A newly released documentary features three men making unverified allegations against the late Republican senator, including one who says he was 17 at the time. The claims have emerged less than two weeks before his sister, Darline Graham, faces Democrat Annie Andrews in a closely watched Senate election.
A documentary released on October 22, 2026, has brought renewed attention to the late Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, with three men alleging that he paid them for sexual encounters.
The roughly 30-minute film, titled The CLOSETocracy, was released by The Young Turks and Swamp Watch Studios. One participant claims he was 17 during an alleged encounter with Graham in 2001.
The allegations have not been independently verified, and the documentary does not establish that the alleged encounters occurred. Graham died on July 11, 2026, at the age of 71.
The story has also entered the political conversation surrounding South Carolina’s November 3 Senate election, in which Graham’s sister, Republican Senator Darline Graham, is running against Democratic pediatrician Annie Andrews.
What does the documentary allege?
The film features interviews with three men identified as Kelvin, Cory and Jesse.
Kelvin claims that Graham paid him for an encounter in Arizona in 2001, when he says he was 17 years old. According to his account, Graham questioned his age before the alleged encounter proceeded.
Another participant, Cory Burns, who previously made public allegations about a Republican senator in 2020, describes an alleged encounter at Washington’s Mayflower Hotel in 2015.
A third participant, Jesse, describes alleged paid encounters in Washington during the following decade.
The documentary’s producers say they assembled 24 supporting documents, including travel records, receipts and public records. However, they acknowledge that these materials do not establish what happened during the alleged private encounters.
The New York Times reported that it had not independently verified the identities of the men or the truth of their accounts. The Advocate likewise stated that it could not independently confirm the allegations.
The film also examines Graham’s history of opposing several LGBTQ-rights measures, including legislation concerning same-sex marriage and military service. Its producers argue that his public political record provides context for the allegations, but those policy positions do not substantiate the men’s accounts.
How have Republicans responded?
The release has produced differing reactions among conservative figures.
Republican Representative William Timmons, who described Lindsey Graham as a longtime friend and mentor, rejected the allegations and criticized the release of accusations against a deceased politician who cannot respond.
Andrew Kolvet, a spokesperson for Turning Point USA, argued that longstanding speculation about Graham’s private life was already widely known and that attempts to connect the controversy to his sister’s election campaign would be misplaced.
A spokesperson for Darline Graham’s campaign declined to comment when contacted by The New York Times.
In footage included in the documentary, Darline Graham also refused to engage with a question about the allegations involving her late brother.
There is no evidence that Darline Graham participated in, knew about or bears responsibility for any of the alleged conduct.
Why the timing matters for the South Carolina Senate race
The documentary was released just 12 days before the November 3 midterm elections, when South Carolina voters will decide whether Darline Graham retains the Senate seat previously held by her brother.
Darline Graham was appointed to the Senate in July after Lindsey Graham’s death and subsequently secured the Republican nomination.
The contest has attracted increasing national attention because recent polling indicates a substantially closer race than South Carolina’s traditional Republican voting pattern might suggest.
On October 20, The Cook Political Report moved the contest from Likely Republican to Lean Republican, following an earlier change from Solid Republican in September.
That rating change occurred before the documentary was published and therefore cannot be attributed to the new allegations.
What the latest South Carolina polls show
The latest Trafalgar Group survey, conducted October 16–18 among 1,095 likely voters, reported:
| Candidate | Vote share |
|---|---|
| Darline Graham (Republican) | 48.6% |
| Annie Andrews (Democrat) | 45.6% |
| Kasie Whitener (Libertarian) | 3.9% |
| Mark Hackett (Constitution) | 0.8% |
The Republican candidate’s numerical advantage was three percentage points, close to the survey’s reported margin of error of approximately 2.9 points.
Other published surveys have generally placed Graham ahead by between one and four points during recent weeks.
These results describe voter preferences before the documentary’s release. They cannot establish whether the controversy has affected public opinion.
For a detailed comparison of the polling and the Cook rating changes, read Votendi’s earlier analysis:
South Carolina Senate race: Why Cook moved it from Solid to Lean Republican
What could change before November 3?
The immediate electoral question is whether the documentary becomes a significant campaign issue or remains primarily a national political controversy.
President Donald Trump campaigned alongside Darline Graham in South Carolina on October 21, a day before the documentary appeared, as both parties increased their attention to the state.
According to Reuters, Republican-aligned outside groups had spent approximately $9.7 million since October 1 supporting Graham or opposing Andrews.
Any measurable change in voter preferences would need to be assessed through surveys conducted after October 22, ideally using comparable methodologies.
For now, the documentary’s allegations remain unverified, and there is no polling evidence demonstrating that its release has altered the South Carolina Senate race.
The distinction matters: an allegation about a deceased public official is not an established finding, and a new political controversy is not automatically evidence of an electoral shift.
Votendi will continue tracking the South Carolina contest through verified polling, campaign developments and the November 3 election results.
