Dem Senate candidate El-Sayed defends ties to hate streamer Hasan Piker, hints at big tax increase for middle class

Dem Michigan Senate hopeful Abdul El-Sayed on Sunday refused to break ties to notorious hate streamer Hasan Piker — while hinting he wants to sock the middle class with the bill for his Medicare for All plan.

El-Sayed even left the door open to continuing to campaign with Piker in the pol’s general election matchup against Republican Mike Rogers — despite arguing that the notorious Twitch streamer’s 2019 comment, “America deserved 9/11” was dumb.

“It was a dumb statement,” El-Sayed told NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “He disavowed it. So yes. America didn’t deserve 9/11.

“But to sit here and play gotcha politics with a dumb thing somebody said out of context — I want to be held accountable for what I say and what I do rather than this idea that we’re so stuck in cancel culture that all of us agreed was a bad idea back in 2020,” the radical candidate said. “But we seem to want to bring back.”

Piker very begrudgingly suggested that his comment was “inappropriate” shortly after his screed against the US in 2019,

But he was later seen with a framed copy of a front-page newspaper story showing the Twin Towers in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, attack. More than 2,750 people, most Americans, died in New York City alone on the infamous day.

Piker has also sparked controversy for claiming that the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack was a “direct consequence” of Israeli actions and asserting that if the terror group engaged in rape, it “doesn’t change the dynamic for me.”

At one point, he fawned over the “brave mujahideen” who injured Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas) and later suggested Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) should be murdered.

Thank you for referencing that article Libloather.

Dem Senate candidate El-Sayed defends ties to hate streamer Hasan Piker, hints at big tax increase for middle class

FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument

Mr. El-Sayed seems to be another clueless, post-17th Amendment (17A; popular vote for federal senators) ratification candidate for federal Senate who has never heard of the Madison Test, and so doesn't understand the federal government's constitutionally very limited powers to tax and spend.

Consider that most post-17A ratification lawmakers long ago discovered that they could promise voters who have evidently never really studied the fed's constitutionally limited powers every unconstitutional federal social spending program under the sun to get themselves elected. Constitutionally naïve voters eventually took the bait and elected these crooks, and then reelected them!

Then once in office, criminal-minded career lawmakers abuse their 16th Amendment powers (16A; direct taxes) by simply fulfilling their campaign promises for unconstitutional federal spending, scandalously ignoring their constitutional Article I, Section 8 spending limits when doing so.

Regarding the Madison Test, note that the 14th Congress in the time of President James Madison (4th pres.), Madison generally regarded as the father of the Constitution, had found some EXISTING tax revenues and got all happy about spending it. So Congress drafted the Bonus Bill of 1817 to use the taxpayer dollars to improve military readiness and commerce by authorizing the construction of roads and canals intended to facilitate moving troops and manufactured goods. But Congress had based the bill solely on the General Welfare Clause (GWC) which turned out to be a BIG mistake.

Article I, Section 8, Clause 1: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States [emphasis added]; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

But while Madison actually AGREED with Congress that the bill would improve transportation, he diplomatically clarified in his veto explanation that while the GWC authorizes Congress to tax and spend, he reminded Congress that the Constitution's drafters, Madison himself a major player, had intended for the clauses that followed it in Section 8 to limit what Congress could spend tax dollars for, no mention of roads and canals for Congress's purpose for the Bonus Bill. Madison also noted that the bonus bill didn't even pass Congress's traditional "wild card" excuse for justifying spending, the infamous "Necessary and Proper Clause."

The legislative powers vested in Congress are specified and enumerated in the eighth section of the first article of the Constitution, and it does not appear that the power proposed to be exercised by the bill is among the enumerated powers, or that it falls by any just interpretation within the power to make laws necessary and proper [emphasis added] for carrying into execution those or other powers vested by the Constitution in the Government of the United States. —President James Madison, March 3, 1817: Veto Message on the Internal Improvements Bill

Also consider that Thomas Jefferson's advice on interpreting Congress's limited powers compliments Madison's veto.

In every event, I would rather construe so narrowly as to oblige the nation to amend, and thus declare what powers they would agree to yield, than too broadly, and indeed, so broadly as to enable the executive and the Senate to do things which the Constitution forbids. —Thomas Jefferson: The Anas, 1793.

In fact, note that the Constitution's drafters appropriately required the peacetime Congress to meet only once a year so that they could approve artwork for new postage stamps. But let's also include military readiness as one of Congress's once a year meeting chores.

Article I, Section 4, Clause 2: The Congress shall assemble at least once in every Year [emphasis added], and such Meeting shall be on the first Monday in December, unless they shall by Law appoint a different Day.
Article I, Section 8, Clause 7: To establish Post Offices and post Roads; It is one of a few government agencies explicitly authorized by the Constitution of the United States. (non-FR)
10th Amendment: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution [all emphases added], nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States.—Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824. (Abuse of 16A)It is one of a few government agencies explicitly authorized by the Constitution of the United States. (non-FR)
If the tax be not proposed for the common defence, or general welfare, but for other objects, wholly extraneous (as for instance [all emphases added], for propagating Mahometanism among the Turks, or giving aids and subsidies to a foreign nation, to build palaces for its kings, or erect monuments to its heroes,) it would be wholly indefensible upon constitutional principles. — Justice Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution 2 (1833).
The congressional record shows that Rep. John Bingham, a constitutional lawmaker, had clarified the federal government's constitutionally limited powers as follows.
Simply this, that the care of the property, the liberty, and the life of the citizen [all emphases added], under the solemn sanction of an oath imposed by your Constitution, is in the States and not in the federal government. I have sought to effect no change in that respect in the Constitution of the country. —John Bingham, Congressional. Globe. 1866, page 1292 (see top half of third column)
From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added]. —United States v. Butler, 1936.
16th Amendment: The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived [emphasis added], without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
Cherish, therefore, the spirit of our people, and keep alive their attention. If once they become inattentive to the public affairs, you and I, and Congress and Assemblies, judges and governors, shall all become wolves [emphasis added]. It seems to be the law of our general nature. —Thomas Jefferson (Letter to Edward Carrington January 16, 1787)

The 16th Amendment is the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow for organized crime, front-ended by deep state Congress, and desperately needs to be repealed. The 17th Amendment, popular voting for federal senators, needs to disappear too.

Note that a resolution to repeal 16A was introduced in 2021, but was unsurprisingly ignored.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.