Will Dem Support Of Nazi Platner Hurt Them In The Midterms?

The Democratic Party's decision to support Platner is a clear indication of their values and priorities

Dem party supports GOP candidate Platner despite Nazi tattoo and abuse allegations
GOP calls on Republicans to make Platner a 'poster child' for Dem values in midterms
NY Times accused of 'catch and kill' strategy to bury story on Platner's alleged abuse

Maine Senate Candidate Graham Platner Holds His Primary Election Night Event — Source: CJ Gunther / Getty

Will Dem Support Of Nazi Platner Hurt Them In The Midterms?

Can the Democratic Party’s willingness to support a candidate with a history of Nazi sympathies and abuse allegations be a turning point in the midterms?

In a recent episode of his podcast, Tony Katz delves into the controversy surrounding Graham Platner, a Republican candidate running for the US Senate in Maine. Platner has been accused of wearing a Nazi tattoo, which he knew was a Nazi symbol, and has a history of abusive behavior towards women. Despite this, the Democratic Party has chosen to support him, with some prominent figures even defending him.

“I’m not saying he has a Nazi tattoo, I’m saying he knew it was a Nazi tattoo,” Katz emphasizes. “The text messages prove he knew it was a Nazi tattoo. I’m calling him a Nazi, and I’m saying that any Republican who doesn’t call him a Nazi every day like the left has called us Nazis every day, including my mother and my rabbi, we’re out of our damn minds.”

Katz argues that the Democratic Party’s decision to support Platner is a clear indication of their values and priorities. “This is who they are,” he says. “If that’s what they’ve allowed to have happen, how does this not affect them in a negative way in a midterm that based on oil prices and based on inflation, and based on Trump’s unpopularity, they should be winning by a country mile everywhere.”

The episode also touches on the topic of the “catch and kill” strategy employed by the New York Times in their coverage of Platner’s allegations. Katz explains that this tactic involves promising a source exclusive access to their story in exchange for their cooperation, only to bury the story or delay its publication. In this case, the Times promised Lyndsey Fifield, a woman who accused Platner of abuse, that they would publish her allegations, but instead sat on the story until the last day of early voting in Maine.

“It’s not nice, it’s not a nice thing to do,” Katz says. “It’s not illegal, but it’s not nice. What The New York Times was trying to do was they reached out to Lindsay Fifield when they found out that she had this type of information, promised her that they were going to put her allegations out there along with all the evidence and testimonials that she gathered to corroborate her story.”

Katz also discusses the Democratic Party’s response to the allegations against Platner, arguing that they are more concerned with winning elections than with holding their candidates accountable for their actions. “If we’re gonna say it just directly, is that I’m a pretty happy man talking to Ed Morrissey of hotair.com,” he says. “Certainly the anti-Israel, anti-Semitic rhetoric has reached its peak, and it’s one thing to have an issue with Israeli policy. I’m a guy who has stated since October eighth, that Netanyahu has to go.”

The segment ends with Katz calling on Republicans to make Platner the issue in the midterms, using him as a poster child for the Democratic Party’s willingness to support candidates with problematic pasts. “This is the Todd Akin,” he says. “I don’t know if you were recall Todd in 2012, you should right. In Missouri, Democrats turned Todd Akin into the poster child of the 2012 cycle. It helped Barack Obama at the top of the ticket. It certainly helped Claire McCaskill win one final term in Missouri, despite the fact that she wasn’t very popular at the time.”