Jew hatred is in his DNA

Michigan Senate Candidate El-Sayed Apologizes For Comments After Synagogue Attack

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/michigan-senate-candidate-el-sayed-apologizes-comments-after-synagogue-attack

BY TYLER DURDEN

MONDAY, AUG 31, 2026 - 06:00 AM

Authored by Jacki Thrapp via The Epoch Times,

Progressive Abdul El-Sayed, the Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate in Michigan, apologized on Aug. 29 for comments he made in March after an armed assailant drove into a Detroit-area synagogue and opened fire.

El-Sayed, who edged out establishment candidate Rep. Haley Stevens (D-Mich.) in the Democratic primary earlier this month, apologized to the state's Jewish Democratic Caucus for linking the local attack to Israel's actions in the Middle East.

"My comments may have been misconstrued to justify something I did not mean to justify," El-Sayed told reporters Saturday in Lansing.

"To anyone who feels like my comments might have been hurtful, I'm really sorry. That was not my intention."

The former Wayne County health director initially released a statement that attempted to link the actions of the shooter, Ayman Mohamad Ghazali, to events that impacted Ghazali's family in the days leading up to his attack.

"Ayman Ghazali lost family, including two children, in an airstrike in Lebanon last week," El-Sayed said in his statement back in March.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) stated that Ghazali's brother, who was killed in the Lebanon strike, was a Hezbollah commander.

In a March video statement, El-Sayed said: "Ayman Ghazali hurt people."

"There is no justification for what he did. It was wrong and he never should have done it. Hurt people hurt people. A week earlier, an airstrike killed his niece and nephew. Imagine if that had never happened. Imagine there was no war in Iran. Imagine if there were no airstrikes in Lebanon. Imagine if his family had never died. Imagine there was never an attack on Temple Israel. That's the world that we want to live in. That's the world we need to build for."

Ayman Ghazali died of a self-inflicted gunshot wound after the synagogue attack. A security guard, who Ghazali hit with his car, was hospitalized with non-life-threatening injuries.

At least 30 law enforcement officers went to the hospital for smoke inhalation caused by the burning car.

No children or staff were injured.

El-Sayed is running against Republican Mike Rogers, a former U.S. Representative, for the open U.S. Senate seat held by U.S. Senator Gary Peters, a Democrat, who did not run for reelection because he wanted to pass the job to the next generation.

"I always knew there would come a time to pass the torch to the next generation of public servants and allow them the opportunity to bring fresh energy and ideas to our nation's capital," Peters said when he revealed he was not running for reelection in January 2025.

"Our founding fathers envisioned members of Congress as citizens serving their country for a few terms and then returning to private life. I agree. After three terms in the House and two terms in the Senate, I believe now it's time for me to write a few more paragraphs in my current chapter and then turn over the reins.

The Cook Political Report has rated the race between El-Sayed and Rogers as a "Toss Up."

Five out of six polls taken in August show El-Sayed with a slight lead, while one poll from Beacon Research/Shaw & Company Research shows Rogers with a slight lead.

The DSA is the Soviet Union 2.0

Democratic socialism could cost the US a staggering $200 trillion, report reveals: ‘Closer to Soviet-style communism’

https://nypost.com/2026/08/31/us-news/democratic-socialism-could-cost-the-us-a-staggering-200-trillion-report-reveals-closer-to-soviet-style-communism/

By 

Chris Nesi

Published Aug. 31, 2026

 Updated Aug. 31, 2026, 4:53 a.m. PDT

How to deal with this violent subculture of takeovers?

Culture> Race

Link copied

The Big Secret about Teen Takeovers

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2026/08/the-big-secret-about-teen-takeovers/

There’s something big the mainstream media don’t want to tell you about these disruptive and dangeorus events.

Jeffrey Folks | August 29, 2026

Soon it will a long, hot Labor Day weekend, and police in many cities are bracing for multiple teen takeovers.

These takeovers, usually of crowded downtown areas, are organized on social media and escalate rapidly into large-scale brawls involving the use of fists, knives, and guns.  Bystanders and police are hurt, and businesses are damaged and have their hours curtailed.

Footage from a large teen takeover from the Wisconsin State Fair in Milwaukee has aired on national media, with commentators noting that “these kinds of takeovers have become all too common.”  What was not said is that “these kinds of takeovers” are largely, though not entirely, black teen takeovers.  Although white teens are certainly guilty of committing crimes, teen takeovers are mostly relegated to blacks.  The question is, why?

Certainly, the Wisconsin State Fair takeover involved mostly blacks, including women punching, kicking, and brawling, and striking a police officer.  As Fox News states, “malls, beaches, and restaurants become battlefields.”  In New Jersey, Georgia, Wisconsin, Detroit, and other states, “massive crowds of juveniles overwhelm public spaces.”  One of the most violent of these occurred at a Washington, D.C. Chipotle Grill restaurant, where a group of teens entered the location and began fighting and throwing chairs.  What the report failed to indicate is that all of the teens shown in the video of the event appeared to be black.  Outside the Chipotle, hundreds of teens reportedly brawled in the streets.  None of the commentators noted that the vast majority of these teens were black, despite the fact that footage of the event showed it to be so.

Similar teen takeovers have occurred at a shopping mall in Glendale, Wisconsin; in downtown Detroit; and in Chicago, and at many other locations.  Body cam footage from the Glendale takeover showed police battling black teens and teens striking police officers.  Additional video showed dozens of black teens brawling, but this was only a small number of those participating in a takeover said to have been organized on social media.  It’s important to note that though most of those involved in the so-called Bayshore Mall takeover appear to have been black, the overall black population of Glendale, Wisconsin, is 16 percent.  Whites constitute 65 percent of Glendale’s population, but by and large they are not out there rampaging and causing harm.  What has been causing a disproportionate number of black youths to participate in these violent takeovers?

In another recent takeover, hundreds of teens reportedly flocked to the Chicago Loop and began fighting and looting.  These footage shows that most of the participants were black.  In Charlotte, North Carolina, over 40 teen takeovers have occurred so far this summer, with most of those on the videos I have seen being black.  In Charlotte, blacks constitute 33 percent of the population; whites and Asians constitute over 40 percent.

Chicago’s 57th St. Beach takeover involved an estimate 400 to 500 teens, again largely black, as one can see in video of the event.  Chicago’s population is 28 percent black.  Why are so many of the teen takeovers black events?

The fact that these takeovers involve mostly black teens is rarely if ever mentioned in media accounts.  That fact by itself — the fact that the media refuse to identify black participants by race despite identifying some of those at the Tybee Island, South Carolina, mêlée as white female teens — may well be one reason blacks feel free to flock to these events: society refuses to face the facts and hold them accountable because they are black.  Likewise, the chance of being arrested and punished is almost nil.

It would be better, for the public at large and for participants in the takeovers themselves, to identify the problem exactly as it is: not a problem with “teen” takeovers, but with “black teen” takeovers, and to move from there toward solutions.  Solutions will never be found if the truth is suppressed and endless excuses are made for exactly those responsible.  There is a problem with a certain segment of blacks youths in America today, and that problem needs to addressed head-on.

In all of the takeovers reviewed above, only a handful — less than a dozen — of the participants were arrested.  There need to be arrests of all of those participating, and there need to be longer sentences along with attempts at re-education.  Along with this, as Florida’s Lt. Governor Jay Collins has it, parents need to take responsibility for educating their children and tracking their whereabouts.

It may also be that current curfews in many cities including Chicago are not early enough and are not strictly enforced.  If young people, both black and white, were kept off the streets to begin with, there would be far fewer takeovers.  Some cities are also attempting to address the problem with after-hours activities for teens.  All of this is well and good, but it has not ended the takeovers.  In our major cities this summer, there have been teen takeovers at multiple locations every weekend.

Conservatives care about the well-being of all persons, and especially about the well-being of our youth.  In every teen takeover, young people are injured and sometimes killed.  Above all, conservatives value human life, and the lives of our young, white and black, are put at risk every time a takeover occurs.  Only a forceful response can save these precious lives.

At its core, there is a problem with the way our society makes excuses for the behavior of black youths.  Too often the story is that offenders have grown up in difficult circumstances.  So did millions of whites, but most of them do not go about breaking curfews and engaging in violence.  There’s also the suggestion that since black Americans have historically suffered from slavery and Jim Crow, the failings of present-day blacks — including lawlessness — should be overlooked, almost as a sort of non-monetary reparations.  But black American teens have never experienced discrimination; if anything, they receive preference in schooling and hiring and can look forward to future promotions ahead of whites.

The problem is not past discrimination.  It is the way black teens, especially males, are being brought up today and the failure of parents and society to correct them when necessary.  At its foundation, that failure is the result of society’s refusal to hold blacks to the same standards as whites.  Until that happens, black teen takeovers, violence, and other lawlessness will continue.

When the parasites get to decide how much you're allowed to have

The government would like to discuss your allowance

https://www.theblaze.com/columns/opinion/the-government-would-like-to-discuss-your-allowance

OWEN ANDERSON

AUGUST 30, 2026

Democratic socialism turns an old American presumption upside down: Your property is yours unless Washington decides you have more than you need.

Abdul El-Sayed did Americans a favor when he sat down with Jesse Watters on Fox News this week. The Michigan U.S. Senate candidate gave us a remarkably clear lesson in the philosophy behind America’s growing democratic socialist movement. The real question is simple: Who owns your property — you or the government?

The most revealing moment was not about Sharia law, transgender medicine, or even socialized health care. It came when Watters pressed El-Sayed about his proposal to tax the wealth of Americans with more than $100 million.

Before giving government more power, ask what happens when the people wielding it decide that you, too, have more than you need.

El-Sayed has made the argument before. Billionaires, he says, can surrender a substantial portion of their wealth and still remain billionaires. Their children and grandchildren will still be rich.

Notice the premise. This is not merely an argument that government needs revenue for legitimate functions, nor a dispute over whether the top marginal income-tax rate should be 35% or 39%. The argument is that you possess more than you need — and government gets to decide how much that is.

That is the part Americans need to understand.

Suppose you build a company. You work for decades. You save, invest, and take risks. The company becomes enormously valuable. Under the traditional American understanding, the presumption is that the property is yours. Government may tax under constitutional authority, but it does not acquire an unlimited moral claim on your property because politicians decide you have too much of it.

El-Sayed reverses that presumption. What are you going to do with all that money? Whatever your answer, the socialist argument says it is too much because you have more than you need.

The proper question is not what you intend to do with your property. The proper question is: By what right does the government take it?

That distinction takes us back to 1776. The founders understood that government is necessary to protect life, liberty, property, contracts, and the peaceful exercise of rights.

But precisely because government possesses coercive power, it must be limited. The founders built a constitutional order around the insight that human beings abuse power, so power must be divided, checked, and restrained.

Read the Declaration of Independence. The complaint against George III is repeatedly that political power has exceeded its proper bounds. The king interferes with colonial legislatures, imposes taxes without consent, and seeks to subject Americans to “absolute Despotism.”

The central political problem was not how government could solve every problem. It was how citizens could prevent government from becoming one.

RELATED: The data center mob wants your property rights too

Compare that instinct with New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s declaration that there is “no problem too large for government to solve, and no concern too small for it to care about.” That is nearly the photographic negative of the American constitutional tradition.

The founders asked: What powers have we actually given government, and how do we limit them? The new socialists ask: What problem is left for government to solve?

El-Sayed’s wealth-tax argument reveals why. Once we abandon the presumption that your property is genuinely yours, the limiting principle becomes hard to locate. If $100 million is too much, why not $50 million? Why not $10 million? If politicians may determine how much wealth you need, why stop with billionaires?

The issue is not whether anyone should feel sorry for billionaires. The issue is who owns the property.

Redistribution is politically easiest when it begins with somebody almost nobody identifies with. He has plenty. You do not. Why shouldn’t government take some?

Because a government powerful enough to decide how much property another person needs has been given a power that does not become harmless merely because its first target is richer than you.

Then there is the comic assumption beneath the argument: Government will spend the money more wisely.

El-Sayed’s home state offers a useful caution. The state auditor found Michigan’s Unemployment Insurance Agency ineffective during the COVID pandemic. Fraud controls were weakened, billions in improper or fraudulent payments went out, and later audits found serious failures in recovering them.

These are the institutions that will reliably improve on the decisions of people who built billion-dollar companies?

Government has legitimate but limited purposes, and legitimate taxation follows from those purposes. But legitimate taxation does not establish a standing claim to whatever share of your wealth politicians decide you do not need.

This debate is especially important because socialism has found a receptive audience among younger Americans. Harvard’s 2025 Youth Poll found support for capitalism among young Americans at only 39%, while nearly half of young Democrats expressed support for socialism.

That is, in part, a failure of education.

We have spent enormous energy teaching young Americans to critique power and too little teaching them why constitutional government was designed to limit it. Much of contemporary oppression theory condemns authorities who presume to know how others should live, then demands political power to impose its own answers.

The next generation needs a different lesson.

RELATED: The DSA’s history lesson has one big omission

• • 
    

Your life is your responsibility. Your neighbor’s property belongs to your neighbor. Wealth does not become public property when it crosses an arbitrary number selected by a politician. Government exists to protect rights, not to decide how much prosperity citizens are permitted to enjoy.

Freedom includes choices politicians consider foolish or wasteful. Save your money, give it away, invest it, build a business, leave it to your children, support your church, fund a charity, or buy something ridiculous. Within the law, those decisions belong to you.

That is what limited government protects.

The socialist temptation is perennial because it begins with an attractive promise: Give us more power, and we will use it to make life fairer.

The American answer is older and wiser: Before giving government more power, ask what happens when the people wielding it decide that you, too, have more than you need.

Hospice fraud victimizes seniors, but Gavin Newsom’s no help

https://nypost.com/2026/08/29/opinion/hospice-fraud-victimizes-seniors-but-gavin-newsoms-no-help/

California hospice fraud is not just fleecing taxpayers.

It’s stealing the health of senior citizens.

Which raises a question: Which group did Sacramento recently act to protect?

The seniors? Or the fraudsters?

5

California hospice fraud is not just fleecing taxpayers. MediaNews Group via Getty Images

5

Which raises a question: Which group did Sacramento recently act to protect? Anadolu via Getty Images

Consider the plight of Linda Henry, 71, of Long Beach. 

As The California Post and other media recently reported, fraudsters enrolled her in hospice care without her knowledge, effectively cutting off her Medicare coverage: Why cover, say, allergy testing for a person on the brink of death?

The mess took months to sort out before Medicare conceded the senior had been victimized. 

Henry’s experience underscores that hospice fraud is not a remote, abstract or victimless crime.

It hurts countless victims like her, all part of a California fraud albatross the feds estimate at $3.5 billion in LA County alone.

5

The mess took months to sort out before Medicare conceded the senior had been victimized.  David Buchan for Ca Post

Those billions were collected from hard-working taxpayers –– only to be squandered on fraud.

One would think the state’s governor and legislators would be appalled by this fraud-fest in their state, and actively work to stop it.

Instead, Gavin Newsom & Co. recently approved legislation to protect the fraudsters. 

The Stop Nick Shirley Act (AB 2624), nicknamed by GOP Assemblyman Carl DeMaio for the journalist who last year exposed rampant fraud in Minnesota, aims to quash scrutiny of the very “nonprofits” that abuse taxpayers to pay for cars, mansions and yachts.

While supporters deny targeting Shirley, the legislation was introduced shortly after the journalist began filming California childcare facilities that he claimed were fraudulent.

The law allows civil lawsuits against those who publish images, like photos or videos, of workers at organizations that purport to help immigrant groups. It also lets potential fraudsters scrub their home addresses from public records by claiming they face harassment.

5

The building at 17075 Devonshire St., which houses the main office of an attending physician for dozens of hospices in California, is pictured on Tuesday, March 24, 2026, in Northridge, California. Pedro Colo for CA Post

Newsom says the law delivers “privacy for immigration support services providers,” whom he claims have faced threats and intimidation following increased public scrutiny.

But the law is likely to chill inquiries into the very kind of fraud that traumatized Linda Henry.

It’s also is a violation of the First Amendment –– and a disgrace.

Of course, Newsom, along with Attorney General Rob Bonta, for the better part of a year has fought, dismissed and denigrated federal efforts to curb California fraud. 

Bonta in February staged a news conference in downtown LA to blast federal claims of California fraud as “reckless,” “false” and “ridiculous.” 

Tell that to victims like Linda Henry.

5

The state’s top law enforcement officer later did prosecute a relative handful of California fraud cases. But talk about late to the party.

The state’s top law enforcement officer later did prosecute a relative handful of California fraud cases. But talk about late to the party.

And in January, Newsom replied to news of federal fraud probes by slamming President Donald Trump as “a deranged, habitual liar” whose “relationship with reality ended years ago.”

As if blasting Trump is the answer to chronic fraud in California. 

Both men’s comments landed poorly and have aged badly.

Just this year, federal prosecutors have brought multiple major fraud cases involving dozens of defendants in California. 

The Trump administration, including fraud czar JD Vance and top LA federal prosector Bill Essayli, deserve credit for doing what Sacramento won’t: pushing to end entrenched fraud in the Golden State.

Meanwhile, we have the spectacle of Newsom, and state legislators, effectively siding with fraudsters over victimized seniors.

That’s quite a platform for the gov’s brazen presidential ambitions.

Bumper sticker thought: “Newsom for fraud 2028!”

https://nypost.com/2026/08/29/opinion/hospice-fraud-victimizes-seniors-but-gavin-newsoms-no-help/

By 

CA Post Editorial Board

Published Aug. 29, 2026, 6:08 p.m. P