New Audio Shows Muslim Candidate Hates the Second Amendment

Abdul El-Sayed was caught on tape floating a swap of the Second Amendment for a constitutional right to health care, and then more than 100 of his videos went dark.

Story Highlights

CNN reported over 100 El-Sayed YouTube videos were made private before his Senate run.
Multiple outlets quoted him suggesting changing “the right to bear arms” to “the right to have health care”.
Fox News cited a clip claiming he argued the Second Amendment protects only a regulated militia, not individuals.
His campaign now says he respects the Second Amendment and the old clips do not reflect his current views.

The Quote That Lit The Fuse

Reports across several outlets quote El-Sayed asking, “What if we tweaked the Constitution, amended the amendment, and instead of the right to bear arms, we change it to the right to have health care?” They date this to an April 6, 2023 YouTube video. CNN’s investigative unit highlighted the line. Fox News, The Hill, and The Federalist echoed it. This was not a stray paraphrase; the same sentence appears across sources, which makes it hard to wave away as a mishear.

Another report says a May 26, 2022 clip had El-Sayed argue the Second Amendment applies to a “regulated militia,” not to individual Americans. That position runs headlong into modern Supreme Court rulings that affirm an individual right to keep and bear arms. The comment, if accurate, signals an approach to gun rights that many voters will find far outside the constitutional mainstream.

What Vanished, And Why It Matters

CNN found more than 100 videos on El-Sayed’s channel had been made private before his Senate launch. Timing matters in politics. Making that much content unavailable removed context the public now wants to see. The move also hands critics an easy narrative: if the takes aged well, why hide them? Whether the clips were rhetorical flourishes or a firm blueprint, voters cannot judge them in full when they are locked away.

When candidates curate their past, they forfeit some benefit of the doubt. The pattern also fits today’s campaign playbook. Old audio can be clipped and shared to reach millions in a day. The most vivid line becomes the story while the longer discussion fades. That does not excuse bad context games, but it does put a premium on preserving the record so people can check the full exchange themselves.

The Campaign’s Rebuttal, And What It Does Not Answer

El-Sayed’s team says he respects the Second Amendment now and that the clips are old and cherry-picked. They also point to a separate Fourth of July post to show a shift in tone. That is a standard crisis response, and it is fair to let people evolve. Still, the core quote about replacing gun rights with health care remains specific, repeated across outlets, and not refuted with a direct, on-the-record clarification of what he meant then and what he believes now about the amendment’s text.

On the health care line, many Americans support better access. The dispute here is not about caring for patients. It is about priorities that the Constitution locks in. The Bill of Rights protects liberty first so that a free people can solve the rest. Trading a clear natural right for a policy goal in the Constitution crosses a bright line for many conservatives and plenty of independents who see rights as guardrails, not bargaining chips.

How Voters Can Weigh The Record

Voters should ask three clean questions. First, did he say it? The cross-outlet match on the exact phrasing says yes. Second, does he still stand by it? The campaign’s answer is not yet a direct yes or no, only that he respects the Second Amendment today. Third, what would he vote for in the Senate? A present-tense policy pledge on individual gun rights and opposition to any amendment that narrows them would settle much of this.

New Audio Shows Abdul El-Sayed Hates the Second Amendmenthttps://t.co/XjV7yTwaSV pic.twitter.com/eyeCNo72YS

— Amy Curtis (@RantyAmyCurtis) August 18, 2026

One more step would help restore trust. Release the full original videos that shaped these quotes, or at least full transcripts. Context can widen understanding. If the lines were thought experiments, say so. If views changed, explain why. Adults can respect honest evolution. What jars people is the sense that the most revealing clips vanish while the talking points shift with the wind.