>Dough
TYB
Former Partners Describe Alleged Violent Conduct by Senate Candidate Graham Platner
Maine Wire StaffBy Maine Wire StaffJune 4, 2026Updated:June 4, 202612 Comments2 Mins Read1K Views
Share
New allegations about Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Graham Platner’s past conduct emerged this week after a New York Times report detailed accounts from former romantic partners who described volatile relationships, heavy drinking, and, in one instance, alleged physical intimidation.
According to reporting by Katie Glueck and Lisa Lerer of The New York Times, three women who previously dated Platner described relationships they characterized as emotionally turbulent and, at times, frightening. The report was based on interviews with more than two dozen people, including six former romantic partners.
One former girlfriend, Lyndsey Fifield, alleged that Platner sometimes grabbed her by the shoulders hard enough to leave marks, pulled her from a taxi during an argument, and on one occasion twisted her arm and confined her to a room until she calmed down. Fifield told the newspaper that the incidents left her shaken and fearful, though she also said he never punched her and did not cause lasting physical injury.
Platner’s campaign strongly disputed allegations of physical intimidation and denied characterizations that he engaged in physical altercations.
The Times also reported that Fifield described comments about violence and domination that she found disturbing. According to the newspaper, she alleged thatPlatner said that if someone broke into his home, he would rape the intruder as a way of demonstrating dominancerather than for sexual reasons. The report said Platner also maintained what Fifield described as a “warrior ethos” and frequently spoke about killing people he viewed as threats.According to The Times, Platner’s campaign did not dispute the remarks when questioned by the newspaper, although a friend interviewed by the publication said the comments sounded out of character.
The allegations add to a series of controversies that have dogged Platner’s campaign, including scrutiny over past online comments, reports concerning a tattoo that critics have linked to Nazi imagery, and revelations that he exchanged sexual messages with women while married.
The Times report noted that other former partners offered sharply different accounts, describing Platner as kind, supportive, and someone who never made them feel unsafe. Several women interviewed by the newspaper said they had positive experiences dating him and continue to support his Senate campaign.
https://www.themainewire.com/2026/06/former-partners-describe-alleged-violent-conduct-by-senate-candidate-graham-platner/
PB
>>24680898, >>24680920, >>24680935 Narcissistic Cannibals
>ALWAYS THE SAME FUCKING ACTORS FUCKING US OVER
New Senate Bill Wants to Fuse Israeli Intelligence with US Intel
Section 622 of the Intelligence Authorization Act Will Give Israeli Intelligence Total Access
The Weichert Brief
Jun 05, 2026
BLUF: Congress is quietly moving beyond supporting Israel andtoward legally embedding Israel into America’s defense and intelligence architecture. Through Section 224 of the FY27 NDAA and Section 622 of the Senate Intelligence Authorization Act, lawmakers are creating institutional ties that future presidents may find difficult to unwind. The real issue is not intelligence sharing itself—which already exists—but whether Congress should permanently codify a strategic relationship that previous administrations deliberately kept flexible.As younger Americans increasingly question traditional U.S.-Israel policies, these measures appear designed to ensure that future political shifts cannot fundamentally alter the partnership.
United States Representative Ro Khanna (D-CA) bathed himself in glory during the hours-long House Armed Services Committee (HASC) meeting on the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2027.
Essentially, Mr. Khanna was the only member of the HASC, from either party, who stood up for the United States. That’s because the HASC overwhelmingly voted to keep the controversial Section 224 of the proposed NDAA for FY 2027 in place. Khanna fought to have it pulled out.
Khanna’s colleagues ignored him.
As I showed in the previous piece on this topic, Section 224 is an unprecedented amendment to the NDAA, which funds our nation’s military-industrial complex.That amendment, if the NDAA ultimately passes into law, fuses Israel’s defense industrial and high-tech development bases with our own.
Neither the United Kingdom nor NATO enjoys that level of access to the United States’ defense industrial base.Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) has vowed to strip Section 224 out of the NDAA when it moves from committee to the Floor of the United States House of Representatives.
Now, for the double-whammy.
Section 622 of the Senate’s Intelligence Authorization Act
As the NDAA winds its way through the elephantine House legislative process, the Senate is moving ahead with S.4615, the Senate’s FY 2027 Intelligence Authorization Act. Just as with Section 224 of the proposed NDAA, the Senate has inserted Section 622 into the Intelligence Authorization Act, which funds America’s byzantine Intelligence Community (IC).
Section 622, the “US-Israel Intelligence Sharing Enhancement” component of S.4615, seems innocuous at first glance. After all, America and Israel are partners. There are plenty of nations with which the United States has deep intelligence-sharing alliances.
The Five Eyes are an example of such an alliance (since the Cold War, the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand have operated together on national security matters that affect them all).
But that is an alliance between the Anglosphere nations. And there are plenty of problems with Five Eyes today. Setting that aside, though, the argument has always been that the Anglosphere countries are more than allies because of their shared cultural, linguistic, and national heritages.
The Arab Center explains on its website that the “Anglosphere” connection is the defining reason behind the Five Eyes, as the shared language and culture create a “share-by-default” group.
https://substack.com/home/post/p-200719481
>New Senate Bill Wants to Fuse Israeli Intelligence with US Intel
>New Senate Bill Wants to Fuse Israeli Intelligence with US Intel
Indeed, CNN, of all places, did an interesting breakdown on the reasons behind the Five Eyes being America’s most trusted spy alliance–and why Anglosphere leaders never included Israel in the Five Eyes alliance. It goes down to the “Trust Economy” engendered by the Anglosphere versus the “Barter Economy” model of intelligence sharing employed by Israel.
Basically, the members of the Five Eyes rarely target one another. The US and Israel, meanwhile, have a long history of conducting aggressive espionage operations against each other, thereby precluding the absolute, unconditional trust exemplified in the Five Eyes network.
US intelligence, when dealing with Israel, engages in transactional behavior. One of the most important functions of US intelligence vetting processes is to meticulously scrub or filter raw data–notably data concerning US citizens before handing it over to Israeli intelligence partners.
That’s because Washington’s spy agencies historically fear that the Israelis will have zero compunction in leveraging any intelligence they may receive about American citizens and turning it back on the Americans in some way.
Another reason the Americans have avoided (until now) elevating Israel to a Five Eyes-like intelligence alliance is the clearly divergent strategic interests. Ultimately, Five Eyes countries march in lockstep.
Yes, there are differences. But those differences are nothing compared to the differences between US intelligence and Israeli intelligence.
For instance, Israeli intel is primed for regional geopolitics and for dealing with kinetic threats. It’s tactical. The Five Eyes focus is on a coordinated, global monitoring system aimed at major state actors, such as China and Russia.
No matter how many times the Israelis want to argue that their nation, too, is part of that club, they are not. They are allies and partners. They’re very close partners. But they simply aren’t part of the Anglosphere.
Anyway, multiple former CIA officers with whom I spoke about this very issue indicated to me that Section 622 was a profound shift in US-Israeli intelligence relations. None of them believed it was for the better.
Israeli Meddling
One high-ranking CIA officer recounted to me the story of when a group of Israeli intelligence officials, while visiting CIA headquarters, circumvented proper security procedures and gained entry into the building.
At the time, the group of Israeli VIPs was going to meet with senior Agency executives on the seventh floor of Langley. One of the members of the visiting delegation, however, was recently assigned to the Israeli embassy in Washington and, as such, had not undergone the proper clearance process to enter the building.
This retired individual recounted the awkward position he found himself in. Did he break protocols for America’s oldest ally, or did he follow procedure?
He followed procedures and denied the Israelis access, telling them they’d have to either reschedule until after the uncleared member went through the proper vetting or they’d have to leave their unauthorized guest with the gate guard outside.
One of the Israelis immediately pulled out a phone, called a high-ranking United States senator directly, and within ten minutes, the Israelis would be ushered through the gate–with the one person who had not been properly vetted by security being pushed throughwhile still being uncleared to enter Langley.
Stories like this are legion among former US intelligence professionals.
A friend and colleague of mine, former CIA Bin Laden Unit leader Dr. Michael Scheuer, has maintained for years that the Israelis were “more trouble than they were worth” when it came to intelligence sharing.
Indeed, Scheuer insisted in an interview with me for my National Security Talk podcast on Rumble that the Israelis would routinely acquire sensitive US intelligence and then use that intelligence to undercut CIA operations in the Mideast systematically. Operations that were usually going hard after al Qaeda!
Still another story comes from a dear friend who spent years in the US Army Intelligence.
According to this individual, who served in the Sunni Triangle of Iraq during the height of the Iraq War, there was an Israeli intelligence “spy ring” operating in his area of responsibility. He only discovered they were operating there because “they kept interfering with our operations” against elements of al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI).
These are just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to intelligence professionals sharing their old war stories as they relate to their encounters with Israeli intelligence. One begins to see why Langley correctly viewed its relationship with Mossad as merely transactional.
>What a shot. Amazing
>What an odd thing to say ….