博客

  • Platner’s disastrous candidacy exposes rifts that could dampen Democrats’ Senate hopes

    Platner’s disastrous candidacy exposes rifts that could dampen Democrats’ Senate hopes

    In a sudden and dramatic turn that has upended one of the nation’s most competitive congressional contests, Graham Platner, the Democratic nominee for Maine’s high-stakes U.S. Senate race, announced Wednesday night he was suspending his campaign. The exit comes just 48 hours after a bombshell report from Politico detailed a sexual assault allegation from Platner’s ex-girlfriend, who accuses him of entering her home uninvited while intoxicated in 2021 and assaulting her — claims Platner has forcefully denied.

    Platner, an oysterman and former U.S. Marine who pulled off one of the most shocking primary upsets in recent Democratic politics, saw his rapid ascent from political obscurity collapse into chaos this week. After defeating popular sitting Maine Governor Janet Mills, a candidate hand-picked by party establishment leaders, Platner built a grassroots movement of more than 15,000 supporters across the state and earned endorsements from progressive icons Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts. He was tapped as the party’s official challenger to five-term Republican incumbent Susan Collins, a race widely viewed as make-or-break for Democrats hoping to flip control of the U.S. Senate in November’s midterm elections.

    This latest allegation is not the first controversy to trail the first-time candidate. Since he launched his campaign last August, reports have emerged of offensive past social media posts, a chest tattoo with documented Nazi ideological ties, sexually explicit text messages sent to women after his 2023 marriage, and multiple accusations from former partners of threatening, toxic behavior. Despite these repeated red flags, 72% of Maine Democratic primary voters backed Platner in June’s nominating contest, a testament to the appetite among the party’s base for anti-establishment, working-class progressive candidates.

    But in the wake of the new sexual assault allegations, political support evaporated within hours. Every major institutional backer, including Sanders and Warren, withdrew their endorsements, and the national Democratic Party cut off all campaign funding. By midweek, it was clear Platner’s campaign could not survive. In his 11-minute pre-recorded announcement video posted to social media, however, Platner pushed back against the narrative that he was stepping down over the allegation. “We went toe to toe with one of the most entrenched political systems in the history of the world, and we won,” he said. “And now they are not going to let us have it, not if it’s me.” He added he would not formally file withdrawal paperwork until he secures guarantees that his replacement will be chosen through an open, democratic process, rather than picked behind closed doors by party leaders.

    The sudden exit has thrown Maine Democrats and national party strategists into panic mode. To win a Senate majority this November, Democrats must flip four Republican-held seats while defending all of their own incumbents, making the Maine seat a critical must-win target. Platner’s departure has not only derailed months of campaign planning but also re-opened deep, long-simmering rifts between the party’s progressive grassroots wing and moderate establishment that could have ripple effects all the way to the 2028 presidential election.

    State party leaders are now rushing to select a new nominee before a mandatory July 27 deadline, announcing this week that a convention of hundreds of delegates will pick a replacement within the next two weeks, with a promise of public input to avoid accusations of a closed-door power grab. The process has already sparked open friction: state party chair Devon Murphy-Anderson accused Platner’s campaign of attempting to manipulate the selection process, a claim Platner’s allies rejected, countering that they only want an open process that blocks an establishment-backed candidate from being anointed without input.

    Political observers warn that mismanaging the nominee selection could alienate Platner’s passionate base, a group Democrats desperately need to turn out in November. “So much of Platner’s base, whose passion Democrats are going to want to have, will sit on their hands and be very angry if it looks like this is another case of the establishment triumphing over what the people want,” said James Melcher, a politics professor at the University of Maine at Farmington.

    Multiple established Maine political figures have already signaled interest in stepping into the race, including former Maine Senate leader Troy Jackson, former gubernatorial candidate and state epidemiologist Nirav Shah, and current Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows, who was the Democratic nominee against Collins in 2014. Still, former state Senator Lynn Bromley, who backed Mills in the primary, warned that uniting voters around a new candidate in just three months will be an uphill battle. “The thing I’m the most worried about is we run somebody and he or she loses, and then we spend the next four years pointing fingers at whose fault that was,” she said.

    Platner’s campaign represented a key test of a growing national trend among Democratic voters: the embrace of outsider candidates who promise uncompromising progressive policy, including universal healthcare, a wealth tax, and expanded affordable housing, and appeal to working-class rural voters that have increasingly abandoned the party in recent cycles. A Platner win in November would have cemented the case that left-wing, working-class candidates can win competitive battleground seats, a precedent that would have boosted prospects for a progressive presidential nominee in 2028. That opportunity is now all but gone.

    Analysts note that Platner’s survival through multiple earlier scandals underscores how hungry Democratic voters are for a new kind of political representation, but it also highlights the major risks of nominating charismatic political newcomers who have not undergone rigorous vetting before running for high office. While some Maine Democrats argue the upheaval could be a blessing in disguise, allowing the party to put forward a more vetted, traditional candidate, the clock is ticking, and five-term incumbent Collins — a proven tough competitor who has defeated Democratic challengers for 30 years, including overcoming poll deficits to win in 2020 — waits for whoever emerges. “It’s not as though it was going to be easy before, and now it’s hard,” Melcher noted. “Beating Collins was always going to be hard.”

  • ‘Earth shifting’: Trump begins process to remove Syria from state sponsors of terrorism list

    ‘Earth shifting’: Trump begins process to remove Syria from state sponsors of terrorism list

    During U.S. President Donald Trump’s high-profile visit to Ankara, Turkey this week, one decision stands out as the most consequential outcome of his diplomatic engagements: on Wednesday, the United States formally initiated the process to strike Syria from its State Sponsors of Terrorism (SST) designation list.

    Syria was first added to the SST roster back in 1979, and currently only four nations remain on the list: Cuba, Iran, North Korea, and Syria, which is set to be the first to exit in decades. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio framed the step as a landmark move by the Trump administration to open a new future for the Syrian population.

    “Lifting the restrictions tied to this designation will unlock international trade and foreign direct investment, create opportunities for Syria to rebuild its war-ravaged infrastructure and institutions, and open a new chapter for the Syrian people,” Rubio said in an official statement. “A stable, unified Syria that is at peace internally and with its neighbors benefits not just the Middle East region, but the entire global community.”

    Beyond its symbolic weight, the de-listing will immediately roll back long-standing U.S. export restrictions on defense-related goods and clear the way for increased American foreign assistance to Syria. This support can extend to capacity-building for the Syrian military and local police forces, as the country works to stabilize after 14 years of devastating civil conflict. The process was triggered Wednesday when Trump submitted formal notification of his intent to rescind Syria’s designation to Congress, kicking off a mandatory 45-day waiting period before the change takes full effect.

    Natasha Hall, an associate fellow in the Middle East and North Africa programme at London-based think tank Chatham House, called the policy shift “earth-shifting” for Syria in an interview with Middle East Eye. She noted that the SST designation stood as one of the last major remaining barriers to Syria’s long-awaited economic recovery. For the Syrian American Council, a advocacy group that has long campaigned for the de-listing, the announcement was greeted with deep gratitude. Alberto Hernandez, the group’s grassroots officer, argued the move represents a clear victory for U.S. national security, framing it as the correct approach to renewed diplomatic engagement with Damascus.

    On Capitol Hill, the proposal has seen unusual cross-bloc support. Hall noted that Republican Party leadership has largely aligned with the Trump administration’s foreign policy priorities on this issue, even when unplanned. On the Democratic side, Senate Foreign Relations Committee top member Jeanne Shaheen joined Senator Elizabeth Warren in penning a joint letter to Trump last week urging him to proceed with de-listing, emphasizing that the designation remained “the most significant remaining legal impediment to Syria’s reconstruction.”

    Rubio confirmed that the U.S. has secured formal written assurances from new Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa that his government will not back any acts of international terrorism moving forward. Wednesday’s announcement came just hours after Trump and Sharaa held a high-profile bilateral meeting on the sidelines of the NATO summit in Ankara, where Trump offered unusually positive public remarks, calling Sharaa “fantastic” and “highly respected.”

    Sharaa’s rapid ascent to diplomatic acceptance with the U.S. is unprecedented: a little over a year ago, he was first introduced to Trump in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, and by November 2024, he was exchanging gifts with the U.S. president in the Oval Office. No Syrian leader – particularly one who was once labeled a terrorist by the U.S. – has stepped foot in the White House for decades. Sharaa’s rise to power has been backed heavily by Turkey, which has sought to build a pro-Ankara government in its neighboring Syria since late 2024.

    Hall notes that Trump’s quick willingness to embrace Sharaa is one of the most notable foreign policy pivots of the past year, a step that she argues no other recent U.S. president from either major political party would have taken. While the de-listing is expected to be widely celebrated by ordinary Syrians emerging from years of conflict and the Assad era, Hall points out that many Syrian civil society activists have expressed disappointment that the policy shift did not include stronger U.S. demands for political inclusion, accountability for past human rights abuses, and other reforms that activists have long demanded.

    Despite these concerns, Hernandez argues that the move aligns with the Trump administration’s shifting global priorities, which now focus heavily on great power competition with China and instability in Latin America. A stable Syria removes the need for ongoing U.S. military and diplomatic engagement in the Middle East, he said, which ultimately serves American national security interests. “If the Middle East is unstable and requires U.S. military or political handholding, that is to our collective countries’ detriment. So for Syria to be strong and stable, that benefits the U.S. national security interests,” Hernandez explained.

    The de-listing process formalized Wednesday builds on an executive order Trump issued in June 2025 that ordered initial sanctions relief for Syria, in response to what the White House describes as positive governance changes and counterterrorism actions taken by Sharaa’s new government, alongside the formal security assurances provided by Damascus. “Today marks a significant milestone in the revived US-Syria bilateral relationship and in Syria’s history as a nation,” Rubio said. “We commend the government of Syria for charting a new course and look forward to enhancing our partnership with Syria and its people.”

  • 11-month-old child hospitalised with serious injuries

    11-month-old child hospitalised with serious injuries

    A shocking case of alleged infant abuse has left an 11-month-old child fighting for life in a Western Australia hospital, with a family member now facing serious criminal charges over the incident. According to local law enforcement details, the infant sustained life-threatening harm following an alleged shaking attack on July 2. Emergency responders immediately rushed the injured child to Joondalup Health Campus in critical condition, before the young patient was transferred to Perth Children’s Hospital for specialized intensive care. As of the latest update, the 11-month-old remains in a critical but stable condition under close medical observation. Western Australia Police confirmed on Monday that the accused, a 25-year-old man from Two Rocks, a coastal suburb north of Perth, was formally charged with one count of aggravated grievous bodily harm this past Friday. Investigators have also confirmed a familial relationship between the accused man and the injured infant, though no further personal details have been released to protect the child’s identity. The suspect is scheduled to make his first court appearance at Perth Magistrates Court on July 29, where formal legal proceedings will begin. This incident has prompted renewed local discussion about infant safety and prevention of non-accidental head trauma in young children, a leading cause of severe injury in infants under 12 months of age across Australia.

  • Democrat accused of rape exits key US Senate race

    Democrat accused of rape exits key US Senate race

    In a sudden development that upends one of the Democratic Party’s top pickup opportunities in this year’s midterm elections, Graham Platner, the scandal-plagued Democratic Senate nominee for Maine, announced Wednesday he is ending his campaign against incumbent Republican Senator Susan Collins.

    Platner, a 41-year-old Marine veteran, commercial oysterman and first-time political candidate, shocked political observers last month when he won the state’s Democratic primary, propelled by a populist, anti-establishment message that won him a fervent grassroots following. His unapologetic, outsider style quickly drew comparisons to Donald Trump’s disruptive 2016 political rise, as he railed against corporate influence, big-money political donors, and Collins, whom he accused of prioritizing the interests of billionaires over working-class Mainers.

    But his campaign began to unravel just days ago, after outlet Politico published a rape allegation from Jenny Racicot, a 41-year-old Maine resident and former romantic partner of Platner. Racicot accused Platner of forcing her to have non-consensual sex in late 2021, despite repeated protests from her. Platner has forcefully and categorically denied the claim, calling the accusation false, troubling, and unrelated to any actual misconduct.

    “This is incredibly difficult, because I know that some will think it’s an admission of guilt, and it most certainly is not,” Platner said in a video statement posted to X Wednesday. He confirmed he would file formal paperwork to withdraw his candidacy, noting that his hand was forced after top national Democratic leaders pulled all financial and institutional support for his campaign. “We’re not doing it because of the allegations, we’re doing it because of the structures that are being taken away from us by those in power,” he added.

    Even before the rape allegation emerged, Platner’s candidacy had been dogged by a series of personal controversies: inflammatory old social media posts, sexually explicit messages sent to women during the early years of his marriage, a tattoo that resembled a Nazi swastika (which he later covered up), and prior claims of mistreatment of women. Platner has acknowledged past struggles with undiagnosed post-traumatic stress disorder from his military service and alcohol abuse, but has repeatedly denied any physical harm to former partners.

    Within 48 hours of the latest allegation becoming public, support for Platner collapsed across every wing of the Democratic Party. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer and Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee chair Kirsten Gillibrand publicly called for his withdrawal, warning that the party’s national campaign infrastructure would not invest a single dollar in the Maine race if he remained on the ballot. Multiple sitting Democratic senators who had previously backed Platner joined the call for him to step aside, and the Maine Democratic Party issued a statement saying “principle does not bend based on party affiliation” while urging his exit.

    Per Maine state election law, Platner’s withdrawal before the July 13 deadline allows state Democrats to select a replacement nominee to appear on the November general election ballot. The state party has until July 27 to name a new candidate, leaving party leaders just weeks to regroup for a high-stakes race that is central to Democrats’ goal of flipping control of the U.S. Senate from Republicans.

    The sudden collapse of Platner’s campaign has exposed deep rifts within the Maine Democratic Party. Progressives are already pushing for a new nominee who will carry forward Platner’s populist policy agenda and grassroots movement, while centrist party leaders are under intense pressure to select a candidate who can appeal to moderate, independent and women voters — blocs that will be critical to unseating Collins. The five-term incumbent Republican, one of the last remaining moderate GOP members of Congress, has long proven resilient in tough Maine elections, and the turmoil surrounding Platner’s exit has handed her campaign an unexpected political reprieve.

    For Democrats, the crisis in Maine comes as the party targets Collins’ seat as one of its most winnable pickup opportunities this cycle. To retake majority control of the Senate, Democrats need to flip multiple Republican-held seats, making the Maine race all the more critical. Platner closed his statement by calling on the Democratic establishment to honor the will and values of Maine’s rural, independent electorate as they move to select a new nominee.

  • US to remove Syria from terror blacklist, in new boost to Sharaa

    US to remove Syria from terror blacklist, in new boost to Sharaa

    In a landmark diplomatic shift that signals a new chapter for post-Assad Syria, the United States announced Wednesday it will remove the country from its decades-old list of state sponsors of terrorism, a major show of support for new Syrian leader Ahmed al-Sharaa. The long-awaited move, formally notified to Congress by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, will go into effect in 45 days, and congressional opposition to the delisting is widely viewed as an unlikely outcome.

    The announcement coincided with a face-to-face meeting between U.S. President Donald Trump and Sharaa held on the sidelines of the NATO summit in Ankara, Turkey. Sharaa, a former jihadist who has rebranded himself as a unifying national leader following the 2024 collapse of the Assad regime that ruled Syria with authoritarian control for 50 years, traded his previous guerrilla attire for a formal suit for the high-profile diplomatic encounter.

    “This is yet another historic step by President Trump to give the Syrian people a chance at greatness,” Rubio said in an official statement. He emphasized that removing the terrorism designation, paired with broader sanctions relief, will unlock critical international trade and foreign investment that Syria desperately needs to rebuild its infrastructure and institutions after years of devastating civil conflict. “A stable, unified Syria at peace with itself and its neighbors benefits not only the region, but the entire world,” Rubio added.

    Trump echoed this positive assessment of Sharaa’s leadership during their meeting, saying, “He’s doing an unbelievable job in unifying Syria. What a job he’s doing. Syria was a mess with what happened with the previous government.”

    The delisting comes despite lingering misgivings from Israel, one of Syria’s long-standing regional adversaries that has carried out repeated airstrikes on Syrian territory in recent years. Trump has previously publicly pushed for Syria to reach a formal peace agreement with Israel, but moved forward with the delisting even without tangible progress on that front. Last month, Trump suggested that Sharaa’s Sunni-led government could lead a military campaign to weaken Lebanese Shia militant group Hezbollah, a proposal Sharaa quickly rejected, noting Syria has no intention of repeating the Assad regime’s decades-long military intervention in Lebanon.

    For months, the U.S.’s initial round of sanctions relief had little tangible impact on Syria’s economy because the state sponsor of terrorism designation remained in place. The label left U.S. and international businesses facing significant legal risks for any commercial activity in Syria, effectively blocking most foreign investment. Rubio confirmed that the decision to delist Syria followed “formal assurances” from Sharaa that the new government will not support any acts of international terrorism moving forward.

    With Syria’s removal, only three countries — Iran, North Korea, and Cuba — will remain on the U.S. terror blacklist. Cuba was controversially added to the list during Trump’s first presidential term amid rising pressure on the island’s communist government.

    The U.S. first designated Syria as a state sponsor of terrorism back in 1979, during the rule of Hafez al-Assad, the late father of ousted president Bashar al-Assad. For decades under the Assad dynasty, Syria hosted a number of Palestinian militant groups, and Damascus was accused of direct involvement in high-profile attacks, including a 1986 attempted bombing of an Israeli El Al airliner. In recent decades, the designation was primarily tied to the Assad regime’s close alliance with Iran and its long-standing support for Hezbollah. Today, Syria is in desperate need of international economic assistance to rebuild after years of brutal civil war that allowed the Islamic State extremist group to seize large swathes of territory and triggered one of the worst global refugee crises of the 21st century.

  • Iran ceasefire, now ‘over’, was always going to break

    Iran ceasefire, now ‘over’, was always going to break

    Just under four weeks after the United States and Iran signed a temporary ceasefire agreement, open hostilities have erupted once again across the Middle East, shattering the fragile truce that US President Donald Trump once heralded as a historic breakthrough. Signed at the Palace of Versailles in France on June 18, the deal that Trump claimed represented Iran’s “unconditional surrender” has now been declared “over” by the US leader himself.

    Long before the latest escalation, this framework was never a genuine, lasting peace agreement. It functioned only as a temporary pause to hostilities – a “deferred crisis” with a built-in trigger that was always destined to detonate. That moment has now arrived. On July 8, speaking on the sidelines of the NATO summit in Ankara, Turkey, Trump dismissed any future negotiations with Tehran as “a waste of time”, capping a rapid downward spiral of tensions that will look grimly familiar to anyone who has followed the decades-long US-Iran conflict.

    The chain of escalation that ended the truce began on July 7, when Iran launched attacks on three commercial vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz, a critical chokepoint for 20% of the world’s daily oil supply. In response, the US carried out what an unnamed senior American official described as “punishment” strikes, targeting more than 80 Iranian military sites across the region. Washington also reimposed full sanctions on Iranian oil exports – stripping away the single most important concession Tehran had secured in the original ceasefire deal.

    Iran immediately retaliated, launching missile and drone strikes against US military installations stationed in Bahrain and Kuwait. Global oil prices surged in the wake of the attacks, reviving the exact economic pressure that had pushed Trump to the negotiating table in June: rising gasoline prices for American consumers, a politically sensitive issue ahead of upcoming US midterm elections.

    This rapid collapse of the ceasefire should come as no surprise to analysts. The Versailles agreement never addressed the core structural contradictions that sparked the original conflict; instead, it institutionalized those tensions, inadvertently creating the exact conditions that make full-scale escalation far more likely.

    The fatal flaw in the original deal was visible from its signing. The memorandum of understanding (MoU) centered on a simple quid pro quo: Iran would reopen the Strait of Hormuz to commercial traffic in exchange for the lifting of crippling oil sanctions, the only major economic lifeline keeping the Iranian economy afloat. But the agreement completely failed to resolve one of the most divisive flashpoints in the region: the ongoing conflict between Israel and Iranian-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon.

    Tehran had made clear from the start that one of its core non-negotiable objectives was halting further Israeli strikes against Hezbollah, a key proxy asset that Iran relies on to project power across the Middle East. For Israel, however, permanently suspending its right to self-defense against cross-border threats was never an acceptable term for a deal it was not even invited to negotiate. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was reportedly “fuming” over the terms of the MoU, which was drafted and signed without any input from Jerusalem.

    This omission has set into motion the vicious cycle of escalation now playing out across the region: continued Israeli military operations against Hezbollah positions in Lebanon prompt Iran to flex its control over the Strait of Hormuz, which in turn forces the US to launch strikes on Iranian assets to preserve its credibility – even as Washington pressures Israel to stand down. With each new exchange of fire, leaders in Tehran, Jerusalem, and Washington grow more convinced that restraint is no longer a viable strategy.

    Political theorists have long noted that leaders abandon restraint not only when threats grow, but when holding back no longer feels like an active, meaningful choice. Restraint only endures when it appears to be working, when it points toward a more stable future, and when it feels like a voluntary decision rather than a concession forced by external pressure. When those conditions collapse, restraint begins to look like political paralysis, and escalation becomes the only path leaders see to reassert control.

    For Trump, all three of those conditions have now collapsed entirely. Iran has resumed attacks on commercial shipping despite the terms of the ceasefire, oil prices are climbing just months before critical midterm elections, and every new Iranian strike makes clear that Tehran, not Washington, is setting the pace of the conflict. This dynamic is fundamentally unsustainable for the US administration.

    For Netanyahu, by contrast, the collapse of the ceasefire is not a failure – it is confirmation of his long-held skepticism of the deal. Israel never accepted the core premise of the MoU, and its security establishment has consistently argued that the conflict with Iran was only paused, not ended. Any framework that granted impunity to Iranian-backed forces in Lebanon was always doomed to be unsustainable from Jerusalem’s perspective. Just days after the June deal was signed, Netanyahu stated publicly that Israel’s “struggle is not over”, and that the Israeli military would “remain in these security zones for as long as necessary to defend our country”.

    Looking ahead, two primary scenarios are now possible, and both hinge on the future of the Strait of Hormuz to determine the outcome. In the first scenario, the US continues large-scale bombardment of Iranian military assets, while attempting to keep the strait open by force. This is an extraordinarily challenging mission. Iran does not need to defeat the entire US Navy to close the waterway; it only needs to make transit risky enough that global maritime insurers refuse to cover commercial vessels passing through the strait. While sustained US airstrikes can degrade Iran’s ability to launch attacks, they cannot eliminate it entirely. This has raised open questions about whether the US could eventually be forced to deploy ground troops to the region – a step that would almost certainly face fierce pushback from the US Congress.

    In the second scenario, Trump limits the scale of US strikes and uses the show of force as leverage to push for a renegotiated ceasefire. But this path also faces steep, perhaps insurmountable obstacles. Without being able to guarantee unimpeded navigation through the strait, it is difficult to see how Trump can negotiate a better deal than the one he just abandoned – especially against a Tehran regime that has already absorbed heavy US punishment and emerged more emboldened and belligerent than before.

    Either way, the available off-ramps for the US are narrowing rapidly. Until Iran’s ability to leverage control over the Strait of Hormuz is eliminated, the current cycle of escalation makes a prolonged, large-scale regional conflict far more likely. This analysis comes from Ben Soodavar, a lecturer in the Department of War Studies at King’s College London, and was originally published via *The Conversation* under a Creative Commons license.

  • Democrat Graham Platner suspends campaign for key US Senate race in Maine

    Democrat Graham Platner suspends campaign for key US Senate race in Maine

    A sudden political upheaval has shaken the critical race for a U.S. Senate seat in Maine, as Democratic hopeful Graham Platner announced the suspension of his campaign amid cascading scandals topped by a sexual assault allegation that collapsed his support within party ranks.

    Platner, an oyster farmer and military veteran whose anti-establishment populist campaign had quickly turned him into the Democratic Party’s front-runner, shared his decision in an 11-minute video posted to the social platform X. He pushed back hard against the assault claim, calling it entirely fabricated, and emphasized that his choice to step aside was not an admission of any wrongdoing. Instead, he blamed unified pressure from national and state Democratic leaders, who had threatened to cut off all financial and organizational campaign support if he remained in the race against incumbent Republican Susan Collins.

    “This has been an incredibly difficult decision, one that my wife and I have wrestled with over the course of several days,” Platner said in the address. “Over the past couple days I have faced some very serious allegations, and I just want to make it clear, this is all false. The things that have been claimed did not happen. It’s not real.”

    Per Maine state election law, Platner needed to formally withdraw by July 13 to allow state Democrats to place a replacement candidate’s name on the general election ballot this November. He confirmed he will file official withdrawal paperwork only after confirming the process to select his successor will follow “transparent and democratic” protocols.

    Platner’s rapid rise in Maine Democratic politics was unprecedented just months ago. Running on a progressive platform that included pushing for universal healthcare and expanded affordable housing, he tapped into widespread voter frustration with the party’s established leadership, propelling him past initial rivals including Maine Governor Janet Mills, who ultimately suspended her own nomination bid. His campaign received high-profile endorsements from leading progressive voices Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, building momentum that appeared to put the competitive seat within Democratic reach.

    That momentum unraveled rapidly over the past week, however, after a new sexual assault allegation became public. By Monday, Warren had joined a growing chorus of top Democrats calling for Platner to exit the race, and three of his most prominent congressional backers — Representatives Ro Khanna and Senators Ruben Gallego and Martin Heinrich — pulled their endorsements entirely. Both the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, which invests millions of dollars in party nominees across the country, and the Maine Democratic Party cut all ties and ended their support.

    The Maine race is widely viewed as one of the most critical pickup opportunities for Democrats as they pursue an uphill bid to flip majority control of the U.S. Senate in this year’s midterm congressional elections. No Republican presidential candidate has carried Maine since 1988, leading Democratic strategists to conclude a well-supported Democratic nominee could defeat Collins, a longtime moderate Republican incumbent.

    This isn’t the first string of scandals to hit Platner’s campaign. Prior controversies began emerging last October, when U.S. media reported he had a tattoo bearing a resemblance to a Nazi-era symbol, which he said he obtained during a drinking trip with fellow Marines in Croatia in 2007 and had since covered up. Later, old posts from the social platform Reddit were unearthed showing Platner arguing that sexual assault victims should “take some responsibility for themselves” by avoiding extreme intoxication, a comment for which he later apologized and asked voters for forgiveness.

    In June, The New York Times reported that Platner had exchanged sexually explicit messages with multiple women outside his marriage, a report he acknowledged was accurate, noting his wife had previously warned his campaign team about the risk of the story becoming public. The Times followed that report with additional accounts from three former girlfriends, who accused Platner of patterns of erratic, angry behavior.

    Jenny Racicot, the 41-year-old woman who made the latest sexual assault allegation, spoke first to Politico and later CNN, confirming she was one of the former girlfriends quoted in the Times report but chose to go public with the assault claim after previously declining to be named for the story to avoid being publicly labeled as a rape victim.

    Platner is the second high-profile Democratic candidate to suspend a campaign this year following sexual misconduct allegations. In April, Congressman Eric Swalwell dropped out of the race for California governor and resigned his seat in the U.S. House after multiple women brought forward claims of inappropriate behavior, which Swalwell has repeatedly denied.

  • Luke Beveridge says AFL’s Will Lewis staging fine sets ‘new precedent’

    Luke Beveridge says AFL’s Will Lewis staging fine sets ‘new precedent’

    A fresh controversy has erupted in Australian Rules Football after Western Bulldogs head coach Luke Beveridge launched a scathing rebuke of the AFL’s decision to uphold a staging fine against forward Will Lewis, accusing the league of dismissing clear medical evidence to set a troubling new precedent for future disciplinary cases.

    The penalty stems from an incident during last Friday’s match at the Sydney Cricket Ground, where the Bulldogs fell to the Sydney Swans. Lewis was issued a AU$1000 fine for alleged intentional staging during the game’s fourth quarter. In a bid to overturn the charge, the Western Bulldogs club submitted official medical documentation proving Lewis had been struck hard in the solar plexus during the play, a blow that left him temporarily unable to breathe and forced him to remain on the ground.

    Despite the submission, the AFL declined to reverse the fine. Beveridge told reporters this outcome now establishes a new, unwelcome standard that all Australian Football League clubs will have to navigate going forward. “In this one, he’s actually copped one in the solar plexus, it’s knocked the wind out of him,” Beveridge explained. “He’s hit the deck and then he’s obviously been charged with staging … what the AFL are saying to us is if you get hit, regardless if you do or don’t, if you stay down you can still be charged with staging.”
    Beveridge emphasized that the medical submission clearly confirmed Lewis could not have gotten back to his feet immediately due to his injury, yet the league brushed this evidence aside. “The AFL has obviously thumbed their nose at it and said, ‘We just think you’ve staged’,” he said. “It’s changed now to what staging is, it’s totally contingent on how long you stay down, not whether or not you actually got hit because he got hit.”
    The coach also came to Lewis’ defense, pushing back against any implication that the forward intentionally faked an injury to gain an advantage. “I feel for him because I don’t want him to be tarred with a brush that he’s put on an act because he hasn’t,” Beveridge said. “It just means now that if doctors from the football clubs, if they put forward submissions that a player is in discomfort, has been hit, the AFL will now ignore that and base it on what they see.”
    Beyond the disciplinary controversy, Beveridge also confirmed that key Bulldogs ruckman Tim English is in fitness doubt ahead of this weekend’s highly anticipated match against the West Coast Eagles. English played through discomfort in last week’s loss to the Swans, and his availability for the upcoming clash remains uncertain. He will need to get through a full training session without issue and pull up well by Friday to be confirmed as a starter.
    Beveridge noted that English has struggled for consistent form this season, a slump he attributes in part to disrupted game time from a recent concussion that has also dented the big man’s confidence. The coach, however, remains optimistic that consistent selection will help English return to his dominant best. “A bit like our midfield group this year, we’ve had some inconsistency through them working together, individuals at times and Tim’s in that,” he said. “But he’s obviously had some disruptions with the concussion, so a part of it might be a confidence thing. I’ve got every thought in my head that he’s going to be able to move towards being influential again – whether that is this week or not remains to be seen.”

  • Belgium gets serious for World Cup quarterfinal with Spain after gleefully routing US

    Belgium gets serious for World Cup quarterfinal with Spain after gleefully routing US

    CARSON, Calif. — The jubilant post-match dances, playful taunts and triumphant social media posts have been set aside. After securing a dominant 4-1 knockout stage win over host nation the United States on Monday in Seattle, Belgium’s Red Devils have shifted fully into preparation mode as they aim to extend their deep World Cup run on American soil.

    The squad held closed training sessions in the Los Angeles area Wednesday, still carrying momentum from two consecutive knockout stage wins that have defied early expectations. They opened their knockout run with a dramatic comeback victory over Senegal, followed by a thorough dismantling of the Americans, and now face their highest-stakes test yet: a quarterfinal showdown Friday against undefeated, tournament favorite Spain, who have yet to concede a single goal throughout the competition.

    For Belgian goalkeeper Thibaut Courtois, this unpredictable, rollercoaster World Cup campaign has forged a new mental grit and collective belief within the squad that he believes can carry them past Spain.

    “We came into the game against the U.S. knowing it would be an enormous battle,” Courtois told reporters at LA Galaxy’s suburban training stadium. “They were the home side, playing in front of a sold-out crowd fully behind them, so to put in a strong performance both defensively and offensively, sticking to our game plan, that gave the whole group a huge confidence boost.”

    Belgium entered the U.S. match fueled by widespread indignation, after FIFA controversially lifted a one-game red card suspension for star American forward Folarin Balogun, a decision that came after former U.S. President Donald Trump called FIFA President Gianni Infantino to demand a review of the suspension. The Red Devils turned that frustration into on-pitch dominance, outclassing the American side and celebrating their win exuberantly both on the pitch and in the locker room after the final whistle.

    The most viral moment of the celebration came when multiple Belgian players performed a simplified dance long associated with Trump, a routine that has been adopted by athletes across global sports in recent months — including American star Christian Pulisic.

    When asked about the timing and meaning of the dance following Trump’s intervention in the Balogun suspension, Belgian left back Diego Moreira offered a low-key explanation through an interpreter. “There are so many different ways to celebrate a goal or a win,” Moreira said. “You can try different dances, and that’s just what we did. We were simply celebrating a big win after the game.”

    Courtois, who was undergoing mandatory doping control immediately after the match and was not present for the locker room celebration, declined to comment on the dance.

    After arriving in the Los Angeles area for their quarterfinal match at SoFi Stadium, the Red Devils confirmed the celebratory chapter is fully closed, and all focus is now on Spain. The squad did, however, retain a bit of friction with their hosts on Wednesday: they received FIFA approval to relocate their training base after concluding their originally assigned fields at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles failed to meet the team’s basic preparation standards, per an official statement from the Royal Belgian Football Association.

    Heading into Friday’s match, Belgium enters as the clear underdog against a dominant Spanish side. That underdog status suits the Red Devils just fine, as their best performances of the tournament have come when the odds were stacked against them — most notably their stunning 3-2 comeback win over Senegal, where they fought back from a 2-0 first-half deficit to claim victory.

    When asked about matching up against the Spanish powerhouse, Courtois immediately drew a parallel to Belgium’s iconic 2-1 upset victory over Brazil at the 2018 Russia World Cup. That win sent the Red Devils to their first World Cup semifinal in 32 years, and proved they can topple tournament favorites when it counts.

    “Back in 2018, Brazil were heavy favorites against us, widely regarded as having more individual talent across their squad,” Courtois said. “But right now, I think this group is incredibly strong collectively, and we never stop fighting. The Senegal match showed exactly that: we keep believing until the final whistle, and that’s one of our biggest strengths at a tournament like this. At the World Cup, winning is the only thing that matters. Playing well is a nice bonus, but the priority is picking up a win and staying in the competition — and that’s exactly what we’ve done so far.”

  • International court tells BBC of breakthrough in Sudan war crimes probe

    International court tells BBC of breakthrough in Sudan war crimes probe

    Two decades after the International Criminal Court (ICC) first opened investigations into widespread atrocities in Sudan’s Darfur region, the court’s top deputy has announced a major investigative breakthrough: concrete evidence tying senior leaders of Sudan’s Rapid Support Forces (RSF) to war crimes and crimes against humanity committed during the group’s violent 2024 seizure of key Darfur cities.

    Deputy ICC Chief Prosecutor Nazhat Shameem Khan shared the update in an interview with the BBC, following a recent visit to refugee camps in eastern Chad that host hundreds of thousands of people displaced by Sudan’s 27-month-long internal conflict. During her trip, Khan collected firsthand testimonies from survivors who fled the siege and takeover of el-Fasher, the capital of North Darfur, one of the deadliest chapters of the ongoing war between the RSF and Sudan’s regular armed forces.

    According to United Nations estimates, more than 6,000 civilians were killed during the RSF’s October 2024 offensive to capture el-Fasher, forcing tens of thousands of residents to flee their homes to neighboring Chad and other safe regions. UN investigators have previously stated that the violence in el-Fasher bears the clear “hallmarks of genocide,” with consistent allegations that the Arab-majority RSF has deliberately targeted non-Arab ethnic communities in Darfur — a pattern of violence that mirrors atrocities committed in the region in the early 2000s. A separate, equally brutal massacre of civilians is also alleged to have been carried out by RSF fighters in the West Darfur capital of el-Geneina.

    Khan confirmed that the court’s years-long investigation into these new atrocities has crossed a key threshold. “We have now found concrete evidence that links what is happening on the ground through linkage evidence to specific persons in leadership mode,” she told reporters, adding that “it may take time for justice to develop, to be brought to the court, but we will get there.” She also confirmed that the evidence gathered so far links RSF leaders not only to war crimes, but to crimes against humanity as well. While the court has not announced a timeline for when formal charges will be filed, Khan emphasized that investigative progress has been substantial. “We cannot say how quickly or how long it’s going to take,” she said. “But we can say that progress has been significant and that we have achieved a breakthrough.”

    The RSF has repeatedly pushed back against the allegations. The group has denied that it carried out widespread ethnically motivated killings across Darfur, claiming that the scale of atrocities has been greatly exaggerated by international observers. RSF representatives have acknowledged that isolated violations may have occurred during the el-Fasher campaign, and say that an internal probe into alleged abuses ordered by RSF leader Gen Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo shortly after the city’s capture remains ongoing.

    Khan noted that the patterns of violence observed in the latest outbreak of fighting in Darfur match exactly the patterns the ICC documented during its investigations into atrocities committed in the region in the 2000s, when the court first received a referral for the Darfur case from the UN Security Council. The current investigation draws on multiple streams of corroborating evidence, including survivor witness accounts, video and photographic documentation of atrocities, and forensic evidence.

    This is not the ICC’s first interaction with senior figures linked to Darfur atrocities. Over the course of 20 years of investigations, the court has secured seven arrest warrants and opened six separate cases against alleged perpetrators. The most high-profile defendant is former Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir, who was ousted from power in a 2019 coup and remains in Sudanese custody, evading transfer to The Hague decades after the ICC issued his arrest warrant. Four other suspects also remain at large with active arrest warrants. In 2024, the court convicted Ali Muhammad Ali Abd-Al-Rahman, a senior former leader of the Janjaweed militia, on 27 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed between 2003 and 2004, sentencing him to 20 years in prison. The Janjaweed, a pro-government militia that targeted non-Arab civilians in 2000s Darfur, is the direct predecessor organization to the modern RSF, which was built from former Janjaweed factions.

    Sudan’s ongoing civil conflict, which erupted in April 2023, grew out of a power struggle between the Sudanese Army, led by Gen Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, and the RSF, led by Dagalo. The conflict has displaced millions of people across the country and killed tens of thousands, with Darfur emerging as one of the worst-affected regions. The Hague-based ICC, the world’s only permanent international court with a mandate to prosecute genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity, has maintained its investigation into Darfur atrocities through the latest conflict, as it continues to pursue accountability for crimes committed across more than two decades of violence in the region.