Blog

UH OH: Three Ex-Lovers of Graham Platner Reveal His Awful Physical Abuse, Shocking Behavior, and Sickening Remarks: “I Would R*pe Them to Show I’m Dominant”

The Senate campaign of Graham Platner is now almost certainly kaput, as several women have come forward with stunning abuse revelations, shocking behavior from him, and more disgusting remarks while they dated.

The New York Times dropped the bombshell of the 2026 election cycle on Tuesday with separate claims from former lovers of Platner who independently say he engaged in predatory behavior.

Interestingly, Platner invited these allegations after several news reports confirmed he had sent sexual messages to women while married. Platner reached out to several of his exes to ask whether they would say he may have been a bad boyfriend but otherwise a good guy.

While some of the women told Platner what he wanted to hear, three offered a more sinister picture after the New York Times reached out.

The Times reported:

In extensive conversations over the past two months, three other women who had been romantically involved with Mr. Platner offered a far more complicated assessment, describing volatile and “toxic” relationships that were unsettling and at times emotionally wrenching.

Mr. Platner could be charming and charismatic, they recalled in interviews, but also demeaning to women and, in at least one case, even physically threatening. He drank heavily and was regularly unfaithful.

40-year-old Lyndsey Fifield, a Virginia conservative who dated Platner between 2013 and 2015, called him “cavalierly contemptuous of women’s emotions, of our ‘weakness.’

She added that Platner “reminded me of just how much he hated women.”

41-year-old Jenny Racicot, a Maine Democrat who dated Platner between 2019 and 2021, said that his sexist Reddit posts about women were not sh*tposting, but true to his character.

“When I saw the old comments that he made online,” she said, “I recognized a version of him that I had experiences with.”

A third woman, also from Maine, had a long-distance relationship with Mr. Platner on and off for years, as recently as 2016. She said she was “collateral damage to the world that is his.”

But the most volatile relationship Platner had was with Fifield. This included him making some incredibly disturbing comments right in front of her.

The most shocking comment that Fifield recalled Platner saying? “I would r*pe them to show them that I’m dominant.

Keep reading

The Toronto police corruption scandal just keeps getting worse

You are NOT going to believe who is heading up the Project South police corruption investigation. Namely, a corrupt cop!

By way of background, Project South was jointly announced in February by the Toronto Police Service and York Regional Police.

The word “shocking” doesn’t even begin to convey the significance of the scandal.

As we reported back in the wintertime, several police officers and civilian staffers, mostly employed by the Toronto Police Service but also with Peel Regional Police, were put under investigation for guns and drug trafficking, bribery, breach of trust, and even conspiracy to commit murder!

Let us reiterate: these are police officers and civilian staffers of police forces facing numerous criminal charges. In other words, the “good guys”. Allegedly.

Toronto Police Chief Myron Demkiw said at the time that corruption has no place in policing and that the force is committed to leaving no stone unturned and assorted other pronouncements of Grade-A bull-shite.

But in the aftermath of all the hot air, how exactly is this initiative playing out? Especially given that Chief Demkiw promised the public a two-year anti-corruption initiative. Project South would get to the bottom of this scandal. It would re-establish trust in policing. Moving forward, the Toronto Police Service would be all about restoring accountability and transparency.

And if you believe those whoppers, we have some oceanfront property for sale in Saskatoon…

That’s because our ex-cop friend Jay Bannister, who now runs the superb MadLab Press website, found out who Chief Demkiw has appointed to run this anti-corruption unit. Namely, Superintendent Riyaz Hussein.

Who’s that, you ask?

Well for starters, Hussein is a police officer who is no stranger himself when it comes to being arrested and convicted of a crime!

Here’s the skinny: Hussein used to serve as a quasi-judge at the Toronto Police Tribunal where he was in charge of judging bad cops and even handing down sentences to those cops found guilty. All of which is quite rich because Hussein is far from squeaky clean himself.

Back in 2022, according to Oshawa court staff, Hussein pleaded guilty to driving with a blood alcohol level over .80 in connection with a crash that occurred in Pickering, Ont. Hussein, who was apparently as drunk as a skunk at the time of the accident, slammed his unmarked police cruiser into the back of a delivery truck on Highway 401. There was even an open bottle of liquor in his car – Appleton’s Rum to be precise.

When Hussein was arrested by police at the scene of the accident, one officer noted that this reprobate was so inebriated that he could barely stand up.

Hussien was later suspended with pay and, if you can believe it, was back on the job just a month later!

He was also found guilty and sentenced to a one-year driving prohibition and fined $1,560.

He was also demoted to inspector for a year. But get this: he would later be cranked up to superintendent again. Why? Nobody knows.

And the irony could not be more perverse nor profound: the police officer in charge of Project South – the investigation into police corruption – is corrupt himself!

The question arises: what the hell is Chief Demkiw thinking? Why is a convicted drunk driver investigating corrupt cops? Hussein shouldn’t even be employed as a meter maid.

And so much for accountability and disclosure! It’s a joke, albeit one without a punchline.

And this latest sordid chapter in Toronto Police history reminds us of one of our favourite Latin quotes: “Quis custodiet ipsos custodes.” Translation: “Who guards the guardians?”

Keep reading

Trump Says Accountability Is Coming Over The ‘Rigged’ 2020 Election

In a new, wide-ranging interview on “Pod Force One” with Miranda Devine, President Donald Trump is saying out loud what he says a growing body of evidence increasingly supports: the 2020 election was rigged, the people responsible are known, and something is coming for them.

Trump was unambiguous. “We had a rigged election,” he told Devine. “I used to say that a year and a half ago, the election was rigged. And the cameras would literally turn off. Yeah. And the anchor would say, ‘Sir, you’re not allowed to say that.’ Now nobody ever turns off the camera because it’s been proven to be rigged.”

Trump added, “Look at what happened in Georgia. Look at all the stuff that we found out. It was a rigged election. Biden lost in a landslide.”

Trump went further, connecting the consequences of that election and the disasters that followed, including Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, which, Trump says, “would have never happened” had he still been in office. And, of course, there was Biden’s border crisis, which resulted in, by Trump’s count, 25 million illegal immigrants into the United States in four years, many of whom, he said, were criminals.

“And fentanyl deaths,” Devine pointed out.

“Yeah. He was the worst president,” Trump argued. “And we were laughed at all over the world as a country. We’re not laughed at anymore. We have the hottest country anywhere in the world.”

Devine pressed him directly on the accountability for what happened in the 2020 election. “So someone has to be punished, though, for that,” she said. “So how do you do that?”

“Well, you don’t have to punish them all,” he said. “I’d rather not get into it. Let’s see what happens. The election was rigged. We know who rigged the election. We know it. We know everything now. You know, we have information that nobody thought was possible. But when you get to office, all of a sudden, people start giving you things.”

Keep reading

Indiana Mayor Suggests Locals Who Oppose Data Centers Are Poor Renters Living in ‘S***y Houses’

An Indiana mayor is under fire for insinuating that people who oppose data centers being built in their area live in “shitty houses.”

Shelbyville Mayor Scott Furgeson was caught on camera making several statements that have upset locals, Fox 59 reported Wednesday.

Furgeson was holding a hand-written anti-data center sign while speaking to several women when he said, “I’ve seen a lot of these all over town, but I only see them in shitty houses.”

A woman told him, “You see them in working class houses,” to which he replied, “Most of them are rentals.”

One local who spoke to CBS 4 about the mayor’s comments said, “I think it was very detrimental and very inappropriate and disrespectful language to be used. To single anybody out and say that they are not worthy to be represented or that they are not worthy to be heard. Everybody’s worthy to be heard on this.”

According to a 2023 post from the Indiana Republican Party, Furgeson was the Republican nominee for mayor of Shelbyville at that time.

The town is facing a proposed billion-dollar data center site and neighbors have shown fierce opposition to the project, according to the Fox article.

“The proposal seeks to turn 429 acres of farmland into an 11-building data center complex. More than 2,000 people signed a petition to halt the project, yet the city council pressed on anyway and advanced the plan in April, ignoring the jeers and shouts of an angry public in attendance,” the outlet said, noting citizens are concerned about the high cost of energy and resources the centers bring.

Furgeson said he regretted that his comments may have caused offense and claimed he was not talking about the “character, value or importance of any resident, homeowner or renter in our community” but was referencing “property maintenance.”

Keep reading

DOJ Opens Investigation Into Suspected Race-Based Practices At Arizona State University

The Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division has launched a Title VI investigation into diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) practices at Arizona State University (ASU), one of the country’s largest public universities.

Wednesday’s announcement comes after recent viral videos that appear to show university personnel participating in or concealing the handling of distinguishing students by race, color, or national origin. Federal officials noted the videos raised the prospect that ASU may have violated civil rights protections while benefiting from considerable taxpayer support.

“No student should be denied access to opportunities or resources because of race, color, or national origin,” Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon of the Justice Department’s (DOJ’s) Civil Rights Division said. “The United States is committed to keeping universities free of unlawful discrimination – especially when they try to hide illegal conduct to avoid oversight and compliance.”

Federal law does not allow discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin at institutions that receive federal funding. ASU has 194,000 students enrolled across its campuses as of the 2024-2025 school year and receives hundreds of millions of dollars in federal grants and aid annually, public records from the U.S. Department of Education show.

The Civil Rights Division’s investigation will determine whether ASU’s DEI-related policies result in illegal discrimination in areas including admissions, recruitment, scholarships, tutoring, and educational support services. Officials underscored that the investigation is underway.

This action comes amid a broader national effort to examine university practices following changes to federal policy and public outcry over race-conscious programs. Many colleges and universities changed or repackaged DEI initiatives in the wake of executive actions and legal challenges.

The Department of Education indicates that Arizona’s major universities, including ASU, have contended with state-level restrictions on certain diversity initiatives while ensuring federal compliance. Universities nationwide have quietly adjusted DEI programs as a result of potential funding cuts and investigations.

Keep reading

Crazy Wealth Tax Proposals In California And New York City

The socialists who have been taking over the Democratic Party lately have a problem—the state and local jurisdictions where they are able to seize power still have to compete with rival jurisdictions that are still relatively friendly to private property and capitalist businesses. The principal targets of egalitarian fury, namely possessors of great wealth, are strongly incentivized to escape from dystopian hell-holes created by socialists to saner locales. Even those who aren’t so clearly targeted as objects of envy suffer from the effects of economic and social decline and are also incentivized to leave.

Even worse from a socialist perspective, the US Constitution restricts what a state or local government can do in terms of seizing private property. The owner of any property taken for public use must be compensated, so a local socialist enterprise can’t get around the problem of having to raise capital (and later to cover the inevitable losses associated with socialist production) with the help of government funding. However, a government’s power to tax only applies within its own jurisdiction; rich people aided by clever lawyers can figure out how to break their tax “nexus” to an oppressive jurisdiction in order to shield themselves, their businesses, and most or all of the associated wealth in other, much less extortionate jurisdictions.

Two jurisdictions where mass flight from Democratic misrule is unmistakable are California and New York City, both of which have lately experienced a net emigration of more than 100,000 residents per year. While lower-tax states like Texas and Florida are well-known destinations for such blue state refugees, in the case of New York City even the just slightly-less overgoverned New Jersey has become a magnet for a lot of former New Yorkers—it takes a lot for a true Gothamite to suffer the indignity of making that move.

One of the consequences of such flight is that as the tax base shrinks, the pressure on committed socialist ideologues to extort whatever wealth remains even more rapidly (before it too flees from their grasp) mounts. Likewise, there is also pressure to tax things that have previously been left untaxed and might still be within reach, thus pushing the envelope of whatever forms of soaking the rich are permitted by the US Constitution.

Keep reading

The United States Of Austrian Economics

Earlier in the week, on Monday, Axios reported that “Iran threatened to abandon the negotiations with the US over Israel’s actions in Lebanon,” with inside sources suggesting that Trump called Netanyahu “crazy.” While Trump did not comment on the exact language, he did confirm the use of “expletives” in an interview with the New York Post on Wednesday that he and Netanyahu haven’t exactly been seeing eye-to-eye: “I was a little perturbed at his constantly fighting with Lebanon. You know, at some point, I said, ‘Bibi, we gotta stop this. You gotta stop it.’” Since then, the US has announced a ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon, “contingent on a complete cessation of fire by Hezbollah and evacuation of operatives from Lebanese territory south of the Litani River.” However, if one looks at the state of the current ceasefire between the US and Iran, one may be tempted to manage their expectations with regards to how long the ceasefire will last, and if this will set a foundation for meaningful negotiations between Washington and Tehran. More importantly, Hezbollah, who operates independently from (and often against the interests of) the Lebanese Government, has not yet indicated that they agree to the terms of the ceasefire. After the announcement, brent crude oil 1-month futures dropped a little more than $1 to $96.7/bbl.

According to Bloomberg, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has published a “restricted” document which reveals that the nuclear risk posed by Iran is now higher today than it was before the war began. Specifically, prior to the war, the IAEA was allowed to inspect Iranian enriched uranium, but such inspections have since largely halted. However, it should be noted that the IAEA was always only inspected where the IRGC told them they were allowed to, and many suspected that nuclear proliferation was happening behind the scenes, in facilities that were not accessible to the IAEA.

Tariff headlines are once again entering the news circuit. Trump has lowered the benchmark of US-content necessary for a copper product to be considered “US-made” and therefore exempt from the 50% Section 232 tariffs. However, there was also bad news for some US trading partners, as the USTR has announced proposed tariffs of 10-12.5% under Section 301. There is also the proposal of 25% tariffs on Brazil, which President Lula responded to by saying “he could not accept the treatment” his country had received.

Kevin Warsh appointed Paul Winfree and Daniel Heil to support him as Fed Chair. Winfree was working at the Heritage Foundation when Project 2025 was published in 2022, and contributed the chapter dedicated to the Federal Reserve. While Warsh has criticized the Fed himself, citing an article he wrote, published in the Wall Street Journal in November of 2025 called “The Federal Reserve’s Broken Leadership,” Warsh’s criticism is aimed at the how the Fed was being run. Some of Winfree’s comments echo those of Warsh (or perhaps Warsh echoed Winfree, given the chronology), such as critiques of mission creep, like how “political pressure has led the Federal Reserve to use its power to regulate banks as a way to promote politically favorable initiatives including those aligned with ESG objectives.” However, the bulk of Winfree’s manifesto takes aim at the Fed as an institution, arguing that it “lacks both operational effectiveness and political independence.” Winfree offers several recommendations, including the following:

  • Eliminate the dual mandate: Winfree argues that expansive monetary policy (the labor mandate) may “inadvertently contribute to recessions” as it provides “easy money” which “causes the clustering of failures that can lead to a recession.” He advocates instead of a focus on dollar protection and managing low and stable inflation.
  • Eliminate the Federal Reserve’s lender-of-last-resort function: Winfree believes that the lender of last resort function acts as a conduit for moral hazard. This is an especially interesting point as it lies in partial opposition to a strategy laid out by Stephen Miran (and friends) in his article, “A User’s Guide to Reducing the Federal Reserve’s Balance Sheet.” While their respective arguments do not lie in total opposition, Miran’s argument is that there should be more communication to lessen the stigma often associated with using the Fed as a lender-of-last-resort, as it “makes banks reluctant to access the [discount] window even when genuinely needed, leading them to hold larger precautionary reserve buffers than rely on the discount window as intended” and “has played a meaningful role in driving up demand for reserves.” See more in Winfree, next recommendation below:
  • Wind down the Federal Reserve’s balance sheet: Winfree, Miran, and Kevin Warsh are aligned on the goal of shrinking the Fed’s balance sheet. However, the methods for doing so are clearly controversial (see above). Miran’s report highlights many (many) strategies for reducing the balance sheet, so further discussion on one component is likely not a dealbreaker.

However, the aforementioned recommendations are overshadowed by his “monetary rule reform options,” the first of which, is free banking. Straight out of the Austrian School, Winfree advocates for the functional abolition of the Federal Reserve altogether, claiming that “potential downsides of free banking stem from its greatest benefit: It has massive political hurdles to clear,” saying that “transitioning to free banking would require political authorities, including Congress and the President, to coordinate on multiple reforms simultaneously.” Recall that this was published in 2022—before the GOP got Trump in the White House, Bessent in the Treasury, and a majority in both Congressional Houses. Naming a self-proclaimed free banker, who supports the dissolution of the Fed, as an advisor to the Chair of the Fed sets the stage for a potential dramatic restructuring of how monetary policy is conducted in the US. Winfree also argues in favor of either restoring the gold standard, or enforcing Milton Friedman’s “K-percent rule,” where the Federal Reserve creates money at a fixed rate.

Keep reading

Senate GOP Narrowly Defeats Schumer’s Amendment to Ban Trump’s Weaponization Fund – These Three Republicans Voted with Dems

Senate Republicans on Thursday voted 49-50 to defeat an amendment that would ban Trump’s weaponization fund.

Three Republican Senators voted with the Democrats: Susan Collins (ME), Dan Sullivan (AK) and John Husted (OH).

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche this week said the DOJ is dropping the $1.8 billion weaponization fund created to pay people who were persecuted by the Biden Regime.

President Trump and the DOJ have suggested that they are working on a backup plan to pay back Americans who were brutalized by Biden’s DOJ.

Democrat Minority Leader Chuck Schumer introduced the amendment to ban Trump’s weaponization fund during Wednesday’s vote-a-rama.

The Hill reported:

Senate Republicans voted on Thursday morning to defeat an amendment sponsored by Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) to prohibit the Department of Justice from establishing a $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” fund for MAGA allies, a proposal that acting Attorney General Todd Blanche told lawmakers this week the administration would abandon.

Notably, Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine), Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) and John Husted (R-Ohio), who all face tough re-election races in November, voted for Schumer’s amendment.

The proposal, which would have amended a $70 billion budget reconciliation package to fund immigration enforcement, still failed by a vote of 49 to 50.

All Democrats voted for it.

Keep reading

Zelensky Pens Lengthy Letter To Putin: ‘Enough Of War, I Am Proposing A Meeting’

On Thursday Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky proposed a face-to-face meeting with Vladimir Putin in a rare open letter sent to the Russian leader. It said Ukraine is also ready for a “full ceasefire.”

“Ukraine proposes ending this war through direct engagement between us – and you. I am proposing a meeting,” Zelensky said in the letter. “Ukraine is ready for a full ceasefire for the duration of the negotiations,” he added.

The letter, which is somewhat lengthy at one point says, “The choice is yours now. Enough of war” and then spells out that “Ukraine proposes to end this war.”

“This must be done honestly, with dignity, and with guarantees that the war will not be reignited,” Zelensky added. And then interestingly, “We see that the United States is fully focused on the issue of Iran, and it would be wrong to simply wait until the war in Europe returns to the center of its attention.“

The new letter was issued just Europe’s most influential powers of Germany, France, and the United Kingdom are trying to again jump-start Ukraine war peace talks, collectively operating as the E3 group.

They seek to implement a new framework aimed at engaging Russian President Vladimir Putin in direct negotiations to end the war. Reuters on Wednesday reports that “A window for dialogue is slowly opening between Russia and Europe on Ukraine, ​although it is likely to be months before talks can ‌begin, a German government official said at a briefing on Wednesday.”

It seems this window of opportunity is based to some degree on perceptions that the war tide and momentum is finally shifting in Ukraine’s favor, given the increasing effectiveness of Ukraine’s devastating cross-border drone attacks of late.

European leaders apparently view the current battlefield and political dynamics as having strengthened Kiev’s bargaining position, creating what they believe is the optimal moment to press Moscow for talks. It seems that Zelensky agrees, and believes that it’s time to get back to the negotiating table.

Putin on sidelines of the ongoing St. Petersburg International Economic Forum: We can control whole Donbass region AND strike a deal. One thing doesn’t contradict the other, why would you think that it does? — Putin to AP News Director

Keep reading

President Trump Announces Investigation into California’s Extremely Slow Vote Counts Just as Suspicious Late Drops Slash GOP Leads in Two Critical Races

President Trump is fed up with the election shenanigans in California and is taking action.

As The Gateway Pundit’s Jordan Conradson reported, highly popular reality TV star-turned-mayoral candidate Spencer Pratt and businessman Steve Hilton emerged on election night seemingly in good shape to advance past the open primary for Los Angeles Mayor and California Governor, respectively.

Pratt is currently leading Marxist LA City Councilwoman Nithya Raman and trailing Bass by a slim margin. Hilton leads all candidates for governor. Few votes have been tallied since election night, but the ones counted so far have been good for Democrats.

Are Democrats beginning to execute the steal?

Trump thinks so. On Thursday morning, Trump alleged “big cheating” by the Democrats and announced an investigation had been launched by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in LA.

There’s BIG cheating by the Dumocrats in California,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “Votes are all tied up. May not be in for weeks.”

“Under investigation by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Los Angeles. Why the vote counting DELAY???”

Keep reading