Democrats demanded Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court nomination be withdrawn over baseless sexual assault allegations under the mantra “believe all women.” Now that their own Senate candidate faces far more credible accusations, the party has gone silent.
The flip came Thursday after The New York Times exposed Graham Platner, Maine’s presumptive Democrat Senate nominee, with allegations from multiple ex-girlfriends of “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.”
The Times report centers on Lyndsey Fifield, a 40-year-old Virginian who worked in conservative circles and dated Platner from 2013 to 2015. Fifield — who has since accused the Times of delaying and twisting the story to benefit Platner — alleged that the Democrat candidate “could be rough with her … particularly when they were drinking.”
She also claimed he “regularly grabbed her by the shoulders — sometimes hard enough to leave marks — and, on one occasion, yanked her out of a cab by her wrist after an argument.”
The Times buried those allegations in the 22nd paragraph of its report.
Platner’s campaign told the outlet he “strongly disputes” Fifield’s claims but admitted he “too often self medicated with alcohol, and was a far from perfect boyfriend.” He called any other characterization “false” and “politically motivated.”
The allegations follow reports that Platner sent sexually explicit text messages to several women while married to his current wife.
His explanation when confronted with this fact tonight was that…she didn’t text *him* about the meaning of his own tattoo. As if she knew it, but he didn’t. And that somehow she’s the one lying about him calling it “my totenkopf” for years. https://t.co/ZVAG9dfj4e
— Guy Benson (@guypbenson) June 5, 2026
Within hours, Democrats dismissed Fifield’s allegations because of her work in Republican circles. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., reportedly said he’s “not impressed” with the Times report and that it “seems like a lot of nothing” from a “woman who works for right-wing political operations.”
Democrats are casting Platner’s accusers as unreliable after treating Kavanaugh’s less-than-credible accusers as gospel.
The evidence against Platner is far stronger than anything presented against Kavanaugh.
Platner doesn’t deny being in a relationship with Fifield. His campaign didn’t dispute some of Fifield’s claims, including that Platner allegedly said he would “rape” anyone who broke into his apartment “in a sexual way, not in a gay way.”
The Times reportedly obtained and reviewed texts between Fifield and Platner, Google Chat exchanges, Facebook messages with Fifield’s friends during and after the relationship, and diary entries from after the relationship ended.
Both parties confirmed they had a relationship. That’s already more than what existed during the Kavanaugh witch hunt.
In Kavanaugh’s case, there was no evidence whatsoever to corroborate his accusers’ claims of sexual impropriety, let alone that he had even met them.
Authors Mollie Hemingway and Carrie Severino noted the inconsistencies in the testimony of Kavanaugh’s chief accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, and how she couldn’t recall basic details about her alleged encounter with Kavanaugh. None of the people Ford named as being at the supposed party — including Ford’s lifelong friend Leland Keyser — recalled being at any such party.
Keyser also said she doesn’t know Kavanaugh, didn’t believe Ford’s story, and told the FBI that Ford’s allies tried pressuring her to change her statement to help Ford.
Claims by accusers Deborah Ramirez and Julie Swetnick also lacked any corroborating evidence and similarly collapsed under scrutiny.
Democrats and their media allies treated them all as credible anyway.
The Platner scandal confirms that the left doesn’t actually “believe all women.” They choose to believe allegations only when they can be weaponized to advance their quest for power.
Kavanaugh’s accusers were deemed believable because they could block a conservative judge from ascending to the Supreme Court. But since Platner’s accusers could threaten Democrats’ chances of defeating GOP Sen. Susan Collins, the party couldn’t care less.
Unless Democrats make a last-minute swap with a less-controversial leftist, the “party of women” will continue to defend Platner for as long as it takes.
