Skip to main content

Rep. Chuck Edwards drops reelection bid after sexual harassment allegations

Republican Rep. Chuck Edwards of North Carolina dropped his bid for a third term early Wednesday, days after the House Ethics Committee recommended he be censured after concluding there is “substantial reason to believe” he violated House rules related to sexual harassment and hostile workplaces.

“After much prayer and reflection, I’ve decided to withdraw from my re-election campaign,” Edwards posted on social media. “I will complete my current term. Serving Western North Carolina has been the honor of my life. Thank you for your trust, prayers, and support. God bless WNC and America.”

The House Ethics Committee said in its report that Edwards “violated the House Code of Official Conduct by failing to adhere to the spirit of rules prohibiting sexual harassment of and unwanted advances to House staffers.” It said it found that Edwards engaged in “persistent unprofessional and inappropriate conduct towards two young female staffers.” 

Edwards has denied any wrongdoing, which was also noted by the Ethics Committee report. 

A statement on behalf of the Edwards campaign said the findings “completely exonerate Representative Edwards under the House rules governing sexual misconduct or harassment.”

“They concluded that he neither engaged in sexual activity with nor explicitly propositioned any individual staff member. They concluded that the allegations in this matter do not implicate quid pro quo sexual harassment. They concluded he did not violate federal sexual harassment law,” the statement said, adding that Edwards “looks forward to having his name cleared.” 

The allegations against Edwards come months after former Reps. Eric Swalwell and Tony Gonzales resigned after being accused of sexual misconduct. Meanwhile, the House Ethics Committee on Tuesday announced it would be investigating Rep. Max Miller, who is accused of domestic abuse and possible drug use. Miller had denied the domestic abuse allegations and said he had a prescription for drugs. He said Tuesday that he would be staying in his reelection race.

Edwards, first elected in 2022, had ousted former Rep. Madison Cawthorn to represent Asheville and other parts of North Carolina. Democrat Jamie Ager, who won the March primary, is the Democrat on the ballot. 

Although the district has not elected a Democrat since 2010, Democrats believe it could be competitive this cycle. 

An agreement on the Strait of Hormuz is taking shape – but not one Trump wants

By CNN
(CNN) — Like shifting winds, plans for the future of the Strait of Hormuz – and their chance of success – change almost daily.US President Donald Trump said an agreement could be reached this week.“It could happen. Tomorrow or the next day,” Trump said Tuesday. “A lot of progress has been made. And they called me and they said, ‘Please let’s talk.’”But he again threatened to attack Iran should no deal be reached.Even so, there’s no consensus even on who is talking to who. Iran has persistently said it is talking solely with Oman on a temporary arrangement for the vital waterway.And others are less confident that a deal is imminent and are skeptical about its longevity.A senior Gulf official familiar with the talks suggested there is about a 50:50 chance of a deal by Friday. One issue is that the Iranian delegation does not include the voice of the hardline Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which would have to sign off on the details, the source said.Iran blames Washington for delaysTrump’s optimism may have surprised Tehran.“The main reason for the delay in reaching an agreement with Oman regarding the Strait of Hormuz is US interference and Trump’s threats,” the semi-official Iranian news agency Tasnim cited “an informed source” as saying on Wednesday.Another semi-official outlet, Fars, struck a similar tone. It said some US officials had “sent mixed signals and, either directly or through regional partners, have disrupted the course of the negotiations. There remains concern that obstruction by the United States or certain regional parties could prolong the negotiations or otherwise interfere with the process.”Fars reiterated that Iran is negotiating only with Oman and those talks “are focused on a middle corridor that would safeguard Iran’s rights while taking Oman’s concerns into account.”“Iran’s rights” is the term that raises many questions.There are competing routes through the strait and what’s on the table appears to involve merging them – with Iran retaining a level of control that would be at odds with US wishes.The negotiations should “establish Iranian arrangements because security, de-mining, and maritime services are handled by Iran,” according to Saeed Ajorlu, a member of Iran’s negotiating committee.Tehran’s goal “is to set temporary arrangements” between one and three months “where Iran is dominant,” Ajorlu told Iranian state broadcaster IRIB this week.“Where Iran is dominant” may not fly in Washington or Gulf capitals.“The negotiations have focused on transforming the southern route, which passes through Omani waters, and the northern route, which passes through Iran’s territorial waters, into an intermediate route that serves the considerations and interests of both coastal states,” said Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei Monday.“We are now talking about a corridor that will have a two-way route, not two or three separate routes,” he said.Baghaei, Ajorlu and every other Iranian official insist the legal regime at the strait will not return to its pre-war state, when no country controlled shipping through the critical waterway.Control or supervision over the chokepoint has become just as much a red line for Tehran as the right to nuclear enrichment.How the US sees the straitThe prospect of such leverage is unacceptable in Washington, Abu Dhabi and Riyadh. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has repeatedly said any form of state control over international waters is against international law.“If we create a precedent in the Middle East where a nation state can decide that they are going to control an international waterway,” he said recently, “charge a toll and if you don’t pay them blow up your ships, we have created a very dangerous precedent, which will repeat itself in other parts of the world,” he said last month.Qatar suggested Tuesday that negotiations were moving forward, but it’s hard to square the circle when the goals and demands of the two adversaries are so far apart.Key questions remain: Will the Revolutionary Guards accept reduced control over the Strait of Hormuz, and under what conditions would it intercept vessels? Would reopening extend to foreign – including American – naval ships? How much information would Iran demand about ships’ cargoes and destinations?It is also unclear whether the arrangement would lift the US blockade on Iranian ports, restore waivers to permit Iranian oil exports, and revive or replace parts of the US-Iran memorandum signed in June and declared dead a month later.The June agreement left key provisions deliberately vague. Article 5 committed Iran to using its “best efforts” to ensure safe commercial passage for 60 days, while also saying Iran and Oman will “define the future administration and maritime services” in the strait.It also said that any future arrangement must be “in line with applicable international law.”But that qualification resolved little. “Given the well-known disagreement between Iran and most of the world over what international law requires in the Strait of Hormuz, this formulation does little more than kick the can down the road,” noted the Lawfare blog.Preserving ‘durable’ influenceUltimately, Tehran “is seeking to convert the leverage it gained during the war into a durable political and institutional role in governing one of the world’s most strategically important waterways,” says Trita Parsi at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft.“By embedding a lasting role in the governance of Hormuz, Iran could preserve much of the influence it gained during the war without relying on continual military coercion,” Parsi posted on X Wednesday.That is a much greater gain than any fees or tolls it may want to collect at the chokepoint.“From day one, it was clear that restoring the Strait of Hormuz to its pre-crisis status would have required either regime change in Iran or a sustained military effort to impose control over the waterway,” said Israeli security expert Danny Citrinowicz.“Neither option was politically or strategically acceptable to Washington, given the enormous costs and long-term commitments they would require. Sometimes, the least desirable option is the only realistic one.”While agreement remains elusive, the world’s oil markets must confront draining crude reserves.If the Strait of Hormuz were opened today, it could still take up to 18 months to replenish depleted inventories, Amin Nasser, the chief executive of the world’s largest oil producer Saudi Aramco, said Tuesday.For every day there is no agreement, some 15 million barrels of crude oil are not travelling through the narrow waterway to world markets.The-CNN-Wire™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.
Read Next Story

Related Stories

Latest News
Abdul El-Sayed says 'there's a lot of healing to do' after Senate primary
10 minutes ago

Abdul El-Sayed says 'there's a lot of healing to do' after Senate primary

El-Sayed holds narrow lead in tight Michigan Democratic Senate primary race

¿Quieres ser el primero en escapar de un huracán? Esta nueva compañía vende asientos en aviones privados

Man carrying ammunition arrested near Trump National Golf Club before president's visit

SpaceX rocket booster slams into moon, expected to leave large crater