Graham Platner, the 41-year-old Democratic Senate hopeful in Maine who built his insurgent brand on attacking the "Epstein Elite," received a $20,000 grant from a family foundation whose board member appears in recently released Department of Justice files related to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
Platner, who is running in the Democratic primary against Governor Janet Mills for a shot at incumbent Republican Susan Collins, took the grant from the Stavros Niarchos Foundation in 2021 to fund an oyster farm he operated, according to an article from the Maine Small Business Development Centers.
The foundation currently lists Spyros Niarchos as a board member. Spyros Niarchos has been described by Greek newspaper Documento as a member of the "inner circle" of Jeffrey Epstein. He appeared in several of the DOJ files released in recent months.
That's a problem for a candidate whose entire pitch involves pointing fingers at the powerful for their proximity to Epstein.
Platner targeted Collins specifically for not voting to release the Epstein files, the Daily Mail reported. He accused her of "protecting pedophiles and abusers" and publicly asked, "whose bidding is she doing?"
Strong words from a man whose oyster farm was bankrolled by the family of someone who shows up in those very files.
The Stavros Niarchos Foundation was established after the death of Greek shipping magnate Stavros Niarchos I in 1996. The family's entanglements with Epstein, however, extend well beyond a foundation letterhead. The shipping mogul's grandson, Stavros Niarchos III, was also named in the files and co-hosted a 2013 Halloween party to which Epstein was invited. Niarchos III, who has dated Paris Hilton and is now married to Dasha Zhukova, the ex-wife of former Chelsea football club owner Roman Abramovich, occupies the kind of rarefied social orbit where Epstein thrived.
The released files paint a picture of Spyros Niarchos's proximity to Epstein that goes beyond casual acquaintance. In a January 2018 conversation between Epstein and a redacted individual, Epstein asked about Niarchos:
"Is there a new boy?"
The redacted person replied that there was "an older man" and added, "You will be proud of me." Epstein called Niarchos "very interesting" and noted they "shared a mutual friend in the 80s," whom he described as a "beautiful Venezuelan girl."
By April 2018, the exchanges grew more disturbing. Epstein emailed a redacted person with a request:
"I need a girls with great task to help decorators. Help dinners, and flowers design etc the island. HELP."
The redacted person responded by asking what nationality and age Epstein wanted, adding: "I am in Saint Moritz with Spyros now!" Epstein's answer: "up to 30 years."
The appearance of an individual's name in the files is not necessarily evidence of wrongdoing. But when a candidate builds his entire campaign on Epstein accountability, the standard he set for others applies to him, too.
The Niarchos Foundation grant is not the first headache for the Platner campaign. It may not even be the biggest one. Last year, a video surfaced showing Platner with what was identified as a Nazi SS symbol tattooed on his chest, reportedly obtained during a drunken visit to a tattoo parlor in Split, Croatia, in 2007. Platner released a statement last fall insisting he was unaware of the symbol's meaning:
"I absolutely would not have gone through life having this on my chest if I knew that – and to insinuate that I did is disgusting. I already had the tattoo covered with a new design."
He later showed off the replacement tattoo in a video posted on X, describing it as "a Celtic knot with some imagery around dogs, because my wife Amy and I, love dogs."
Then there's the Reddit history. Platner has come under fire for posts in which he reportedly asked why "black people don't tip" and suggested that women who are raped in the Army should be careful about how much they drink. On the latter, Platner told local station WGME:
"I made that comment in 2013. I had just come out of the infantry, which was, at the time, all male. I rarely interacted professionally with women in the service."
The explanation is almost more revealing than the original comment. The defense amounts to: I said something indefensible about sexual assault victims because I hadn't spent enough time around women. Platner's campaign dismissed the controversies as politically motivated, timed to coincide with establishment competition entering the race.
"[My donors] know that this is all nonsense. It is no surprise that these stories dropped within days of DC's chosen candidate getting into this race."
Democratic Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, who favors Governor Mills in the primary, had avoided a public endorsement until after the tattoo story broke. Then he declared Mills "the best candidate to replace Susan Collins." Bernie Sanders, meanwhile, endorsed Platner to "fight oligarchy."
The Democratic primary in Maine has become a microcosm of the party's broader identity crisis:
Platner drew crowds of 500 in Ellsworth and 200 in Caribou. He clearly has an audience. But audiences don't survive the kind of compounding scrutiny that comes from Nazi tattoo stories, Reddit posts about race and sexual assault, and financial ties to the family of an Epstein associate, all landing in the same campaign cycle.
The core issue here isn't the $20,000. It's the hypocrisy. Platner positioned himself as the candidate brave enough to name names and demand accountability for anyone who brushed against Epstein's world. He attacked Susan Collins for insufficient zeal on the Epstein files. He branded himself the anti-establishment warrior who would expose the "Epstein Elite."
The records showed that the foundation of an Epstein associate's family funded his business. His campaign has not provided a public response, and neither has the Stavros Niarchos Foundation.
The left loves to construct moral hierarchies. They decide who gets to lecture, who gets to accuse, and who must answer. Platner wanted to be the one asking the questions. Now the questions are pointed at him, and the silence is conspicuous.
When you make Epstein your campaign issue, you don't get to dismiss your own Epstein-adjacent funding as "nonsense." You opened that door. You walked through it with cameras rolling and righteous indignation blazing. You don't get to close it behind you now.
