Michigan Senate candidate Mike Rogers tells CNN‘s Dana Bash (10/18/26) that his opponent Abdul El-Sayed ” did not disavow the Muslim Brotherhood”—minutes after Bash played him tape of El-Sayed answering “yes, absolutely” to the question, “Will you disavow the Muslim Brotherhood?”

Mike Rogers, the former Michigan congressmember and Republican candidate for Senate, is a liar. Aren’t all politicians liars? Rogers stands out not just for the audacity of his false statements, but the racism underpinning them.

In an exchange with CNN’s Dana Bash (10/18/26), Rogers said his Democratic opponent Abdul El-Sayed would not disavow the Muslim Brotherhood, an Islamist social movement that briefly took power in Egypt after the Arab Spring (BBC, 6/17/19; Council on Foreign Relations, 8/15/19). El-Sayed is Egyptian American, and the right has falsely tried to tie him to the group, whose Egyptian branch was recently designated as a terrorist group by the US Treasury Department (1/13/26) because of its alleged “material support” for Hamas.

In fact, during a town hall event in the Thumb of the Michigan mitten, El-Sayed responded affirmatively to a man asking if he would denounce the Muslim Brotherhood (Bridge Michigan, 10/19/26), an answer that took over the news cycle  (CNN, 10/17/26; CBS News, 10/19/26; Wall Street Journal, 10/19/26). Bash responded to Rogers citing the incident, pointing out that El-Sayed “did say—he said, ‘Sure, yes,’” that he condemned the Brotherhood. Rogers responded, “No, that’s not true.”

But the widely viewed video of the exchange clearly shows Sayed saying “Sure, yeah, absolutely.” Rogers kept at it, again trying to tie El-Sayed to the Brotherhood on NBC’s Meet the Press (10/25/26). “He has denied and denounced the Muslim Brotherhood,” responded the show’s host, Kristen Welker, to which the Republican flailed, “Listen, I get you guys want to defend this guy.”

‘He saw bin Laden’s body’

Metro Times (10/21/26): “A Metro Times analysis of congressional votes, public statements, and independent fact checks found repeated falsehoods about the Democrat alongside glaring omissions about Rogers’ own record.”

For the Metro Times (10/21/26), Detroit’s main free alternative newspaper, these incidents led into Rogers’ tendency to advance myths about his own life as well—namely, his exaggeration of his record as an army officer and FBI agent. The paper said:

Rogers has also exaggerated his own role in the operation that killed Osama bin Laden. He claimed he helped plan the raid, said he was “there at the bin Laden raid,” and told donors he saw bin Laden’s body with his own eyes.

A previous Metro Times investigation found that Rogers was at home in Washington during the operation. He learned the outcome in a phone call from then-CIA Director Leon Panetta. What he later saw was a photograph of bin Laden’s body.

When Metro Times asked about those claims for its October 8 report, Rogers’ campaign declined to answer specific questions. It instead defended his record and repeated an unfounded allegation that El-Sayed received money from terrorist organizations.

So the Metro Times (10/21/26) made an announcement: “For this reason, we are no longer reaching out to Rogers’ campaign for comment to avoid spreading falsehoods and bigoted attacks on El-Sayed’s Muslim faith.”

‘Views differ on shape of planet’

It’s good to see the New York Times (10/24/26) being more forthright about factchecking Donald Trump’s falsehoods—but if the Times doesn’t call out those falsehoods in real time when it publishes them on its front page, Trump will still be able to rely on them.

Coming from an alternative paper in a liberal-leaning urban area, this decision might not have the biggest impact on the race. But it is an important lesson for American journalism in an age of media distortion, misinformation and the anti-Islamic demagoguery of the contemporary Republican Party.

The conventional wisdom holds that “fair” and “balanced” journalism gives equal time to both major-party candidates in an election, allowing them the opportunity to say their piece without distortion and let the voters decide. But this approach of a news outlet being a neutral, restrained medium for partisan agendas comes at a cost when politicians exploit that restraint to promote outright falsehoods.

An old joke by former Times columnist Paul Krugman demonstrates the problem. If a candidate says that the Earth is flat, the New York Times will run the headline “Shape of the Planet: Both Sides Have a Point” (New York Times, 1/8/11).

The point is, neutrality isn’t adequate in such a situation. Establishment corporate media have to have the courage to say that the Earth is round, the sky is blue and the Earth rotates around the Sun. They also have to say that anyone, especially someone who is holding or seeking political power, who says the contrary is just plain wrong.

Bash and Welker challenged Rogers. That’s good. And the New York Times has come a long way from the days when its White House correspondent Elisabeth Bumiller (Extra!, 1–2/05) articulated the paper’s standard as “You can’t just say the president is lying.” A Times factcheck (10/24/26) this week on Donald Trump’s electoral disinformation began, “In his second term, President Trump has seldom let a day go by without repeating lies about election results or casting doubt on the country’s voting system.”

But FAIR has long argued (e.g., 3/1/17, 11/16/17, 10/2/20) that the media must do more to be an aggressive referee in a time when false information clouds elections: They should refuse to give a free microphone to those spewing falsehoods. They have to say, “If you want to have a back and forth with your opponent on our airwaves and pages, you have to stick to the truth.” The Metro Times is doing that, and editors and producers around the country would do well to take notice.

‘Actively threatening rights’

In its endorsement of Abdul El-Sayed, the Detroit Free Press (9/27/26; cited in Deadline Detroit, 9/27/26) called Mike Rogers an “election denier who’s willing to deprive Michiganders of essential rights.”

The Metro Times knows that even right-wing Republicans need oxygen in media outside the far-right channels. This paper is setting a standard that says: If you want a platform, you have to agree to some semblance of common decency.

There’s still some days before voting closes for this election, but polling (Lansing State Journal, 10/26/26; WDIV, 10/27/26) shows El-Sayed ahead of Rogers. In its endorsement of El-Sayed, the Detroit Free Press editorial board (10/19/26) said, “Rogers is a vocal supporter of an administration that is actively threatening the rights of Michiganders,” including those of racial, gender and sexual minorities. It said, “Rogers’ own politics are discouraging, and we find no indication that he would check Trump’s romp through the rule of law.”

The Michigan race has the chance to lead a reckoning for the media on how to deal not just with political lying, but a massive campaign of hate toward a marginalized population, the kind of campaign that led Jews to the gas chambers and Armenians into the death marches.

It is a rare bit of optimism that a scrappy alt-weekly is setting a new model for how the media can handle the current moment. The question now is: Will corporate media be watching?

From FAIR via This RSS Feed.