LEAKED Audio Shows Muslim Dem Hates the Second Amendment

Abdul El-Sayed’s own words floated swapping the right to bear arms for a right to health care—and the videos went private before his Senate run.

Story Snapshot

A 2023 clip quoted El-Sayed suggesting changing the Second Amendment to a right to health care.
A 2022 video reportedly argued the Second Amendment protects militias, not individual gun owners.
More than 100 videos on his channel were made private before his campaign launch, CNN reported.
His campaign says he respects the Second Amendment today and calls old remarks cherry-picked.

What The Record Shows On The Second Amendment

CNN’s investigation reported a 2023 video where El-Sayed asked, “What if we tweaked the Constitution… and instead of the right to bear arms, we change it to the right to have health care?” The outlet also noted more than 100 videos on his channel were set to private before his Senate launch. The Hill and other outlets echoed the same quote, showing a consistent transcription across newsrooms. Fox News separately cited a 2022 clip claiming the amendment covers militias, not individuals.

These lines would not be small slips. The Supreme Court has recognized an individual right to keep and bear arms, not just a militia function, which makes the 2022 claim legally out of step. That gap matters to voters who see the Constitution as a fixed foundation, not a choose-your-own-adventure. The 2023 health care swap reads like a direct value trade: downgrade a core liberty protection to elevate a policy goal—an idea gun-rights voters view as a bright red line.

The Timing And Takedowns Raise Stakes

Timing shapes trust. CNN reported the mass privatizing of videos before the campaign, not after the press attention. That sequence signals a deliberate reset of his public archive, not a spur-of-the-moment cleanup. The New York Post and other outlets highlighted the same theme: the hot-button clips existed, then vanished from public view, leaving voters with filtered memories and reporter summaries instead of full, stable context they could judge for themselves.

Campaigns curate. Voters decide if curation becomes concealment. When a candidate’s own channel goes dim on over 100 uploads, questions multiply. Were these remarks isolated riffs, or a pattern of soft-spoken revisions to bedrock rights? Without easy public access to the full videos, the conversation depends on quotes and fragments. That favors emotion over context in a race where one sentence can carry more weight than a white paper.

What His Campaign Says Now—and How To Weigh It

El-Sayed’s team says he respects the Second Amendment today and calls the resurfaced remarks cherry-picked from old content. They also pointed to later posts that sound more mainstream, like telling people to enjoy July Fourth fireworks. The campaign line invites voters to accept growth and clarify current stands. That is fair to consider. But voters should square today’s assurances with yesterday’s tape and the legal reality of an individual right affirmed by the Court.

On the scale of evidence, the core quotes appear in multiple outlets with consistent wording, and the mass-privacy move was documented by CNN. Those are solid anchors. The missing piece is the full, original videos for full context. That gap does not erase what he said, but it does leave room for tone and setup. The most direct fix is simple: release the files, uncut. Until then, the plain meaning of his words drives the debate.

Why This Fight Matters Beyond One Candidate

This clash is about which rights are non-negotiable. Many Americans place self-defense and the Second Amendment alongside speech and due process—rights to shield the innocent from the powerful. Turning a liberty into a government service changes that balance. Health care access is important, but it belongs in statute and policy, not as a replacement for a constitutional right that guards the rest. The center of gravity in our system stays with the people, not the state.