Happy Wednesday — this is Associate Editor Audrey Moorehead, still coming down from the patriotic high of spending the Fourth of July in Philadelphia, America’s founding city. If you had told seven-year-old Audrey she’d be here for the 250th, she wouldn’t have believed you. The semiquincentennial celebrations aren’t over yet — the Declaration of Independence was originally read to the public in Philly on July 8, 1776, so today the city’s holding a public reading exactly 250 years later. Even writing that sentence gives me full-body chills. 

As much as I’ve enjoyed celebrating America’s history, I can’t help but feel unsettled and distraught about our present. Today, I’ll be writing about the sexual assault allegations against Graham Platner and what the ongoing saga says about our political culture. Read on for an under-the-radar story about a drop in the U.S. death rate, a look back at the opening of Japan to trade, and some newly discovered historical documents. It’s a 14-minute read.

Voting ends soon.

Tangle is up for the first-ever Newsletter People’s Choice Award, and voting ends on Saturday. We’re currently in the lead (out of 112 nominated newsletters), but we need your help to bring it home. If you haven’t already, we’d appreciate it if you could cast a vote for us! Note: Be sure to confirm your vote in your email after you submit the form.

Quick hits.

1. President Donald Trump suggested that the U.S.–Iran ceasefire is over amid resumed attacks by each side, saying, “I don’t want to deal with them anymore… as far as I’m concerned, it’s over.” (The comments)
2. President Trump criticized member states of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization at the alliance’s summit in Turkey, specifically questioning Europe’s energy and immigration policies while resuming calls for the United States to control Greenland. (The criticisms)
3. The Department of Homeland Security said an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer fatally shot a Mexican immigrant during a traffic stop in Texas. The department claimed the man was in the country illegally and attempted to evade arrest. (The incident)
4. A federal judge nullified a Justice Department subpoena that sought personal information about thousands of Georgia election workers related to the department’s investigation into the 2020 election. The judge said the statute of limitations for bringing potential charges had “long expired.” (The ruling)
5. Right-wing French politician Marine Le Pen said she will run for president in France after a court shortened the length of her ban on seeking elected office, part of her sentence for misusing European Union funds. (The announcement)

Today’s topic.

New misconduct allegations against Graham Platner. On Monday, Jenny Racicot, a former girlfriend of Maine Senate candidate Graham Platner (D), accused him of raping her in 2021. Politico, which first published the report, corroborated aspects of Racicot’s account after speaking with a man whom Racicot dated after Platner, as well as reviewing messages between her and her therapist and an acquaintance. Platner denied the accusation but said he is “taking the time to reflect on the best path forward.” A significant number of Congressional Democrats, including many lawmakers who previously endorsed Platner, have called on him to drop out of the race. 

Back up: Platner, 41, is a progressive Democrat and military veteran who most recently worked as an oyster farmer in Maine. In June, he won the Democratic Senate primary with 72% of the vote after Gov. Janet Mills suspended her campaign in April. Platner has until Monday, July 13 to have his name removed from the general election ballot if he chooses to drop out; in that event, the Maine Democratic Party will have until July 27 to choose a candidate to replace him on the party line. 

Since entering the Senate race in August 2025, Platner’s campaign has been marred by a series of significant controversies. He had a tattoo on his chest of a skull symbol associated with the Nazi police, which he claimed not to know the meaning of when he had it done in 2007. Separately, his past activity on the social media platform Reddit has drawn scrutiny for his repeated use of slurs and disparaging comments made about various groups. In May, The Wall Street Journal reported that Platner’s wife had discovered sexually explicit texts between him and multiple women last spring; The Journal also discovered that Platner has an active account on Kik, a private-messaging app often used to arrange sexual encounters. Finally, in June, The New York Times published testimonies from three women who were romantically involved with Platner — including Racicot — accusing him of volatile and “toxic” behavior in their relationships, which Platner has denied. 

We covered Platner’s past controversies here and here. 

Racicot did not accuse Platner of rape in her comments to The New York Times, but she told Politico that she decided to come forward after seeing that another accuser quoted in the Times’s story, Lyndsey Fifield, was dismissed by some commentators as being politically motivated. According to Racicot, on a night in 2021, Platner let himself into her home after she had told him not to come over. She said he appeared heavily inebriated and forced himself on her despite her explicit rejection of his advances; he then allegedly had sex with her against her will. 

Separately, on Tuesday, the Washington Post published a new account from Fifield, in which she claimed that Platner had removed condoms during sex without her consent on multiple occasions, adding to her previous claims of physical abuse. 

In a statement on Monday, Platner called Racicot’s accusation “troubling, serious, and false” but said his campaign is “reflect[ing] on the best path forward.” Since the story broke, as of Wednesday morning, 38 Democratic senators have called on Platner to drop out, including several former endorsers, such as Sens. Ruben Gallego (AZ), Sheldon Whitehouse (RI), Elizabeth Warren (MA), and Bernie Sanders (I-VT). The Maine Democratic Party also said he should withdraw. Neither Platner nor his campaign has made a public comment since his statement on Monday. 

Today, we’ll cover the latest controversy and the potential end of Platner’s campaign, with views from the right and left. Then, Associate Editor Audrey Moorehead gives her take.

What the right is saying.

• The right criticizes Democrats for their response to Platner’s controversies. 
• Some see Platner’s success so far as a sign of an immoral political climate. 
• Others say Platner’s lack of fitness for office has been obvious for some time. 

In National Review, Philip Klein argued “Democrats have less leverage over Graham Platner than they think.”

“If [Platner drops out] before next Tuesday, Democrats will be able to replace him by the end of the month. But it isn’t that simple,” Klein wrote. “It’s quite possible that he will decide to stick it out. In reality, he holds all the cards. He won the Democratic primary, and there is no mechanism for replacing him unless he decides to give up. The guy wouldn’t have gotten as far as he did were he not a narcissist who ignored the advice of the party’s power brokers.”

“He knows that if he steps aside, he will be remembered forever as the guy who had to drop out after being credibly accused of rape, which will convince everybody that the accusations about him are true,” Klein said. “If he holds on, however, Democrats will be stuck with him after next week. Given how negative partisanship works, the left-wing tilt of the state, and the control of the Senate at stake, it’s easy to see Democratic voters talking themselves into the idea that they have to suck it up and support Platner.”

In UnHerd, Emily Jashinsky called the allegations “a test of Democrats’ moral limits.”

“Even after the tattoo scandal, the Reddit scandal and the adultery scandal, Platner is leading in RealClearPolitics’s average,” Jashinsky wrote. “Platner’s persistence remains a symbol of our political climate. Character concerns are a luxury that can now be overcome by energetic anti-establishment politics and a weak opponent. A big chunk of the electorate has accepted that their vote is ultimately just a choice between the lesser of two evils. 

“At this point, the calculation is really just when character concerns become too much of a risk if other options are available, even when those other options might lack Platner’s populist flair,” Jashinsky said. “The lesson of [Trump’s] arc is that Americans are now much more likely to be persuaded by arguments about their material interests, not abstract appeals to integrity and decency. Nobody believes politicians are qualified to make that case, so they might as well talk about healthcare, gas prices, and rent.”

In Hot Air, David Strom said “who could have guessed that Graham Platner was a bad guy?”

“What makes [this controversy] of interest is what it says about the Democratic Party today, and how far off the rails it has gone,” Strom wrote. “Graham Platner wore a Nazi tattoo for 18 years. His hobby, before getting into the race, was training transgender people at the Socialist Rifle Club of Maine on how to storm buildings with assault rifles. He derided women, blamed them for their own rapes, and declared himself a communist.” 

“It would be one thing if the Democrats didn’t already know that Platner was profoundly flawed, but they all did. Perhaps they didn’t know all the specifics, but then again, all the specifics they did know would and should have been disqualifying,” Strom said. “Democrats are campaigning with Hasan Piker. Kamala Harris is reaching out to Zohran Mamdani. Full-blown communists who openly say that they want to destroy America and Western Civilization are winning Democratic primaries. Where are the Democratic Party leaders willing to stand up and say ‘No?’”

What the left is saying.

• Most on the left condemn Platner and call for him to withdraw. 
• Some predict that a new Democratic candidate can still win the seat. 
• Others say bad judgment caused Platner’s supporters to ignore red flags. 

In The Nation, Steve Phillips said “Maine Democrats must replace Graham Platner now.”

“We appear to be left with an impossible choice: betray the survivors, or sacrifice the seat… But it doesn’t have to be that way. We have another option,” Phillips wrote. “The task before us is clear and achievable. Platner should take responsibility, recognize the larger good, and withdraw before July 13. And everyone who lifted him up… should now publicly call on him to step aside, withdraw their endorsements, and rally around a new nominee. Pressure, applied with clarity and conviction over a matter of days, will make the difference as to whether Democrats lose this seat.

“If Platner does step aside, the next decision matters just as much,” Phillips said. “The energy Platner tapped — the willingness to challenge a sclerotic status quo, the championing of working people, the demand for transformative change — is real, and it is why the surveys showed him running stronger against [Susan] Collins than [Janet] Mills did. Strip away the disqualifying conduct and that appeal remains. The way forward is to find a nominee who carries the energy without the abuse.”

In Bloomberg, Ronald Brownstein suggested “Platner’s fall could save Democrats from themselves.” 

“That it has come to this is a story of panoramic failure within the Democratic Party,” Brownstein wrote. “Most surveys agree that Trump is more unpopular in Maine than he was in 2020. For that matter, the share of voters with a favorable view of Collins is also lower now. And yet, in this must-win race, Democrats were relying on a candidate who had never sought public office and whose mounting vulnerabilities had left them with no more than a coin-flip’s chance of success.”

“To beat Collins, the job for Maine Democrats was not to find an exceptional candidate, but really just an acceptable one,” Brownstein said. “Instead, the Maine Democratic Senate nomination became entangled in the proxy war between left and center over the party’s direction… The political consequence [of Platner’s fall] is that, very much despite themselves, Democrats will likely get a much better chance to oust Collins — and a much clearer path toward recapturing a Senate majority.”

In The Argument, Jerusalem Demsas described “what Graham Platner’s defenders refused to see.”

“People sometimes treat moral failures as separable from errors of cognition. This is wrong. Moral failures sprout directly from bad practical reasoning,” Demsas wrote. “The problem, of course, is that Platner’s defenders have done some bad practical reasoning. They have decided that the world is sorted cleanly into friends and enemies, which means evaluating claims is a matter of figuring out which team you’re on, not whether the argument has merit. That’s why every time people raised concerns with Platner’s behavior, it was shot down as an attack on a friend by an obvious enemy.”

“This is how bad judgment accumulates. It calls itself loyalty, forgiveness, realism, nuance, an anti-establishment revolt, or refusing to play by the enemy’s rules. All of those things can be virtues, but sometimes they’re just rationalizations,” Demsas said. “Platner himself is likely finished in Democratic politics, but the habits of mind that put him a hair’s breadth from power are what really need to be defeated… There will be other Graham Platners, other people who seem like they are on your team but for some pesky red flags. The point of good judgment and all that annoying virtue is that it prevents you from making the mistake of trusting them.”

My take.

Reminder: “My take” is a section where we give ourselves space to share a personal opinion. If you have feedback, criticism or compliments, don't unsubscribe. Write in by replying to this email, or leave a comment.

• I’m heartened by Fifield’s and Racicot’s bravery in coming forward to share their stories.
• I can understand why Platner’s supporters stuck it out until now, but it still makes me feel deeply cynical about our politics.
• Platner may not even drop out, and I’m unsure where Maine Democrats go from here.

Associate Editor Audrey Moorehead: I’ve never had a rosy view of politics and its practitioners, but man, things seem especially gloomy these days.

With that said, I want to start with the only possible positive spin to take from this story: the courage of Lyndsey Fifield and Jenny Racicot, two of the women who have accused Graham Platner of a range of misconduct in recent months. These women spoke up about some of the worst things that had ever happened to them — while knowing they were certain to face backlash and scrutiny. 

I imagine that Fifield knew the truth of her account would be questioned since she’s a right-wing staffer; sure enough, many pundits accused her of exaggerating or even fabricating her claims in a “hit job” attempt. Never mind that if she really wanted to execute a hit job, she would have come forward after the July 13 dropout deadline, when Democrats would be stuck with Platner. But she didn’t, and instead of going silent or hiding in the face of the subsequent attacks, Fifield convincingly defended herself, criticizing The New York Times for misleading her about the direction of their story and for misrepresenting the claims she made to them. Fifield claimed that she thought her story would just be one of several, rather than the focal point of the article; instead, others (aside from Racicot) remained anonymous, their accusations presented as less serious. Fifield bore the brunt of the skepticism and anger that always follows serious sexual misconduct allegations against popular public figures.

Enter Jenny Racicot, one of the other women quoted in the Times piece. According to Politico, Racicot said she initially didn’t want to accuse Platner of sexual assault because she shared his politics and didn’t want to be seen as a “rape victim.” But after watching the fallout from the Times story, and watching Fifield’s name get dragged through the mud, Racicot decided to put her qualms aside and come forward again. Though Racicot continues to face some disbelief, it seems like most people are taking the picture she painted of Platner seriously. I’m glad to see that, even if I remain frustrated about how Fifield was treated.

My initial reaction to basically all of Platner’s scandals has been anger, slowly building as they stacked on top of each other. In my perfect world, each scandal would have been more than enough to sink his candidacy. Instead, each was waved off, justified or absorbed by many in the commentariat, even as his polling numbers seemed to slip in recent weeks. Nothing seemed to truly imperil his campaign until Racicot’s rape allegations this week — after, of course, he had already clinched the Democratic nomination.

But, after taking two days to cool off, I can admit that it’s not really fair of me to be so angry with people who supported Platner up to this point. Forming my political consciousness in an exclusively post-Trump world has given me no illusions about the kinds of people who seek and gain power. It also made me understand that perfectly decent people can vote for perfectly indecent candidates if they see politics as a zero-sum game. 

If I step back, it’s easy for me to see how each successive allegation against Platner could be waved off. The Nazi tattoo and Reddit comments, presented together as mistakes from the past, create a picture of a man whose military service fundamentally changed him and who’s now trying to get better; who am I to deny him a chance at redemption? Apparent infidelity is a line I would draw personally, but his wife spoke out to support him, saying that they were working through things and she wouldn’t want to marry anyone else; that honesty and forgiveness earned my grudging respect. His profile on the messaging app Kik, known as a gathering place for young people, rings alarm bells; but no evidence of predatory behavior has surfaced beyond the existence of the account.

Candidly, I have never been a “believe all women” type when it comes to allegations of abuse and violence. I’m too cynical to think that allegations would never be embellished and weaponized for political or personal reasons. And, however it might reflect on me, I remember reading Lyndsey Fifield’s accusations and thinking, well, that’s not as serious as I was expecting, especially since the other women didn’t allege anything worse. It was only after Fifield defended herself online, and other writers I trusted spoke up to corroborate her claims and support her, that I became convinced that her accusations were true and that they might even be more serious than I initially perceived.

Knowing all of that, I have to ask myself: If I thought Graham Platner was critical to my political goals in some way — if I thought he was key to controlling the Senate or passing crucial legislation or even just shaking things up by unseating an establishment senator who’d been in office for 30 years — would I, too, have waved things off until I couldn’t anymore? I like to think that I wouldn’t have, that the moral standards I hold myself to are genuine and unwavering, but the truth is, when the chips are down, I’m as human as anyone else.

My opinion on Platner’s diehard supporters — and on the party that, ultimately, enabled him — is more complicated. While a handful of Democrats spoke out against Platner and warned voters about his character, Maine voters had a different opinion. Of course, the moment Platner became the odds-on favorite, party opposition all but disappeared — with very few elected Democrats still opposing him. And while the party can more credibly claim that they actually oust accused sex abusers, in this case they were forced to, far later than the Nazi tattoo and domestic abuse warranted. That delay doesn’t sit well with me.

Those problems obviously aren’t unique to Democrats, either. Republicans have had their own fair share of candidates with sordid pasts — some of whom resigned or were voted down, but one of whom currently holds the highest office in the land. And the allegations of sexual misconduct against the president are just as bad as, and more numerous than, those against Platner. Yes, Republican Party leaders once upon a time tried to stop Trump, but they’ve shown little but fealty since his 2016 rise to power, so I’m not exactly interested in hearing from former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) about how the GOP “walks away” from bad candidates. 

The uncomfortable truth is that, for all the attempts to create more decent politics, we still live in an era where political expediency comes before virtue. On some level, there’s clearly an electoral appetite for the Donald Trumps, Graham Platners and Ken Paxtons of the world — perhaps because, in a political system full of establishment fakers or rigid ideologues, voting for the amoral jerk feels like a middle finger to the status quo or a safe bet to protect oneself from being on the other end of an ideologue’s accusation of immorality. I’m just not sure how we come back from this.

I’m also not entirely sure where Maine Democrats go from here. For one thing, as of this writing, Graham Platner hasn’t yet dropped out. He’s facing immense pressure from all wings of the party to do so, and I sincerely hope that he caves to that pressure — but he may not. He’s reportedly attempting to exercise influence over the state party’s choice of replacement, and while the party is making a big show of calling his bluff, Platner holds the cards. If he doesn’t drop out by July 13, his name will be on the ballot whether Democrats want it there or not. And while I hope he has more character than I give him credit for, I think he’s exactly the type to do a disservice like that to the people of Maine.

If Platner does stay in, I have to wonder what happens next. Does the national party abandon Maine and pour their money into other races? Or do they do what Republicans did not so long ago and begrudgingly fall back in line because of sheer political math? 

If that happens, what will the people of Maine do? Will they reject Platner, or will they, too, make the same political calculus that countless other voters have made?

I doubt Platner would actually win with all of this baggage, but if the race is even close, it’s just another bad omen for the direction of our politics. Let’s hope it doesn’t come to that.

Take the survey: Should Platner drop out? Will he? Let us know.

Disagree? That's okay. Our opinion is just one of many. Write in and let us know why, and we'll consider publishing your feedback.

Under the radar.

On Thursday, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shared provisional data that showed the death rate in the United States decreased to a record low — 689.2 per 100,000 people — in 2025. The rate dropped 4.6% from 2024 and decreased for all demographic groups “except American Indian and Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and Asian people,” according to the report. The top causes of death remained heart disease and cancer, with influenza, pneumonia, and kidney disease entering the top 10 after being absent in 2024. The report identified some vulnerabilities in the data — such as varying timeliness in death certificate submissions — but said it offers an “early signal about shifts in mortality trends.” The Hill has the story.

This day in history.

By the mid-1800s, the United States had doubled down on its “manifest destiny” ideology after establishing a foothold in the West and expanding into territory won in the Mexican–American War. Seeking additional routes for economic opportunity amid rapid globalization, President Millard Fillmore became interested in establishing new spheres of influence in Asia. 

Portuguese explorers were the first Europeans to discover Japan in 1543, and in the century that followed, missionaries from Portugal, Spain, and other Western countries attempted to engage in trade and convert the population to Christianity. By the mid-1600s, the ruling Tokugawa shogunate decided the risk of foreign meddling was too high, and effectively sealed Japan from most foreign visitors and external trade, save for the trade-oriented Chinese and non-proselytizing Dutch. 

On July 8, 1853, U.S. Commodore Matthew C. Perry sailed into modern-day Tokyo Bay with a fleet of warships with the charge to put an end to 200 years of Japanese isolationism. Under orders from President Fillmore, Perry arrived in peace, though his four American warships were as much of a showing of military might as they were a coercive tactic. After the initial contact, Perry returned the following year to present Japanese leaders with gifts that represented Western industrialization, including a telegraph, a model locomotive train, and barrels of whiskey. 

For the Japanese, these new relations with the outside world sparked rapid globalization, and the introduction of new technologies from the West created a deep divide between the proponents of modernization and protectors of the past. The tension sparked a sociopolitical transformation, fully restoring and centralizing imperial power with Emperor Meiji and ending the centuries-long feudal military power held by the Tokugawa shogunate. 

Several monuments to Perry still stand across Japan, the first of which was erected in 1901 at the site where Perry and his men first landed in Kurihama, Yokosuka. The monuments generally refer to Perry’s role in “opening Japan’s doors to the world,” and remember him as a catalyst for modernization and introduction to the world economy in 19th-century Japan.

The extras.

• One year ago today we covered the Supreme Court decision on age verification for pornography websites.
• The most clicked link in our last regular newsletter was (again) the voting page for the 2026 People’s Choice Newsletter Awards.
• Nothing to do with politics: Meet Neil, “a 1-ton seal who respects nothing.”
• Our last survey: 1,201 readers responded to our survey on the Supreme Court striking down limits on coordinated campaign spending, with 45% saying they oppose the legal reasoning and the outcome. “We need to get big money out of our elections altogether,” one respondent said. “Does money really influence votes anymore?” asked another.

Have a nice day.

One day in 2024, Professor Christian Tornau received a telephone call with a request for help translating a 12th-century manuscript of six Latin sermons by the scholar Augustine of Hippo. The work led Tornau to an unexpected surprise: Two of the sermons appeared to have been previously undiscovered. To verify their authenticity, Tornau worked closely with fellow scholar Clemens Weidmann, then convened a summer school in 2025 with 20 other Latin scholars. Ultimately, the group concluded that the texts were genuine. Tornau is now working on a critical edition of the new sermons, coming in late 2026. The University of Würzburg has the story.