed
Claim
Political Emails preserved a Rogers for Senate fundraising email that says Rogers was running against someone who believes America deserved 9/11 and describes the opponent’s ideology as a threat to the country’s way of life and national security. The archive reports a September 20 sent time; it documents the campaign’s wording but does not establish the underlying accusation.
[13]Rogers for Senate email preserved by Political Emails (September 20, 2026)
Source excerpt
But never in a million years did I think I would be running for the U.S. Senate against someone who believes America deserved 9/11.
Political Emails identifies the sender as Mike Rogers <[email protected]>, lists Rogers for Senate as the payer, and reports a September 20 sent time. The message repeats the campaign’s accusation about Abdul El-Sayed and says his ideology threatens the country’s way of life and national security. The archive documents the message and its displayed metadata; it does not independently prove the underlying accusation.
Rogers for Senate email preserved by Political Emails (September 20, 2026)Metadata table; body paragraph beginning “But never in a million years did I think…”Rogers renews call for El-Sayed to disavow Piker
Reaction
Rogers said El-Sayed had invited “dangerous rhetoric” by campaigning with Hasan Piker and called for an apology to Rep. Stevens, condemnation of supporter rhetoric, and a disavowal of Piker. The post records Rogers’s campaign position; it does not independently establish the conduct or rhetoric to which he referred.
[14]Mike Rogers
Source excerpt
“Abdul should apologize to Congresswoman Stevens immediately, condemn this unacceptable rhetoric coming from his supporter, and disavow Hasan Piker.”
Rogers said Abdul El-Sayed had invited “dangerous rhetoric” by campaigning with Hasan Piker and called for an apology to Rep. Stevens, condemnation of supporter rhetoric, and a disavowal of Piker. The post supplies Rogers’s campaign position; it does not independently establish the conduct or rhetoric to which he refers and does not repeat the earlier allegation that El-Sayed believed America deserved the September 11 attacks.
Mike Rogers calls on Abdul El-Sayed to disavow Hasan Piker · Mike RogersX post published September 20, 2026, at 02:10:32 UTC.
October 2026
Mediaite reports El-Sayed's response about Piker after debate
Source release
Mediaite reported that El-Sayed responded to Vittert's question about Hasan Piker's 9/11 remark by distinguishing a president's power from a streamer's influence. The report describes an October 8 post-debate exchange. It does not report a new endorsement of the remark.
[15]Mediaite reports El-Sayed's post-debate answer about Piker
Mediaite report republished by Yahoo, dated October 9 at 12:27 a.m. EDT. It quotes an October 8 exchange distinguishing a president's power from a streamer's influence.
Mediaite reports El-Sayed's post-debate answer about PikerExchange with Leland Vittert after Thursday's Senate debateDetroit Metro Times calls Rogers's 9/11 claim false and stops seeking his campaign's comment
Reaction
A Detroit Metro Times analysis by Steve Neavling described as false Rogers's claim that El-Sayed "believes America deserved 9/11". It noted that PolitiFact had rated the claim Pants on Fire in August. The paper said it would no longer seek comment from Rogers's campaign, citing what it called falsehoods and bigoted attacks on El-Sayed's Muslim faith, and Fox News reported the decision the next day.
[16]Mike Rogers keeps lying about Abdul El-Sayed. We counted the ways
Detroit Metro Times analysis of Rogers's statements about El-Sayed, published before their second debate. It calls the 9/11 claim false, cites PolitiFact's ratings and says the paper will stop seeking comment from Rogers's campaign.
Mike Rogers keeps lying about Abdul El-Sayed. We counted the waysDetroit Metro Times analysis, October 21, 2026; section headed "An inflated counterterrorism resume".[17]Fox News
Fox News report on the Detroit Metro Times decision to stop seeking comment from Rogers's campaign, quoting reporter Steve Neavling's announcement on X. Fox reported that neither the campaign nor the paper responded to its requests for comment.
Michigan paper declares it won't seek comment from Mike Rogers due to 'lies and bigoted attacks' on El-Sayed · Fox NewsFox News Digital report, October 22, 2026; opening paragraphs.Trump invokes Flight 93 against El-Sayed at a Rogers rally
Reaction
At a rally for Mike Rogers in Port Huron, Michigan, Trump compared voting against Abdul El-Sayed to the fight Todd Beamer and other Flight 93 passengers waged against the hijackers, and called El-Sayed a jihadist. He then introduced David Beamer, Todd Beamer's father, who has appeared in Rogers's campaign ads and told the crowd that a birth certificate does not make El-Sayed an American. NBC News reported that Trump offered no evidence for his claims about El-Sayed, who has denied any tie to the Muslim Brotherhood.
[18]CNBC
Source excerpt
"Twenty-five years later, Michigan needs to stand up and fight, just like Todd did, to stop a jihadist from walking into the Capitol," Trump said.
Reuters report, published by CNBC, on President Trump's October 25 rally for Mike Rogers in Port Huron, Michigan. It quotes Trump comparing a vote against Abdul El-Sayed to the Flight 93 passengers' fight against the hijackers and notes that Rogers spoke on NBC's Meet the Press before the rally.
Trump invokes 9/11 in urging Michigan voters to oppose Muslim Senate candidate El-Sayed · CNBCParagraphs 2 and 5 to 6[19]NBC News
Source excerpt
Trump sought to draw a comparison between the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and El-Sayed as he introduced speaker David Beamer, whose son, Todd Beamer, was a passenger who died on the hijacked United Flight 93.
NBC News report on Trump's October 25 rally in Port Huron, Michigan. It quotes Trump's remarks about Abdul El-Sayed, the speech David Beamer gave after Trump introduced him, and Mike Rogers's answer on Meet the Press when asked about Trump's description of El-Sayed.
Trump leans into Islamophobic rhetoric at Michigan rally · NBC NewsParagraphs 1 to 6 and the passage on David Beamer's remarks
Claims
Claims separate what was said from what is contested. Follow each source for the original wording and context.
What was said
Attributed statement
Abdul El-Sayed believes the United States deserved the September 11 attacks.
Sources (1)
- Mike Rogers’s August 5 statement following the Michigan Senate primary · Mike RogersParagraph beginning with Rogers’s counterterrorism experience and ending with the accusation about America deserving 9/11
What's disputed
Disputed claim
Appearing at a political event with Hasan Piker does not establish agreement with all of Piker’s statements.
Sources (1)
- El-Sayed rejects justifying 9/11 while defending campaigning with Hasan PikerOpening interview quotations about 9/11 and appearing with someone without agreeing; embedded video 6392681742112
Arguments
Documented position
Mike Rogers’s August 5 statement and Alyssa Brouillet’s August 6 campaign response.
Campaign associations can be evidence of political judgment
Rogers’s campaign treats continued association with Piker, coupled with reluctance to disavow him, as grounds for an adverse assessment of El-Sayed. The argument asks voters to judge the company a candidate chooses as well as the candidate’s individual statements.
Limit of this argument
A judgment about an association is not proof of a particular belief. El-Sayed explicitly rejected justifying 9/11, so the stronger attribution in Rogers’s statement requires evidence beyond co-appearance.
Read sources and related claim
Related claim
Abdul El-Sayed believes the United States deserved the September 11 attacks.
Sources
- Mike Rogers’s August 5 statement following the Michigan Senate primary · Mike RogersParagraph beginning with Rogers’s counterterrorism experience and ending with the accusation about America deserving 9/11
- PolitiFact documents Rogers’s accusation and his campaign’s supporting rationaleAlyssa Brouillet quotation; linked full April 7 event at 3:12:12; sources identify August 6 campaign email exchange
- El-Sayed rejects justifying 9/11 while defending campaigning with Hasan PikerOpening interview quotations about 9/11 and appearing with someone without agreeing; embedded video 6392681742112
Documented position
Abdul El-Sayed, April 7 Fox & Friends interview and August 5 All In interview.
An explicit rejection limits what association can establish
El-Sayed distinguishes outreach to Piker’s audience from agreement with Piker’s statements. His recorded rejection of justifying the attacks directly contradicts the belief attributed to him; his later response challenges using his identity and associations to divide voters.
Limit of this argument
Rejecting that attribution does not prohibit criticism of his decision to campaign with Piker or require voters to find the association acceptable.
Read sources and related claim
Related claim
Abdul El-Sayed believes the United States deserved the September 11 attacks.
Sources
- El-Sayed rejects justifying 9/11 while defending campaigning with Hasan PikerOpening interview quotations about 9/11 and appearing with someone without agreeing; embedded video 6392681742112
- El-Sayed responds to Rogers’s attacks in his August 5 All In interviewOriginal interview embedded at top, dated August 5; paragraphs quoting El-Sayed on division and Islamophobia
Documented position
Mehdi Hasan, in his September 1, 2026 Guardian opinion column.
Scrutinize both candidates’ associations by the same standard
Hasan argues that attention to El-Sayed’s association with Piker has displaced scrutiny of Rogers’s own allies. He contrasts Piker’s campaign appearances with Lorenzo Sewell’s formal role on Rogers’s faith leadership team and calls for comparable questioning of Rogers about Sewell’s rhetoric. His objection concerns unequal scrutiny, not a direct assessment of the specific 9/11 belief attributed to El-Sayed.
Limit of this argument
Hasan explicitly says he is not excusing Piker’s statements or opposing scrutiny of Piker and El-Sayed’s decision to appear with him. His comparison does not itself resolve Rogers’s 9/11 accusation.
Read sources
Sources
- The media’s Hasan Piker obsession is letting Republican Mike Rogers off the hookConcluding discussion of consistent scrutiny of both candidates, including Hasan’s explicit qualification about Piker
Response record
Responses
Choose one response filter, or select All responses to see the full record.
31 responses. First 6 shown initially. Newest first.
Donald TrumpPresident of the United States, speaking at a campaign rally for Mike RogersBefore this statement
Trump spoke about Todd Beamer, the Michigan native who died on United Flight 93 after passengers fought back against the hijackers, as he introduced Beamer's father, David Beamer.
"Twenty-five years later, Michigan needs to stand up and fight, just like Todd did, to stop a jihadist from walking into the Capitol"
Defended or excusedCase context: Mike Rogers’s 9/11 accusation against Abdul El-Sayed
Full statement and sources
At a Port Huron rally for Mike Rogers, Trump compared voting against Abdul El-Sayed to Todd Beamer's fight against the Flight 93 hijackers and called El-Sayed a jihadist. NBC News reported that Trump offered no evidence for his claims about El-Sayed, who has denied any tie to the Muslim Brotherhood.
After the statement
Trump said El-Sayed would be the only senator required to pass through a metal detector to enter the Senate. David Beamer told the crowd that a birth certificate does not make El-Sayed an American.
Trump invokes 9/11 in urging Michigan voters to oppose Muslim Senate candidate El-Sayed · CNBCParagraphs 2 and 5 to 6Trump leans into Islamophobic rhetoric at Michigan rally · NBC NewsParagraphs 1 to 6 and the passage on David Beamer's remarksWhy this label?
The case concerns the 9/11 accusation Rogers made against El-Sayed. At a Rogers rally, Trump carries that 9/11 framing further, likening a vote against El-Sayed to the Flight 93 passengers' resistance and calling him a jihadist. That supports the line of attack under scrutiny, so we labeled it as defending it.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Abdul El-SayedDemocratic nominee for U.S. Senate in MichiganDirectly involvedBefore this statement
Erin Burnett noted Piker’s controversial remarks and asked El-Sayed how he would address an association with a supporter.
"It’s a dumb comment. He himself has called it a dumb comment. And they keep bringing it up because all they can talk about is the comment of a guy who has zero power aside from his stream, rather than talk about the guy who has a lot of power to make dumb wars that we’re paying for."
Challenged the characterizationResponding to: Abdul El-Sayed believes the United States deserved the September 11 attacks.
Full statement and sources
In a CNN interview, Abdul El-Sayed called Hasan Piker’s 9/11 remark “a dumb comment” while saying that continued focus on it was a campaign talking point and that Piker had no power beyond his livestream. The transcript records El-Sayed’s attribution that Piker had also called the remark dumb; it does not independently establish that Piker statement.
After the statement
El-Sayed redirected to his campaign’s Michigan economic and policy priorities, then Burnett closed the interview.
Abdul El-Sayed calls Hasan Piker’s 9/11 remark “a dumb comment” on CNNAired September 21, 2026, 7–8 p.m. ET; exchange beginning [19:55:03]Why this label?
On the central allegation that El-Sayed’s association with Piker supports an adverse inference about El-Sayed’s belief, El-Sayed rejects the use of the remark as a campaign talking point while expressly criticizing the remark itself. This challenges the Piker-linked characterization of El-Sayed; it does not defend Piker’s comment or establish a new Piker statement.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
- Abdul El-SayedDemocratic nominee for the U.S. Senate in Michigan, in a statement provided to AxiosDirectly involved
Before this statement
Republican-aligned groups have spent nearly $3 million on advertising targeting El-Sayed over his association with Piker, according to AdImpact data reported by Axios, with many of the ads featuring Piker's 2019 remark that "America deserved 9/11." El-Sayed had addressed the association at a Fox 2 Detroit debate two days earlier.
"I do not agree with this statement, nor do I give much weight to the statements made by a social media streamer. I am more concerned with the dangerous policies of Donald Trump and Mike Rogers that are raising the prices of gas, groceries and healthcare for Michiganders."
Challenged the characterizationCase context: Mike Rogers’s 9/11 accusation against Abdul El-Sayed
Full statement and sources
After Hasan Piker told Axios that the United States commits more terrorism than al-Qaeda "pound for pound," Abdul El-Sayed said in a statement to Axios that he did not agree and did not give much weight to statements made by a social media streamer, redirecting to what he called the dangerous policies of Donald Trump and Mike Rogers on the cost of gas, groceries and health care. It is the fourth occasion recorded in this case on which El-Sayed has publicly distanced himself from Piker's remarks while the association remains a Republican line of attack.
After the statement
Piker's claim itself, and El-Sayed's rejection of it on the merits, are recorded in the separate case on that comparison. Rogers has continued to tie the two, saying at the Republican midterm convention in Dallas that "Abdul El-Sayed has chosen Hasan as his running mate."
Why this label?
El-Sayed does not address the accusation directly here; he disputes the inference it rests on, by disavowing Piker's newest remark and denying that a streamer's statements carry weight for him. That is a challenge to the attributed linkage rather than a substantive evaluation of Rogers's accusation. The closest competing label is “Mixed or conditional”, which is how his September 15 debate answer (753) is classified because he disavowed specific remarks while defending the broader association; it loses here because this statement offers no defence of the association at all. “Explicitly stayed out” also loses: unlike his September 13 "Face the Nation" answer (752), he engages with the substance before redirecting.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Mike RogersRepublican candidate for the United States Senate in MichiganDirectly involvedBefore this statement
Rogers had previously attributed a belief about the September 11 attacks to El-Sayed. El-Sayed had rejected justifying the attacks and disputed the inference that appearing with Piker meant agreement with him.
"He can’t walk away from this, and he said multiple times that he won’t disavow what [Hasan Piker] said."
Defended or excusedResponding to: Abdul El-Sayed believes the United States deserved the September 11 attacks.
Full statement and sources
Rogers said El-Sayed could not distance himself from Piker’s language and alleged that El-Sayed had repeatedly declined to disavow Piker. The campaign statement presents this as support for Rogers’s earlier attribution about El-Sayed; it does not independently establish El-Sayed’s beliefs or the underlying claims about Piker.
After the statement
The release accompanies excerpts attributed to a Hannity appearance and directs readers to a campaign website. It remains a campaign statement; no independent material in this source establishes its characterizations of El-Sayed or Piker.
Mike Rogers renews criticism of Abdul El-Sayed over Hasan Piker · Mike RogersOpening and sections “On Conman Abdul El-Sayed’s Running Mate Hasan Piker” and “On Conman Abdul El-Sayed Begging for Chuck Schumer’s Money.”Why this label?
Rogers uses El-Sayed’s association with Piker and an asserted refusal to disavow him as a rationale for continuing the earlier attribution. The record classifies that defense of the accusation without treating the underlying attribution as established.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
- Abdul El-SayedDemocratic candidate for U.S. Senate, MichiganDirectly involved
Before this statement
Asked at the Fox 2 Detroit "The Pulse" Senate debate, September 15, 2026, whether he would "100%" disavow Hasan Piker.
"When Hassan made these comments about Jewish Americans and Jewish Michiganders, I disavowed them entirely."
Mixed or conditionalCase context: Mike Rogers’s 9/11 accusation against Abdul El-Sayed
Full statement and sources
At a Senate debate, Abdul El-Sayed disavowed specific past comments by Hasan Piker about Jewish Americans while defending his continued engagement with Piker generally.
After the statement
Mike Rogers skipped this debate; the exchange occurred without him present to respond directly.
Why this label?
El-Sayed disavows Piker's specific comments about Jewish Americans and Jewish Michiganders while defending his continued general engagement with Piker — combining a specific condemnation with a broader defense, rather than the full, unconditional disavowal he was asked for.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
- Mike RogersMichigan Republican Senate nomineeDirectly involved
Before this statement
Posted to Rogers's campaign X account on September 13, 2026.
"Here's Hasan Piker openly saying that Abdul is conning Michiganders with his scripted 9/11 anniversary video."
Defended or excusedCase context: Mike Rogers’s 9/11 accusation against Abdul El-Sayed
Full statement and sources
Mike Rogers's campaign quoted Hasan Piker to accuse Abdul El-Sayed of insincerity in his 9/11 anniversary video.
After the statement
The post was amplified by other Republican figures, including former RNC chair Ronna McDaniel.
Why this label?
The case records the competing argument as whether declining to disavow an ally warrants an adverse inference about a candidate's judgment or beliefs. The campaign uses Piker's own words to argue that El-Sayed's September 11 anniversary video was insincere, sustaining the accusation by casting his public rejection of the attacks as performance. That supports the adverse inference rather than questioning it. The closest competing label is condemns, previously carried here; it loses for the same reason as Rogers's other records. Relabelled from condemns in a September 17 audit: condemns was being carried both by the speakers making this accusation and by those attacking it, so the label was doing opposite work on one conduct under scrutiny. Speakers who assert or support the accusation are now classified “Defended or excused”, matching Alyssa Brouillet (433) and John Fetterman (974); speakers who criticise it, including El-Sayed (434, 509, 512), Cole Wozniak (459) and Jon Favreau (437), keep condemns.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Show fewer responses
- Abdul El-SayedDemocratic candidate for U.S. Senate, MichiganDirectly involved
Before this statement
Asked by moderator Weijia Jiang on CBS's "Face the Nation," aired September 13, 2026, why he had not directly condemned Hasan Piker's rhetoric.
"Weija, with all due respect, this is the third time you've asked about a Twitch streamer in California... I'm not all that interested in having a conversation about streamers in California because they are not raising the prices of gas and groceries."
Explicitly stayed outCase context: Mike Rogers’s 9/11 accusation against Abdul El-Sayed
Full statement and sources
Pressed a third time on CBS about condemning Hasan Piker, Abdul El-Sayed declined to answer and redirected to cost-of-living issues.
After the statement
Two days later, at the Fox 2 Detroit debate, El-Sayed gave a narrower, more specific answer on Piker (see related statement).
Transcript: Michigan Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan," Sept. 13, 2026AI exchange, transcript lines 127–131; video segment linked at transcript lines 146–149.Why this label?
Pressed directly on why he has not condemned Piker's rhetoric, El-Sayed redirects to a different topic rather than answering — an explicit decline, not silence.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
- Abdul El-SayedDemocratic nominee for U.S. Senate in Michigan, replying from his campaign-linked X accountDirectly involved
Before this statement
The post quote-replied to Rogers’s September 10 X statement alleging that El-Sayed campaigned with a person who said America deserved 9/11 and demanding that he disavow Hasan Piker.
"You’re right. Sorry. Turns out you didn’t vote to deny 9/11 first responders healthcare twice. You did it NINE times."
CondemnedCase context: Mike Rogers’s 9/11 accusation against Abdul El-Sayed
Full statement and sources
Replying to a Rogers post that urged him to disavow Hasan Piker, El-Sayed criticized Rogers’s record on 9/11 responder health care and asserted that Rogers had opposed it nine times. The entry records El-Sayed’s criticism and asserted count, rather than treating the count as an independent finding.
After the statement
Metro Times reported nine votes or actions from 2003 through 2010 involving 9/11 responder health-care funding.
Abdul El-Sayed’s reply to Mike Rogers about 9/11 responder health care · Abdul El-SayedX post 2098888435700298207; displayed September 12, 2026 timestamp; reply to Rogers’s embedded postMetro Times reports on Mike Rogers’s 9/11 responder health-care votesPublished September 12, 2026; paragraphs beginning “A Metro Times review of congressional records found nine” and “You’ve got some nerve”Why this label?
El-Sayed directly criticizes Rogers’s conduct and voting record in a reply within the ongoing campaign dispute.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
- Abdul El-SayedDemocratic nominee for U.S. Senate in Michigan, delivering an anniversary statement published by his campaignDirectly involved
Before this statement
The campaign’s September 11 release introduces a video statement commemorating the attacks. Before the selected words, El-Sayed discusses American civic ideals and honors those killed in terrorism.
"Nothing can justify the murder of innocent civilians. Nothing."
Challenged the characterizationResponding to: Abdul El-Sayed believes the United States deserved the September 11 attacks.
Full statement and sources
In his September 11 anniversary statement, El-Sayed rejected any justification for killing innocent civilians and mourned the people killed in the attacks. The statement supplies later evidence of his stated views; it did not mention Rogers or Piker.
After the statement
He mourns the victims, families, and destruction, then calls for building a more inclusive and just country. The release says he attended Lansing’s remembrance ceremony that morning. Rogers and Piker are not named. The published text was checked; the linked video was unavailable.
Abdul El-Sayed’s September 11 campaign statement · Abdul for U.S. SenateCampaign press release dated September 11, 2026; quoted statement in paragraphs beginning “Today, on 9/11” and “They tried to diminish America.”Why this label?
This statement provides contrary contextual evidence to the belief attributed to El-Sayed in Claim 113. He expressly rules out justification of the attacks. The classification concerns that attribution; the source does not establish an explicit reply to Rogers or condemnation of Rogers’s campaign conduct.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Tucker CarlsonConservative broadcaster and founder of the Tucker Carlson Network, writing in his own newsletterBefore this statement
The New York Post reported 2021 audio in which El-Sayed said "9/11 scarred our country in profound ways, but what we did after 9/11 scarred millions of other people." Rogers called the remarks "disgusting" and "disqualifying."
"El-Sayed did not celebrate airplane hijackings or cheerlead Al-Qaeda; he simply said that the U.S. conducting terrorism of its own in response to 9/11 was not exactly an appropriate reaction. He is obviously right."
CondemnedCase context: Mike Rogers’s 9/11 accusation against Abdul El-Sayed
Full statement and sources
In his September 11 newsletter, Tucker Carlson rejected Mike Rogers's characterisation of Abdul El-Sayed's 2021 remarks about the aftermath of September 11, writing that El-Sayed had not celebrated the attacks and was obviously right that the American response amounted to terrorism of its own. Carlson turned Rogers's "unfit to serve" language back on him, said he hoped Michigan voters would keep Rogers "far away from Washington," and had separately said on his podcast that he would not vote for Rogers "at gunpoint."
After the statement
Carlson's intervention was widely characterised as an effective endorsement of El-Sayed. Rogers's campaign declined to comment. Carlson is a prominent figure on the political right, which makes this a cross-partisan rejection of the accusation rather than a partisan one.
Tucker Carlson Jumps to Abdul El-Sayed's Defense Over Controversial 9/11 Comments: 'He Is Obviously Right' · MediaiteMediaite, September 11, 2026. Reports and quotes Tucker Carlson's September 11 morning newsletter at tuckercarlson.com.Why this label?
Carlson rejects that assertion, distinguishes what El-Sayed actually said from celebrating the attacks, and criticises Rogers for making the charge. The closest competing label is “Challenged the characterization”, since much of the passage disputes how Rogers described El-Sayed's remarks. That loses because Carlson does not stop at correcting the description; he condemns Rogers's judgment and fitness for office in terms directed at the accusation itself.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Stephen MillerDeputy White House chief of staffBefore this statement
Said as a guest on Hannity on Fox News, September 11, 2026, in a segment on Democratic Senate candidates ahead of the midterms. This is six days before the Axios interview and responds to Piker's earlier remark, not the later al-Qaeda comparison.
"The Democrat Party has embraced the platform of individuals who fundamentally hate America and hate Americans. ... Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan campaigned and promoted with Bernie Sanders a man named Hasan Piker. ... Hasan Piker said that America and Americans deserve 9/11."
Defended or excusedCase context: Mike Rogers’s 9/11 accusation against Abdul El-Sayed
Full statement and sources
On Hannity, Stephen Miller tied Abdul El-Sayed to Hasan Piker over Piker's "America deserved 9/11" remark, and said a party that makes common cause with him should receive no votes.
After the statement
Miller added that "a political party that gets into bed with, finds common cause with, that joins in concert with a man who says they had it coming and they deserved it is a party that in a country of conscience should get zero votes," and said the Democratic Party "fundamentally has sided with the jihadists in the war on terror." Quotation is drawn from Internet Archive closed captions, which contain artifacts elsewhere in the broadcast; the item's audio cannot be downloaded for independent transcription.
Hannity, Fox News, September 11, 2026 (Stephen Miller on El-Sayed and Piker)Approximately 6:19-6:21 pm PDT segment (roughly 1140-1260 seconds into the hour)Why this label?
Miller supports the substance of that line of attack, naming El-Sayed directly and treating his promotion of Piker as grounds to reject the party. He attributes the "deserved 9/11" sentiment to Piker rather than to El-Sayed himself, which is how the accusation has generally been constructed.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
- Mike RogersRepublican nominee for U.S. Senate in MichiganDirectly involved
Before this statement
El-Sayed had criticized Rogers for voting against the 2010 James Zadroga Act, which funded health care for 9/11 first responders. Rogers's post opens by calling 9/11 one of the worst days in American history.
"It’s disqualifying that Conman Abdul is using Washington speak about the help Congress provided victims and their families to distract from how he’s platforming someone who believes “America deserved 9/11.”"
Defended or excusedResponding to: Abdul El-Sayed believes the United States deserved the September 11 attacks.
Full statement and sources
Responding to El-Sayed's criticism of his House votes on 9/11 aid, Rogers said the suggestion that he does not support the victims was false and that he had pushed for an annual $150 million appropriation. He said El-Sayed was using the issue to distract from platforming someone who believes America deserved 9/11.
After the statement
The post ends with the quoted sentence. The same day, Rogers spoke at the Republican midterm convention in Dallas, where he again tied El-Sayed to Piker.
Mike Rogers post on 9/11 aid and El-SayedX post by @MikeRogersForMI, September 10, 2026, 17:26 UTCWhy this label?
The reference point is Rogers's accusation that El-Sayed believes America deserved the 9/11 attacks. Here Rogers keeps the accusation's basis, El-Sayed's association with Piker, and repeats it as a reason El-Sayed is unfit. That backs the accusation, so we used Defended or excused. Challenged the characterization fits only his rebuttal about his own 9/11 votes, which is a separate dispute. The quote is from his own X post.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Cole WozniakSpokesperson responding on behalf of Abdul El-Sayed's U.S. Senate campaign Before this statement
The Detroit News reported Rogers's convention criticism and El-Sayed's previous rejection of the idea that the September 11 attacks were justified. It explicitly identified Wozniak's reply as a September 10 statement.
"has always unequivocally condemned terrorism and the September 11 attacks."
CondemnedCase context: Mike Rogers’s 9/11 accusation against Abdul El-Sayed
Full statement and sources
In a September 10 statement reported by The Detroit News, campaign spokesperson Cole Wozniak said El-Sayed had consistently condemned terrorism and the September 11 attacks, rejecting Rogers's portrayal of his beliefs.
After the statement
Wozniak accused Rogers of misrepresenting El-Sayed's beliefs. The campaign also raised Rogers's votes concerning benefits for September 11 responders, which are separate from the selected response.
Detroit News records Rogers's convention criticism and the El-Sayed campaign's replyParagraph beginning Campaign spokesman Cole Wozniak said in a Sept. 10 statement, and the following paragraphWhy this label?
The very next attributed sentence calls the attack bad-faith lies meant to mislead voters. The complete reply directly condemns campaign conduct, beyond correcting the belief attributed to El-Sayed.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
- Mike RogersRepublican U.S. Senate nominee speaking at the party's September 10 conventionDirectly involved
Before this statement
Rogers recalled the September 11 attacks, then identified Piker as the person who thought America deserved them. He described Piker as El-Sayed's running mate, a rhetorical label rather than a literal electoral ticket.
"Together, they attack America, excuse extremism, and treat our country like the villain."
Defended or excusedCase context: Mike Rogers’s 9/11 accusation against Abdul El-Sayed
Full statement and sources
In his September 10 convention speech, Rogers criticized El-Sayed for campaigning with Piker and portrayed their association as sympathy for extremism.
After the statement
He went on to make separate campaign-finance and Temple Israel allegations. El-Sayed's prior rejection of justifying 9/11 and the campaign's September 10 rebuttal remain distinct records.
Mike Rogers's full September 10 convention speech · Mike RogersFull campaign-published transcript; passage beginning That's why I never imagined; later Temple Israel passage beginning We saw that testedDetroit News records Rogers's convention criticism and the El-Sayed campaign's replyParagraph beginning Campaign spokesman Cole Wozniak said in a Sept. 10 statement, and the following paragraphWhy this label?
The case records the competing argument as whether declining to disavow an ally warrants an adverse inference about a candidate's judgment or beliefs. Rogers advances the accusation at his party's convention, grounding it in the association rather than in any statement by El-Sayed: he attributes the 9/11 sentiment to Piker and holds El-Sayed answerable through their campaigning together. That is support for the adverse inference the case turns on. The closest competing label is condemns, previously carried here; it loses for the same reason it does on his other records. The shift from his earlier direct assertion about El-Sayed's belief to attribution via Piker is preserved and no retraction is inferred. Relabelled from condemns in a September 17 audit: condemns was being carried both by the speakers making this accusation and by those attacking it, so the label was doing opposite work on one conduct under scrutiny. Speakers who assert or support the accusation are now classified “Defended or excused”, matching Alyssa Brouillet (433) and John Fetterman (974); speakers who criticise it, including El-Sayed (434, 509, 512), Cole Wozniak (459) and Jon Favreau (437), keep condemns.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Curtis HertelChair of the Michigan Democratic PartyBefore this statement
In his September 10 convention speech, Rogers said he never imagined running against "somebody that campaigns with Hasan Piker, who thinks America deserved it." The Michigan Advance reported that Democrats responded by calling the speech another example of Islamophobia against El-Sayed. It reported Hertel's statement as issued after the speech and as addressing Rogers's rhetoric about El-Sayed's heritage.
"trafficking in dishonest, Islamophobic attacks because he wants to distract from how his and Trump’s agenda is spiking costs and hurting Michiganders."
CondemnedCase context: Mike Rogers’s 9/11 accusation against Abdul El-Sayed
Full statement and sources
In a statement issued after Rogers's September 10 convention speech, Michigan Democratic Party Chair Curtis Hertel said Rogers was "trafficking in dishonest, Islamophobic attacks" to distract from how, in Hertel's words, Rogers's and Trump's agenda is "spiking costs and hurting Michiganders." The Michigan Advance reported the statement.
After the statement
The Michigan Advance also quoted El-Sayed spokesperson Roxie Richner, who said Rogers and his allies were "resorting to shameful lies" about the Democratic nominee.
Rogers uses RNC midterm platform to attack El-Sayed as Dems push back against Islamophobic rhetoricSection headed "Democrats label Rogers' remarks as pure Islamophobia": Richner's statement in its opening paragraphs and Hertel's statement in its closing paragraphs.Why this label?
The reference point is Rogers's use of a 9/11 accusation against El-Sayed, and the Islamophobia charge El-Sayed raised in response. Hertel, reacting to Rogers's September 10 convention speech, called Rogers's attacks on El-Sayed dishonest and Islamophobic. The Michigan Advance framed the remark as a response to Rogers's rhetoric about El-Sayed's heritage, and Hertel's quoted words do not single out the 9/11 accusation. The statement expressly criticizes the conduct under scrutiny, so we labeled it Condemned.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
- Abdul El-SayedU.S. Senate candidate, through campaign statementDirectly involved
Before this statement
Rogers had repeatedly invoked El-Sayed’s association with Hasan Piker and Piker’s 2019 9/11 remarks in the Michigan Senate campaign.
"This is somebody who—when he thinks it’s politically useful for him—wants to invoke the memory of 9/11."
CondemnedCase context: Mike Rogers’s 9/11 accusation against Abdul El-Sayed
Full statement and sources
In a campaign release, El-Sayed criticized Rogers for invoking 9/11 in campaign rhetoric while, in El-Sayed’s characterization, opposing health care for people who responded to the attacks. The release linked that criticism to reporting on Rogers’s congressional voting record.
After the statement
The campaign release followed reporting on Rogers’s votes concerning first-responder and survivor benefits. The release’s criticism does not itself establish the broader allegations it discusses.
Abdul for U.S. Senate criticizes Mike Rogers’s 9/11 rhetoric and voting record · Abdul for U.S. SenateWhy this label?
El-Sayed’s statement directly criticizes Rogers’s conduct and political use of the 9/11 attacks. The record attributes the health-care characterization to El-Sayed’s campaign and keeps the vote reporting separate.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Great Lakes Conservatives FundPolitical group backing Mike Rogers for U.S. Senate, in a paid TV adBefore this statement
The ad opens with news audio from the morning of September 11, 2001, and says America was attacked for who it is and united afterward. The narrator then says the hatred behind 9/11 did not disappear, and the ad plays a clip of Hasan Piker saying America deserved 9/11 and that he hates America.
"Abdul El-Sayed gives comfort to that hatred. He campaigns with it. He accepts money from it. And he justifies it."
Defended or excusedResponding to: Abdul El-Sayed believes the United States deserved the September 11 attacks.
Full statement and sources
A one-minute TV ad from Great Lakes Conservatives Fund, a group backing Rogers, said the hatred behind 9/11 did not disappear, played a clip of Hasan Piker saying America deserved 9/11, and said El-Sayed gives comfort to that hatred, campaigns with it, accepts money from it and justifies it.
After the statement
On screen, the ad pairs 'he justifies it' with El-Sayed's March 13 video. The ad closes by saying America is being tested again 25 years later and asks voters to remember what is at stake.
Great Lakes Conservatives Fund 9/11 anniversary TV adOne-minute ad posted on X by @GreatLakes_HQ, September 9, 2026; about 0:32 to 0:47Why this label?
The reference point is Rogers's accusation that El-Sayed believes America deserved the 9/11 attacks. The ad pairs Piker's 9/11 remark with a claim that El-Sayed gives comfort to and justifies the hatred behind the attacks, which extends the accusation. We used Defended or excused. Mixed or conditional loses because the ad has no qualification. The quote is from the ad's audio, posted by the group.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Tom EmmerUnited States representative for Minnesota’s 6th congressional district and House majority whip.Before this statement
Mike Rogers had accused El-Sayed of believing America deserved the September 11 attacks based on El-Sayed’s association with Hasan Piker. El-Sayed had rejected justifying the attacks.
"This evil man pals around with people who believe Americans deserved to be attacked on 9/11."
Defended or excusedCase context: Mike Rogers’s 9/11 accusation against Abdul El-Sayed
Full statement and sources
At the Republican midterm convention, Emmer called El-Sayed an “evil man” and linked him to people he said believed Americans deserved the September 11 attacks.
After the statement
The reports attribute the remarks to Emmer. They do not establish that El-Sayed agrees with Piker's past comment or holds the belief that Americans deserved the attacks.
Associated Press reports Tom Emmer’s GOP convention remarks about Abdul El-SayedParagraph identifying Tom Emmer’s convention remarks about Abdul El-Sayed and Hasan Piker.Audio replay preserving Tom Emmer’s GOP convention remarksAudio replay at 2:12:04–2:12:21.Why this label?
The case records the competing argument as whether declining to disavow an ally warrants an adverse inference about a candidate's judgment or beliefs. Emmer repeats the accusation from the convention stage, again routing it through association rather than any statement by El-Sayed, and adds a personal denunciation. Endorsing and amplifying the charge is support for the proposition under scrutiny. The closest competing label is condemns, previously carried here; it loses because his denunciation of El-Sayed is the accusation being made, not a criticism of it. Relabelled from condemns in a September 17 audit: condemns was being carried both by the speakers making this accusation and by those attacking it, so the label was doing opposite work on one conduct under scrutiny. Speakers who assert or support the accusation are now classified “Defended or excused”, matching Alyssa Brouillet (433) and John Fetterman (974); speakers who criticise it, including El-Sayed (434, 509, 512), Cole Wozniak (459) and Jon Favreau (437), keep condemns.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
- Mike RogersRepublican U.S. Senate candidate, speaking in an approved campaign advertisementDirectly involved
Before this statement
The campaign published the ad's full transcript and announced its start date.
"Abdul El-Sayed runs around with a terrorist sympathizer who said, “America deserved 9/11.”"
Defended or excusedCase context: Mike Rogers’s 9/11 accusation against Abdul El-Sayed
Full statement and sources
In the September 8 ad, Rogers criticized El-Sayed's association with Piker, attributing the 9/11 remark to Piker.
After the statement
The ad inserts Piker's remark and El-Sayed declining to disavow people's views. El-Sayed's earlier explicit rejection of justifying 9/11 remains contrary context.
Rogers campaign publishes its September 8 ad about El-Sayed and Piker · Mike RogersComplete campaign-published video transcript; Rogers's sentence immediately before Piker's first inserted clip (web lines18–33)El-Sayed rejects justifying 9/11 while defending campaigning with Hasan PikerOpening interview quotations about 9/11 and appearing with someone without agreeing; embedded video 6392681742112Why this label?
The case records the competing argument as whether declining to disavow an ally warrants an adverse inference about a candidate's judgment or beliefs. The advertisement makes the association itself the charge, attributing the 9/11 remark to Piker and treating El-Sayed's proximity to him as disqualifying. It does not quote El-Sayed endorsing the attacks, which is precisely the inference the case asks about, and the ad asserts that inference. The closest competing label is condemns, previously carried here; it loses because the ad prosecutes the accusation rather than criticising it. Relabelled from condemns in a September 17 audit: condemns was being carried both by the speakers making this accusation and by those attacking it, so the label was doing opposite work on one conduct under scrutiny. Speakers who assert or support the accusation are now classified “Defended or excused”, matching Alyssa Brouillet (433) and John Fetterman (974); speakers who criticise it, including El-Sayed (434, 509, 512), Cole Wozniak (459) and Jon Favreau (437), keep condemns.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
John FettermanUnited States senator from Pennsylvania, interviewed on Fox News's "America's Newsroom"Before this statement
El-Sayed had campaigned with Piker during the Michigan Democratic Senate primary, and Republican-aligned groups had begun advertising against him over the association. Fetterman has been among the few Democrats to criticise both Piker and El-Sayed publicly over their ties.
"I'm offering $50,000 for you to do a rally with Hasan Piker on 9/11, the anniversary, and you can all explain to people why America deserved that 25 years ago."
Defended or excusedCase context: Mike Rogers’s 9/11 accusation against Abdul El-Sayed
Full statement and sources
On Fox News's "America's Newsroom" on September 2, Sen. John Fetterman offered Abdul El-Sayed $50,000 to hold a rally with Hasan Piker on the anniversary of the September 11 attacks and explain why America deserved them, echoing Piker's 2019 remark. The Washington Examiner reported the total offer reached $100,000, with a second $50,000 tied to El-Sayed appearing with his half-sister, though that portion is reported rather than quoted. Fetterman is among the few Democrats to attack El-Sayed publicly over the association. The framing that El-Sayed would have to explain why America deserved the attacks is Fetterman's rhetorical device, not a position El-Sayed has stated.
After the statement
The remarks predate the September 11 anniversary and Piker's September 17 Axios interview. No rally took place. El-Sayed continued to face questions about the association through September, and after the Axios interview said he did not agree with Piker's comparison, which is recorded separately.
Why this label?
Fetterman answers that question in the affirmative: his dare treats El-Sayed as answerable for Piker's view, inviting him to explain it alongside him. That places him with Alyssa Brouillet (433), labeled "Defended or excused" for supplying the campaign's rationale for the accusation.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
National Republican Senatorial CommitteeOfficial press release of the National Republican Senatorial CommitteeBefore this statement
According to FactCheck.org, El-Sayed said on NBC's Meet the Press on Aug. 9 that Piker's 2019 remark was "a dumb statement" and that "America didn't deserve 9/11." FactCheck.org also reported that the Rogers campaign told PolitiFact its 9/11 claim was based on a video of El-Sayed declining to disavow Piker's comments.
"When Hasan Piker said that ‘America deserved 9/11’, Abdul refused to disavow it and campaigned with Piker numerous times"
Defended or excusedCase context: Mike Rogers’s 9/11 accusation against Abdul El-Sayed
Full statement and sources
The National Republican Senatorial Committee said in a press release that Abdul El-Sayed refused to disavow Hasan Piker's remark that America deserved 9/11 and campaigned with Piker numerous times.
After the statement
The release then turned to a more recent Piker remark, that American Jews who support Israel will be targeted because of it, and said El-Sayed again refused to disavow Piker.
Abdul El-Sayed Refuses to Condemn Hasan Piker… Again · National Republican Senatorial CommitteeSecond paragraph of the release, beginning "When Hasan Piker said"FactCheck.org: Rogers Makes False 9/11 Claim About El-SayedPassages on the April 7 campaign event and the August 5 CNN interviewWhy this label?
The case's reference point is Rogers's accusation that El-Sayed believes America deserved the September 11 attacks, which his campaign backed by pointing to El-Sayed's refusal to disavow Hasan Piker. The NRSC repeats that basis, saying El-Sayed refused to disavow Piker's 9/11 remark. It supports the accusation's rationale rather than questioning it, so we labeled it Defended or excused.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Emma VigelandCo-host of The Majority ReportBefore this statement
Vigeland opens the segment after El-Sayed's primary win. Between the two quoted passages she reads Rogers's statement that El-Sayed "pledged his support to the Muslim brotherhood and campaigns with people who refuse to condemn terrorism" and then says, "Oh, wow."
"As soon as El-Sayed won the primary in Michigan, the Republican Party immediately is running to Islamophobia. I mean, what else do they have? It was predictable, but they're running on a basically an Islamophobic pitch right at the outset. Once again, guilt by association with Hasan Piker."
CondemnedCase context: Mike Rogers’s 9/11 accusation against Abdul El-Sayed
Full statement and sources
On The Majority Report, Emma Vigeland says Republicans turned to Islamophobia as soon as Abdul El-Sayed won Michigan's Senate primary and calls Mike Rogers's statement guilt by association with Hasan Piker.
After the statement
Her co-host then says, "Again, this is all projection."
The Majority Report segment on Republican attacks on Abdul El-Sayed00:00–00:25 and 01:18–01:23 (Vigeland on Mike Rogers's post-primary statement)Why this label?
Relative to Rogers's post-primary attacks on El-Sayed, Vigeland calls them an Islamophobic pitch and guilt by association with Hasan Piker. That condemns the attacks.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
- Abdul El-SayedDemocratic nominee for U.S. Senate in MichiganDirectly involved
Before this statement
Welker asked whether El-Sayed would keep campaigning with Piker, and he said he was more focused on who he was campaigning to. She then said Sen. Bernie Sanders had called Piker's 9/11 comments a dumb statement and asked whether El-Sayed agreed and disavowed them.
"Of course. Of course it was a dumb statement. And, of course, I think Hasan himself would say that was a dumb statement. He disavowed it. So, yes, America didn't deserve 9/11. But, you know, to sit here and play gotcha politics with a dumb thing somebody said out of context that they disavowed themselves to say, oh, well, what does that mean about what you think?"
Challenged the characterizationResponding to: Abdul El-Sayed believes the United States deserved the September 11 attacks.
Full statement and sources
Asked on Meet the Press whether he disavowed Hasan Piker's comment that America deserved 9/11, El-Sayed called it a dumb statement, said Piker had disavowed it, and said America did not deserve 9/11. He called questions tying him to the remark gotcha politics and cancel culture.
After the statement
El-Sayed said he wanted to be held accountable for what he says and does, and compared the questioning to cancel culture.
Meet the Press: Abdul El-Sayed full interview after primary winNBC News full interview, about 15:30 to 16:13, Welker asks whether El-Sayed disavows Piker's 9/11 commentsWhy this label?
The reference point is Rogers's accusation that El-Sayed believes America deserved the 9/11 attacks. El-Sayed states the opposite belief and rejects the practice of judging him by a remark Piker made, which disputes the attribution. We used Challenged the characterization. Condemned is close, but here he rejects the inference from Piker's remark rather than denouncing Rogers or the attack ads. We checked the quote against the audio of NBC's published interview.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Alyssa BrouilletSpokesperson for Mike Rogers’s U.S. Senate campaign Before this statement
PolitiFact asked the Rogers campaign to substantiate the accusation; its source list dates the email exchange to August 6.
"Abdul was asked point blank if he’d disavow Hasan Piker’s comments, and he wouldn’t do it."
Defended or excusedResponding to: Abdul El-Sayed believes the United States deserved the September 11 attacks.
Full statement and sources
Brouillet defended Rogers’s accusation by pointing to El-Sayed’s refusal to disavow Piker’s comments.
After the statement
The report contrasted this rationale with El-Sayed’s explicit rejection of justifying 9/11. The private email itself is not reproduced in the public source; its attributed quotation is original interview reporting.
PolitiFact documents Rogers’s accusation and his campaign’s supporting rationaleAlyssa Brouillet quotation; linked full April 7 event at 3:12:12; sources identify August 6 campaign email exchangeWhy this label?
She supplied the campaign’s rationale for the accusation in a direct response to a request for evidence.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
- Mike RogersRepublican nominee for U.S. Senate in Michigan, issuing an official campaign statementDirectly involved
Before this statement
The campaign release followed the Michigan primary and criticized El-Sayed across multiple policy areas.
"Never in a million years did I think that I would be running against someone who believes America deserved 9/11."
Defended or excusedResponding to: Abdul El-Sayed believes the United States deserved the September 11 attacks.
Full statement and sources
Rogers attributed support for the idea that America deserved 9/11 to El-Sayed and used it to argue that his opponent was an extremist.
After the statement
The release did not quote El-Sayed endorsing the attacks. His campaign’s later explanation relied on association and reluctance to disavow Piker, which must be distinguished from El-Sayed’s own recorded denial.
Mike Rogers’s August 5 statement following the Michigan Senate primary · Mike RogersParagraph beginning with Rogers’s counterterrorism experience and ending with the accusation about America deserving 9/11Why this label?
The case records the competing argument as whether declining to disavow an ally warrants an adverse inference about a candidate's judgment or beliefs. Rogers is the author of the accusation and states it in its strongest form, presenting it as an established belief of his opponent rather than an inference. That is the clearest possible assertion of the proposition under scrutiny. The closest competing label is condemns, which this record previously carried; it loses because condemns marks rejection of the accusation, and Rogers is making it. Relabelled from condemns in a September 17 audit: condemns was being carried both by the speakers making this accusation and by those attacking it, so the label was doing opposite work on one conduct under scrutiny. Speakers who assert or support the accusation are now classified “Defended or excused”, matching Alyssa Brouillet (433) and John Fetterman (974); speakers who criticise it, including El-Sayed (434, 509, 512), Cole Wozniak (459) and Jon Favreau (437), keep condemns.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
- Abdul El-SayedDemocratic nominee for U.S. Senate in Michigan, interviewed by Jacob Soboroff on All InDirectly involved
Before this statement
Rogers had issued his 9/11 accusation after the primary. The interview also addressed other Republican criticism, so the selected quotation is not exclusive to the 9/11 claim.
"So they’re going to use Islamophobia because their ideas are tired."
CondemnedResponding to: Abdul El-Sayed believes the United States deserved the September 11 attacks.
Full statement and sources
Responding to attacks from Rogers and other Republicans after the primary, El-Sayed characterized their approach as divisive and anti-Muslim rather than an accurate account of his priorities.
After the statement
El-Sayed emphasized shared concerns about family welfare, health care and economic conditions, and challenged Rogers to debates. His earlier explicit rejection of justifying 9/11 is recorded separately.
El-Sayed responds to Rogers’s attacks in his August 5 All In interviewOriginal interview embedded at top, dated August 5; paragraphs quoting El-Sayed on division and IslamophobiaPolitiFact documents Rogers’s accusation and his campaign’s supporting rationaleAlyssa Brouillet quotation; linked full April 7 event at 3:12:12; sources identify August 6 campaign email exchangeWhy this label?
The direct interview condemns divisive campaign conduct rather than just correcting attribution. Original reporting ties the answer specifically to the accusation; broader criticisms do not erase that link.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Jon FavreauPod Save America co-host discussing the general-election attack strategyBefore this statement
The hosts played an NRSC ad containing Piker’s statement and an allegation that El-Sayed refused to disavow it. Favreau mocked its combination of a religious-extremism portrayal and a tax message; Pfeiffer argued the combination could work.
"I think you got to pick one."
CondemnedCase context: Mike Rogers’s 9/11 accusation against Abdul El-Sayed
Full statement and sources
Discussing the NRSC ad that linked El-Sayed to Piker’s 9/11 remark, Favreau questioned mixing a Muslim-extremism portrayal with a tax attack. He argued that a coherent economic-extremism argument would need different supporting material.
After the statement
Favreau proposed keeping the economic attack coherent, then the discussion turned to El-Sayed's strategy against Rogers. He did not explicitly endorse the ad's allegations or give a direct factual assessment of Rogers's separate statement.
Bonus: Abdul El-Sayed Wins in Michigan feat. Bernie SandersOfficial full audio 20:06–24:23; Pfeiffer at 22:18–22:21 and Favreau at 22:21–22:23Automated transcript of Pod Save America’s August 5 El-Sayed bonus episode20:40–24:33; Favreau at 21:25, 21:39 and 23:04; Pfeiffer at 21:37, 22:13 and 23:37Podscripts transcript of Pod Save America’s El-Sayed bonus episodeNRSC ad discussion; block starting 00:20:57 contains Pfeiffer’s qualification and Favreau’s immediate responseWhy this label?
He criticizes how the attack is constructed while acknowledging why campaigns combine unpopular associations. The classification concerns his qualified assessment of the ad, not endorsement or rejection of the belief Rogers attributed to El-Sayed.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Dan PfeifferPod Save America co-host and political strategist analyzing a Republican campaign adBefore this statement
After hearing the NRSC ad, Favreau questioned its mixture of Muslim-extremism imagery and tax claims. Earlier in the episode Pfeiffer said he had donated to El-Sayed after the primary.
"It's not the best version of that ad, but I understand the argument."
Mixed or conditionalCase context: Mike Rogers’s 9/11 accusation against Abdul El-Sayed
Full statement and sources
Pfeiffer argued that the NRSC ad’s portrayal of El-Sayed as extreme could make its economic accusations more persuasive to voters. He regarded the combined message as more strategically coherent than some critics did, while qualifying his assessment of the execution. He was assessing effectiveness, not endorsing the allegations.
After the statement
Pfeiffer described the ad as a preview of a larger campaign that could link identity-based attacks and economic claims. Favreau disagreed about the message’s construction. Neither this strategic judgment nor Pfeiffer’s support for El-Sayed supplies a direct response to the truth of Rogers’s separate 9/11 assertion.
Bonus: Abdul El-Sayed Wins in Michigan feat. Bernie SandersOfficial full audio 20:06–24:23; Pfeiffer at 22:18–22:21 and Favreau at 22:21–22:23Automated transcript of Pod Save America’s August 5 El-Sayed bonus episode20:40–24:33; Favreau at 21:25, 21:39 and 23:04; Pfeiffer at 21:37, 22:13 and 23:37Podscripts transcript of Pod Save America’s El-Sayed bonus episodeNRSC ad discussion; block starting 00:20:57 contains Pfeiffer’s qualification and Favreau’s immediate responseWhy this label?
His qualified argument concerns how the campaign ad might persuade voters. It is not support for Rogers's claim that El-Sayed believed America deserved the attacks.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Tom CottonU.S. Senator from Arkansas (Republican), in a post on XBefore this statement
Cotton was responding to a post by Sen. Chris Murphy saying he was excited about El-Sayed's victory over Haley Stevens in the Democratic Senate primary, according to HuffPost.
"Senate Democrats are ‘excited’ for Abdul El-Sayed who proudly said America deserved 9/11"
Defended or excusedCase context: Mike Rogers’s 9/11 accusation against Abdul El-Sayed
Full statement and sources
Sen. Tom Cotton wrote on X that Senate Democrats were excited for Abdul El-Sayed, who he said had proudly said America deserved 9/11. HuffPost reported that Cotton later edited the post to say El-Sayed proudly campaigns with extremists who say it.
After the statement
HuffPost reported that Cotton appeared to have mistaken El-Sayed for Hasan Piker, who said "America deserved 9/11" in a 2019 Twitch broadcast and later called the remark inappropriate. It also reported that Cotton updated his post to say El-Sayed "proudly campaigns with extremists who say America deserved 9/11."
GOP Senator Falsely Claims Abdul El-Sayed Made Offensive 9/11 Remark, Then BacktracksParagraphs 1 to 3 and the paragraph on Cotton's updated postWhy this label?
The case centers on Mike Rogers's accusation that El-Sayed believed America deserved the September 11 attacks. Cotton's post makes the same attribution in his own words, so it backs that accusation. We labeled it Defended or excused, as we did for the other speakers who back the accusation.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
- Abdul El-SayedDemocratic U.S. Senate candidate in Michigan, interviewed on Fox & FriendsDirectly involved
Before this statement
He was asked about Piker’s controversial remarks before their scheduled Michigan campaign events.
"Of course I don’t think 9/11 was justified."
Challenged the characterizationResponding to: Appearing at a political event with Hasan Piker does not establish agreement with all of Piker’s statements.
Full statement and sources
El-Sayed rejected justifying the attacks but defended appearing with Piker, separating agreement with a statement from engaging an ally’s audience.
After the statement
He criticized demands to avoid an appearance because of disagreement. This interview predates Rogers’s August accusation and is included as contrary contextual evidence.
El-Sayed rejects justifying 9/11 while defending campaigning with Hasan PikerOpening interview quotations about 9/11 and appearing with someone without agreeing; embedded video 6392681742112Why this label?
He combined rejection of the underlying sentiment with a defense of the campaign appearance; neither unconditional endorsement nor complete disavowal describes both parts.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
- Abdul El-SayedHost of America Dissected and former Detroit health directorDirectly involved
Before this statement
At the beginning of a September 7, 2021 episode marking the twentieth anniversary, El-Sayed calls the attacks devastating and says the nearly 3,000 people who died should be remembered and honored.
"The people who carried it out were a group of people driven by hate who attacked my country."
Challenged the characterizationCase context: Mike Rogers’s 9/11 accusation against Abdul El-Sayed
Full statement and sources
In a 2021 America Dissected podcast, Abdul El-Sayed described the September 11 attackers as driven by hate and said they attacked his country. He also discussed the harms of post-9/11 U.S. actions. The remarks predate Mike Rogers’s 2026 campaign accusation and do not name Rogers.
After the statement
He says that September 11 scarred the country but that what the United States did after the attacks scarred millions of other people. The episode later turns to Afghanistan and postwar consequences.
America Dissected: Abdul El-Sayed on the twentieth anniversary of September 11Published September 7, 2021; transcript lines 34–44 and 71Why this label?
The recorded statement directly conflicts with the characterization that El-Sayed endorsed the September 11 attacks, while its broader discussion also criticizes the U.S. response after the attacks. It is classified only as a challenge to that characterization, not as a 2026 response.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Sources
(46)
Official statement
Mike Rogers’s August 5 statement following the Michigan Senate primary
Relevant passage: Paragraph beginning with Rogers’s counterterrorism experience and ending with the accusation about America deserving 9/11
About this source
Complete campaign statement. The accusation concerns El-Sayed’s supposed belief; it does not supply a quotation from him endorsing the attacks. Rogers’s campaign subsequently defended the inference by pointing to El-Sayed’s association with Hasan Piker. Other allegations in the release are outside this case.
- Author
- Mike Rogers; campaign release posted by Hinson Peed
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Trump leans into Islamophobic rhetoric at Michigan rally
Relevant passage: Paragraphs 1 to 6 and the passage on David Beamer's remarks
Excerpt
"Trump sought to draw a comparison between the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and El-Sayed as he introduced speaker David Beamer, whose son, Todd Beamer, was a passenger who died on the hijacked United Flight 93."
About this source
NBC News report on Trump's October 25 rally in Port Huron, Michigan. It quotes Trump's remarks about Abdul El-Sayed, the speech David Beamer gave after Trump introduced him, and Mike Rogers's answer on Meet the Press when asked about Trump's description of El-Sayed.
- Author
- Raquel Coronell Uribe
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Trump invokes 9/11 in urging Michigan voters to oppose Muslim Senate candidate El-Sayed
Relevant passage: Paragraphs 2 and 5 to 6
Excerpt
""Twenty-five years later, Michigan needs to stand up and fight, just like Todd did, to stop a jihadist from walking into the Capitol," Trump said."
About this source
Reuters report, published by CNBC, on President Trump's October 25 rally for Mike Rogers in Port Huron, Michigan. It quotes Trump comparing a vote against Abdul El-Sayed to the Flight 93 passengers' fight against the hijackers and notes that Rogers spoke on NBC's Meet the Press before the rally.
- Author
- Reuters
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Michigan paper declares it won't seek comment from Mike Rogers due to 'lies and bigoted attacks' on El-Sayed
Relevant passage: Fox News Digital report, October 22, 2026; opening paragraphs.
About this source
Fox News report on the Detroit Metro Times decision to stop seeking comment from Rogers's campaign, quoting reporter Steve Neavling's announcement on X. Fox reported that neither the campaign nor the paper responded to its requests for comment.
- Author
- Joseph Wulfsohn
- Published
- Accessed
Analysis
Mike Rogers keeps lying about Abdul El-Sayed. We counted the ways
Relevant passage: Detroit Metro Times analysis, October 21, 2026; section headed "An inflated counterterrorism resume".
About this source
Detroit Metro Times analysis of Rogers's statements about El-Sayed, published before their second debate. It calls the 9/11 claim false, cites PolitiFact's ratings and says the paper will stop seeking comment from Rogers's campaign.
- Author
- Steve Neavling, Detroit Metro Times
- Published
- Accessed
Original video
The Majority Report segment on Republican attacks on Abdul El-Sayed
About this source
The Majority Report published this segment on its YouTube channel on August 9, 2026. Emma Vigeland opens it after Abdul El-Sayed won Michigan's Democratic Senate primary.
- Author
- The Majority Report
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Mediaite reports El-Sayed's post-debate answer about Piker
Relevant passage: Exchange with Leland Vittert after Thursday's Senate debate
About this source
Mediaite report republished by Yahoo, dated October 9 at 12:27 a.m. EDT. It quotes an October 8 exchange distinguishing a president's power from a streamer's influence.
- Author
- Michael Luciano
- Published
- Accessed
Original post
Great Lakes Conservatives Fund 9/11 anniversary TV ad
Excerpt
"But the hatred behind 9/11 did not disappear. … Abdul El-Sayed gives comfort to that hatred. He campaigns with it. He accepts money from it. And he justifies it. … GLCF is responsible for the content of this advertising."
About this source
The post says the minute-long ad was airing on TV in Detroit for the 25th anniversary of 9/11. The ad uses news audio from the attacks, a clip of Hasan Piker, and footage of El-Sayed campaigning with Piker. On screen, the ad pairs 'he justifies it' with El-Sayed's March 13 video.
- Author
- Great Lakes Conservatives Fund
- Published
- Accessed
Original post
Mike Rogers post on 9/11 aid and El-Sayed
Excerpt
"9/11 was one of the worst days in American history. The insinuation that I do not support the victims or their families is patently false. In Congress, I proposed and advocated for an annual $150 million appropriation to support the needs of 9/11 survivors and victims’ families. It’s disqualifying that Conman Abdul is using Washington speak about the help Congress provided victims and their families to distract from how he’s platforming someone who believes “America deserved 9/11.”"
About this source
Rogers posted this after El-Sayed criticized his House votes on aid for 9/11 first responders. CBS News cited the post on September 11, 2026.
- Author
- Mike Rogers
- Published
- Accessed
Original video
Meet the Press: Abdul El-Sayed full interview after primary win
Excerpt
"Of course it was a dumb statement. And, of course, I think Hasan himself would say that was a dumb statement. He disavowed it. So, yes, America didn't deserve 9/11."
About this source
NBC News published the full Meet the Press interview with Abdul El-Sayed on August 9, 2026, after his Michigan Democratic Senate primary win. Interviewer Kristen Welker asked about his campaign appearances with Hasan Piker and Piker's 2019 remark about 9/11.
- Author
- NBC News / Meet the Press
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
GOP Senator Falsely Claims Abdul El-Sayed Made Offensive 9/11 Remark, Then Backtracks
Relevant passage: Paragraphs 1 to 3 and the paragraph on Cotton's updated post
Excerpt
"“Senate Democrats are ‘excited’ for Abdul El-Sayed who proudly said America deserved 9/11,” Cotton wrote on X in response to Murphy’s comment."
About this source
HuffPost report, published August 6, 2026, on Sen. Tom Cotton's August 5 post about El-Sayed and its later edit. It quotes the post directly and gives the background on Hasan Piker's 2019 remark.
- Author
- Curtis M. Wong
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Abdul El-Sayed Refuses to Condemn Hasan Piker… Again
Relevant passage: Second paragraph of the release, beginning "When Hasan Piker said"
Excerpt
"When Hasan Piker said that ‘America deserved 9/11’, Abdul refused to disavow it and campaigned with Piker numerous times"
About this source
Press release published on the National Republican Senatorial Committee's website. It says El-Sayed refused to disavow Piker's 9/11 remark and a later Piker remark about American Jews and Israel.
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Rogers uses RNC midterm platform to attack El-Sayed as Dems push back against Islamophobic rhetoric
Relevant passage: Section headed "Democrats label Rogers' remarks as pure Islamophobia": Richner's statement in its opening paragraphs and Hertel's statement in its closing paragraphs.
Excerpt
"resorting to shameful lies Rogers’ remarks were dangerous and desperate, and they were beneath the office he seeks."
About this source
Michigan Advance report by Ben Solis on Rogers's September 10 convention address and the responses to it. The address included the campaign-finance allegation. Neither Roxie Richner's nor Curtis Hertel's quoted words mention the funding sentence, so neither response is recorded as a denial of it.
- Author
- Ben Solis
- Published
- Accessed
Interview
Abdul El-Sayed calls Hasan Piker’s 9/11 remark “a dumb comment” on CNN
Relevant passage: Aired September 21, 2026, 7–8 p.m. ET; exchange beginning [19:55:03]
Excerpt
"It’s a dumb comment."
About this source
In a CNN interview, El-Sayed responded to a question about Hasan Piker’s statement by calling it “a dumb comment” while saying the campaign’s continued focus on Piker was a talking point. His statement that Piker himself has called it dumb is attributed to El-Sayed and is not treated here as a verified Piker statement.
- Author
- Erin Burnett OutFront / CNN
- Published
- Accessed
Archived source
Rogers for Senate email preserved by Political Emails (September 20, 2026)
Relevant passage: Metadata table; body paragraph beginning “But never in a million years did I think…”
Excerpt
"But never in a million years did I think I would be running for the U.S. Senate against someone who believes America deserved 9/11."
About this source
Political Emails identifies the sender as Mike Rogers <[email protected]>, lists Rogers for Senate as the payer, and reports a September 20 sent time. The message repeats the campaign’s accusation about Abdul El-Sayed and says his ideology threatens the country’s way of life and national security. The archive documents the message and its displayed metadata; it does not independently prove the underlying accusation.
- Author
- Mike Rogers / Rogers for Senate
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Mike Rogers renews criticism of Abdul El-Sayed over Hasan Piker
Relevant passage: Opening and sections “On Conman Abdul El-Sayed’s Running Mate Hasan Piker” and “On Conman Abdul El-Sayed Begging for Chuck Schumer’s Money.”
Excerpt
"He can’t walk away from this, and he said multiple times that he won’t disavow what [Hasan Piker] said."
About this source
Rogers’s campaign release publishes excerpts it attributes to Rogers’s September 16 Hannity appearance. Rogers alleges that El-Sayed is responsible for Piker’s language because of their association and because, Rogers says, El-Sayed would not disavow Piker. The release does not independently establish the underlying descriptions of Piker’s statements, El-Sayed’s views, or the campaign’s other allegations.
- Author
- Hinson Peed; statement attributed to Mike Rogers
- Published
- Accessed
Analysis
FactCheck.org: Rogers Makes False 9/11 Claim About El-Sayed
Relevant passage: Passages on the April 7 campaign event and the August 5 CNN interview
Excerpt
"I’m not here to disavow people’s views. I’m here to have a conversation about how to get money out of politics, put money back in pockets, and pass Medicare for all."
About this source
FactCheck.org article documenting that El-Sayed rejected Piker's 9/11 remark when asked directly, while quoting his April 7 refusal to offer a general disavowal of Piker's views and his August 5 CNN answer declining to renounce Piker. Updated August 11 with the Rogers campaign's response.
- Author
- D'Angelo Gore
- Published
- Accessed
Analysis
PolitiFact: Mike Rogers falsely ties Abdul El-Sayed to Twitch streamer's 9/11 comments
Relevant passage: Passages quoting El-Sayed's Fox & Friends interview and the Rogers campaign's response
Excerpt
"Of course I don’t think 9/11 was justified. Because you appear with somebody doesn’t mean you agree with him on everything."
About this source
PolitiFact fact-check rating Pants on Fire a Rogers claim tying El-Sayed to Piker's 9/11 remark. It quotes El-Sayed's Fox & Friends answer rejecting the remark and the Rogers campaign's reply, including spokesperson Alyssa Brouillet's statement that El-Sayed would not disavow Piker's comments when asked.
- Author
- PolitiFact
- Published
- Accessed
Original post
Mike Rogers calls on Abdul El-Sayed to disavow Hasan Piker
Excerpt
"“Abdul should apologize to Congresswoman Stevens immediately, condemn this unacceptable rhetoric coming from his supporter, and disavow Hasan Piker.”"
About this source
Rogers said Abdul El-Sayed had invited “dangerous rhetoric” by campaigning with Hasan Piker and called for an apology to Rep. Stevens, condemnation of supporter rhetoric, and a disavowal of Piker. The post supplies Rogers’s campaign position; it does not independently establish the conduct or rhetoric to which he refers and does not repeat the earlier allegation that El-Sayed believed America deserved the September 11 attacks.
- Author
- Mike Rogers
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Tucker Carlson Jumps to Abdul El-Sayed's Defense Over Controversial 9/11 Comments: 'He Is Obviously Right'
Relevant passage: Mediaite, September 11, 2026. Reports and quotes Tucker Carlson's September 11 morning newsletter at tuckercarlson.com.
Excerpt
"El-Sayed did not celebrate airplane hijackings or cheerlead Al-Qaeda; he simply said that the U.S. conducting terrorism of its own in response to 9/11 was not exactly an appropriate reaction. He is obviously right."
About this source
Quotes at length from Carlson's own newsletter defending El-Sayed against Mike Rogers's characterisation of his 2021 remarks, and turning the "unfit to serve" charge back on Rogers. Carlson had separately said on his podcast that he would not vote for Rogers "at gunpoint." The underlying newsletter is at tuckercarlson.com/september-11-2026-morning-note; the same passages are reported by MS NOW, HuffPost, USA Today and The Independent.
- Author
- Zachary Leeman
- Published
- Accessed
Interview
Hannity, Fox News, September 11, 2026 (Stephen Miller on El-Sayed and Piker)
Relevant passage: Approximately 6:19-6:21 pm PDT segment (roughly 1140-1260 seconds into the hour)
Excerpt
"the democrat party has embraced the platform of individuals who fundamentally hate america and hate americans ... abdul el-sayed in michigan campaigned and promoted with bernie sanders a man named hasan piker ... hasan piker said that america and americans deserve 9-11"
About this source
Internet Archive TV News recording of Hannity on Fox News, aired September 11, 2026, 6:00-7:00pm PDT, with deputy White House chief of staff Stephen Miller as guest. The text available from this item is Internet Archive closed-caption data, not a verified verbatim transcription. The captions contain visible artifacts elsewhere in the hour ("country of conscious" for conscience, "fine phone calls" for final phone calls, "a ceasation" for association), so the wording here should be treated as caption-derived. The quoted lines are independently corroborated by contemporaneous write-ups at The Gateway Pundit and LifeZette, which render them the same way. Capitalisation has been normalised from the all-lowercase caption feed. This broadcast pre-dates the September 17 Axios interview by six days; Miller is responding to Piker's earlier "America deserved 9/11" remark, not to the al-Qaeda comparison.
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Washington Examiner: "Fetterman offers el Sayed $50,000 to do 9/11 rally with Hasan Piker"
Excerpt
"I'm offering $50,000 for you to do a rally with Hasan Piker on 9/11, the anniversary, and you can all explain to people why America deserved that 25 years ago."
About this source
Washington Examiner report of September 2, 2026, 1:08 PM ET, on remarks Sen. John Fetterman made that day on Fox News's "America's Newsroom." The report and its headline describe a total offer of up to $100,000, with a second $50,000 tied to El-Sayed appearing with his half-sister, but the only passage quoted directly is the first offer, which is what is quoted here. The remarks predate both the September 11 anniversary and Piker's September 17 Axios interview, so they respond to the El-Sayed–Piker association and Piker's earlier "America deserved 9/11" remark rather than to the al-Qaeda comparison.
- Author
- Britta Miller
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
TheWrap: "Hasan Piker Stands by Calling America the 'Top Dog in Terrorism' in Contentious Interview"
Excerpt
"I do not agree with this statement, nor do I give much weight to the statements made by a social media streamer."
About this source
TheWrap report of September 17, 2026 carrying fuller quotation from Piker's Axios interview than the Axios article itself, including his citation of a U.S. missile strike on an elementary school in Minab, Iran, and his statement that the analysis "doesn't justify" the September 11 attacks. It also carries Abdul El-Sayed's full statement to Axios rejecting the comparison, and his separate Fox 2 Detroit debate remarks of September 15 on why he engages with Piker. It notes the Associated Press found evidence at least one U.S. missile struck the school, that the Trump administration has not released the Pentagon investigation's findings, and that the death toll remains unknown; the 140 figure is Piker's.
- Author
- A.J. Katz
- Published
- Accessed
Interview
Axios: "Hasan Piker on 'The Axios Show': America worse than al-Qaeda 'pound for pound'"
Excerpt
"Pound for pound as far as the number of deaths, yes."
About this source
Axios write-up of an exclusive interview with Hasan Piker for a new episode of "The Axios Show," datelined Los Angeles and published September 17, 2026. Asked whether America commits more terrorism than the organization behind the September 11 attacks, Piker answered "Pound for pound as far as the number of deaths, yes" and added "We have caused tremendous terror all around the world." The piece's "why it matters" section ties the remarks to Republican attacks in the Michigan Senate race after Democratic nominee Abdul El-Sayed had Piker campaign for him in the primary. The published article is brief; fuller quotation from the same interview is carried in TheWrap's report.
- Author
- Alex Thompson
- Published
- Accessed
Original post
Mike Rogers on X: Piker "openly saying that Abdul is conning Michiganders"
About this source
Rogers's campaign account quoting Hasan Piker to attack El-Sayed's 9/11 anniversary video.
- Author
- Mike Rogers for Michigan
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
U.S. Senate debate: Abdul El-Sayed, Mike Rogers takeaways and analysis
About this source
Coverage of the Fox 2 Detroit "The Pulse" Senate debate on Sept. 15, 2026, which Mike Rogers skipped.
- Published
- Accessed
Archived source
Audio replay preserving Tom Emmer’s GOP convention remarks
Relevant passage: Audio replay at 2:12:04–2:12:21.
Excerpt
"This evil man pals around with people who believe Americans deserved to be attacked on 9/11."
About this source
Audio replay preserving the convention-speech segment used to corroborate the attribution and wording reported by AP. It is a rebroadcast archive, not an official convention recording.
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Associated Press reports Tom Emmer’s GOP convention remarks about Abdul El-Sayed
Relevant passage: Paragraph identifying Tom Emmer’s convention remarks about Abdul El-Sayed and Hasan Piker.
Excerpt
"This evil man pals around with people who believe Americans deserved to be attacked on 9/11."
About this source
AP reports and quotes Emmer’s GOP convention remarks. The source attributes the statement to Emmer; it does not establish the underlying accusation about El-Sayed.
- Author
- Associated Press
- Published
- Accessed
Interview
Transcript: Michigan Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan," Sept. 13, 2026
Relevant passage: AI exchange, transcript lines 127–131; video segment linked at transcript lines 146–149.
Excerpt
"We've also been calling for a pause on any of this frontier AI research until we can assure that this is being done safely."
About this source
Full transcript of Abdul El-Sayed's September 13 Face the Nation interview. In the AI exchange, he argues for a public AI-safety agency, defined no-go uses, public oversight, and a pause in frontier-AI research pending safety assurance.
- Author
- CBS News
- Published
- Accessed
Interview
America Dissected: Abdul El-Sayed on the twentieth anniversary of September 11
Relevant passage: Published September 7, 2021; transcript lines 34–44 and 71
Excerpt
"9/11 scarred our country in profound ways, but what we did after 9/11 scarred millions of other people."
About this source
This official America Dissected transcript preserves Abdul El-Sayed’s 2021 remarks on the twentieth anniversary of September 11. In the opening context, he calls the attacks devastating, honors the nearly 3,000 victims, and describes the attackers as driven by hate who attacked “my country.” He later criticizes post-9/11 U.S. actions. It predates the 2026 Rogers allegation and is contextual historical evidence, not a response to that allegation.
- Author
- America Dissected / Crooked Media
- Published
- Accessed
Original post
Abdul El-Sayed’s reply to Mike Rogers about 9/11 responder health care
Excerpt
"Turns out you didn’t vote to deny 9/11 first responders healthcare twice. You did it NINE times."
About this source
Direct campaign-account reply in the ongoing El-Sayed–Rogers dispute.
- Author
- Abdul El-Sayed
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Metro Times reports on Mike Rogers’s 9/11 responder health-care votes
Relevant passage: Published September 12, 2026; paragraphs beginning “A Metro Times review of congressional records found nine” and “You’ve got some nerve”
Excerpt
"A Metro Times review of congressional records found nine separate votes or legislative actions between 2003 and 2010 in which Rogers opposed, tried to block, or sought to restrict federal health care funding for 9/11 responders."
About this source
Metro Times’s characterization of Rogers’s 2003–2010 record and its account of the El-Sayed–Rogers exchange. The reported nine-action total remains attributed to the outlet in this record
- Author
- Steve Neavling
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
The Guardian reports on Mike Rogers’s 9/11 first-responder votes and campaign response
Excerpt
"Rogers has twice voted against healthcare and other benefits for 9/11 first responders and survivors."
About this source
The report links congressional vote records for Rogers to arguments over 9/11 first-responder benefits and includes the Rogers campaign’s response. It reports allegations by John Feal separately and should not be used to treat those allegations as established fact.
- Author
- Tom Perkins
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Abdul for U.S. Senate criticizes Mike Rogers’s 9/11 rhetoric and voting record
Excerpt
"This is somebody who—when he thinks it’s politically useful for him—wants to invoke the memory of 9/11."
About this source
Campaign release responding to Mike Rogers’s 9/11-focused rhetoric. It attributes the quoted criticism to Abdul El-Sayed and links its health-care-voting argument to contemporaneous reporting. It is a campaign statement, not independent verification of its characterizations.
- Author
- Abdul for U.S. Senate
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Abdul El-Sayed’s September 11 campaign statement
Relevant passage: Campaign press release dated September 11, 2026; quoted statement in paragraphs beginning “Today, on 9/11” and “They tried to diminish America.”
Excerpt
"Nothing can justify the murder of innocent civilians. Nothing."
About this source
The campaign’s press release says El-Sayed released a video statement that morning and links an X post.
- Author
- Abdul El-Sayed / Abdul for U.S. Senate
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Rogers campaign publishes its September 8 ad about El-Sayed and Piker
Relevant passage: Complete campaign-published video transcript; Rogers's sentence immediately before Piker's first inserted clip (web lines18–33)
About this source
Primary campaign text identifies the ad's September 8 start. Speaker labels distinguish Rogers, Piker and an inserted El-Sayed clip. The running-mate description is rhetorical.
- Author
- Alyssa Brouillet; Mike Rogers campaign
- Published
- Accessed
Analysis
The media’s Hasan Piker obsession is letting Republican Mike Rogers off the hook
Relevant passage: Concluding discussion of consistent scrutiny of both candidates, including Hasan’s explicit qualification about Piker
About this source
Original Guardian opinion column. Hasan contrasts scrutiny of El-Sayed’s association with Piker with coverage of Rogers’s ties to Lorenzo Sewell. He expressly preserves scrutiny of Piker and El-Sayed. This is evidence of Hasan’s argument, not independent verification of each allegation. The date is recorded at day precision; no publication time is asserted.
- Author
- Mehdi Hasan
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Rogers campaign releases a collection of 9/11-related testimonials
Relevant passage: September 10 release with named sections for Jon Turnbull, David Beamer, David and Tricia Nadeau, and Joaquin Guerrero
About this source
Original campaign release dated September 10 compiling selected quotations and links to videos published between September 8 and 10. This supports the dated compilation/publication action only. Recording times and full audiovisual context for the individual videos have not been established; the quotations are not being made into separate reaction records. Rejection of the claim that America deserved 9/11 does not by itself establish agreement that El-Sayed personally made or holds that claim. The publication timestamp is the campaign page's, not the individual videos' recording times.
- Author
- Hinson Peed for Rogers for Senate
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Detroit News records Rogers's convention criticism and the El-Sayed campaign's reply
Relevant passage: Paragraph beginning Campaign spokesman Cole Wozniak said in a Sept. 10 statement, and the following paragraph
About this source
Complete original reporting dated September 10, displaying an update time of 8:15 p.m. Eastern. Only the calendar publication date is asserted. The reporter explicitly dates Cole Wozniak's campaign statement September 10. His reply is recorded in his campaign-spokesperson capacity, not as a personal quotation by El-Sayed. The report also preserves El-Sayed's earlier rejection of justifying 9/11; that earlier context is not a newly made response.
- Author
- Melissa Nann Burke
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Mike Rogers's full September 10 convention speech
Relevant passage: Full campaign-published transcript; passage beginning That's why I never imagined; later Temple Israel passage beginning We saw that tested
About this source
The campaign publishes the complete speech text and links its full recording at https://youtu.be/caqS8edf8p4. Rogers attributes the 9/11-deserved sentiment to Piker and criticizes El-Sayed's association with him; his running-mate language is rhetorical. A separate passage renews the accusation that El-Sayed excused the Temple Israel attack. The transcript also includes Rogers's separate campaign-finance allegation; it establishes that Rogers made the statement but does not identify a donor, amount, or supporting campaign-finance filing. The publication timestamp is the campaign page's; it is not the speech's recording time.
- Author
- Mike Rogers; published by Alyssa Brouillet for Rogers for Senate
- Published
- Accessed
Archived source
Automated transcript of Pod Save America’s August 5 El-Sayed bonus episode
Relevant passage: 20:40–24:33; Favreau at 21:25, 21:39 and 23:04; Pfeiffer at 21:37, 22:13 and 23:37
About this source
Complete automatically generated transcript with speaker labels and timestamps, used to locate the exchange. The original publisher corroborates episode identity, date and host names, and a separate Podscripts transcript corroborates the passage with different advertising offsets. The exact wording and speaker sequence were subsequently checked against the official full audio. The ad’s allegations are not the hosts’ own assertions; Pfeiffer’s assessment of persuasive effectiveness is not endorsement of their truth. The page’s automatically generated summaries and topic labels are not used as evidence.
- Author
- Musixmatch Podcasts; original program: Pod Save America
- Accessed
Archived source
Podscripts transcript of Pod Save America’s El-Sayed bonus episode
Relevant passage: NRSC ad discussion; block starting 00:20:57 contains Pfeiffer’s qualification and Favreau’s immediate response
About this source
The transcript of the full episode corroborates the substance and short quotations, apart from rendering Favreau’s contracted wording as “got to” instead of “gotta.” It lists August 6, while the original publisher dates the episode August 5 because the official feed release crossed midnight UTC. Advertising offsets differ from Musixmatch. The exact wording and speaker sequence were checked against the official full audio.
- Author
- Podscripts; original program: Pod Save America
- Accessed
Analysis
Bonus: Abdul El-Sayed Wins in Michigan feat. Bernie Sanders
Relevant passage: Official full audio 20:06–24:23; Pfeiffer at 22:18–22:21 and Favreau at 22:21–22:23
About this source
The original publisher dates this bonus Pod Save America episode August 5 and identifies Jon Favreau and Dan Pfeiffer as its hosts. Crooked Media’s page embeds the complete official Audioboom feed. The relevant section was checked directly against that audio after first being located through two separately generated transcripts. Tommy Vietor appears in an advertisement in one transcript, not as a participant in the exchange. This is not a Pod Save the World episode. The hosts assess the strategy of an NRSC ad that includes Piker’s 9/11 statement; they do not endorse the ad’s allegations or issue a factual verdict on Rogers’s separate assertion about El-Sayed’s beliefs.
- Author
- Pod Save America / Crooked Media; Jon Favreau and Dan Pfeiffer
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
PolitiFact documents Rogers’s accusation and his campaign’s supporting rationale
Relevant passage: Alyssa Brouillet quotation; linked full April 7 event at 3:12:12; sources identify August 6 campaign email exchange
About this source
Original reporting includes the campaign’s response to a request for its evidence. Brouillet’s statement is a direct quotation from that exchange, not an inference from silence. The report distinguishes El-Sayed’s explicit rejection of justifying 9/11 from his refusal to disavow an ally. We record that distinction without adopting PolitiFact’s rating as the case’s purpose.
- Author
- PolitiFact
- Published
- Accessed
Interview
El-Sayed responds to Rogers’s attacks in his August 5 All In interview
Relevant passage: Original interview embedded at top, dated August 5; paragraphs quoting El-Sayed on division and Islamophobia
About this source
The broadcaster embeds the full August 5 interview and quotes El-Sayed’s response; its accompanying article was published August 6. The YouTube mirror is ZxcOGYPE16w. The broadcaster’s text and PolitiFact corroborate the response and date.
- Author
- Allison Detzel / MS NOW; interviewee: Abdul El-Sayed
- Published
- Accessed
Interview
El-Sayed rejects justifying 9/11 while defending campaigning with Hasan Piker
Relevant passage: Opening interview quotations about 9/11 and appearing with someone without agreeing; embedded video 6392681742112
About this source
Original broadcaster’s account and embedded interview. El-Sayed rejects justification of 9/11 and argues that sharing an appearance need not signal agreement. This predates Rogers’s August accusation and is included as relevant context, not presented as a response made afterward.
- Author
- Fox News / Fox & Friends; interviewee: Abdul El-Sayed
- Published
- Accessed
Corrections
(3)
Corrections address errors in our reporting or labels. When a speaker changes their position, we add a separate statement and link it to the earlier one.
Classification correction
Correction to: Statement by Cole Wozniak
- Previous classification
- Challenges the characterization. The campaign explicitly disputes Rogers's characterization. The quotation is a sentence fragment whose subject, El-Sayed, is supplied by the reporter's surrounding sentence; it is not a verbatim personal statement by El-Sayed.
- Corrected classification
- Condemns. The very next attributed sentence calls the attack bad-faith lies meant to mislead voters. The complete reply directly condemns campaign conduct, beyond correcting the belief attributed to El-Sayed.
We corrected the editorial classification of Cole Wozniak's response about Rogers’s alleged misrepresentation of El-Sayed’s beliefs. The very next attributed sentence calls the attack bad-faith lies meant to mislead voters. The complete reply directly condemns campaign conduct, beyond correcting the belief attributed to El-Sayed. This corrects our labeling, not a later change in the speaker's position.
This corrects an editorial classification.
Complete original reporting dated September 10, displaying an update time of 8:15 p.m. Eastern. Only the calendar publication date is asserted. The reporter explicitly dates Cole Wozniak's campaign statement September 10. His reply is recorded in his campaign-spokesperson capacity, not as a personal quotation by El-Sayed. The report also preserves El-Sayed's earlier rejection of justifying 9/11; that earlier context is not a newly made response.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Classification correction
Correction to: Statement by Abdul El-Sayed
- Previous classification
- Challenges the characterization. He directly challenged how opponents were presenting him; the characterization of their tactics is attributed to El-Sayed, not asserted by DI as a motive finding.
- Corrected classification
- Condemns. The direct interview condemns divisive campaign conduct rather than just correcting attribution. Original reporting ties the answer specifically to the accusation; broader criticisms do not erase that link.
We corrected the editorial classification of Abdul El-Sayed's response about Rogers’s attack and its allegedly Islamophobic tactics. The direct interview condemns divisive campaign conduct rather than just correcting attribution. Original reporting ties the answer specifically to the accusation; broader criticisms do not erase that link. This corrects our labeling, not a later change in the speaker's position.
This corrects an editorial classification.
The broadcaster embeds the full August 5 interview and quotes El-Sayed’s response; its accompanying article was published August 6. The YouTube mirror is ZxcOGYPE16w. The broadcaster’s text and PolitiFact corroborate the response and date.
Original reporting includes the campaign’s response to a request for its evidence. Brouillet’s statement is a direct quotation from that exchange, not an inference from silence. The report distinguishes El-Sayed’s explicit rejection of justifying 9/11 from his refusal to disavow an ally. We record that distinction without adopting PolitiFact’s rating as the case’s purpose.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Reporting correction
Correction to: Statement by Dan Pfeiffer
- Previous language
- Private review: exact audio wording still requires a listening check.
- Corrected language
- The wording and speaker sequence were checked against the official full audio.
Removed a stale internal review note after checking the quoted passage against Crooked Media’s official full audio. The quote and classification did not change.
This corrects our account of what happened.
The original publisher dates this bonus Pod Save America episode August 5 and identifies Jon Favreau and Dan Pfeiffer as its hosts. Crooked Media’s page embeds the complete official Audioboom feed. The relevant section was checked directly against that audio after first being located through two separately generated transcripts. Tommy Vietor appears in an advertisement in one transcript, not as a participant in the exchange. This is not a Pod Save the World episode. The hosts assess the strategy of an NRSC ad that includes Piker’s 9/11 statement; they do not endorse the ad’s allegations or issue a factual verdict on Rogers’s separate assertion about El-Sayed’s beliefs.
The transcript of the full episode corroborates the substance and short quotations, apart from rendering Favreau’s contracted wording as “got to” instead of “gotta.” It lists August 6, while the original publisher dates the episode August 5 because the official feed release crossed midnight UTC. Advertising offsets differ from Musixmatch. The exact wording and speaker sequence were checked against the official full audio.
Complete automatically generated transcript with speaker labels and timestamps, used to locate the exchange. The original publisher corroborates episode identity, date and host names, and a separate Podscripts transcript corroborates the passage with different advertising offsets. The exact wording and speaker sequence were subsequently checked against the official full audio. The ad’s allegations are not the hosts’ own assertions; Pfeiffer’s assessment of persuasive effectiveness is not endorsement of their truth. The page’s automatically generated summaries and topic labels are not used as evidence.
Share or embed this case
The embed keeps its attribution link to The Dispute Index. Credit the image to The Dispute Index and link to the case page.
Cite this record
- Publisher
- The Dispute Index
- Title
- Mike Rogers’s 9/11 accusation against Abdul El-Sayed
- First published
- Last updated
- Permalink
- https://disputeindex.com/cases/mike-rogers-abdul-el-sayed-hasan-piker-911-accusation
The Dispute Index. "Mike Rogers’s 9/11 accusation against Abdul El-Sayed". First published: 2026-08-07. Last updated: 2026-09-11. https://disputeindex.com/cases/mike-rogers-abdul-el-sayed-hasan-piker-911-accusation