Mike Rogers’ 9/11 Claim Against Abdul El-Sayed Draws Scrutiny in Michigan Senate Race

Michigan’s U.S. Senate campaign opened with a political attack built around one of the most painful events in American history. Within days, however, the central allegation came under serious scrutiny. 

Republican nominee Mike Rogers accused Democratic nominee Abdul El-Sayed of believing the United States deserved the September 11 terrorist attacks. The accusation followed El-Sayed’s narrow victory in Michigan’s August 4 Democratic primary. 

“Never in my life did I think I would be running against a guy who thinks America deserved 9/11,” Rogers wrote in an August 5 social media post. “Abdul is too dangerous for Michigan. We can’t let him anywhere near the United States Senate.” 

The statement delivered the kind of blunt opening punch that can define a competitive campaign. Yet the words at the center of the controversy did not come from El-Sayed. 

They came from Hasan Piker, a progressive political livestreamer who campaigned with El-Sayed earlier this year. 

The comment came from someone else 

During a 2019 livestream, Piker said, “America deserved 9/11, dude,” as he criticized American foreign policy in the Middle East. 

The remark produced immediate backlash. Piker later walked it back, saying he opposed violence and had been arguing that previous U.S. policies contributed to the conditions that produced anti-American extremism. 

When Piker appeared at campaign events with El-Sayed in Michigan in April 2026, the seven-year-old statement followed him into the Senate race. Republican groups and some Democratic critics questioned why El-Sayed would share a political stage with such a controversial figure. 

El-Sayed addressed the issue before those events. Asked on “Fox & Friends” if he agreed with Piker’s statement, he gave a direct answer. 

“Of course I don’t think 9/11 was justified,” El-Sayed said. “Because you appear with somebody doesn’t mean you agree with him on everything.” 

That recorded rejection is important because Rogers’ accusation went beyond criticizing El-Sayed’s choice of campaign partner. It assigned Piker’s belief directly to the Democratic nominee. 

A PolitiFact review found no evidence that El-Sayed had said America deserved the attacks. PolitiFact rated the claim “Pants on Fire,” its strongest false rating. Snopes reached the same basic conclusion, finding no evidence that El-Sayed made or endorsed the statement. 

Rogers’ campaign points to a different exchange 

Although El-Sayed rejected Piker’s 9/11 position, he later resisted requests to condemn individual statements associated with the streamer. 

“I’m not here to disavow people’s views,” El-Sayed said at an April campaign event. “This whole gotcha game, platform policing, cancel culture, I thought we were over it.” 

Rogers’ campaign cited that exchange when PolitiFact requested evidence supporting the Republican’s accusation. The campaign also highlighted El-Sayed’s refusal to say clearly whether he would appear with Piker again. 

“Abdul was asked point blank if he’d disavow Hasan Piker’s comments, and he wouldn’t do it,” Rogers campaign spokesperson Alyssa Brouillet told PolitiFact. “That tells you everything you need to know.” 

The exchange gives Rogers room to question El-Sayed’s political judgment and associations. It does not erase El-Sayed’s separate and explicit statement that the September 11 attacks were unjustified. 

Asked after the primary whether Piker would join him again during the general election, El-Sayed did not provide a yes-or-no answer. 

“I’m not as focused on who I’m campaigning with,” he told MS NOW. “I’m focused on who I’m campaigning for.” 

A fierce general election begins 

The dispute arrived as the candidates were shifting rapidly from primary campaigning to a nationally important general election. 

El-Sayed, a physician and former Detroit health director, defeated Rep. Haley Stevens after a costly contest between the Democratic Party’s progressive and establishment wings. His campaign emphasized Medicare for All, reducing corporate influence in politics and ending U.S. military assistance to Israel. 

The Associated Press reported that El-Sayed organized events in more than 100 Michigan cities and built a volunteer network numbering in the thousands. His narrow victory came despite substantial outside spending supporting Stevens. 

Rogers is a former FBI special agent and former member of Congress. He previously ran for the Senate in 2024, losing narrowly to Democrat Elissa Slotkin. His official response to the latest primary portrayed El-Sayed as an extremist whose policies would move Michigan far outside the political mainstream. 

In an interview with MS NOW, El-Sayed countered that Republicans were using anti-Muslim sentiment because they lacked ideas that would improve voters’ lives. He also criticized Rogers for mispronouncing his name during the opening exchanges of the campaign. 

“If you can’t say the name, keep the name out your da** mouth,” El-Sayed said during his victory speech, according to People. 

The remark drew loud cheers from his supporters and signaled that identity will remain part of the general election debate. 

The stakes extend beyond Michigan 

The candidates are competing for the seat held by retiring Democratic Sen. Gary Peters. With control of the Senate potentially at stake, both parties are expected to treat Michigan as a national priority. 

The general election will also test whether El-Sayed can unite Democrats after a bitter primary and expand his support among independents. Stevens endorsed him after conceding, giving the party an early opportunity to close ranks. 

Rogers, meanwhile, appears ready to make El-Sayed’s progressive positions and political relationships central to his campaign. The disputed 9/11 accusation offers an early look at how sharp that strategy may become. 

For voters, the distinction at the center of this controversy is straightforward. El-Sayed chose to campaign with a figure who made a deeply offensive statement, and that decision is open to political scrutiny. But the available evidence shows that Piker made the remark and El-Sayed expressly rejected its premise. 

Michigan’s Senate race began with a fight over words, identity and association before the general election campaign had fully taken shape. The coming months will reveal whether voters remain focused on that dispute or turn their attention to health care, taxes, foreign policy and the candidates’ records. 

Campaigns can make political associations powerful. They cannot make one person’s words belong to someone else.