Abdul El-Sayed cried 'racism' over taxpayer-funded transgender operations for illegal aliens: AUDIO



Tax-paying voters who don't want to pay for transgender surgeries for illegal aliens are not likely to support Abdul El-Sayed after a new revelation.

The Democratic candidate for one of Michigan's seats in the U.S. Senate made the comments on podcasts back in 2021 and 2022, according to a Washington Free Beacon report.

'That’s going to be the example that they’re going to push forward because it captures a group of multiple marginalized people whom they want to cast as being undeserving.'

In one of the clips, El-Sayed complains that "conservatives" are using the issue of transgender surgeries for illegal aliens to oppose "Medicare for All."

"A lot of the most difficult conversations break on the question of who deserves what care, right?" he said on his "America Dissected" podcast from Feb. 2022, according to the Free Beacon.

"The prime example that conservatives will impose on a conversation about Medicare for All will be ‘well, what do we do with the undocumented person who comes to this country and wants to get gender reassignment surgery on Medicare for All?'" he adds.

He goes on to accuse those opposing transgender treatments for illegal aliens of being guilty of "the original sin of racism," a common anti-American trope among far-left extremists.

"That’s going to be the example that they’re going to push forward because it captures a group of multiple marginalized people whom they want to cast as being undeserving," he adds.

In the second clip from a Boston University health policy podcast in 2021, he makes it clear he wants the taxpayer to pay for the trans surgeries for illegal aliens.

"When you talk about care for transgender people, when you talk about care for immigrants, like, all of these things are going to be deeply politicized," said El-Sayed.

"My hope, right, is that we would pass a Medicare for All that is truly inclusive and offers the full gamut of health care that any and everyone would need," he added.

RELATED: Woke mob raising funds for trans-surgery to PROTEST Tacoma brewery's political donation

El-Sayed Called for Universal Health Care for Trans ‘Undocumented Persons’

Cole Wozniak, a campaign spokesman for El-Sayed, released a brief statement that implied El-Sayed still supports transgender surgeries for illegal aliens.

"Abdul wants to guarantee health care for every single American taxpayer and believes that medical decisions should be between a patient, their family, and their doctor," said Wozniak.

Ironically, support for transgender surgeries for illegal aliens was one of the many issues that doomed the presidential campaign of Democrat Kamala Harris in 2024. In a brutally effective campaign ad, Harris is seen promoting trans-related surgery for prison inmates. The ad closes with the memorable line "Kamala is for they/them. President Trump is for you."

An April 2025 poll by the American Principles Project found that 66% of American adults oppose the federal government paying for any transgender surgeries or gender reassignment treatments.

Here's the latest polling in the contest between El-Sayed and Republican Mike Rogers, according to the Blaze News Poll Watch:

Michigan Senate polls 2026: El-Sayed vs. Rogers

Michigan Senate polls 2026: El-Sayed vs. Rogers pollwatch.theblaze.com

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

States need to take election security into their own hands



Americans can’t afford to be complacent about our election security. The right to vote is one of the most indispensable civil rights in a constitutional republic, but it is not self-executing. Laws must protect that right, ensure its proper administration, and defend it against error, fraud, and foreign influence.

Citizenship must be verified when voters register. States must maintain accurate voter rolls and give federal authorities the data to which they’re legally entitled. They must also have reliable proof-of-eligibility requirements and prosecute election-law violations.

Americans have fought too long and sacrificed too much to surrender sovereignty to administrative negligence and foreign influence.

This is ultimately not merely an election-administration issue — it is a matter of sovereignty.

The proposition that only American citizens may vote in elections is a cornerstone of our republic. The citizenship requirement preserves self-government and ensures that those who decide our elections are members of the American political community. If these basic rules are treated as mere aspiration rather than an enforceable legal requirement, then American sovereignty is at risk.

The vote — and the machinery that receives, records, verifies, counts, and reports it — is how the American people confer legitimate authority on public officials.

The size of the illegal immigrant population in the country underscores the point. The Department of Homeland Security estimated that roughly 11 million unauthorized immigrants — or 3.3% of the U.S. population — resided in the country in January 2022. The Federation for American Immigration Reform’s March 2025 estimate puts this population at approximately 18.6 million at the beginning of 2025.

Whatever the precise number, the practical consequence is the same: A large non-citizen population resides in communities served by state voter-registration systems.

The cost of waiting to verify eligibility until after an election is too high, because even one unlawful vote dilutes a lawful citizen’s vote and undermines confidence in the electoral process.

RELATED: 11 years later, Trump’s immigration promises still aren’t law

Aaron Schwartz/Getty Images

Recent reports only reinforce the need for scrutiny. DHS has found that preliminary reviews identified more than 250,000 potential non-citizens on voter rolls in four states and asked those states to work with the department on election security. Some state officials and election experts have disputed that claim. Fine. Then investigate it thoroughly, transparently, and promptly. The answer to a serious allegation is verification, not indifference.

Though Congress began requiring states to offer voter registration when people apply for or renew driver’s licenses through the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, convenience is not the enemy of integrity. The NVRA did not relieve states of their duty to maintain accurate voter rolls. States must ensure that illegal aliens and other ineligible persons do not vote in elections.

History supplies ample warning on this score. A review of Department of Motor Vehicles records revealed that Philadelphia mistakenly allowed non-citizens to register to vote around 2016. State officials later revised the system, but the episode demonstrates why citizenship verification cannot be left to bureaucratic happenstance.

And the problem isn’t limited to administrative error.

In the Eastern District of North Carolina, federal prosecutors charged 19 foreign nationals with voting in the 2016 election. In the Southern District of Florida, three non-citizens pleaded guilty to illegally voting in federal elections and committing related election offenses.

These numbers may not be large in isolation, but that misses the point. Election crimes are crimes against public trust. They injure every lawful voter whose ballot is entitled to equal weight under law.

RELATED: George Washington’s advice for the midterms

Universal History Archive/Universal Images Group/Getty Images

To combat this, states and municipalities should require reliable proof of citizenship and verification before an ineligible registration can result in a ballot being cast. State election officials should coordinate with federal authorities to obtain accurate citizenship and immigration-status information, consistent with law. The Department of Justice should continue to prosecute those who breach the system.

Encouragingly, some states have begun to act. The National Conference of State Legislatures reports that four states enacted documentary-proof-of-citizenship requirements in 2026. Thirteen states now have such laws at some point in the registration process, though litigation and court decisions have prevented some provisions from taking effect.

Other states have adopted bifurcated systems that allow voters who have not provided documentary proof of citizenship to vote in state elections, while still requiring verification for federal elections. These reforms reflect a necessary shift toward verifying citizenship rather than relying solely on a voter’s word.

The reason is obvious. If election safeguards are weak enough to allow non-citizens to register, vote, or otherwise influence elections, public policy could be shaped by individuals who have not assumed the duties of American citizenship or pledged allegiance to the constitutional order. That is a clear breach of the social compact.

The federal government already recognizes the critical nature of citizenship when public trust and national interest are at stake. For example, many national security positions require U.S. citizenship because they involve access to sensitive government information.

Though voting is different from government employment, it is still an exercise of sovereign authority. Through the ballot, citizens choose who will make law, set policy, spend public money, appoint officials, and direct the machinery of government. Sovereignty is preserved not by slogans but by laws faithfully enforced, passed by representatives chosen by American citizens.

State legislators must give election officials the tools to reinforce safeguards, confirm citizenship, maintain accurate voter rolls, and protect citizen self-government. Americans have fought too long and sacrificed too much to surrender sovereignty to administrative negligence and foreign influence.

The rule is simple, just, and essential: American citizens — and only American citizens — must decide American elections.

Editor’s note: This article was originally published at the American Mind.

Democrats Revive Nullification With Refusals To Assist Federal Immigration Enforcement

What a state cannot be permitted to do is transform a policy disagreement into an exercise of state power to nullify federal authority.

SCOTUS To Hear Major Case On Trump’s Deportation Agenda

The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear a major case involving a core tenet of President Trump’s deportation agenda. The high court announced on Thursday that it will hear arguments in Rhoney v. Barbosa da Cunha during its 2026 term. The case deals with whether the federal government can detain certain categories of illegal […]

DOJ Brings Complaint Against Minnesota Judges For ‘Pandering’ To NYT About Deportations

The Department of Justice filed a judicial misconduct complaint on Wednesday against several Minnesota-based federal judges for “pander[ing]” to legacy media about ICE operations in the state. “Seven federal judges in the District of Minnesota talked to the New York Times about cases, some of which are on-going, in a manner that the Department of […]

Supreme Court kick-starts Trump's mass deportation machine​



Deportation flights are cleared for takeoff.

The Supreme Court of the United States on Tuesday issued an emergency ruling allowing the Trump administration to resume deporting migrants to "third countries," or those other than their nation of origin. The administration has deported Cubans and Venezuelans to African nations like Liberia and Eswatini.

'A bad day for criminal illegals and open borders activists alike.'

Though the one-page stay did not include a vote count, the three liberal Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson noted they would not have granted the Trump administration's request.

The Department of Homeland Security wasted no time taking a victory lap on social media.

"In our second Supreme Court victory in less than a week, DHS’s third country removal policy is back in effect," DHS General Counsel James Percival said on X after the ruling. "A bad day for criminal illegals and open borders activists alike. It’s not too late to get $3,000 and a flight home."

The practice became a practical necessity for removing illegal aliens after several countries, including Cuba and Vietnam, refused to accept the return of their deported nationals.

Though third-country deportations to African nations have generated prominent media attention, Mexico remains the leading destination for said removals. Of the roughly 25,000 third-country deportees since the policy took effect, 20,000 have been sent to Mexico.

Department of Justice Solicitor General D. John Sauer filed the successful application to stay Biden-appointed U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy's February judgment.

RELATED: Libertarian think tank clutches pearls about reduced Islamic migration — but it's music to MAGA ears

J. David Ake/Getty Images

"The United States relies on third countries in part to facilitate the removal of criminal aliens who are otherwise difficult to remove because their home countries and other countries refuse to take them," Sauer wrote in the filing. "Absent an effective third-country removal policy, the United States is forced to retain (and often release into the interior) vicious criminals who have already harmed our communities."

Tuesday's emergency ruling is a temporary stay, not a final decision. The justices also granted the administration review and set oral argument for December.

SCOTUS will evaluate in December whether Murphy had jurisdiction to issue a nationwide pause and whether the third-country policy is lawful on its merits. The emergency ruling allowed the Trump administration to resume third-country deportations without the lengthy notice-and-hearing process previously imposed by Murphy.

"The Left wants you to believe that removing aliens to countries other than their home country is cruel," Percival said. "What is cruel is allowing criminal illegals who can’t be sent home to stay in our communities and victimize anew."

Tuesday's order marks the third time that the Supreme Court has granted the federal government third-country deportation powers pending a final hearing and decision.

The DHS and DOJ did not respond to requests for comment.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Florida Kicks Illegal Immigrants Out Of State-Funded Job Training

By prioritizing citizens and legal residents for trade education, states can safeguard their economies and protect legal residents.

Democrat prosecutor helps illegal aliens arrested for drunk driving escape deportation, GOP report says



A Democrat prosecutor's office lashed out at Republicans angry at a policy that helps illegal aliens escape deportation.

The county attorney for Arlington in Virginia accused Republicans of perpetrating a "political sham" while defending the policy to change charges for DACA recipients accused of driving under the influence.

'Arlington County’s new policy protects the worst of the worst of criminal aliens — murderers, terrorists, and sex traffickers — from deportation.'

The House Judiciary Committee released a report accusing Arlington's Commonwealth Attorney Parisa Dehghani-Tafti of threatening public safety to serve her liberal agenda.

The report included a document of the office's internal prosecution policies pointing out amnesty recipients accused of drunk driving could be deported by the Department of Homeland Security.

"Because of this, we must take an individual’s DACA status into account when developing offers to ensure that, while appropriate sanctions and conditions are put in place to protect the public and prevent future similar behavior, an individual is not deported because of their decision to drive while intoxicated," the policy read.

It adds that prosecutors must do their part "to prevent the disproportionate collateral consequences of a DUI conviction for a DACA recipient.”

The Republican committee said this as well as the county's reluctance to turn over illegal aliens to federal authorities for deportation also threatened public safety.

Dehghani-Tafti responded defiantly to the report.

"The authors of this report are confident, but wrong. Wrong about Virginia law, wrong about county policy, wrong about our office’s policies and their impact, and wrong about the cases they cite," she said.

"From the start, this was a political sham. The committee refused to hear my testimony in public because open testimony doesn’t let you distort a record," Ms. Dehghani-Tafti said in part.

"Now it’s clear why they wouldn’t hold a public hearing and why they stonewalled my requests for the full deposition transcript," she added. "They didn’t want the public to see it. I demand the committee release the full, unedited transcript of my deposition immediately."

RELATED: Trump says he will cut federal funds to sanctuary cities and states

"Arlington County’s new policy protects the worst of the worst of criminal aliens — murderers, terrorists, and sex traffickers — from deportation," read the report from the Republican committee.

The Democrat-led board of Arlington denied the allegations.

"The facts and the law have not changed; immigration enforcement is the responsibility of the federal government, and the county’s policies and actions have been compliant with the law," they responded.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Hit-And-Run Reveals Hypocrisy Of Democrats’ ‘Universal’ Health Care Plans

The fact that Democrats care so little about uncompensated auto insurance claims means I won't take lessons from them on universal coverage as a way to 'solve' the problem of uncompensated health care.

Thousands Of Noncitizens On Jersey’s Voter Rolls Represent Just ‘The Tip Of The Iceberg’

'Ladies and gentlemen, ... that’s called a cover-up,' said Rep. Jeff Van Drew, R-NJ, during a hearing on New Jersey's dirty voter rolls.