Graham Platner says allegations of physical abuse of former partner ‘are simply not true’ – US politics live

Senator Bernie Sanders, the Vermont socialist who was an early supporter of Graham Platner’s candidacy for the US Senate, repeatedly declined on Thursday to comment on the allegations of abuse a former romantic partner made to the New York Times.

Igor Bobic of NOTUS reports Sanders, “walking out of the Capitol with a slice of pizza in hand, says he hasn’t read the latest NYT story on Graham Platner and declines to comment”.

Earlier in the day, before the Times article was published, but as rumors about its contents swirled in Washington, a reporter for the conservative Washington Examiner asked Sanders if he was concerned that “sexual assault allegations could come out on Graham Platner”, the senator asked, “Who are you with?”

When the reporter, Ramsey Touchberry, replied, “the Examiner”, Sanders said: “Why don’t we examine income and wealth inequality?”

“I’m sure he’s not a saint”, Sanders told CNN’s Kaitlan Collins on Tuesday, after previous reporting on Platner’s wife finding sexual messages to other women on his phone last year.

“He went through some very bloody and horrible situations” Sanders added, referrign to Platner’s time fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. “He has acknowledged that he came back with PTSD. He’s had his share of problems.”

The senator also pointed to what Platner’s wife, Amy Gertner, said in a video message shared by his campaign.

“She is standing by her husband, and I think it’s better for this country that we start focusing on the enormous crises facing working people, a corrupt political system, than spending so much time worrying about, you know, the personal life of an individual”, Sanders said.

During a live interview with MS NOW on Thursday, Graham Platner flatly denied having ever been physically abusive to a former romantic partner, as she alleged to the New York Times.

The Maine Senate candidate made the denial to Chris Hayes after the host read him the published allegations from Lyndsey Fifield, who claimed that, during one argument, he “twisted her arm behind her back, shoved her into a bedroom and held the door closed from the other side”. On another occasion, she told the paper, he “yanked her out of a cab by her wrist after an argument”.

Platner said that neither of those incidents took place and suggested that Fifield, a Republican political operative, was lying to damage his campaign.

“There are some allegations in this piece that are simply not true. Anything alleging physicality, anything alleging I knew what my tattoo was, these are the statements of somebody politically motivated,” Platner said. “That is not true.”

Platner also said that Fifield was lying when she said that he knew that the skull-and-crossbones tattoo he got in 2007 was a Nazi symbol, used by the SS.

Asked about his former partner’s claim that he did know what the tattoo was, Platner said: “No, I did not.”

He pointed out that he had taken his shirt off, clearly displaying the tattoo, at his brother’s wedding to a Jewish woman, which he would not ahve done had he known of the Nazi associations.

He also suggested that Fifield was likely the source of earlier reports that he knew the meaning of the tattoo. “She’s the person who’s been telling people this from the beginning, and I feel like, you know, we’re kind of rehashing the thing we’ve been through,” he said.

He also declined to speculate on the authenticity of a screenshot Fifield showed to the Times which she said was text message she sent to friends in August 2025 saying that he had “a Nazi tattoo”.

“I certainly didn’t know,” Platner said.

When Hayes asked Platner to comment on reports last week that his wife found sexual messages to other women on his phone last year, Platner declined to say how recently the messages were sent and asked for somer privacy in his marriage.

“At the beginning of our marriage, I made mistakes, and Amy helped me be accountable for them, and we worked through them, and the work that we did made our marriage significantly stronger, and who we are today is an incredibly faithful and happy married couple,” he said.

Supporters of Graham Platner, the Maine Democrat challenging Republican Susan Collins for a seat in the US Senate, are drawing attention to the fact that a woman who told the New York Times he was physically abusive to her during two arguments when they dated, between 2013 and 2015, works with a Republican group that has supported Collins.

According to the Times, Platner’s former romantic partner, Lyndsey Fifield, alleged that, during one argument, he “twisted her arm behind her back, shoved her into a bedroom and held the door closed from the other side”. On another occasion, she told the paper, he “yanked her out of a cab by her wrist after an argument”.

Platner’s campaign told the Times he “strongly disputes” any claims of physical intimidation or altercations, and described Fifield as “a lifelong G.O.P. operative”.

Fifield was a social media manager at the nonprofit Hiring Our Heroes, which helps veterans get employment, when she started dating Platner, himself a veteran, according to her LinkedIn profile.

She then spent nearly seven years as a social media manager for the Heritage Foundation, a rightwing think tank that was later known as the driving force behind Project 2025, the blueprint for the second Trump administration.

After working on Nikki Haley’s Republican presidential campaign, Fifield has spent the past three years as a fellow at the Independent Women’s Forum, a conservative group.

The scope of Fifield’s work for the Independent Women’s Forum is not clear, but, as the journalist Ryan Grim noted on Thursday, that group’s chair, Heather Higgins, is on record boasting about the role the forum played in writing talking points used by Susan Collins to support of the confirmation of of Brett Kavanaugh to the supreme court despite sexual assault allegations.

Speaking in 2020 at the Leadership Institute, a conservative professional network, Higgins said that she was “extraordinarily proud” of IWF’s work in support of the Kavanaugh’s confirmation after his accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, testified in the Senate.

“We were approached and they said, ‘Can you tell us how to talk about supporting Kavanaugh without alienating the Me Too movement?’ We wrote a memo, it was used by a lot of members of the Senate and the House and Fox News and elsewhere. But most important is, Susan Collins told me that without that memo, she could not have seen how to support him,” Higgins said.

“And if you look at her speech that she gave on the Senate floor, it is entirely the playing put and architecture of how we said to structure the argument and what to say and how to say it, which is just so gratifying. We were watching TV saying ‘That’s ours!’”

Donald Trump confirmed on Thursday that the troubled Freedom 250 concert series, in honor of the nation’s 250th anniversary, is off, and will be replaced by what he called “A Rally to end all Rallies”, featuring himself.

Writing on his social media platform, Trump announced the rally, with a prominent dig at the many musical artists who dropped out of the concert series last week when they realized it would be closely associated with him.

“We don’t want singers with no talent, but big fees to put you to sleep, we’ve told them all to stay home,” Trump wrote. “All we want is you, me, a few speakers, and the Greatest Music ever played, the same Music you have listened to for years!”

The president then explained that the featured musical performers would be two of the same artists who regularly perform at his rallies: “Lee Greenwood introducing me with what has turned out to be one of the Greatest Hits of All Time, GOD BLESS THE U.S.A., and the amazing Christopher Macchio, who will sing Nessun Dorma, Hallelujah, Ave Maria, God Bless America, and others”.

The rally will also feature musical performers from the US military, the president said, “PLUS a fine and highly dignified gentleman known as, President DONALD J. TRUMP!”

The Republican National Committee, which perhaps planned for a more explosive report on Graham Platner’s treatment of his former romantic partners than than the New York Times actually delivered on Thursday, sent a statement to reporters with the deeply misleading claim that the article reveals that “Graham Platner abused and kidnapped women”.

That characterization appears to be based on the account of one woman who dated Platner between 2013 and 2015, a Republican campaign operative who alleged that, during one argument, Platner “twisted her arm behind her back, shoved her into a bedroom and held the door closed from the other side so she couldn’t get out, telling her to remain there until she was ‘calm’”.

A spokeswoman for the RNC, Delanie Bomar, said in a statement:

“Every day brings another deeply disturbing revelation about Graham Platner. If he’s willing to do this to his own girlfriend, imagine what he’s willing to do in a position of political power. Maine voters deserve to know why Democrats are willing to excuse this deranged behavior. If Chuck Schumer and national Democrats don’t distance themselves from Platner, they’ll be forced to answer for his behavior every day from now until Election Day.”

Platner’s campaign said in a statement to the Times that he “strongly disputes” any claims of physical intimidation or altercations.

The New York Times reports that three of Maine Senate candidate Graham Platner’s former romantic partners described volatile and “toxic” relationships to reporter in conversations over the past two months.

While other former romantic partners described Platner in a flattering light to the newspaper, and said they felt safe with him, one of the three women with bad memories, a Republican campaign operative Platner dated from 2013-2015, claimed that he was physically abusive to her during two arguments.

Platner’s campaign said in a statement to the Times that he “strongly disputes” any claims of physical intimidation or altercations.

The same woman, Lyndsey Fifield, who worked for the Heritage Foundation, the rightwing think-tank that produced Project 2025, and on Nikki Haley’s 2024 presidential campaign, told the Times that Platner knew then that the skull-and-crossbones tattoo he got on his chest in 2007 was a Nazi symbol.

Platner told Politico in October that he only “realized this tattoo resembled a Nazi symbol” after he launched his campaign last year and “reporters and D.C. insiders” made him aware that it looked like the skull-and-crossbones members of the Nazi Schutzstaffel, or SS, called a Totenkopf.

Fifield, however, told the Times Platner called it “my Totenkopf” more than a decade ago when they dated. “He would joke about it being a Nazi tattoo”, she said.

Fifield also showed the Times a screenshot of a private chat group from last summer in which she said she told friends that Platner “has a Nazi tattoo on his chest.”

“I will personally go campaign for Collins,” she wrote, in reference to Susan Collins, the incumbent Republican senator Platner is running to unseat.

In a statement to the Times, Platner’s campaign said: “Let’s be very clear: This is a lifelong G.O.P. operative who’s dedicated her career to electing Republicans.”

At an Oval Office event supposedly about coal production that began an hour ago and is still going, Donald Trump began by focusing, again, on his many building and renovation projects in Washington DC, and is now repeating many of his familiar false claims on a variety of subjects in response to reporter questions.

At one stage, the former Fox News radio correspondent Jon Decker asked the president about opposition even among Republicans to his choice of Bill Pulte, the top federal housing official, to serve as acting director of national intelligence after Tulsi Gabbard leaves at the end of the month.

Asked why he picked Pulte, the president first called his pick, who was ousted from the board of his family’s construction firm Pulte Homes in 2020, a man of “high integrity”.

Trump then hinted at what might be closer to the real reason he is installing Pulte to oversee the nation’s intelligence agencies. “He’s a very smart guy and he may find out some things about the rigged elections,” Trump said. “I think he’d like to do it.”

Before her decision to resign, Gabbard made a mysterious appearance at a raid by the FBI on an election center in Georgia, apparently as part of an effort to pursue conspiracy theories Trump turned to to explain away his defeat by Joe Biden in the 2020 election.

When Decker followed up to ask if Pulte has “the necessary national security experience to take on that position”, Trump pointed out that Pulte had the same total lack of experience with national security as he did when he was elected president in 2016.

“I do”, Trump said. “And I think he does actually, because he’s smart. Because a lot of national security- look, I wasn’t greatly experienced in national security, and I think I’ve done a really great job with it.”

Per my last post, Trump is using a wartime presidential authority to hand $700m to coal-fired power plants in the US, the latest move by the president to bolster what he calls “beautiful clean coal” despite it being the dirtiest of fossil fuels.

The president is using the Defense Production Act, a cold war-era statute used to accelerate American industrial output in times of national need, to provide grants to more than a dozen existing coal plants across the US, including facilities capable of exporting coal.

The president has long been a champion of reviving the US’s ailing coal industry, with today’s White House event featuring supportive governors and lawmakers from coal-rich states such as Wyoming and West Virginia.

In the past year, the Trump administration has doled out hundreds of millions of dollars to the coal industry, signed orders forcing ratepayers to pay extra for ageing plants to stay open and dismantled environmental rules that limit toxins from coal leaching into Americans’ shared air and water.

Regardless of Trump’s characterization of coal as “clean, beautiful”, the reality is that coal is not clean. It is the most carbon-dense fossil fuel and therefore a leading cause of the climate crisis when burned. Coal also gives off tiny toxic particles that sicken miners and trigger widespread respiratory and heart health problems across the US – research has estimated that as many as 460,000 deaths in the US from 1999 to 2020 were attributable to air pollution from coal plants alone.

Environmental groups strongly criticized the administration’s latest aid for coal. “It is disgusting and reprehensible that the president of the United States is giving away our taxpayer dollars to deadly and expensive coal plants that will make Americans sicker and drive up electricity prices even more,” said Patrick Drupp, climate policy director of the Sierra Club.

“This handout betrays everything Donald Trump promised and only serves his big coal buddies who stroke his ego and hand him shiny trophies.”

Read Oliver’s full report here:

Donald Trump has just announced a $700m investment into what he described as “beautiful, clean coal” projects, as his administration continues to grapple with steep energy costs amid his war on Iran.

The funds will protect 14 coal plants and 42 coal mines, build two new coal plants and a new export terminal, Trump said in the Oval Office. “It’s real power,” he said, adding – falsely – that “there’s no alternative”. (Cue his usual attacks on windmills).

in New Orleans

The ranking member on the US Senate’s influential finance committee has demanded transparency over a proposed “first-of-its-kind” ICE family and child detention center in Alexandria, Louisiana, citing reporting by the Guardian that first revealed the Trump administration’s plans in March.

Ron Wyden, an Oregon Democrat, has written to the project’s contractors and to the Department of Health and Human Services [HHS] expressing concerns over conflicts of interest, environmental contamination, and “the absence of a public process” in the center’s planning.

“A federal facility designed to hold children and families in federal custody cannot be stood up in secrecy,” the letter states.

The move comes as documents obtained by the Guardian, including layout designs, draft contracts and email communications, provide further details of the proposed facility’s operations, as the Department of Homeland Security continues to refuse to comment on the project.

A spokesperson for England Airpark, the local authority responsible for leasing the land, confirmed that no contract had yet been signed.

Here’s Oliver’s report:

Further to the last post, ahead of the vote this morning, Republican senator Bill Cassidy and Democrat Cory Booker filed an amicus brief calling the “anti-weaponization” fund an “immediate and dire threat to our constitutional order and the authority of Congress”.

Urging a federal judge to block the fund in court, the lawmakers laid out their argument that the fund violates the constitution and is “designed to compensate the insurrectionists who stormed the US Capitol on January 6th”.

“The existence of the fund strikes at the core of congressional authority and our Ccnstitutional order,” they wrote.

Though Cassidy ultimately voted no on Chuck Schumer’s motion (see my last post), he quickly filed his own amendment to prohibit payments from the fund.

Earlier, Senate Republicans voted to kill Chuck Schumer’s motion to ban the DOJ from creating an “anti-weaponization” fund to compensate the president’s allies – though other efforts are expected later today that could get their support.

The initial Democratic effort was defeated by 49-50 votes, with three Republicans facing tough re-election races in November – Susan Collins, Jon Husted and Dan Sullivan – joining Democrats to vote in favor.

Acting attorney general Todd Blanche told lawmakers under oath earlier this week that the department was “not moving forward with the fund”, but he refused to put it in writing. Donald Trump also admitted yesterday that he didn’t know if the fund was dead or just on hold, and called it “a beautiful thing”.

Senate business was at a standstill for hours this morning as Republican senators deliberated over possible amendments to put into the bill that would kill the fund for good. Bill Cassidy, Husted and Sullivan held out for hours in an effort to “optimize chances for success”, as Cassidy later told reporters.

But ultimately, he and even retiring Thom Tillis voted no, with Tillis telling reporters that he and other Republicans were working on a range of ideas that would “get the fund out” without imperiling the underlying immigration bill.

Donald Trump has two things to say about his war with Iran. The first is that it’s already over. And second, a symbolic congressional vote to end it – carried by four members of his own party – is a stab in the back that could derail the peace talks he’s conducting for the war that’s already over.

By a 215-208 margin yesterday, the House voted to direct the president to withdraw US forces from hostilities with Iran, the first time either chamber has passed such a measure in the little over three months since “Operation Epic Fury” began on 28 February. By this morning, Trump was on Truth Social calling the vote “unpatriotic” and blaming it on “Trump Derangement Syndrome”.

The four Republicans who crossed the aisle, each with different ideologies, don’t exactly fit the bill for such a diagnosis.

Thomas Massie is a libertarian-leaning constitutionalist who has opposed the war from day one, lost his primary to a Trump-backed challenger, and has, in Trump’s estimation, nothing left to lose. Warren Davidson is a West Point graduate, former army ranger, and ex-Freedom Caucus member who voted against the war alongside Massie in March, but flipped back until recently.

Brian Fitzpatrick, a former FBI agent representing Philadelphia’s suburbs, is well known as a moderate who framed his vote in the plainest possible terms. “You either follow the law, or you change the law,” he said. “You can’t violate the law. That’s not an option.”

Tom Barrett voted in March against a war powers resolution, saying Trump had “earned the opportunity to resolve this conflict quickly”. By May, however, he had changed his mind, citing the economic pain hitting his constituents. All four lawmakers coalesced for last night’s vote.

But none of this has stopped the administration from declaring, with some confidence, that the war is already over. The Trump administration insists the US is now only conducting “completely defensive” strikes.

And yet gas prices are averaging close to $4.24 per gallon nationwide, per AAA, and nearly $6 in California. The strait of Hormuz, through which roughly 20% of the world’s oil normally flows, remains effectively closed, three months after the first strikes on Iran.

Trump’s own Truth Social post – in which he condemned yesterday’s vote as unpatriotic – describes active “final negotiations to end the War with the Islamic Republic of Iran”. The war that has concluded is, apparently, still being negotiated to a conclusion.

The absurdity of calling anyone out for noticing the contradiction as disloyal does not appear to be winning over most Americans. A May Economist/YouGov survey found 59% disapproved of Trump’s handling of Iran, while only 31% approved. About two-thirds of Americans told Reuters/Ipsos that rising gas prices had hurt their household finances, and Moody’s Analytics estimates the conflict has cost US households roughly $100bn in aggregate through higher energy costs.

Yesterday’s House vote is, as the White House correctly notes, largely symbolic. But symbols have a way of accumulating. In the Senate, the math is moving. The war remains unpopular. The strait of Hormuz is still closed.

Trump is insisting the conflict is over and, in the same breath, that talking about it is unpatriotic. For a growing number of Americans, and their representatives on Capitol Hill, this is not a winning message.

Israel and Lebanon have agreed to implement a ceasefire to end hostilities as the US attempts to overcome one of the largest barriers to reaching a broader deal to end the war with Iran.

But the Israel-Lebanon ceasefire is dependent on a complete halt of fire from Hezbollah, and the evacuation of all its fighters in southern Lebanon.

The California governor’s race remained unsettled Thursday, as state election officials continued to sift through uncounted primary ballots – a process that could take days or even weeks as voters eagerly await the results.

Polls indicated that British-born conservative pundit Steve Hilton was narrowly leading the race, followed by former US health and human services secretary Xavier Becerra. Billionaire Tom Steyer trailed behind the pair. Under California’s primary system, the top two vote-getters will advance to the general election.

The question of which two will face off in November may be unanswered for weeks, according to election officials. Per state law, California counties must finish counting ballots by 15 June, but certain ballots are exempt from that deadline. For example, mail-in ballots postmarked by election day and received by 9 June are valid and can be processed beyond the deadline.

An estimate of the number of remaining unprocessed ballots is expected on Thursday. Faced with a crowded slate of gubernatorial contenders, many Democratic voters held on to their mail-in ballots until election day as they weighed which candidate had the best chance of reaching one of the top two slots.

Dharna Noor and Oliver Milman

Democratic-led states are eroding their climate policies, as red states are scaling up their clean energy deployment.

California on Friday scaled back its cap-and-invest program, offering more than $3bn in free pollution allowances to polluting companies. Earlier the same week, New York weakened its groundbreaking climate law, delaying a plan to regulate carbon from 2024 until 2028 and reducing emissions-slashing targets. Rhode Island’s governor, meanwhile, is attempting to roll back aggressive clean-energy programs.

The moves come as Donald Trump’s administration withdraws clean energy incentives and energy savings programs, and as energy prices spike across the country amid trade disruptions stemming from the US-Israeli war on Iran.

Proponents have said the changes are necessary to suppress electricity costs, but climate advocates say that view is short-sighted and misguided.

“Using affordability as a cudgel to weaken climate policy is a major error that will not solve either crisis, ultimately amplifying both,” said Johanna Bozuwa, executive director of the Climate and Community Institute, a left-leaning thinktank.

For the full story, click here:

The Senate is voting on a motion to ban the creation of the DOJ’s so-called “anti-weaponization” fund and also send the underlying immigration enforcement bill back to committee.

Despite a number of Republicans being fiercely opposed to the fund, they might not vote yes because doing so could tank the immigration bill.

Introducing the motion on the Senate floor, minority leader Chuck Schumer said:

America has never seen a more clear-cut case of corruption than Donald Trump’s slush fund.

“Republicans are trusting the word of Todd Blanche, who built a career on lying, that the administration will just drop this slush fund,” he added. Blanche assured lawmakers earlier this week that the fund had been abandoned, though he declined to put it in writing.

Trump also said yesterday he’d have to ask his lawyers whether it was dead or just on hold. “I’d have to ask the lawyers. I don’t know,” he said in the Oval Office.

Schumer’s amendment needs just 50 votes to pass.

Treasury secretary Scott Bessent is testifying at another congressional hearing this morning, this time before the House ways and means committee.

Once again he dodged questions about whether the IRS has recommended “any taxpayer be granted immunity from an audit for their taxes” during his tenure.

Bessent told Democratic representative Lloyd Doggett he was unable to answer due to the matter being “under litigation”.

Doggett replied that, “it isn’t a question of being ‘not able’ – it’s being ‘not want to’.” He repeated the question, and Bessent once again said he was “unable” to answer.

“You can answer it, you refuse to answer,” Doggett said. “Your appearance here today, and yesterday, defines deception, and that’s what you’re doing to the American people.”

He later added:

I think we can assume from your deception today that nothing’s being done, and this president is being treated in a way that no other president – no other American citizen – has been treated in an incredibly corrupt deal.

As we reported yesterday, Bessent refused to be drawn on questions about the status of the contentious provision that provides Donald Trump, his family and his businesses with immunity from IRS audits and repeatedly deferred to the justice department.