Controversy over Abdul El-Sayed's family ties to Muslim Brotherhood ignored, downplayed by liberal media
- ABC, CBS, CNN, and MSNBC have collectively yawned at El-Sayed’s alleged family ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, while Fox News does its usual deep-dive into the archives.
- Half-sister’s tweets are the smoking gun—or at least a smoke machine—showing mommy dearest’s ‘activism’ in the 70s, but El-Sayed says it’s all hearsay from a tweet.
- NBC, the lone brave soul, actually asked the candidate a direct question—and got a snippy ‘are you serious?’ for their trouble.
- The New York Times, keeper of the flame, apparently can’t find the story in their search bar. Convenient.
- El-Sayed’s defense: born in ’84, Michigan raised, so why should he care about Egypt circa 1970? Because family ties don’t expire, buddy.
- summary:
- The legacy media’s selective amnesia is on full display as they tiptoe around Abdul El-Sayed’s alleged family ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, treating it like a hot potato they’d rather drop than examine. With his half-sister’s tweets practically screaming 'MB pride'—mom’s a member, family’s been in it for ages—the only thing missing is a membership card, and yet ABC, CBS, CNN, and MSNBC have all managed to develop a sudden case of laryngitis.
- NBC, ever the outlier, actually asked the question and got a 'Born in Rochester Hills, rebuilt Detroit, what’s Egypt got to do with it?' classic deflection. It’s a masterclass in misdirection, but the real question is why the rest of the press pack is so eager to play ostrich. Meanwhile, the Times—the self-proclaimed Paper of Record—can’t seem to find the story in their own archives, which is either a search engine failure or a philosophical one.
- impact:
- This is your reminder that when the media picks a side, facts get a little fuzzy. If these outlets can’t cover a candidate’s family ties, what else are they sweeping under the rug? For voters, it means you’re not getting the full picture—whether that’s a legitimate issue or a smear is for you to decide, but you can’t decide if no one tells you.
- It’s a test of media credibility: do they ignore because it’s a non-story, or because it’s inconvenient? If you’re a Michigander, this is your Senate race, and you deserve to hear the whole messy truth, not just the sanitized version. If you’re not, it’s a peek behind the curtain of how the fourth estate picks its battles—and who gets to be 'deplatformed' by omission.
- isRelevant: true
- summary_raw:
- The legacy media’s selective amnesia is on full display as they tiptoe around Abdul El-Sayed’s alleged family ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, treating it like a hot potato they’d rather drop than examine. With his half-sister’s tweets practically screaming 'MB pride'—mom’s a member, family’s been in it for ages—the only thing missing is a membership card, and yet ABC, CBS, CNN, and MSNBC have all managed to develop a sudden case of laryngitis.
- NBC, ever the outlier, actually asked the question and got a 'Born in Rochester Hills, rebuilt Detroit, what’s Egypt got to do with it?' classic deflection. It’s a masterclass in misdirection, but the real question is why the rest of the press pack is so eager to play ostrich. Meanwhile, the Times—the self-proclaimed Paper of Record—can’t seem to find the story in their own archives, which is either a search engine failure or a philosophical one.
Brief Summary
The legacy media’s selective amnesia is on full display as they tiptoe around Abdul El-Sayed’s alleged family ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, treating it like a hot potato they’d rather drop than examine. With his half-sister’s tweets practically screaming 'MB pride'—mom’s a member, family’s been in it for ages—the only thing missing is a membership card, and yet ABC, CBS, CNN, and MSNBC have all managed to develop a sudden case of laryngitis. NBC, ever the outlier, actually asked the question and got a 'Born in Rochester Hills, rebuilt Detroit, what’s Egypt got to do with it?' classic deflection. It’s a masterclass in misdirection, but the real question is why the rest of the press pack is so eager to play ostrich. Meanwhile, the Times—the self-proclaimed Paper of Record—can’t seem to find the story in their own archives, which is either a search engine failure or a philosophical one.
Why This Matters
This is your reminder that when the media picks a side, facts get a little fuzzy. If these outlets can’t cover a candidate’s family ties, what else are they sweeping under the rug? For voters, it means you’re not getting the full picture—whether that’s a legitimate issue or a smear is for you to decide, but you can’t decide if no one tells you. It’s a test of media credibility: do they ignore because it’s a non-story, or because it’s inconvenient? If you’re a Michigander, this is your Senate race, and you deserve to hear the whole messy truth, not just the sanitized version. If you’re not, it’s a peek behind the curtain of how the fourth estate picks its battles—and who gets to be 'deplatformed' by omission.