JMO.

That's a lot of coordination for rat-fuckery.

https://www.cnn.com/2026/04/10/us/eric-swalwell-sexual-misconduct-allegations-invs

to get even more power. It's why Christine Blasey Ford came forward, and why Anita Hill agreed to testify.

The gist is, each one thought they were the only one, and felt some level of personal responsibility for what happened.

I'm pretty sure that's common among sexual abuse victims.

From the article, emphasis added:

The timing is just too convenient and phone numbers can easily be spoofed.

But as I posted in other spots, what has me leaning a little more to his guilt is the description of the heavy drinking aspects, and the lack of vociferous denials of THAT by people who should know.

Combine the booze factor with a guy who has been shaped in a misogynistic culture - even if sober he doesn't agree with it - and the risks are very high that there is some truth to the accusations. (to be clear, risk does not equal something actually happening. but best for someone to avoid the risk, period.)

Hell, maybe he could credibly claim in each case that he thought the woman consented. Then we get into whether consent is truly possible in these situations.

Or is my suggestion totally stupid? I am so honored by this news, I can't think straight.


Why now ????? Why?

Like throwing what he did back to the lady like it's her fault. This is just bad, bad, bad. On to our next best hope. We don't need the 4th largest economy in the world being run by a rePUKE.

And has repeatedly been answered in some form of, "Because when I saw other women .." " It wasn't just me ..!" "I gained strength from knowing .. "
i.e., - there is safety, strength (and solidarity) in numbers ...

I don't think the question can ever be irrelevant or dismissed out of hand - but it certainly needs to be posed withing a context of understanding the very real dynamic of sexual assault. Yes?

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I wonder how he managed to stay married to her as long as he did.

despite the campaign's claim that they never used them.

wouldn't they have waited until Swalwell was the nominee, then sprung this on him? It could be pukes behind releasing this information now, but the impact would have been even worse had Swalwell been the only Dem left.

women are not believed....that's why. The only thing you can do is tell your your friends about it. So they are witnesses right after it happens. Go to the police?? they'll blow you off. There's strength in numbers. I saw a post on IG about 10 days ago about this. Glad more women came forward. I think the poster mentioned having to sign a NDA.

Why did Roger Stone know about the allegations before they were public knowledge?

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100221165932#post1

This news only helps the Democrats, so Roger Stone isn't helping the GOP here. It could be he personally wants to destroy Swalwell or he just is reporting a credible issue neutrally.

Eric Swalwell's falls makes it very unlikely a Democrat will lose because his 30% will go to other Democrats in the race, not the 2 Republicans tied for the lead.

are actually repuke plants.

There was a whole lot of support.

That's the part that *I* have a problem with. I can't get to the article because of the subscription, but are they all speaking out NOW? I mean, it's a little suspect that four come forward all at the same time and just when he's running for governor.

So, there's two sides to that thinking.

If he's guilty, let him fry. But coordinated attacks typically make me go "hold on a minute, let me get the facts".

I've been really disappointed about the things that I've read about Katie Porter of late, and she was really quick to call for his withdrawal.

So, my stance is still wait and see. I don't know if he's guilty, or innocent. Haven't made up my mind just yet.

Just my opinion to wait and see and not rush to judgment. Magats will be running around screaming for him to drop out of the race because that's what they do, without looking at their adjudicated rapist and 34-count convicted felon deliberately destroying our country for pootin.

Let's just give this some time and see what develops.

but there seems to be some 'there' there in that article (sorry you can't get to it).

I sort of doubt that they would even be able to make credible allegations except that the circumstances they describe would be deemed likely by people who know Swalwell. That is, the heavy drinking aspect.

Even if he isn't guilty of the sexual allegations: if he's doing a lot of heavy drinking with staffers ... or hanging out with staffers and allowing them to drink heavily and not seeing to it that they get safely home ... to me that's bad enough for me to scratch him off my list of any politician I want to see promoted. Just really bad self management and bad way to interact with staff. And if he isn't the kind of guy who puts himself in those positions - where are his supporters and other staffers loudly proclaiming, hey this has to be a lie, he just doesn't behave like that at all?
Yet instead, some staffers decided to resign. Perhaps they have 'experiences' also and just want out, without coming forward into the limelight.

Yeah I want to see people who should know, loudly calling 'RUBBISH, that's not him'.

But I don't want to see him give up his Congressional seat until we can replace him, and also not until the investigation plays out a little more.

Not defending Timothy Busfield, but Melissa Gilbert gave an interview earlier this week and that was what she said. If Busfield is even found innocent and charges dropped, etc., there is always going to be that stigma of the charges. Same with most men who are accused.

In a court of law, I guarantee you the woman who says she was attacked twice while drunk would be laughed out of court. Same with the State Trooper who accused Cuomo. Cuomo is assuredly a dirty asshole, but a State Trooper should be expected to be able to defend herself, wouldn't you think? People on DU can scream all they want about it not being fair. It isn't.

I am an old and devout feminist, and I certainly believe that there are times when women are abused. Full stop. But I also know that there are times when those accusations are "timed" just for a certain result. *I* (personally) want to empower women to be able to fight back against sexual abuse. *I* grew up with the understanding that if a man came on to me and I said "no", that the next step was going to be to slap the shit out of him, find a safe place and call the police. I realize I'm simplifying. But women need to feel strong enough to report these things WHEN they happen. That's my hope for a future one day, and that will make the abuse less frequent when men know that there's a price to pay timely.

I'll continue to wait until we see some further evidence before I condemn Swalwell. That doesn't mean that when I see what I need to see that makes me believe he may be guilty, that I won't change my mind and call for him to step down. I'm just not there yet on this one.

whether you are male or female. Men often have trouble with is because they gave so much more privilege than women, and even when it's explained to them, they seem to find it diffivult to grasp. So, if you are maie, imagine you were one of four altar boys who were raped by a priest. Yu all knew about it, and said nothing except to each other. But now the priest is underconsideration for a bishopric. Might you not decide to come forward and at least try to precent the promotion?

But you or I could win the CA gubernatorial race if we ran as a Democrat. It's not as if Swalwell is some political savior.

The top two right now are Repubs, combined they are polling at 28%.

Multiple Dems are right around 10%, with Swalwell at 12% so his numbers will go to some other Dem.

With the Swalwell issues, one Dem will hop the Repukes for the lead. If two hop then the Repubs will get shut out and not even have a candidate for the General.

As for the allegations against Swalwell having an impact on Dems, are you fucking kidding me! If any Dem nationwide can’t handle a question like this in the Trump era then said person needs to grow a backbone.

Simple to state, he was polling at 12%! And unlike Republicans and Donald J. Trump, we took responsibility and quickly worked towards correcting the situation.

Personally I think Steyer is most likely to get the bump, he has been advertising non stop for months. Only issue is who else can get enough support.

In a generic sense, it should be Katie Porter, but she hasn’t been able to get any momentum. In fact, she has lost all momentum after giving up her House seat and running for the Senate.

Swalwell is cooked. His staff quit. His supporters withdrew. It looks bad. Four accusers, corroborated accounts, unsolicited dick picks. My lord.

Al Franken was blindsided. The first accusation wasn't a slam dunk so suddenly there were others with stories. "He made me uncomfortable" "he grabbed my butt" he this--he that, etc. Like Al, Eric has mingled with lots of people. He has been there the whole time and now suddenly the faucet opens and a stream of allegations are flowing out.
Yes, it stinks, and Roger Stone is in the mix.
Where are all those Al Franken sexual harassment people now? Did they shrink back into the woodwork?
The details of the first complaint against Eric is the one being bolstered by a stream of "he sent me inappropriate photos" etc.
The first complaint really needs a good look.The collaborator is an ex-boyfriend who has claimed she told him several years ago, and she had a pregnancy test, etc. Did she? Also, if she did what does it prove about her allegations? Did she file a report? No. She worked with him for several more years. Also, the assumption that something had happened because of how she felt the next morning is interesting. After the first time why would she allow it again? If "she was intimidated by his power" then what changed? Enter Roger Stone and all the dirty tricks he is known for along with his buddy Steve Bannon.
We need to consider that this is a dirty trick op. Not only would it end Eric Swalwell's run for governor of one of our most important and financially stable states, but it would knock him off the Judiciary Committee and other caucuses. He has been a strong and reliable steward for justice and democracy. He is a skilled lawyer and his track record until now has been stellar and effective. He has been a voice for releasing the Epstein files and for supporting the victims of Trump and Epstein as well as others. Of course he is on Trump's regime's hit list. He started a war as a distraction for fux sake and is a menace to the whole world.
Our stance should be to give him our support because he has had our back.
We should insist the accusers file appropriate charges and/or provide evidence, and we need to stop clutching pearls.
Meanwhile, if no certifiable pictures and evidence not AI'd we should back our candidate.
This isn't about not believing women. This is about knowing that people can be persuaded or intimidated. Eric might not be the one using those tools.
Eric Swalwell believes in law and justice. We should let it play out and if he is ever found guilty of an offence he would be replaceable then. Meanwhile let him do his jobs.

And it could have been arranged very quickly.

There are 19 other Democratic candidates for the nomination.

Last edited Sat Apr 11, 2026, 02:01 PM - Edit history (1)

The fear is they split the vote and two MAGAS are the top two and go on to November. That would be a catastrophe. I wish Kamala would come and clear the field.

No way in fucking hell the Pukes take this election.

He went from about a 50% chance in the betting/predictitions market to 2%. If the accusations are true it's sad. He seemed like a decent and earnest guy.

It's not like there aren't other viable Dems in California.

The problem is putting humans on pedestals. No matter how decent and earnest they may seem, they're still human, with all the frailties of every other human. We need to stop the deifying shit. We're not Pukes.

I didn't really put him on a pedestal. He's likeable enough. There is also a difference between a playa and a serial abuser. Neither is laudable, but the latter should be a bar to public office or worse. We just need to ensure a Democrat finishes in the top two.

.... but these kind of guys who are forbidden to eat certain meats and are then shown at the pork chops & sausage feast at DENNY'S...like Clinton...like Spitzer...it happens but risking Presidencies & Governorships while cretins like Gingrich, Cruz, Trump, DeSantis eat our lunch by spending their lives figuring out how NOT to improve American lives has gotten us to a place where Republicans answer for nothing AND are held to a lower or non existent(King Cyrus) standard while DEMS get caught up like the hall monitors stealing the cupcakes on Open House day.

We can understand that we are all human and subject to the same tendency to do right or wrong. But we must expect more and, because we lost in 2024 due to a tarnished sense that we say & present but don't really MEAN IT!, we have to pay a higher price when we fall short.

Both by Swallwell and by the California Dems in general.

8+ Dems candidates vs 2 Republicans in a jungle primary.

The Republicans did the math.

They see a vacant seat and everyone and their dog files.

And when we have special elections here, there is no filing fee. So, it's a free for all.

Every reason to refuse to believe victims.

But have always wished it would have been her last.

There are something like twenty Democratic candidates running in the California primary for governor. The one who wins the Democratic primary is very likely to win in the general election this fall.

Republicans would want a wounded candidate to win the primary. Republicans would have kept the accusations against Swalwell quiet, hoping he would win the nomination and then they could reveal all this right before the November election.

It doesn't make sense for this to be a Republican operation. It's not at all in their interest.

"Jungle primary" top 2 vote getters no matter which party

Many don't realize how this primary works. Both Ds and Rs are basically in the same primary and top two go on to the general.

Although it may extend a little too much credit to Republicans as strategists.

The accusers come forth early to throw those who are suspicious off-track.

You are giving the MAGAt Republicans too much credit.

They'd never start a war with Iran, either, right?

There could be 2 repubs facing off

(or unwitting stooges?)
Seems just a little unlikely ... - - - - - - - - - - - - -

But I don't jump on too many bandwagons either.

than after the primary.

Unfortunately, I am not a California voter.

And if it’s true, It doesn’t matter who did it.

Democrats always turn tail and run at the slightest controversy while repubes circle the wagons.

The Dem field needed to be narrowed in CA for governor anyway.

Swalwell was leading in the polls among democrats but behind the two republican nominees. In the "jungle primary system" dems would be shut out of the general election at this point. Maybe with Swalwell out another dem nominee can break into the top 2?

I bet they're laughing their asses off watching Dems race to do the MAGAt dirty work. AGAIN.

So, an opposing political party should wait until the LEAST optimal time? That ain’t rat-fuckery (which I agree exists), but it is fair game if a candidate puts themselves on a shiny silver platter.

Let the facts play out. Seems there’s definitely some smoke in need of exploring.

More important, let’s stop the “chess vs.checkers” self-hating Dem-speak. It is peak loser-ing and giving Rs way too much credit they haven’t earned. Plus, it isn’t a stretch for a D campaign to launch this.

If anything, Dems play way too much D.C. beltway consultant-industrial complex chess instead of just leaning-in on the foundational basics — while MAGA plays tic-tac-d’oh by exploiting “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness” like the electoral street pimps they are with working/middle class voters.

Screw the self-defeatism. I doubt John Lewis ever wondered if the racists were playing chess while they Civil Rights Movement were playing checkers. Enough.

Let’s just make It plain. We play values vs. unprincipled, ethical vs. unethical, moral vs. immoral, constitutional vs. authoritarian.

Onward to November. 💪👊🇺🇸

Everything else is still excuses, excuses, excuses. Where did the thing about everybody needs to be punished? Is it because he hasn't shown up in the Epstein files? He's a Dem, so he can't be as bad as a Republican?

I'll wait and see.

Women should be believed. However, if there were so many allegations, the timing makes them look suspect.

They both waited a lot longer to make their allegations.

Believe victims. It's really hard for them to come forward in general, but especially against powerful popular men.

n/t

I kmow Pelosi has asked him to drop out. While I respect Pelosi as a politician. I was alarmed she did not strike back vehemently at Trump that his hateful rhetoric almost got her husband killed.

Back to Eric, silence is not golden.

Why can't you accept the fact that a man got a woman passed out drunk and then raped her?

That governors chair is as safe as West Virginia's is for the Pukes. This isn't 1982.

Swalwell. Just goes to show that humans are human and we should never, ever, ever, ever deify them. Period. Guilty or not, the truth will come out and if he did what's accused, then to hell with him. Lets not double standard, please.

That is what happened with Bill Clinton and the Arkansas Project, Rutherford Institute, and all of the Scaife-backed outfits promoting "scandals" leveled against Bill Clinton. They were motivated by one thing: to prevent Democratic inroads into the GOP's "southern strategy."

The timing is highly suspect.

Should we be like the Republicans, ignoring or silencing their victims?

I think not.

The Democratic Party has a deep bench of highly qualified and electable candidates who are not sex pests or abusers. We don't have to compromise. We don't have to shrug our shoulders, mutter "boys will be boys" and look away when shit like this is exposed. It's better to assume that "where there is smoke there is fire" than to dismiss the claims of credible women as some kind of hysterical morning-after regret.

It can't be all that difficult to find candidates who are not creepy and have never had the sort of sex that anyone regrets afterwards.

It sounds like roofies in a few instances. And totally creepy and unprofessional behaviour overall.
I don’t think the Al Franken allegations were anything like this (though I did not follow them much as I was pretty tuned out at that time). Hell, I don’t think the Weiner allegations were this bad. This is rape ffs.

Women’s rights have been taking a steady beating in the last 6-7 years with the overturn of Roe v Wade, the disproportionate impact of covid on women’s livelihoods, the rise of a tacitly anti-equality strain of thought (a ghastly oped by someone called Ben Wray in the Jacobin struck me in particular). Women make up a significant portion of the dem base given that if you care about the environment, science or women’s rights at all, the U.S. is pretty much a one-party country.
There is the rare GOP candidate who may even spout some economic populism, but never support for women’s rights.

These allegations are about as serious as they get and it is up to four women:

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/eric-swalwell-sexual-assault-allegations_n_69d97452e4b0ccb589ece93b?origin=article-related-nonlife

What irks me the most, and I am certain upsets many here, is the double standard. I want our leaders to be held accountable. But republicans never seem to be held accountable. By the media, by their voters, or by members of their own party. Democrats resign, drop out, get media attention, etc. Republicans get voted in as president.

He is always behind this crap.

I did not believe a word of the accusation against Joe Biden because I know him and I know he wouldn’t do it. Anybody vouching for Swalwell like that? and other men never see this kind of bad behavior because it’s only done to women.

More like Democrats play by the rules while Republicans cheat.

Prominent Democrats are calling for him to withdraw from the race. The paper quoted the ex-staffer's boyfriend (at the time) and a few other friends, that say, she told them about the incident at the time.

There were no statements from people who worked at the staff event and or bars, where the supposed drinking to excess took place and harassment took place . The article did not say, they had seen the pictures or texts from Swalwell that would corroborate the es-staffer's story.

I tend to believe woman who complain of abuse (since as a woman who worked in offices during 1970 to 1980 when the 3 martini lunch was rampant, I've had to gently turn down jackasses, so I could keep my job.)

I'll believe the ex-staffer's story when there is corroborating story from a waitress/waiter that says Swalwell was a well known flirt/abuser or weirdo.

Also, the ex-staffer's story reads like her drink was spiked, doesn't really explain how she could she blacked out and didn't know what was going on.

The prominent Democrats should tell us what specifically made them change their support of Eric Swalwell.

Until he gets that -- or issues a public statement of guilt -- I am reserving judgment.

The reason there is concern that the top two could be the Republicans is because there are many Democrats and two Republicans running.

Swalwell called himself the frontrunner, but Steyer, Porter and Swalwell have each had polls where they were the top Democrat. Swalwell entered last and appeared to possibly have momentum, but the reason the Republicans have the top two is there is NO real frontrunner among the Democrats.

Let's assume he drops out and his numbers approach zero even though he will be on the ballot, what does that do? Let's say 10 of his 13 to 18, migrate to the top 2 Democrats. Suddenly, one or both of them are in the top 2.

and face justice, full stop. What really ticks me off is that Republicans are pointing fingers and screaming foul while their guy is a pedophile and guilty of sexual assault. And let's not mention Bobert and her grope fest at the Beetle Juice performance.

Let me be clear, I am in favor of sexual predators being held responsible and facing legal consequences, but Republicans only seem to think it's a violation when the perpetrator is a Democrat.

God, I am so sick of this crap.

against every accuser and file a demand discovery to be submitted before the Nov election.

I know the allegations are credible. But the primary ballots have been printed. The primary election is less than 2 months away. Swalwell was the clear frontrunner. The timimg of this allegation is perfect for maximum damage to CalDems.

What'll get Swalwell to bow out is if the cops invetigate and district attorney pursues charges. We're well within the satute of limitations, so there HAS to be an investigation. If there's no police invetigation or charges, than that means something is seriously wrong, one way or the other.

But, the CNN article seems conclusive to me. Damning, in fact. It proves that men are scum, no matter what party they're from.

I wrote a post earlier about the liklihood that we could end up with 2 repubs to chose from in Cali due to the ranked choice voting we have here now. This episode brings that disaster closer to reality. Though we're seen as pretty bright blue, there are a ton or repub voters here - enough of a supply to get R's into the governor's chair if voting Dems here are split even a tiny bit.

SOME men are scum

there are PLENTY of decent men around; heck, there are a lot of them right here on DU

The "Believe Women" movement, arising from the #MeToo campaign, asserts that allegations of sexual harassment or assault should be taken seriously and assumed truthful, countering the historical tendency to discredit victims. It seeks to combat systemic silence, shift the burden of proof, and foster empathy for survivors.

Meaning and Core Principles
Presumption of Truth: It argues for listening to survivors and accepting their accounts as credible, rather than defaulting to skepticism, particularly when accusing powerful individuals.

Countering Misconceptions: It challenges the false belief that false accusations are common, pointing out that true abuse is overwhelmingly more prevalent.

Addressing Structural Injustice: It focuses on the reality that existing systems often fail to protect or believe victims, thus requiring a "believe women" approach as a necessary remedy.
Cultural Shift: The movement aims to change how society handles these allegations, prioritizing support for the victim over immediate protection of the accused.

#MeToo Movement: Founded by Tarana Burke in 2006 to show the prevalence of sexual violence, it went viral in 2017 following allegations against Harvey Weinstein.

Keeping him on the ballot increases the odds of a R vs R jungle Primary result...

I think the origin is elsewhere.

When it’s a democrat?

Trump hates Swalwell. But we can't let Steve Hilton win. Fuck that guy.

While they protect a pedophile without question, they have convicted Swalwel

...and when Speaker Pelosi speaks (is that alliteration?), I listen. YMMV

On edit: no, it's polyptoton

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyptoton

Pure genius.

... is a classical rhetorical figure in which a sentence or clause begins and ends with the same word or phrase.

Examples:

The king is dead, long live the king!

He smiled the most exquisite smile, veiled by memory, tinged by dreams. (Virginia Woolf: https://www.litcharts.com/lit/to-the-lighthouse)

Both California primary staff and Washington DC staff have issued a statement:
“We stand with our former colleague, and the other women who have come forward. We believe you should stand with them, too. The behavior detailed in these reports is abhorrent, beneath the dignity of those serving in public office and betrays the trust of all Californians.”--Washington Post

The Epstein Files are worse.

And the news is all over one story and not the other.

Like when Rauner was gov in IL, the dem majorities in the house and senate neutered him. Dude didn't know how to deal with Madigan.
I too smell a skunk but after all, pedophiles are a protected people in the little "r" party.

swamp, they are the deep state. The ones we see are only the tip of the iceberg. What we don't see are those that are willing to kill, blackmail, subvert, destroy for an agenda that only benefits the super-wealthy.