Inquirer.com – Zurich DR

Category: News

U.S. resumes strikes on Iran after 3 tankers hit in Strait of Hormuz,

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates — The U.S. military launched a series of strikes against Iran early Wednesday, hours after three merchant ships were struck in the waters off Oman in the Strait of Hormuz.

The renewed attacks from both sides threaten the interim deal reached last month, with the U.S. and Iran both saying the strikes violate that initial agreement. The fresh assaults will add to the difficulty of the negotiations aimed at fully reopening the strait, rolling back Tehran’s disputed nuclear program, and reaching a permanent end to the war launched Feb. 28.

In a statement posted to social media, U.S. Central Command said American forces launched the strikes “to impose heavy costs for targeting and attacking commercial shipping crewed by innocent civilians in an international waterway.”

“Iran’s demonstrated aggression was unwarranted, dangerous, and a clear violation of the ceasefire,” the command said in their statement.

The latest exchange followed a similar spate of Iranian attacks on shipping and U.S. retaliation that occurred late last month.

Hours after the three tankers were struck by projectiles, the United States revoked a license that had authorized the sale of Iranian oil as part of the interim deal to end the fighting between the U.S. and Iran.

The new assaults in the fuel-shipping waterway were the most in a single day since late April, according to the U.N. International Maritime Organization. The fresh attacks threatened to choke off the flow of traffic in the strait just as countries hoped to restore normal shipping practices and ease the global economic strain of the war.

A U.S. official said the license was revoked because Iran’s actions in the strait were unacceptable and needed to be met with consequences. The official spoke with the Associated Press on the condition of anonymity to share insight into the reasoning behind the move.

The Iranian mission to the United Nations did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

One tanker caught fire after getting hit

One tanker was traveling off the coast of Oman when it was hit and caught fire, the United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations center said. Iranian state television said the liquefied natural gas tanker came under attack after ignoring warnings but did not directly claim the assault.

The other two ships sustained some damage, but no one was injured, and both continued on their way, the U.K. maritime agency said.

Tehran, which has repeatedly declared that only its approved route through the strait is safe, is suspected of attacking other ships that have used another route close to the Omani shore.

Location details provided by the U.K. agency showed that all three attacks occurred off the coast of Oman or the neighboring United Arab Emirates, making it likely that the ships were using the route near Oman.

Talks between U.S. and Iran are on hold

The U.S. is eager to press ahead with negotiations with Iran aimed at fully reopening the strait, rolling back Tehran’s disputed nuclear program and reaching a permanent end to the war launched Feb. 28.

Previous attacks in the strait have sparked retaliatory strikes by the U.S. Iran then attacked Gulf Arab states.

In peacetime, a fifth of all traded oil and natural gas passed through the channel.

The license issued by the U.S. authorized the production, delivery and sale of Iranian oil through Aug. 21. U.S. Vice President JD Vance said at the time that lengthy talks with senior Iranian officials in Switzerland created a “good foundation for a successful final deal” to end the war.

U.S. sanctions on the purchase of Iranian oil had been in place since the 1979 Iranian Revolution. After the U.S. and Israel launched the war, and after the closure of the strait, the U.S. had authorized the temporary sale of Iranian oil at least twice as an incentive toward a deal.

Meanwhile, talks between Iran and the U.S. appeared to be on hold until after the burial of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who was killed at the beginning of the war.

Qatar calls attack a violation of international law

One tanker was carrying liquid natural gas south through the strait near Limah, Oman, when a projectile hit the left-side engine room and sparked a fire, the U.K. Maritime Trade Operations center said.

Majed Al-Ansari, a spokesperson for the Qatari Foreign Ministry, said the Qatari tanker Al Rekayyat was targeted in an “unacceptable attack” on international navigation and global energy security. He called it a “serious and explicit violation” of international law.

In a post on X, he said Qatar holds Iran “fully legally responsible.”

Later Tuesday, the U.K. maritime agency reported that an oil tanker was hit on its left side as it exited the strait near the Omani-Emirati border. A third tanker was struck by a drone off Oman, the agency said.

The Joint Maritime Information Center, a multinational body overseen by the U.S. Navy, told shippers Monday that the route around Oman “has been expanded and remains available for all traffic.”

Ships going to the north on the Iranian route must register with Tehran. Those going south work with Oman and the U.S.

Iran and the United States agreed as part of an interim deal to allow ships to pass without paying charges for 60 days. But Tehran insisted it must control the vessels’ routes and later charge fees for passage, which would upend decades of practice in the waterway.

The U.S. and many Gulf Arab states say they will not agree to Iran charging for passage through the strait.

The data firm Kpler reported that at least 108 ships crossed through the strait last weekend using various routes.

Mourners gather in Qom for Khamenei’s funeral

Authorities flew Khamenei’s body to the Shiite seminary city of Qom, where mourners honored him Tuesday.

Iranian state television aired live images of hundreds of thousands of people walking toward Jamkaran Mosque, just south of Qom, for the funeral service. Shiites believe the mosque once hosted Muhammad al-Mahdi, the 12th and last Shiite imam, who disappeared in the 9th century and is supposed to one day reappear to bring justice to the world.

Khamenei’s son, Iran’s new Supreme Leader Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei, has yet to make an appearance at the ceremonies, which began Saturday in Tehran. He is believed to be in hiding after reportedly being wounded in the airstrike that killed his father.

Khamenei’s body arrived late Tuesday in Najaf, Iraq, where it was received by senior officials from both countries. Processions are planned for Wednesday in Najaf and Karbala, the two holy cities of Iraqi Shiism. Iraq has a sizable Shiite population and is home to major Shiite religious sites and centers of learning.

Khamenei, who was 86, will then be returned to Iran to be buried Thursday at the Imam Reza shrine in Mashhad, his birthplace.

July 7, 2026
Farage says he will resign as U.K. lawmaker to trigger a special election

LONDON — Nigel Farage, the leader of the populist right-wing Reform UK party, on Tuesday said he would resign his seat in Parliament and run for reelection in his Clacton seat to answer criticism of his financial affairs.

The unexpected move comes after recent revelations about gifts and financial support received by Farage, both from a cryptocurrency billionaire and from a political ally who was once convicted of fraud in the United States.

“I have decided that the people of Clacton should be the judges of my actions,” Farage said in a statement that was broadcast on his party’s YouTube channel. “This will be a ‘people versus the establishment’ by-election,” he added, referring to a special parliamentary election.

The success of Farage, whose anti-immigration party has led in opinion polls for more than a year, was instrumental in destabilizing Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who announced his resignation last month.

But Farage has suffered several setbacks lately amid growing scrutiny of his financial affairs.

In May, it emerged that he had received an undisclosed gift of 5 million pounds (about $6.7 million) from a cryptocurrency billionaire, Christopher Harborne, a Briton who lives in Thailand.

Farage argues that the gift was unconditional, was made before he won a seat in Parliament in the general election in 2024, and there was no requirement to declare it. However, Daniel Greenberg, Parliament’s standards commissioner, has opened an investigation into whether the money should have been made public under rules that require new lawmakers to declare some financial benefits received in the 12 months before their election.

Over the weekend, the Sunday Times of London reported that Farage had separately failed to declare benefits provided by a political ally, George Cottrell, a convicted fraudster who served prison time in the United States.

According to the newspaper, Cottrell’s support included providing social media staff members who worked for Farage in the year before he was elected, as well as the use of a property rented by Cottrell near Buckingham Palace.

Farage has insisted he followed all of the rules and has accused journalists of “despicable behavior” and of hounding his family.

However, in his statement Tuesday, Farage suggested that the Sunday Times article had now triggered a second investigation, saying that, “Despite the fact that many of the things that were written in the article were inaccurate or irrelevant, yet another standards investigation is underway.”

If Greenberg finds that the gift from Harborne should have been declared, Farage might, under British parliamentary rules, have been suspended from Parliament and forced to fight for reelection in his parliamentary constituency of Clacton, in eastern England. So the announcement Tuesday effectively preempts that possible outcome, although it would not stop the findings being published.

Farage, a highly effective campaigner and a longtime disrupter of British politics, will likely be confident of winning the seat again, having achieved a majority of 8,405 votes in the 2024 general election. Polling suggests he remains popular in the area.

However, even a convincing victory there would not guarantee an end to the scrutiny of Farage and his finances as he attempts to convince the country he should become its next prime minister. The next general election must take place by 2029.

Reform UK has recently faced competition on its right flank from a far-right party called Restore Britain, which was founded by Rupert Lowe, once an ally of Farage, after a bitter public rift with him.

Despite Reform’s success in May in local elections in Wales, Scotland, and British municipalities in England, the party has also suffered some reverses. Last month it lost a crucial special parliamentary election in Makerfield, in northwest England, which was won by Andy Burnham, who is expected to succeed Starmer.

Earlier this year, it lost in another special election in nearby Gorton and Denton to an insurgent Green Party. And last year, it suffered a similar fate in Caerphilly in Wales, in a special election to the Welsh parliament, which was won by the center-left nationalist Plaid Cymru party.

In national polls, Reform’s support has fallen from about 30% last year to about 25% now, with Labour and the Conservatives around 20% each.

This article originally appeared in the New York Times.

July 7, 2026
Frontier fills Spirit Airlines’ void left at Philadelphia airport with new flight

Frontier Airlines has begun new nonstop daily service between Philadelphia International Airport and Detroit, taking over a route formerly operated by discount carrier Spirit Airlines.

The service began Sunday, the airline said, adding that it is offering a special introductory one-way fare of $79 between the two cities.

Frontier and other budget airlines such as Allegiant Air have moved to fill gaps in service since Spirit, a pioneer of cheap fares, ran out of cash and shut down May 2.

“We are pleased to grow our service at PHL, ensuring low-cost travel options remain available for consumers,” Josh Flyr, vice president of network and operations design at Frontier, said in a statement.

The airline is touting other new products, including UpFront Plus seating, an option with extra leg and elbow room in the first two rows of the aircraft, the airline said. UpFront Plus customers are guaranteed an empty middle seat.

Frontier carried about 3.1 million passengers into and out of PHL during 2025, ranking second after American, the airport’s dominant carrier, with over 20 million passengers last year.

It operates primarily from 17 gates in Terminal E.

The promotional $79 tickets must be bought before 11:59 p.m. July 12. They apply to select nonstop flights for travel between Aug. 3 and Sept. 2, according to Frontier.

Spirit Airlines had been in chapter 11 bankruptcy and was seeking a $500 million federal bailout to keep going. No deal was reached, so it closed and liquidated its fleet of planes. Spirit had high debt and was struggling under the weight of rising costs, especially of fuel.

July 7, 2026
AP-NORC poll: About 3 in 10 US adults believe Israel has committed genocide against Palestinians

NEW YORK — After decades of reliable bipartisan backing for Israel, a new AP-NORC poll reveals a dramatic erosion of support for the longtime U.S. ally, with rising opposition from Democrats and signs of division among Republicans.

The survey by the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research arrives at a moment when a once-consensus foreign policy issue is increasingly polarizing Americans along partisan and generational lines, driven by criticism for Israel’s conduct nearly three years after the outbreak of its latest war with Hamas in Gaza.

About one-third of U.S. adults — including roughly half of Democrats — believe that Israel has committed genocide against Palestinians during the war in Gaza, an accusation that’s been leveled by some human rights organizations and vehemently denied by Israel and the U.S. government. About 2 in 10 Americans say Israel has not and the rest, about half, don’t know enough to say.

A similar share, 30%, of Jewish adults say Israel has committed genocide, although about half, 49%, say it has not.

Harold Kalmus, a 69-year-old Democrat from Arden, Del., who describes himself as Jewish by birth, said he remembers being proud of Israel when he was younger. Not anymore.

“I realize that there is a threat from Hamas. And I realize they’re in a very difficult situation, but what they have done is just an unspeakable horror,” he said of Israel’s military action against the Palestinians. “They’re trying to wipe out a civilization as far as I’m concerned.”

The findings show sharply eroded views of Israel in the U.S., nearly three years after Hamas’ attack on Oct. 7, 2023, which left 1,200 people dead in Israel, mainly civilians, while 251 hostages were taken back to Gaza. More than 73,000 Palestinians have died in Gaza according to the Hamas-run Gaza Health Ministry, which doesn’t distinguish between civilian and militant deaths, including more than 1,000 killed since the beginning of the latest ceasefire. American sympathies had been shifting toward the Palestinians and away from the Israelis since around 2020, according to other polling, but has nose-dived since the latest war in Gaza began.

Many Americans, about 4 in 10, don’t know enough to say whether Israel’s immediate military response to Hamas’ attack or its ongoing military operations were justified. Among those who did have an opinion in each case, most say the initial retaliation was justified — but a majority think its current actions are not.

About three-quarters of Jewish adults said Israel’s initial response was justified, but only about 4 in 10 believe that about its ongoing operations.

Only about one-third of U.S. adults view Israel as an “extremely” or “very” important issue to them personally. But it’s been a searing topic in American politics as the relationship between the two countries remains tense, just four months before high-stakes midterm elections determine the balance of power in Congress for President Donald Trump’s final two years in office. Vice President JD Vance recently criticized Israeli leaders who have expressed frustration with Trump, while vocal critics of Israel recently defeated establishment-backed Democrats in New York and Colorado primaries.

Democrats’ support for Israel drops

The AP-NORC poll reveals a decisive shift within the Democratic Party.

About 58% of Democrats now say the U.S. is “too supportive” of the Israelis, up from 45% in an AP-NORC poll from January 2024 when former President Joe Biden was in office. That includes 51% of Jewish Democrats in the new poll.

Roughly 6 in 10 Democrats, 62%, say the U.S. is “not supportive enough” of the Palestinians, up from 49% in 2024. Younger Democrats — those 45 and younger — are still more likely than older ones to say that the United States is “not supportive enough” of the Palestinians, but older Democrats are catching up to their younger counterparts. About 57% of older Democrats now say the U.S. should do more for the Palestinians, up from 39% two years ago.

Joy Jennik, a 73-year-old Democrat from Brookfield, Wis., said she didn’t have strong opinions about the U.S. relationship with Israel until after Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack.

Now, she believes Israel is guilty of genocide.

“The Gaza Strip, there’s not a lot left of it. Those poor people are barely living,” said Jennik, a retired home economics teacher.

GOP stays behind Israel, but less so among young Republicans

Just a sliver of Republicans, 13%, describe Israel’s actions as genocide, although there is an apparent age gap. About 2 in 10 Republicans under 45 say Israel has committed genocide, while about 1 in 10 Republicans ages 45 and older say the same.

Overall, 60% of Republicans describe the U.S. support for Israel as “about right.” Only about 2 in 10 Republicans say that the United States is “too supportive” of the Israelis, although Republicans under 45 are more likely to say this.

The share of Republicans overall who say the U.S. is “too supportive” of Israel has not changed meaningfully since 2024, but the share who say the U.S. is “not supportive enough” has shrunk from 39% to 15%.

Mike Cardona, a 70-year-old Republican from suburban Phoenix, said he’s pleased with the level of support that the U.S. is giving Israel and rejects the notion that Israel has committed genocide.

“I wish they’d gone in harder and better,” Cardona, a retired industrial supply salesperson, said of Israel’s military action in Gaza. “Unfortunately, some innocents will be hurt, but Hamas and Hezbollah never took that into consideration when they were killing children and women in Israel.”

Netanyahu is broadly unpopular, while views of Mamdani are split

In interviews, several respondents emphasized that their criticism of Israel was focused on its leaders, especially Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is perceived as closely aligned with Trump after repeated clashes with Democratic presidents.

Overall, only 20% of U.S. adults have a favorable view of the Israeli prime minister, while about twice as many, 38%, have an unfavorable view. About 41% don’t know enough to have an opinion.

Netanyahu is particularly unpopular among Jewish adults: about 6 in 10 view him unfavorably, while about one-third see him positively.

Younger adults, regardless of party, are more likely than older adults to say they don’t have an opinion about Netanyahu. But while older Republicans see Netanyahu more positively than negatively, younger Republicans’ views tilt unfavorably.

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani has gained prominence as an outspoken critic of Israel, and 27% of U.S. adults have a favorable opinion of the 34-year-old democratic socialist. Another 28% of U.S. adults have an unfavorable opinion, while 44% don’t know enough to say.

Jewish adults, who overwhelmingly identify as Democrats, have a more positive view of Mamdani than of Netanyahu, with 44% viewing the New York City mayor positively, 39% viewing him negatively, and 17% saying they don’t know enough to say.

About half of Democrats overall have a favorable impression of Mamdani and only about 1 in 10 have an unfavorable view of him, while the rest, about 39%, don’t have an opinion.

Meanwhile, the U.S.-Israel relationship is not top of mind for many Americans as they think about the upcoming midterm elections.

For people like Michael Ripka, a 34-year-old stage hand from Casper, Wyo., who typically votes Republican, the economy is by far the most important thing on his mind.

“Everything is mad expensive,” he said. The conflicts in the Middle East, he added, is “100% a very big distraction.”

July 7, 2026
Rahm Emanuel to tell Israel its alliance with the U.S. cannot ‘survive as it has been’

Rahm Emanuel, the former Chicago mayor and potential Democratic presidential candidate, plans to use a speech in Tel Aviv on Wednesday to warn that America’s relationship with Israel is “not sustainable” unless the Israeli government sharply changes course.

Emanuel, according to draft remarks provided to the Washington Post, plans to offer criticism of all parties involved in the decades-long conflict between Israel and its Arab neighbors — warning that Israel has become a “pariah” under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, calling out “the corruption of the Palestinian leadership” and challenging the “unconditional support” the United States has offered Israel.

Emanuel, who is Jewish and whose father was born in Jerusalem, plans to tell the Israeli audience that the relationship between the United States and Israel is “at a crossroads” and cannot “stand or survive as it has been,” given the country’s harsh treatment of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.

“The United States cannot continue to finance and support that cynicism in silence,” Emanuel plans to tell the audience at Tel Aviv University. “You cannot fight indefinitely against a world that has stopped believing you have the right to fight. You must instead find a new sustainable path to peace, security, and economic prosperity.”

The debate over Israel and Palestinian territories is causing enormous upheaval in the Democratic Party, where negative views of Israel have shot up since its lethal invasion of Gaza following the Hamas attacks of Oct. 7, 2023.

Democratic lawmakers in New York and Colorado suffered primary defeats recently against political newcomers critical of their past backing of Israel, while Democrats weighing 2028 presidential runs are already facing tough questions on the Middle East. Party leaders have yet to find a way to navigate between those who still fundamentally support Israel, most of whom nonetheless criticize the Netanyahu government, and those who want to end all economic and military cooperation.

Emanuel may be in a particularly sensitive spot because his connections to Israel are notable. His uncle is buried in Jerusalem, and he served as a civilian volunteer for the Israeli military during the 1991 Gulf War. He also worked on Arab-Israeli peace as a top aide to presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.

Emanuel said in an interview that he opted to “come and be frank” by speaking in Israel, rather than “shooting spitballs from across the Atlantic.” In a possible shot at other Democrats considering presidential runs, he added, “I don’t think it takes a lot of courage to criticize Israel from the opinion pages of any publication or from the floor of the Senate.”

In his prepared remarks, the former congressman says the push for a “Greater Israel,” one that includes Gaza and the West Bank, is as “self-destructive and fanatical” as the demands for a Palestine stretching “from the river to the sea.”

Emanuel also plans to outline a three-part proposal: full diplomatic relations between Israel and its Arab neighbors, who will be responsible for standing up a credible Palestinian authority; economic investment to deepen connections between Israel and its Arab neighbors; and an end to the “American taxpayer’s subsidy of Israel’s defense budget.”

But the tone of his speech could be as important as the content. “Hear me now: Israel will be alone if its leaders choose to attempt to annex the West Bank and pursue the fantasy of a Greater Israel,” he plans to say. “America will not and cannot be complicit or complacent in that endeavor.”

In the interview, Emanuel said his central message is that the status quo cannot continue.

“I happen to think the alliance, if done right, serves American interests. But if it doesn’t, I’m going to say, ‘This is going to change,’” Emanuel said. “And if it doesn’t change, it can’t stay as is. This is not sustainable for the United States.”

Netanyahu comes in for particular criticism. “The prime minister and his government have led Israel into a dead end,” Emanuel plans to say.

Emanuel and Netanyahu have a tangled history. While working as Obama’s chief of staff, Emanuel challenged the prime minister on new housing in the West Bank, leading to headlines in Israel that Netanyahu called Emanuel and Obama adviser David Axelrod “self-hating Jews.”

Emanuel now wields that insult like a badge of honor, given Netanyahu’s low standing among Democrats. “I didn’t need a war to know that what he was going to do was going to lead to perpetual war. That’s what I said to him in 2009,” Emanuel said in the interview. “If there was a prediction I wanted to be wrong on, that was it.”

Still, the speech reads like a statement of tough love from a friend, one that finds the former mayor leaning on his connections to the nation to deliver blunt criticism. Emanuel plans to open by noting his uncle’s grave site on Jerusalem’s Mount of Olives and his father’s service in the Irgun, a Jewish underground militia, during the 1948 Arab-Israeli War.

“The most important thing a true friend can do is to tell the truth even when it’s painful,” he plans to say. “And today is a day for truth.”

Emanuel, unlike many critics of Israel, contends in his speech that Israel over the years has repeatedly offered the Palestinians sovereignty in exchange for security, only to be rebuffed.

Emanuel said his trip to Israel is part of a broader strategy to mount a nontraditional presidential campaign, should he “decide to take the dive into the deep end.”

“I’m not going to do a campaign the traditional way,” Emanuel said, adding that if he chooses to run, he will not make any announcement until after the 2026 midterms.

The dramatic shift in Democrats’ position on Israel began in the Biden administration. President Joe Biden, a traditional pro-Israel Democrat, flew to Israel to show support in October 2023 after Hamas militants surged over the Gaza border and killed some 1,200 people.

As Israel mounted an aggressive retaliatory military campaign that ultimately killed more than 70,000 Palestinians, Biden was increasingly besieged by progressive protesters at his events hurling chants of “Genocide Joe.”

Even with the 2028 election more than two years away, potential Democratic hopefuls are already facing questions about their stance toward Israel.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom in March referred to Israel as “sort of an apartheid state,” a remark he later walked back under pressure. Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker was sharply critical of AIPAC, the influential pro-Israel group, after it spent lavishly on political campaigns in his state.

Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear, asked in a Politico interview in March whether Israel was guilty of genocide in Gaza, responded, “That’s becoming one of those new litmus tests that we said we would never do as a party again.”

He added that he supports Israel and its right to exist but disapproves of Netanyahu’s handling of the Gaza war.

July 7, 2026
Platner should drop out of Maine’s U.S. Senate race after sexual assault allegation, Sanders says

PORTLAND, Maine — Sen. Bernie Sanders on Tuesday became the latest and most notable lawmaker to pull support for Maine Democratic U.S. Senate nominee Graham Platner following an allegation of sexual assault, adding to a chorus of calls for him to step aside as party leaders scramble to determine the next steps.

Sanders, a Vermont independent who caucuses with Democrats, has long backed Platner in the high-stakes race against Republican Sen. Susan Collins, but he said in a statement that he spoke with the candidate and “in light of these very serious allegations, I have recommended that he step aside.”

Platner, who denies the allegation, has not heeded the wave of calls to resign as the nominee. Instead, he posted a video on Monday saying he’s considering the next steps for his campaign while canceling town hall events.

Platner posted the video after reports that a woman who previously dated the first-time candidate said he drunkenly forced her to have sex after she told him to stop.

The allegation is the latest in a string a controversies Platner has faced and so far weathered since the oyster farmer and Marine veteran entered the race. But the seriousness of the assault claim has put the Maine contest — and Democrats’ ability to win control of the Senate — at risk, with even some of his strongest supporters questioning whether Platner should continue his campaign.

A Platner voter is ‘heartbroken’

Joanie Monteith, a passionate supporter from the southern Maine town of York who organized a trivia night about Platner in March, said through tears Tuesday that she was “numb” and “heartbroken” at the news. She was waiting for another public statement from Platner before making a decision about whether she could keep supporting him.

“I’m in tears. I’m numb and I’m waiting for what Graham has to say. I’m trying not to be a part of this public trial. And I’m heartbroken. And I’m heartbroken for him and his wife.”

She added she believes the allegations are serious.

“I’m not going to blame a victim. Because if this is true I feel very bad for the woman,” she said. “You just don’t know how to feel.”

Jenny Racicot, who lives in Maine, told Politico that Platner entered her home in 2021 while drunk and assaulted her. Racicot said she had been in an on-and-off relationship with Platner, but she cut off contact with him after that night and told him the incident wasn’t consensual. She said in a CNN interview on Monday evening that she opted not to fight back for fear of Platner, a former Marine, becoming more violent.

Another Maine voter, Lee Holman, said she wants Platner to stay in the race.

“I feel like the people of Maine have spoken,” the Democrat said. “If they wanted Janet Mills, they could have voted for her.”

She said the allegation against Platner may be legitimate, but she questions the timing. Democrats, she added, can be too quick to “throw the baby out with the bathwater” by calling on politicians facing allegations to resign.

“Every time we think we have a chance to snatch our democracy back, something gets in the way,” she said.

Replacing Platner may further divide Democrats

The pressure for Platner to withdraw from the Senate race has only increased given the short deadlines Maine law allows for replacing general election candidates. There is no mechanism for Democrats to remove Platner from the ballot, meaning Platner must first opt to drop out of the general election before a replacement can be selected. The deadline to withdraw is 5 p.m. on July 13.

Just who should replace Platner if he drops out appeared to already be further splintering Democrats. Some argued the next Democrat should echo Platner’s progressive messaging, pointing to his success at rallying voters across the state. Others cautioned that having ties to Platner will only doom an already uphill campaign against Collins.

Joe Baldacci, a Democratic state senator, said he’s concerned about what the latest allegations will do to the voter excitement over the past year.

“I think the major concern, even with a nominee, a new replacement, is that person is going to start very much behind the eight ball,” Baldacci added.

Gov. Janet Mills, who sought the Democratic nomination but dropped out before the June 9 primary, could be considered as a nominee. Mills was supported by Democratic Senate leader Chuck Schumer but abandoned her campaign, saying she couldn’t raise the money needed to compete.

Another possible replacement is Troy Jackson, Maine’s former state senate president, who unsuccessfully ran to be the Democratic gubernatorial nominee earlier this year with the backing of Platner and Sanders.

While he hasn’t publicly said he’d run for the Maine Senate seat, U.S. Rep. Ro Khanna threw out his name as someone who stands up for “progressive values” after the California Democrat withdrew his support for Platner.

Other names include Nirav Shah, the former director of Maine’s Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Shah came in second in this year’s Maine Democratic gubernatorial primary, where he was considered more moderate compared with Jackson.

In a statement Tuesday, Shah said he’s “evaluating” whether he should enter the race should Platner step aside.

Other potential replacements include Shenna Bellows, the current Maine Secretary of State; Dan Kleban, founder of Maine Beer Company; Maine U.S. Rep. Jared Golden, who is not running for reelection; and Hannah Pingree, currently Maine’s Democratic gubernatorial nominee.

July 7, 2026
U.S. gave Tehran details on Iranian asylum seekers, lawsuit alleges

A lawsuit filed Tuesday in Washington alleges the Trump administration violated U.S. law by providing Iran’s government with confidential information detailing the asylum applications for Iranians it planned to deport.

The extraordinary claim, outlined in court papers submitted by the Iranian American Legal Defense Fund and Public Citizen Litigation Group, contends that the materials it alleges were shared with the Iranian government could jeopardize the lives of pro-democracy protesters along with members of religious minorities and the LGBTQ community and their families.

An annual State Department report on human rights in Iran, released last year under the Trump administration, called the situation in Iran “severe” and worsening, with political protest movements and religious minorities targeted by authorities. Previous U.S. administrations have reported that Iranian authorities have targeted LGBTQ people for prosecution and subjected them to humiliating treatment.

“The law couldn’t be more clear that information in asylum applications is protected,” said Michael Kirkpatrick, a Public Citizen attorney involved with the complaint. He called the case “potentially a matter of life and death” for Iranian asylum seekers who end up deported back to Iran.

Since returning to office last year, immigration hard-liners in the Trump administration have taken several steps that opponents say has eroded the United States’ established practice of allowing migrants who say they are fleeing persecution to seek asylum in the country. The administration and its allies have argued that the asylum system had become overwhelmed and, in some cases, abused by individuals making dubious claims.

The lawsuit names as defendants Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin, and acting director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) David Venturella, along with the agency each leads.

Spokespeople for the three agencies did not provide comment. The Iranian Mission to the United Nations did not respond to a request for comment.

The lawsuit seeks an end to the alleged practice and to require that the U.S. government notify anyone whose personal information was shared with the Iranian government without their consent. It is not immediately clear how the government might respond or whether the case would succeed.

Despite long-running tensions between the U.S. and Iranian governments, which escalated into all-out warfare in February, the Trump administration has deported more than 100 Iranians back to the country since President Donald Trump’s return to office in 2025, according to advocate groups that track deportations and reports in the Iranian news media.

Iranian officials said last year that they had reached an agreement with the Trump administration to accept approximately 400 Iranian deportees. More recently, the administration included at least one Iranian national among a group of people deported from the United States to the Central African Republic, lawyers for the group have said.

The lawsuit filed Tuesday in U.S. District Court in D.C. includes accounts of alleged secret meetings between officials from the Trump administration and representatives of the Iranian government dating to March 2025.

Because the United States does not have diplomatic relations with Iran, the government in Tehran is represented in Washington by the Iranian Interests Section at the Embassy of Pakistan.

Kirkpatrick told the Washington Post that the allegations contained in the lawsuit are based, in part, on the account of an Iranian government official who is assigned to the Pakistani Embassy and accounts from deportees who have said that Iranian officials knew details from their applications seeking asylum in the United States.

The lawsuit does not identify the Iranian government officials or the deportees to whom attorneys spoke. The Pakistani Embassy did not respond to a request for comment.

At the initial meeting in March 2025, the lawsuit alleges, State Department officials met with representatives of the Iranian Interests Section in Washington. The lawsuit alleges that the discussion encompassed the Trump administration’s desire to deport Iranians to Iran, with the administration officials handing over a list of roughly 150 names. The lawsuit does not identify by name any of the meeting’s participants.

After this encounter, the lawsuit alleges, it was agreed that officials from ICE and the Iranian government representatives would hold monthly meetings so that the administration could share information about Iranians in U.S. custody.

ICE falls under the Department of Homeland Security, which at that time was led by Kristi L. Noem. Mullin took over as secretary in March after Trump removed Noem from the post. Noem now serves as the special envoy to the Shield of the Americas, a State Department position. The State Department did not respond when asked if she wanted to comment.

The lawsuit also alleges that while in-person meetings between ICE officials and Iranian officials were halted after Feb. 28, when the U.S. and Israel started the war with Iran, ICE officials continued to send documentation to the Iranians.

Roughly 115 Iranian nationals are believed to have been sent back to Iran on three U.S. deportation flights, according to advocacy organizations that track the deportations. The most recent is said to have occurred Jan. 26, only weeks after anti-government protests there were met with a severe response that is estimated to have left thousands dead.

Trump had earlier this year expressed sympathy with the protesters, telling them on Jan. 13 that “help is on the way.”

It is not clear how many of those deported back to Iran had asylum claims pending before the U.S. government. Lawyers for some of the deported Iranians have said that people from at-risk groups were among those deported on the flights.

July 7, 2026
British military says second ship hit in Strait of Hormuz

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates — The British military says a second ship has been hit in the Strait of Hormuz.

The United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations center made the announcement Tuesday, hours after it said a tanker traveling off the coast of Oman in the strait was struck by a projectile and caught fire. It was the latest attack targeting a vessel moving through the narrow mouth of the Persian Gulf.

The agency said the second ship was believed to have sustained structural damage, but no one was injured.

Iranian state television said the first ship, a liquefied natural gas tanker, came under attack after ignoring warnings but did not directly claim the assault.

Tehran, which has repeatedly declared that only its approved route through the strait is safe, is suspected of attacking other ships that have used another route close to the Omani shore.

The U.S. is eager to press ahead with negotiations with Iran aimed at fully reopening the strait, rolling back Tehran’s disputed nuclear program and reaching a permanent end to the war launched Feb. 28. Previous attacks in the strait have sparked retaliatory strikes by the U.S. Iran then attacked Gulf Arab states.

In peacetime, a fifth of all traded oil and natural gas passed through the channel.

Meanwhile, talks between Iran and the U.S. appeared to be on hold until after the burial of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who was killed at the beginning of the war. Mourners at his funeral have called for the death of U.S. President Donald Trump.

Authorities flew Khamenei’s body to the Shiite seminary city of Qom, where mourners honored him Tuesday.

Tanker struck in latest attack in strait

The United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations center said the tanker was hit near Limah, Oman, in the strait. The UKMTO said the projectile hit the port side of the vessel as it tried to travel south out of the strait toward the Gulf of Oman.

The agency said there were no environmental effects from the strike and that authorities were investigating.

Iranian state TV, quoting anonymous sources, implied that Tehran carried out the assault on a tanker it said was carrying natural gas from Qatar. However, there was no official claim from the Islamic Republic for the attack.

Majed Al-Ansari, a spokesperson for the Qatari Foreign Ministry, said targeting the Qatari tanker, Al Rekayyat, in the strait was an “unacceptable attack” on international navigation and global energy security. He called it a “serious and explicit violation” of international law.

In a post on X, he said Qatar holds Iran “fully legally responsible” for the attack.

Iran’s joint military command warned last Thursday that all oil tankers moving through the strait must use its approved routes. It also said that interference by U.S. forces in the strait “will be met with a rapid and decisive reaction.”

But the Joint Maritime Information Center, a multinational body overseen by the U.S. Navy, told shippers Monday that the route around Oman “has been expanded and remains available for all traffic.”

Speaking Monday at the White House, Trump warned Iran that it would need to “make a deal, or we’re going to finish the job.”

“I’d rather make a deal, because I don’t want to affect 91 million people,” Trump said. “We can knock down their bridges in one hour. We can knock out their energy supply.”

Iran and the United States agreed as part of an interim deal to allow ships to pass without paying charges for 60 days. But Tehran insisted it must control the routes of the vessels and later charge fees for passage, which would upend decades of practice in the waterway.

The U.S. and many Gulf Arab states say they will not agree to Iran charging for passage through the strait. An effort by Oman and a United Nations agency to launch a new route near Oman’s shore earlier sparked attacks across the Mideast.

The data firm Kpler reported that over last weekend at least 108 ships crossed through the strait using various routes.

Mourners gather in Qom for Khamenei’s funeral

Iranian state television early Tuesday aired live images from a helicopter of hundreds of thousands of people walking toward Jamkaran Mosque, just south of Qom, for a funeral service for Khamenei. Shiites believe the mosque once hosted the Muhammad al-Mahdi, the 12th and last Shiite imam, who disappeared in the 9th century and will one day reappear to bring justice to the world.

Images of Khamenei and his son, Iran’s new Supreme Leader Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei, were displayed on banners and posters held by mourners. Mojtaba Khamenei has yet to make an appearance in the funeral ceremonies, which are unfolding over several days. He is believed to be in hiding after reportedly being wounded in the airstrike that killed his father.

At the height of the war, before an April ceasefire, Israel targeted top Iranian leaders, in at least one case likely using their public appearances to fix their position. It has also threatened to kill the younger Khamenei.

Authorities have shut down streets, airspace and daily life for the mourning, which began Saturday and will end Thursday as Khamenei is buried at the Imam Reza shrine in Mashhad, his birthplace. Khamenei was 86.

July 7, 2026
NATO unveils billions in arms deals to prove its firepower as Trump arrives in Ankara

ANKARA, Turkey — President Donald Trump arrived in Ankara Tuesday afternoon for the NATO summit, as the transatlantic military alliance was announcing billions in arms deals in an attempt to appease the mercurial U.S. leader.

Trump was expected to head first to the presidential compound of Turkish leader Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, a close ally who is hosting this year’s gathering.

Just before Air Force One touched down in Ankara, NATO showcased a series of military projects worth billions of dollars — an investment that the alliance’s secretary-general, Mark Rutte, called “money well spent.” An energized Rutte was speaking to government ministers and defense industry officials at a forum billed as NATO’s “big reveal,” to the thrum of techno music and a slick video display.

NATO as an organization does not own any weapons — these are the property of the 32 member countries — but it does have a fleet of 14 AWACS early warning radar surveillance planes that are about 50 years old, along with some newer surveillance drones.

A deal to replace the aging planes was announced Tuesday. Swedish manufacturer Saab will be supplying up to 10 new GlobalEye surveillance aircraft for a 10-nation consortium, Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson announced.

“It’s a moment of great pride,” he said, noting that the twin-engine aircraft would be “made within the alliance for all the alliance.”

Some of the projects will be paid for with funds from a system of cheap loans for defense purposes set up by the European Union, comprising up to $170 billion raised on capital markets.

“We need to ensure that we are translating our economic might into military capabilities, putting the cash to work from defense plans to drones, from money to missiles and interceptors,” Rutte said.

Trump has branded NATO a “paper tiger” that would cease to function without American arms and leadership. At the forum on Tuesday, Michael Duffy, a U.S. undersecretary of defense, said “the reality is that we need production increases across the board.”

“We will be looking to increase our exports to those who are looking to buy our equipment, and we’ll also be looking to partner with the expansion of production capacity here in Europe,” he said.

Defense sales announced

Representatives from 15 nations shook hands and patted shoulders on a vast podium under the NATO logo as they announced a multinational effort to buy air-to-air refueling and transport planes from Airbus.

Then Rutte announced a four-country effort to purchase as many as five new Triton surveillance drones to add to NATO’s small fleet.

“It is genuinely made in NATO, and creating jobs on both sides of the Atlantic,” he said.

Rutte told reporters on the eve of the military alliance’s two-day summit in Turkey that “we will announce tens of billions in new contracts that will provide the crucial kit we need to deter and defend.”

However, at Tuesday’s event, no dollar figures were given and the display included some projects long since agreed.

The defense industry splash comes a few weeks after Rutte tried to ease U.S. concerns about military spending at NATO with a new pitch using a chart labeled “The Trump Trillion” — showing $1.2 trillion in spending by European allies and Canada since 2017.

Far from being impressed, Trump appeared unmoved, saying he was still disappointed at some NATO allies’ refusal to join the Iran war, which he had launched alongside Israel without consulting them.

“We don’t need their money — we don’t need anything,” Trump said. “I just want loyalty.”

Debate over jet sales to Turkey

The summit is being held in President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s sprawling palace compound in Ankara, and Trump has suggested he would come bearing gifts for the Turkish leader.

Speaking Monday on the morning show “Fox & Friends,” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu urged the U.S. not to sell F-35 fighter jets to Turkey, saying that Erdogan “calls openly for the annihilation of Israel.”

Turkey and Israel have acrimonious relations. Erdogan frequently accuses Israel of committing genocide in its war in Gaza, triggered by the deadly Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas-led attack on southern Israel.

Turkey was barred from the F-35 program in 2019 after it purchased Russian-made S-400 missile defense systems. However, Trump, who has warm relations with Erdogan, has hinted ahead of his planned visit to Ankara that the sales could soon resume.

Netanyahu said selling Turkey F-35s would “upset the power balance in the Middle East, which is ultimately guaranteed by Israeli air superiority and also, I think, by America’s posture in the Middle East.”

Israel’s Air Force depends on hundreds of U.S. fighter jets, including F-35s, F-16s and F-15s.

Turkey beefed up security and banned protests in Ankara during the summit, but a small group of demonstrators gathered on Tuesday in the capital. They were quickly surrounded by police, and a legal association said 22 students affiliated with the leftist Turkish Workers Party and three lawyers had been detained.

Seeking a stronger Europe for a stronger NATO

The focus of the summit is a stronger Europe for a stronger NATO. The Trump administration has warned the allies that they must handle Europe’s security alone as the United States focuses on China and the Indo-Pacific region.

The Pentagon wants a reboot and is promoting what it calls “NATO 3.0,” a vision of the alliance in which Europe assumes greater responsibility for its own defense, freeing the U.S. to concentrate on other priorities.

But hiking defense spending means increasing taxes or diverting resources from other priorities. U.K. Defense Secretary John Healey unexpectedly quit last month, saying the British government was not willing to spend at a time of rising threats.

Concern is mounting among some northern and central eastern countries that Russia might be preparing a hybrid attack — a combination of conventional warfare with tactics like cyberattacks — on the continent as Russian President Vladimir Putin struggles to secure victory in Ukraine.

Keir Starmer’s office said the British leader will be “focused on building a stronger and more European NATO” on what is likely to be his last foreign trip as prime minister.

Starmer, who announced his resignation June 22, has faced criticism from military leaders, opposition politicians and some in his center-left party for the slow rate of increase in U.K. military spending.

His government has committed to reach the NATO budget target of spending 3.5% of gross domestic product on defense by 2035 but does not have a concrete plan to get there. Its current spending plan will see that spending hit 2.7% of GDP by 2029.

July 7, 2026
The demand for purity in Trump’s GOP comes from the death of the party’s moderate wing

With the 2026 midterm elections shaping up to be one of the most consequential in recent memory, President Donald Trump has gone on offense — not only against Democrats, but also against Republicans who he has accused of disloyalty. In fact, in recent primary elections, Trump has targeted candidates in his own party, from those running for state office to U.S. senators seeking reelection, including John Cornyn and Bill Cassidy.

Most of those targeted by Trump have lost, which has sent a clear message: there is no longer room for debate within the GOP; only complete allegiance to MAGA orthodoxy — and by extension to Trump himself — is acceptable. This is a far cry from the GOP of yesteryear, which comfortably included staunch conservatives like Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan, as well as a robust moderate-to-liberal wing centered in the Northeast, upper Midwest and on the West Coast. In Pennsylvania and New Jersey alone, moderate Republicans like Hugh Scott Jr., Arlen Specter, Thomas Kean Sr. and Christie Whitman, routinely won Senate and gubernatorial elections into the 21st century.

In fact, an often-forgotten chapter in the career of Richard Nixon — the president most often compared with Trump — vividly illustrates that the ideological boundaries in the GOP were once quite malleable. Nixon regularly shapeshifted and operated across multiple wings of the GOP as he rose from congressman to senator to vice president, and finally, to president. Yet, as Republicans have become more ideologically rigid, such moves have become increasingly difficult, replaced by debates over who qualifies as a “real Republican” — and who is a Republican in Name Only (RINO).”

The Richard Nixon who embarked on a political career in 1945 was nothing like the figure who resigned the presidency in disgrace three decades later. When he launched his first campaign in California’s 12^th Congressional District, Nixon pledged to local Republicans that he would wage an “aggressive, vigorous campaign on a platform of practical liberalism” to defeat the popular incumbent congressman, Jerry Voorhis.

At this time, Nixon modeled himself on Republican Harold Stassen, the former “boy wonder” governor of Minnesota. Stassen had built a national reputation in the late 1930s for his bipartisan “middle way” approach to governance, which blended fiscal discipline, civil service reform and bipartisan labor legislation. By 1943, when he resigned from the governorship to serve in the Navy during World War II, Stassen had become one of the country’s most prominent progressive Republicans.

In Stassen’s success, Nixon saw a model for how a newcomer could win over liberal and independent voters in California. He wrote to the Minnesotan, “I have been very interested in following your campaign to liberalize the Republican Party because I feel strongly that the party must adopt a constructive progressive program in order to merit the support of voters.” Key to this program was retooling the principles of Democrat Franklin D. Roosevelt’s vaunted New Deal instead of rejecting them outright like many conservative Republicans did.

This formula included accepting popular New Deal programs like Social Security — and even bolstering them. It also involved advocating against American isolationism and in favor of increased international cooperation. On labor rights — another thorny issue — Nixon, like Stassen, sought a middle ground: he supported arbitration to avoid strikes, while balancing the interests of workers and management. In a campaign speech, Nixon claimed that he “would not be a candidate if he were not strongly in favor of unions and small business.”

This platform proved successful for Nixon, who the Minneapolis Star Tribune dubbed a “Stassen Candidate.”

Shortly after he upset Voorhis and became the representative-elect for the 12^th District, a former Whittier College classmate wrote to Nixon to offer “hearty congratulations” — despite being a Democrat who hadn’t voted for him. Nixon’s progressive message resonated with his former classmate, who expressed hope not only for Nixon’s success but “for the success of the progressive and liberal elements” within the Republican Party.

In the coming years, Nixon would dash this hope as he illustrated the ease with which politicians moved between ideological camps in the GOP. During his early years in Congress, Nixon hung his hat not on the progressive vision of Stassen, but on staunch anti-Communism and red baiting. In 1947, Nixon joined the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC), where his pursuit of former State Department official Alger Hiss generated national attention. The case helped transform Nixon from an anonymous freshman congressman into one of the nation’s most prominent anticommunists.

In 1950, Nixon further cemented his anti-Communist reputation during a successful Senate campaign against Rep. Helen Gahagan Douglas, who he portrayed as soft on Communism by repeatedly linking her voting record to that of left-wing Congressman Vito Marcantonio.

Nixon’s reputation as an anti-Communist crusader compelled Dwight Eisenhower to select him for the 1952 GOP ticket as an olive branch to disgruntled conservatives after he beat their preferred candidate for the nomination, Ohio Sen. Robert Taft.

Eisenhower’s election was a victory for progressive Republicans as he promised an era of “Modern Republicanism” — which paired a commitment to free enterprise with a belief that the government had an obligation to improve society and provide a basic social safety net.

The GOP’s right flank derided this philosophy, and Nixon often spent time mediating between the two wings of the party. His ability to move comfortably between the camps reflected the ideological flexibility that still characterized the Republican Party during the 1950s.

Made By History sponsors. FOR USE ON MADE BY HISTORY STORIES ONLY.Inquirer Staff

Yet, even as he tried to reassure conservatives, Nixon embraced Modern Republicanism; he represented the Eisenhower administration abroad, including during his highly publicized exchanges with Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev. This engagement reflected the desire to contain communism through diplomacy and alliances, and the administration’s internationalist approach.

Domestically, Nixon served as the administration’s point man on civil rights, supporting measures such as the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and overseeing efforts to combat employment discrimination through his leadership of the President’s Committee on Government Contracts. In 1958, Martin Luther King Jr. expressed his belief that “Nixon would have done much more to meet the present crisis in race relations than President Eisenhower has done.”

In 1960, Nixon embarked on his first presidential campaign. During an October question-and-answer session at the University of Southern California, the vice president turned to the question of whether he considered himself a liberal or a conservative.

He started by offering a definition of liberalism from Roosevelt. “A liberal is a man who wants to build bridges over the chasms that separate humanity from a better life,” Nixon explained. To him that meant, “we’re all liberals … We all want a better life.” Nixon concluded his answer by describing himself as a “practical progressive” — an echo of the “practical liberalism” he embraced during his 1946 campaign.

Nixon went on to lose that race narrowly. But in 1968, he rebounded, by once again successfully navigating the party’s competing factions. He appealed to conservatives with his Southern Strategy and rhetorical emphasis on “law and order,” while reassuring moderates that he remained an experienced and pragmatic Republican.

As president, he did some things that were progressive by today’s standards, including enacting the first federal affirmative action program and signing the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts. Simultaneously, however, he tangled with the liberal wing of his party over Vietnam and several Supreme Court appointments, and he vetoed legislation to provide federally funded daycare for children.

Nixon is typically remembered for helping to usher in the populist conservative tide that would eventually sweep GOP politics. Today, he’s often compared with Trump because of his embrace of white grievance politics, his demands for personal loyalty and his abuse of power.

Yet, his career also highlights how the Republican Party once had a vibrant and popular progressive and moderate wing. When Nixon launched his career, the idea of branding someone a RINO would have been far-fetched because the GOP comfortably managed to include staunch conservatives like Taft, as well as progressives like Stassen. The progressive or moderate wing of the party survived into the 1990s and 2000s; in Pennsylvania, Specter won the first of five Senate terms in 1980, while in New Jersey, Kean and Whitman both served as governors in the 1980s and 1990s.

Yet, their careers tell the story of what happened as the brand of populist conservatism that Nixon capitalized on to win the presidency gained steam: In 2009, Specter switched parties and became a Democrat for his last years in the Senate, and Whitman is now a national co-chair of the Forward Party, and has endorsed Democrats in the last three presidential elections.

Their departures reflected the rise of a new hard-line conservative Republican base with little tolerance for moderation or compromise. The collapse of the GOP’s liberal wing made today’s battles of who counts as a “real Republican” not just possible, but inevitable.

Gaetano V. Della Torre is a New Jersey-based historian and educator. His article “Nixon’s Practical Liberalism: How Richard Nixon Tapped Harold Stassen’s Progressive Vision in 1946” is forthcoming in the Southern California Quarterly.

Made by History takes readers beyond the headlines with articles written and edited by professional historians. Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of The Inquirer.

July 7, 2026