The Dictatorship

Netflix doc shows the ‘Trainwreck’ that was Dov Charney’s American Apparel

Published

12 months ago

July 9, 2025

Netflix doc shows the ‘Trainwreck’ that was Dov Charney’s American Apparel

Netflix last week debuted “Trainwreck: The Cult of American Apparel,” a documentary that chronicles the rise and fall of the cult clothing brand. Central to American Apparel’s story is founder Dov Charney and what former employees assert was his consistently repugnant behavior.

Founded in 1989 by Charney, American Apparel was at the height of popularity, expansion and influence between 2005 and 2010. The brand began selling merchandise wholesale before opening retail locations in Los Angeles, New York City and Montreal in 2003. Revolutionary at the time, American Apparel was dedicated to making its clothing domestically without sweatshops. Charney was also known for his liberal-minded open-border immigration beliefs. American Apparel was flagged for allegedly hiring factory workers with false or forged papersbut a lawyer for the company said then that it had not been accused of knowingly hiring people unauthorized to work in the U.S.

Can you divorce the trend and the aesthetic from the man behind it? And, should you?

Now American Apparel and its aesthetic are poised for a resurgence: with Y2K and early 2010s fashion very much on trend, the makeup light, hyper-sexual advertisements feel very current. American Apparel appealed to us young 2010s shoppers because of the cost, the styles and the provocation. Today, those same things appeal. This reality forces an uncomfortable question: Can you divorce the trend and the aesthetic from the man behind it? And, should you?

In the midst of falling financials, Charney was ousted in 2014 because of an “ongoing investigation into alleged misconduct” which included reports of sexual harassment and violence toward employees. As Netflix acknowledges on its website“Charney has denied the allegations and has not been found guilty of, or liable for, any crimes. The lawsuits against him either settled or went to arbitration.” American Apparel filed for Chapter 11 in 2015.

In a statement to Entertainment Weekly, a spokesperson for Charney asserted that “the Netflix documentary grossly misrepresents the story of American Apparel and Charneyrelying on paid actors to emotionally restate long-disproven allegations. […] No credible insiders — including Charney himself — participated in the production. One can only hope the full, unvarnished story of American Apparel and the forces behind its downfall will one day be told.”

The Netflix documentary ends with brave voiceovers of women sharing their gutting stories of abuse they say Charney subjected them to. On-screen language from the film explains that “during legal proceedings some of the women’s allegations entered the public domain. Now for the first time we are bringing their accounts together, voiced by actors.”

Netflix didn’t immediately respond to a question asking if Charney was asked to participate in the documentary.

American Apparel’s ethos was stylized, sexualized basics. There were tank tops, T-shirts and skirts of every color. Choice pieces became ubiquitous and iconic: the shiny and tight disco pants, the mesh paneled bodysuit made famous by Megan Fox’s 2009 Rolling Stone cover and flowy skater skirts. You could get a plain cotton sweatshirt or a skintight bodycon dress (a staple in every 2012 teens’ wardrobe, much to our mothers’ chagrin). Everyone at my North Jersey high school and at my Connecticut college shopped at American Apparel in one way or another.

Everyone at my North Jersey high school and at my Connecticut college shopped at American Apparel in one way or another.

The brand was most notorious for highly suggestive advertising campaigns that embodied the indie sleaze aesthetic pervasive in the early 2000s. The advertisements were antithetical to what was appearing in glossy ads at the time: intentionally grainy, appearing unedited, inclusive of imperfections like stretch marks. They featured mostly makeup free young people in provocative positions. The ads routinely faced backlash and outrage, and some were even banned overseas. A notorious onewhich showed a topless woman sprawled on a bed looking up from a man’s crotch, was followed by internet speculation that the man was Charney himself. Charney’s face appeared in many American Apparel ads.

Charney prized what he called authenticity. In a sprawling 2017 interview with Retail DiveCharney explained, “What made it special is that it wasn’t rehearsed, it wasn’t contrived, it was honest. It was real. The people were real, and we challenged notions of beauty because we rarely used professional models. […] The reason that this was one of the most recognizable fashion ad campaigns or any ad campaign — a huge element of what made it special and why people connected to it — was its authenticity and its realness.”

Infamously, many of the women photographed were not professionals, but American Apparel store employees. According to Fashion Lawthe brand’s website once read, “We find our models all over the world, through online submissions, word of mouth, and in retail stores, where we’ve been known to do an impromptu test shoot or two.”

The documentary does a great job at examining the painfully chaotic, toxic and inappropriately sexually charged work environment that Charney created for American Apparel employees. This includes, of course, the numerous allegations of sexual harassment and misconduct Charney faced.

In 2015, Charney unsuccessfully sued American Apparel and its chairwoman for defamation, a filing that prompted her to respond in a court filing that evidence of Charney’s sexual misconduct and his abuse of employees was “voluminous” and that he “engaged in all manner of sexual behavior with numerous models and employees, which for some incredible reason had been saved by Mr. Charney to the company’s network server by him with the use of his company computer.”

Provocation, it seems, always appeals to younger people.

Provocation, it seems, always appeals to younger people. American Apparel, at the time, was a way to push the boundary of your own self-expression and sexuality. When you examine the brand through a 2025 lens, it is clear that it worked because it married the edginess and the on-trend Indie sleaze with an ideological ethos at, crucially, just the right time. American culture, which is so often reflected back to us in the advertisements that encourage us to buy things, was that of exploitation and degradation for women. It was then and it still is now.

Long after his public fall from grace, Charney’s career has never faltered. He’s gone on to found a company in American Apparel’s likeness called Los Angeles Apparel. He also helmed another company you might have heard of with a hugely problematic founder: Yeezy.

Today, there are many TikToksset to 2008 pop songs, that show young people modeling their genuine American Apparel finds from Depop and Poshmark. The look, the energy and the vibe once found inside of American Apparel stores is very much so back. So, can you separate the man from the aesthetic he helped create? It looks like we are going to.

Hannah Holland

Hannah Holland is a producer for BLN’s “Velshi” and editor for the “Velshi Banned Book Club.” She writes for BLN Daily.

The Dictatorship

Monday’s Campaign Round-Up, 6.22.26: Why Trump backed both Republicans in a key S.C. race

Published

1 day ago

June 22, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Monday’s Campaign Round-Up, 6.22.26: Why Trump backed both Republicans in a key S.C. race

Today’s installment of campaign-related news items from across the country.

* In South Carolina’s gubernatorial raceDonald Trump endorsed Lt. Gov. Pam Evette last month. Last week, however, ahead of this week’s primary runoff election in the race, the president published an online item telling voters that “you can’t go wrong” with either Evette or state Attorney General Alan Wilson.

If this sounds at all familiar, it’s because Trump has done this before. Around this time two years ago, for example, he endorsed both Republicans running in a congressional primary in Arizona. And two years before that, he endorsed two leading contenders in a Senate primary in Missouri.

Only the president can say for sure why he ended up endorsing Evette and Wilson in the South Carolina race, though it’s worth emphasizing for context that GOP primary voters have already ignored his direction into two gubernatorial primaries this month, and it stands to reason that he hoped to avoid a third.

* We’re one day away from a variety of notable racesincluding but not limited to South Carolina’s gubernatorial race. There are also some congressional primaries in a handful of statesincluding Maryland, New York and Utah.

* In took a while, but the ballots have been tallied under Maine’s ranked-choice systemand we now know that Democrat Hannah Pingree, the former state House speaker, will face off against Republican Bobby Charles, who worked at the State Department during the Bush-Cheney era.

* As for Maine’s closely watched congressional racestate Auditor Matt Dunlap won the Democratic nomination in the battleground 2nd District, defeating state Sen. Joe Baldacci, who enjoyed the backing of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. Dunlap will run in the fall against a familiar figure: former Republican Gov. Paul LePage, who had moved to Florida a few years ago, but who returned to run for Congress.

* In California’s congressional special electiontwo Democratic candidates — state Sen. Aisha Wahab and Melissa Hernandez, a Bay Area Rapid Transit director — have advanced to an Aug. 18 special general election. The winner will fill the vacancy left by disgraced former Rep. Eric Swalwell, who resigned in April.

* In a new commercial shared first with MS NOWDemocrat James Talarico has launched his campaign’s first multimillion-dollar ad buy in Texas’ gubernatorial race. In the 30-second spot, Talarico focuses on affordability and the cost of living. The state lawmaker will face scandal-plagued state Attorney General Ken Paxton in the fall.

* And in New Jersey, Republican Rep. Tom Kean Jr.who has been missing from Capitol Hill since early March, will reportedly return to work on June 30according to a statement from his spokesperson. Neither Kean nor his office have offered any public information about why he has been away.

Steve Benen is a producer for “The Rachel Maddow Show,” the editor of MaddowBlog and an MS NOW political contributor. He’s also the bestselling author of “Ministry of Truth: Democracy, Reality, and the Republicans’ War on the Recent Past.”

The Dictatorship

Trump tries dual endorsement in South Carolina as his pick for governor flounders in polls

Published

1 day ago

June 22, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Trump tries dual endorsement in South Carolina as his pick for governor flounders in polls

Jun. 22, 2026, 11:39 AM EDT

After President Donald Trump’s pick for governor in Iowa lost in the Republican primary earlier this month, the president argued that he “would have endorsed the other person” if he had “the proper information.”

Trump is taking no chances in the South Carolina gubernatorial primary. Over the weekend he rescinded his exclusive endorsement of Pamela Evette, the lieutenant governor, announcing instead that he would support both Evette and her runoff opponent, Alan Wilson, the state’s attorney general.

The move put Evette’s political future in jeopardy: Even before Trump’s dual endorsement, she trailed in limited public polling and was seen by political observers in South Carolina as a weak candidate with little to show besides the president’s coveted endorsement.

“Her chief distinction from Alan Wilson was that Trump endorsed her,” said Dr. Dubose Kapeluck, a professor of political science at the Citadel Military College of South Carolina.

Trump’s dual endorsement “was a kiss of death,” he told MS NOW.

Evette, who moved to South Carolina from Ohio to found a successful payroll and HR company in 2000, has been lieutenant governor since 2019, serving under Gov. Henry McMaster, who is term-limited.

In office, she has pursued meaningful but little-celebrated policies, like a key tort reform bill, according to Gil Gatch, a Republican member of the South Carolina state House and an Evette supporter.

But voters could be forgiven for knowing little about Evette besides the fact that Trump endorsed her, which he did just days before the June 9 primary. Visitors to her campaign website are greeted with a full-screen message labeling Evette as “Trump-endorsed.” The first line in her X bio states the same. Pro-Evette television ads are quick to tout the endorsement.

An accomplishment like tort reform, while noted on Evette’s website, “maybe could have been something that was highlighted more heavily,” Gatch told MS NOW.

The political makeup of South Carolina nearly guarantees the next governor will be whoever emerges on Tuesday between Evette and Wilson. They survived a crowded primary field on June 9, and nearly every challenger who fell short of the runoff publicly endorsed the attorney general.

“She’s just not a good candidate,” Josh Kimbrell, a state senator who failed to make the runoff and has since said he’d back Wilson, said of Evette.

“She kind of assumed this was a coronation, and that was never going to go over that well,” he added.

Even some pro-Trump voters were confused by the president’s initial endorsement of Evette, whom he called “a good friend, fighter, and WINNER” in a social media post in May.

“I have no clue why Trump would endorse Pamela Evette,” Leland Lemmons, a 30-year-old Trump supporter told MS NOW as he exited a polling site in the Greenville suburb of Easley on June 9.

“She’s served, you know, a decent time. I just haven’t seen much fruition of what she’s done in office,” he added.

In a post on Truth Social Friday announcing his dual endorsement, Trump wrote, “I can’t hurt one of them by only Endorsing the other, so, therefore, I am going to Endorse, for Governor of South Carolina, both Pam Evette and Alan Wilson!”

In a subsequent statement on X, Evette said, “I was proud to come in first as [Trump’s] endorsed candidate for Governor on June 9th. Looking forward to doing it again on June 23rd.”

After The Washington Post foreshadowed the dual endorsement last Tuesday, allies of Evette were quick to denounce the possibility.

“I would guess that’s fake news,” Suzanne Pucci, a member of Evette’s finance committee, told MS NOW of the chance Trump would also endorse Wilson. “She’s probably not real worried about it.”

Another close ally and supporter told MS NOW at the time the report was “a total, fabricated lie.”

“[Trump] is invested in Pamela Evette because she invested in him. He’s a loyal guy. That kind of stuff is important to him,” added the supporter, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

“With or without Trump, I think she is going to win,” they said.

On Thursday, a senior campaign aide, who spoke on condition of anonymity, brushed off the idea of a dual endorsement, telling MS NOW in a statement, “Pamela Evette has earned the complete and total endorsement of President Trump. She is the only Trump-endorsed candidate in this race and we look forward to delivering a big win for the president on Tuesday.”

Roughly 24 hours later, Trump retracted the exclusive endorsement.

Will McDuffie is a reporter for MS NOW.

The Dictatorship

Fears of an ‘economic catastrophe’ helped push Trump toward an Iran deal

Published

1 day ago

June 22, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Fears of an ‘economic catastrophe’ helped push Trump toward an Iran deal

As last week’s G7 summit in France got underway, a reporter asked Donald Trump whether his purported deal with Iran was final. “No, it’s not final,” the president replied. Later that day — during a visit to Versaillesof all places — he signed the framework anyway.

But moments after signing his name to the memorandum of understanding, Trump offered an unsubtle hint about what he was thinking at the time. Amid applause from those around him, the American president pointed down and then up while saying“Oil down, stocks up.”

In other words, Trump’s focus had nothing to do with natural security and everything to do with the economy. What’s more, the four-word phrase was part of a larger and underappreciated pattern. The Washington Post reported:

In the more than 100 days since President Donald Trump launched a war with Iran, he has offered a shifting list of reasons for why he started the conflict. But in explaining his push for peace, he named a priority much closer to home: protecting the stock market.

“I didn’t want to see economic catastrophe,” Trump told reporters gathered in the Alpine spa town of Évian-les-Bains, France, after the Group of Seven summit.

As the summit wrapped up, the Republican similarly said“I’ve studied presidents, some good, some bad, some great. Not too many are great and some really bad. … And the one president I did not want to be was the late, great Herbert Hoover. I didn’t want that and who knows what would have happened.”

He pushed the same point in an interview with Axios, which was released over the weekend.

“If I went further, the stock market would be much lower,” the president said. “Now think of this: I have one primary wish as president, in terms of people: I never want to be the late, great Herbert Hoover.”

The comments came days after Trump similarly argued“The alternative to this deal was a global recession. There are stupid people who want to see a global recession. They are just stupid people.”

Whether the president fully appreciates the implications of his own rhetoric, this string of comments doesn’t just shed light on his motivations for accepting a defeat, it also suggests he saw his failed policy in Iran as pushing the global economy toward a dangerous cliff.

In other words, based on Trump’s own comments, the war he started was poised to create an “economic catastrophe,” which he was desperate to avoid — and which led him to accept a framework that empowered Iran to get what it wanted in exchange for effectively no concessions at all.