Hasan Piker told Axios the US has caused more terrorism than al-Qaeda "pound for pound." The full episode added more contested claims -- on Iran's nuclear programme, Mao Zedong, China and Zionism -- and drew condemnation from both parties.
Role at the time: Founder of Freedom Watch and plaintiff in the civil suit against Piker, writing on the Freedom Watch website
Condemned
Statement summary
In an October 5 Freedom Watch post, Larry Klayman called Piker an antisemitic podcaster, said his lawsuit against Piker had put a target on his back, and said Cenk Uygur and Ana Kasparian of The Young Turks were next on his list.
“I have already filed suit against anti-Semitic podcaster Hasan Piker, who is Uygur’s nephew. That has put a target on my back, but I am doing this on behalf of our people, which includes you and your loved ones.”
The reference point is Piker's August 20 remarks and the competing readings of them. Klayman again calls Piker antisemitic and presents his suit as action against people he says foment violence, so we labeled it Condemned, consistent with his earlier statements in this case. Mixed or conditional does not fit because nothing in the post qualifies the condemnation. Evidence level: Klayman's own first-person post on the Freedom Watch website; his descriptions of Piker and others are allegations, not court findings.
Role at the time: Political streamer and commentator
Challenged the characterization
Statement summary
In an Axios interview published September 18, Hasan Piker said Abdul El-Sayed was making a mistake by taking ownership of an insincere characterization while distancing himself from Piker.
“I think he is making a mistake with taking ownership over something that I think most voters understand is insincere.”
Role at the time: Michigan Democratic U.S. Senate nominee
Condemned
Statement summary
During a September 15 Michigan Senate debate, Abdul El-Sayed said he had disavowed Hasan Piker’s comments about Jewish Americans and Jewish Michiganders entirely.
“Absolutely… when Hasan made these comments about Jewish Americans and Jewish Michiganders, I disavowed them entirely.”
Role at the time: Children’s educator and video creator, writing on her own verified Instagram account
Defended or excused
Statement summary
Ms. Rachel argues against punishing people for supporting Palestine and criticizes Sheeran for yielding to pressure. She urges others to oppose what she describes as genocide in Gaza.
“Ed Sheeran had an opportunity show that we won’t be bullied into punishing people for supporting Palestine.”
Read the original post (opens in a new tab)Ms. Rachel criticizes Ed Sheeran over pressure against support for Palestine · Ms. RachelPost DdR1LH3gYBP: text image, opening sentence; accompanying caption
What this label refers to
On Macklemore’s pro-Palestinian MetLife speech, Ms. Rachel supports speaking out for Palestine and rejects punishment for doing so. Her criticism of Sheeran’s response supports that defense; it does not condemn Macklemore’s speech.
Role at the time: Host of The Philip DeFranco Show, giving his own commentary.
Defended or excused
Response to this claim
Ed Sheeran and his team decided to remove Macklemore from the remaining Loop Tour support dates.
“at the very least, I'm disappointed in Ed”
Watch the original video (opens in a new tab)Philip DeFranco criticizes Ed Sheeran's response to Macklemore's tour removal · Philip DeFranco13:10–13:41; selected quotation at 13:11; separate continuation at 13:53–14:01
Why we used this label
The condemnation targets Sheeran's response and the exclusion of Macklemore, not Macklemore's original speech. DeFranco expressly voices disappointment and criticizes the reported refusal to take sides; his subsequent argument about conflation supports that evaluation. This substantive criticism is stronger than a characterization-only label. Ms. Rachel's embedded statement is not counted as his words.
Role at the time: Political streamer and commentator, in an onstage conversation with Peter Mertens at the ManiFiesta festival in Ostend, Belgium
Challenged the characterization
Response to this claim
Piker’s wording encouraged or justified violence against American Jews.
“This is something that even Zionists themselves at times acknowledge, including people who have, in the United States of America, attacked me for saying exactly those words in the past. They themselves have repeated it.”
Watch the original video (opens in a new tab)Hasan Piker in conversation with Peter Mertens at ManiFiesta 2026Approximately 16:50 to 19:12 (chapter "Hasan Piker answers the antisemitism accusation")
Why we used this label
The reference point is Piker's August 20 remarks about American Jews and Israel and whether they warned about antisemitic danger or implied a threat. Piker restates the warning reading and disputes the critics' interpretation, so we labeled it Challenged the characterization, as with his earlier responses in this case. Defended or excused is the closest alternative, but he does not argue that any conduct under scrutiny was justified; he rejects the antisemitism charge and restates what he says he meant. Evidence level: the published video of the conversation, checked by ear and against captions; the event details come from the video's description.
Role at the time: Plaintiff in the referenced civil lawsuit and author of the Freedom Watch post
Condemned
Statement summary
In a September 11 post, Larry Klayman condemned Hasan Piker and repeated allegations underlying Klayman’s civil lawsuit. The post is a statement of Klayman’s position and does not establish the allegations as fact.
“He is effectively a terrorist who has said that “America deserved 9/11”, and I am suing him for his calls to violence against Jews and Christians who support the State of Israel.”
Klayman uses directly condemnatory language about Piker and frames the lawsuit as a response to alleged calls to violence. The classification describes Klayman’s stated position, while the allegations remain attributed.
Role at the time: Civil plaintiff and legal activist speaking personally in a published announcement
Condemned
Statement summary
Larry Klayman condemned Hasan Piker’s August 20 remarks as he announced a Palm Beach County civil lawsuit seeking more than $150 million and an injunction. The complaint’s allegations and requested remedies are not judicial findings.
“Piker yelled fire at Jews and Christians who support Israel.”
Read the official statement (opens in a new tab)Larry Klayman announces personal civil suit against Hasan PikerOpening announcement of Palm Beach County case; paragraph beginning Upon filing the complaint; linked complaint
What this label refers to
His own announcement explicitly characterizes the passage as a threat rather than merely a warning. This records Klayman's allegation without treating it as a legal finding.
Role at the time: Journalist and host of America, Actually, appearing as a guest on The Majority Report.
Challenged the characterization
Statement summary
In a Majority Report discussion of the Democratic response to Piker, Herndon characterized Sen. Jon Ossoff’s statement as responding to something he believed had been taken out of context. He also said candidates should be cautious about responding to every short X news cycle.
Herndon does not defend all of Piker’s statements: earlier in the same discussion, he said Piker was more incendiary than several progressive figures and said he was not defending everything Piker had said. This selected response expressly challenges the framing of the August 20 passage, so challenges the characterization fits more closely than defends or excuses.
Role at the time: Law professor at the University of Minnesota and former chief White House ethics lawyer, posting on X
Condemned
Response to this claim
Piker’s passage was antisemitic.
“Hasan Piker has crossed the line between criticizing the Israeli government and publicly attacking American Jews who support Israel's right to exist. He is a bigot.”
Read the original post (opens in a new tab)Richard Painter post on Hasan Piker and American Jews · Richard PainterOriginal post body, linking a Forbes explainer on Piker's remarks
Why we used this label
The reference point is Piker's August 20 remarks about American Jews and Israel. Painter says the remarks crossed from criticism of a government into an attack on American Jews and calls Piker a bigot, a direct rejection, so we labeled it Condemned. Challenged the characterization loses because Painter does not dispute anyone's description of the remarks; he adopts the critical reading. Evidence level: his own post, which links a Forbes explainer on the remarks.
In response to reporters’ questions about Piker and a possible condemnation, El-Sayed explicitly declines to make a conversation about Piker the focus.
Role at the time: Co-host of Some More News’s Even More News podcast
Challenged the characterization
Statement summary
Stoll said Democratic criticism of Piker’s remarks gave conservatives material and reflected an effort to keep “the real left” out of policy. Earlier in the segment, she said Piker can be crass while arguing that the criticism misrepresented his remarks.
“They want they would rather lose. They would rather give the talking points to the conservatives and and let it lose. They don't want any element of uh the left, the real left involved in the policy.”
He agrees with the need to distinguish Jewish identity from Israel while explicitly separating his position from the safety condition he attributes to Piker.
Nessel described Piker as “very anti-Semitic” after discussing his remarks about American Jews and the image of Jeremy Moss displayed during the stream.
Martin’s original post directly characterizes the described blame as dangerous, wrong, and antisemitic. Contemporaneous reporting identifies the post as a response to Piker’s remarks.
Role at the time: U.S. Representative for New Jersey’s 5th congressional district
Condemned
Statement summary
Gottheimer characterized Piker’s remarks about American Jews as antisemitic and called for a House vote on a bipartisan resolution.
“Telling millions of followers that Jewish Americans are bringing violence on themselves is blatantly antisemitic and one of the oldest tropes in the book.”
Read the official statement (opens in a new tab)Gottheimer calls for House vote on resolution condemning Piker and Owens · Josh GottheimerQuoted statement beginning “Hatred is hatred, period.”
What this label refers to
In an official statement explicitly tied to Piker’s recent remarks about American Jews, Gottheimer calls the description of Jewish Americans “blatantly antisemitic.”
Role at the time: Chief executive of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, posting on her X account
Condemned
Response to this claim
Piker’s wording assigned American Jews responsibility for antisemitic violence directed at them.
“Blaming Jews for the actions of the Israeli government. And then blaming Jews for antisemitic violence that targets them under the guise of protesting Israel. All of it is dangerous & wrong.”
The reference point is Piker's August 20 remarks about American Jews and Israel, which critics read as an implicit threat and Piker described as a warning. Spitalnick calls them antisemitic, says they blame Jews for violence directed at them, and ends "All of it is dangerous & wrong," so we labeled it Condemned. Challenged the characterization loses because she does not dispute how others described the remarks; she gives her own critical reading. Evidence level: her own post.
Piker’s wording encouraged or justified violence against American Jews.
Quotation excerpt
“do not let a coordinated republican smear campaign become “reality.” my argument against the dangerous false conflation between zionism and judaism which in turn increases antisemitism is now turned on it’s head. zionism is not judaism.…”
Read full quotation
“do not let a coordinated republican smear campaign become “reality.” my argument against the dangerous false conflation between zionism and judaism which in turn increases antisemitism is now turned on it’s head. zionism is not judaism. antizionism is not antisemitism.”
In a reply to Jeffries’s characterization, Piker describes it as a coordinated smear and says his argument has been inverted. It disputes the interpretation rather than independently defending or condemning violence.
Larry Klayman is an American legal activist, author and commentator who founded Judicial Watch and Freedom Watch USA. His work includes public-interest litigation and political advocacy. He studied political science and French literature at Duke University and earned his law degree at Emory University. He previously worked at the U.S. Department of Justice and ran in the 2004 Republican U.S. Senate primary in Florida.
Hasan Piker, also known as HasanAbi, is a political commentator and livestream host. He broadcasts on Twitch and publishes videos on YouTube, discussing current events and politics. Piker previously made programs for The Young Turks, including Agitprop with Hasan Piker and The Breakdown. He graduated from Rutgers University with degrees in political science and communications.
Philip DeFranco is an online news host, producer and commentator. He presents The Philip DeFranco Show, which discusses current events and popular culture on YouTube. He also co-hosts Crashing Out with Alex Pearlman. DeFranco also shares news and commentary through his social media accounts.
Astead Herndon is a journalist, editorial director at Vox and host of America, Actually. He previously reported for The New York Times, where he hosted The Run-Up podcast. The National Association of Black Journalists named him its 2025 Journalist of the Year.
Richard Painter is an American lawyer and law professor at the University of Minnesota Law School. He was chief White House ethics lawyer under President George W. Bush from 2005 to 2007 and writes and comments on government ethics.
Katy Stoll is a commentator and co-host of Some More News's Even More News podcast. She also is an actress and producer. Her acting credits include How I Met Your Mother and Bones, and she previously worked at Cracked.
Dov Waxman is a professor of Israel studies at the University of California, Los Angeles, and an author on Israel, American Jewry, and antisemitism. He writes academic work and public commentary on Jewish politics and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He earned his undergraduate degree at Oxford University and his MA and PhD in international relations at Johns Hopkins University. He previously taught at Northeastern University and the City University of New York.