]

Did he plan and coordinate a campaign for Governor without once asking himself, "uh...is there anything in my past...?"

Extra marital affairs are risky enough to be a red flag to yourself

then whatever he did probably wasn't nice.

Loved him in the House. He was effective in his way and should have stayed put.

He's no more a short-timer than any other member of the House. He will continue to vote on legislation all year. He is asolutely still a member of the House.

He is a short timer in politics.

That is a fact that cannot be changed by any of your convoluted reasoning.

We can't donate to him via Act Blue now. He will pretty much be a pariah on the Hill while he's still in office.

Have a good week.

"Loved him in the House. He was effective in his way and should have stayed put" Note you used past tense.

I then pointed out that he was still in the House (I didn't say anything else) and you started making all kinds of excuses to argue with my factual statement. I have no clue why you felt the need to argue with my factual statement but you clearly had a problem letting it go. I will always continue to point it out when someone tries to argue with my factual statements.

or exposed.

Sexual assault, sexual abuse, exploitation of an authority/power position for coercive control?

We're not talking about allegations of a dodgy mortgage or something

Anybody can make a charge. Everybody is entitled to a fair trial if the charges are seen to have any merit.

This is obviously not about a rape. If it was, then the charges should have been filed at the time. When they are brought up in an obvious attempt to alter the outcome of an election, we should all be very skeptical.

Why was this not brought up on 2019?

But that does not seem to be the case here. They have had nine years to speak up and they chose this particular moment to bring a charge? Are they even asking for criminal charges or are they just trying to destroy the candidacy? When the timing is such it makes me highly skeptical.

The first accuser has not brought a charge. The San Francisco Chronicle, which reported the original story, reached out to her first.

https://archive.ph/IDj4E

Have you not been paying any attention - past 20-30 years?

You are quite within your rights to 'hold your fire' on this particular incident/set of accusations ...
But, really - THAT old canard .. ?

I said nothing of the sort. I simply said that when people have a choice to bring charges and they wait for 9 years and then spring the charges in the middle of a campaign, I am skeptical.

That same office that successfully prosecuted Trump. It's highly unlikely they're in cahoots with MAGA. They also opened up a tip line for other alleged victims to come forward.

But it does not answer the question why, if a person had this evidence (and receiving a dick pic means one has clear evidence in their possession), this was not brought out when it happened.

That suggests:
1) the evidence was fake -- you know there are a lot of fake pictures these days
2) it wasn't unwelcome at the time
3) the recipient decided rather than taking immediate action, they would rather save this for a time that could do more damage.

If it is #3, that is not the way our justice system is supposed to work. That would be a variation of WEAPONIZING the justice system.

There are many real cases of sexual abuse against women. When a person seems to be using charges for political reasons rather than for justice for the original crime, this makes it harder for women who are truly violated to get their justice.

This isn't weaponizing the justice system any more than E Jean Carroll or Christine Blasey Ford did in waiting to tell their stories.

For example, at least one of the accusers did work for him. And there is more:

Were you skeptical of her charges when they were made?

We all understand that there are strong reasons why women do not come forward, especially when a powerful person is involved.

By the same token, it is fair to ask why the claims were not brought out at the time and are now brought out when this is certain to affect the gubernatorial election.

Rather than torches and pitchforks, we should all be asking for evidence from both sides.

I'm sure republicans were skeptical of the timing as well.

I just find it interesting this happened to one of our most effective Democrats.

This style of ratfucking seems to be the most effective for them and unfortunately, their practice has paid off and made them good at it.

If the allegations are true, then he knows it. In that case, what do YOU think he should do? I think finding another line of work would certainly be an honorable choice, under those circumstances. I would hope he does so voluntarily, with promises to be a better person in future, hopefully sincere.

If they're not true, he knows that too, and should mount a vigorous defense. However, we should acknowledge that the accusations will still reduce his chances of winning even if he's innocent. That's an unfortunate fact of life.

On edit: What leftstreet said, #2.

Edit 2: and if the allegations are true, we should be glad they emerged now, rather than after he was anointed the Dem candidate.

except it has been suggested to me that the Democratic leadership(?) would rather have a Republican win than certain Dem candidate(s). This does not seem to have come up in any discussions. Hope this notion is completely false.

But after Franken, I know RW shenanigans exist. I’ll leave it up to people more in the know to decide.

That said, these are serious allegations.

Victims in cases like these will often come forward when they see that someone they know as a predator or pest is about to get even more power. It's why Christine Blasey Ford came forward, and why Anita Hill agreed to testify.

The situations described either are, or are not, like situations he is known to get into by his staff and colleagues. By "situations" I refer to the drinking with staffers until they are plastered ... and not making sure they are safely home (as opposed to winding up in bed with some guy they didn't necessarily want to be with, especially in that state).

It's pretty simple, really. He either acts that kind of way, or he doesn't. It's freakin' hard to believe that this type of behavior - short of the sexual aspects - wouldn't be known, if he is like that.

If he IS like that, frankly I don't want him on the Dem ticket in any new election. It's not proper behavior for an adult who is a position of public responsibility. This behavior alone - even if nothing sexual actually happened - would open him up to EXACTLY the accusations he's now facing.

And if he ISN'T like that - where are his colleagues and staff loudly asserting that? Instead I see staffers jumping ship. I think that speaks volumes ... but will wait to hear more. I am sure more is coming.

conceding to the fact that this fits a pattern ....
Which is what you are correctly pointing to.

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

1 day ago on Alex Joneses program. Because I do no have X I couldn’t fin the entire post.

“Out of curiosity... Why did Roger Stone tell Alex Jones that Democratic ...

1 day agoOut of curiosity… Why did Roger Stone tell Alex Jones that Democratic House Rep. Eric Swalwell's "campaign will be blowing up today" hours before the release of the San Francisco Chronicle article where an ex-staffer accuses Swalwell of sexually assaulting her (claims Swalwell denies)? Smells” snip

requires talking to a lot of people, many of whose names or even presence aren't even mentioned in the final article. Those people talk to other people, and word gets around. The first victim saw that rumors were going around so she called the campaign to see if her name was out there.

https://archive.ph/IDj4E

feel rather ill though….and will always wonder about the timing….

Go look up Mrs Frazzled on social media. For example.

https://www.smobserved.com/story/2026/04/06/news/social-media-circulates-allegations-of-inappropriate-sexual-relationships-with-interns-ndas-involving-rep-eric-swalwell/9761.html

"The allegations appear to stem in part from earlier posts by the X/TikTok account @mrs.frazzled (also referenced as @ms_frazzled), who in mid-March 2026 claimed that "no less than a dozen people" had approached her with accounts of inappropriate relationships between Swalwell and young staffers."

Roger Stone isn't behind this, he's just capable of reading social media and having contacts in the media as it was known California newspapers were working on the story before it hit.

He's friends with Woodward and Bernstein. I wouldn't be surprised if he's friends and neighbors with more inside info.

I stumbled on a podcast of his in the summer of 2024. He said, "Biden is gonna drop out on Sunday and will address the nation". I thought BS. But he was right. He had insider info. I don't know where he gets it, but he had it. Sometimes people share with the other side. You would be surprised. Someone probably doesn't share directly with Stone, but they share with someone who knows him and it get backs to him.

the allegations and give the accused a chance to respond if they want.

I think our side immediately calling for resignations has hurt us .

The media went after Biden on that one accusation which was easily shown to be fake when it was proven he never even attended the event where it happened. Yhe media could have easily done the research on that but they didn't.

So do an investigation, ler info come out and let the accused present their side and let voters decide.

a full investigation has determined his culpability".

If this is true, and it may very well be, they can surely release some text messages or something like that.

My concern is that we not set a precedent that there can be an accusation made and BOOM, the candidate drops out. Let's think this through. Right now it's our frontrunner for the governor of California. What happens 6 months from now when we only have one dem candidate in the running for CA governor (that could easily happen!) and there's mysteriously a round of accusations that happen right before voting starts, accusing our candidate. Do they drop out? Do we rush to drop support?

What happens when republicans learn from how quickly we will burn someone with zero evidence (it hasn't even been 24 hours) and decide this would be a cool trick to pull in our 2028 primary, taking out our frontrunner for president? They control most of the media now, and the billionaires are on their side, too. What happens when after they take out our frontrunner, and we get a nominee no one is excited about, they wait until October and release "damning information" about our nominee, that later turns out to be untrue, but it takes months to figure that out, and we are so quick to condemn that we've already lost?

I think we need to be careful, especially given what happened with Franken, not to get ahead of ourselves. I would like to see evidence.

I don't want him working for me.

We've all been rejected by potential employers for much, much, less -- even frivolous or random reasons...

This shit is serious. He needs to go away.

Franken arguments do not impress me either.

I'm not looking for any fucking heroes or celebrities..

Heck, if Cesar Chavez had been exposed immediately we might have ended up in a better place. Now we have to wonder if he was somehow compromised for thinking with his dick.

Zero tolerance for this kind of crap doesn't make Democrats losers, it's what distinguishes us from the modern Republican party.

If we can't win on a solid ethical platform, then fuck it all, this nation ain't worth saving.

on the various allegations?

Do I know the whole story? By no means. But there is clearly at the very very very least, some very bad behavior on the part of Swalwell. And unfortunately it appears to be typical behavior of men in power positions preying on young women. And the responses of young women who become enamored of men they perceive of as being in positions of power. That women in their early 20s, who have gotten drunk with men who have some control over their careers, real or perceived, and then tell family and friends (as these women appear to have done) but do not come forward and claim rape to police is not unusual. And if they think they were the only one that this happened to — it is perfectly believable that they didn’t come forward earlier. These kinds of encounters would typically leave women feeling guilty, responsible and unsure of culpability. That’s how men are able to take advantage of these situations.

Be a shame if something happened to it.

He’s been soliciting customers/investors for his AI campaign software startup company on Capitol Hill, despite the clear ethical conflict of interest.

Unlike so many in Congress.

ETA: Going by the shitstain billionaires currently running the show, it’d be good more Democrats to get into AI.

a.) "I didn't do these things"; and

b.) "You know me."

a.) We should believe him, why?

b.) No, no we do not.

Don't misconstrue; I am a big fan of the political Swalwell.

But I'm not in a cult.

And I go back to the days when I defended the National Enquirer when they printed the TRUTH about John Edwards and Rielle.

Please be accurate about it. It's not especially convincing when his defenders chronically misstate events to minimize things.

https://www.twincities.com/2017/12/07/al-franken-sexual-misconduct-allegations-timeline-senator-minnesota/

The timing is an important consideration.

He seems like a good guy..

The earliest allegation dates to 2019, which means Stone or other republicans would have had to plant an operative on Swallwell’s staff six years before he decided to run for governor.

Then Stone/republicans would have had to plant three more operatives to work on his staff faithfully until this week, then suddenly make “false” accusations.

Then, Stone/republicans would have also had to plant four operatives on his staff to to work faithfully, then resign in disgust once the news broke.

Or, there is truth to the accusations, but they are difficult to prove criminally due to the passage of time, but the women involved nevertheless spoke out to achieve some sort of accountability and closure.

If there is ratfuckery, it is far more likely that the allegations are true, and someone “encouraged” the women to go public to winnow the field of candidates, so that this would not be a ticking time bomb for November.

I am consistently impressed by the quality of your analysis and your obvious intellect.

He's trailing Swalwell and he certainly has the money to do some digging.

But if Swallwell is forced out of the race, Steyer is the prime beneficiary, at least for the moment.

It will be interesting to see how Porter handles this situation.

Should e Jean Carroll have gone to the authorities instead of waiting decades to reveal what had happened to her decades earlier?

So, again I say, these anonymous accusers should go report these alleged crimes immediately and have law enforcement investigate.

And sometimes a victim blames herself and thinks she's the only one, till someone else comes forward.

That's why Alvin Bragg, he of the successful Trump prosecution, has opened an investigation and set up a tip line for alleged victims to come foward.

Hence why he has had to ask the accusers or anyone else that might have knowledge about the accusations to come forward.

experienced something that they feel is morally, socially or culturally wrong but not sure about the legality of it. Would you say that's accurate?

...you should be willing to tell your story to the police.

And if they're not sure about the legality of rape (???) then that's even more reason to go to the police.

Whether it's defending men because we like them or because the victim didn't respond the "right" way, or fast enough.

are investigating the allegations.

they started their investigation.

It's up to any victim whether they feel more comfortable going to the police, their friends --online or IRL -- or the media.

I'm curious, do you say the same thing about Epstein victims?

And Epstein victims DID go to the authorities.

And while we're being curious, what are your thoughts if Epstein's victims chose not to cooperate with police and in doing so let their abusers get away with their crimes?

It's not clear to me that the investigation was opened because of the reporting; just that it was opened after the reporting, fwiw.

To the media.


They are accusing someone of serious crimes. I don't see why it's that controversial to want them to now tell their story to the police.

So annoying, aren't they?

But I refuse to say that Swalwell should immediately resign before he has an opportunity to defend against these allegations. Pardon me, if I still believe in that.

Some posters seem to think that an accusation should be an immediate call for a politician to step aside. Well, if that's the case, we won't have ANYONE running for public office for fear of being accused.

There is a process. I want to let the process work and see what the facts are. That does not mean that I think it would be okay for any man to do what Swalwell is accused of doing. It just means that I don't want to condemn him without having the whole story.

Swalwell has been one of THE most vocal critics of Trump, and I like that aspect of him. Whose gonna be accused next? Mark Kelley?
Ted Lieu?

Let the process play out. There will be plenty of time for him to resign if that's what the facts show needs to happen. This does not have to be decided tonight.

How can we pay attention to Epstein, when we've got one of our own drugging and raping women?

Roger Stone seems to have some inside info with the Democratic Party. He knew that Biden was gonna drop out and he knew when he was gonna drop out. I thought was BS'ing or whatever. I stumpled on some podcast he had. Then it happened just like he said.

You would be surprised that info does get shared. He discussed his relationship with Woodward and Bernstein. Sometimes people are friends and neighbors from those who work across the aisle and they find out that way.

I don't think he was ratfucked in that sense. I do think this a big distraction from Melania/Epstein/Ugaro and that Italian guy.

This kind of bribery is dollar and dime stuff. Getting one of the most successful democratic congressmen in California out of a race where he was on a trajectory to win, and out of Congress, knowing that women's accusations effectively end a man's career even if the evidence eventually exonerates him is a successful strategy. Even if innocent, no man or person of color ever recovers from that.

Shame.

If there was nothing to it, if he was being ratfucked, Swallwell had all the opportunities in the world to fight back.

Instead, once again someone who seems just a few hairs’-breadths away from the equivalent of supporting their favorite politician even if he did rape a few women with his best friend who had a whole island for raping women, is casting doubt on whether their favorite politician really did abuse a woman who came forward with a detailed story and evidence.

Being “our guy” is not an excuse to cast doubt when apparently HE isn’t even casting doubt on a pretty long-term abusive situation. He has all the reason and ability to fight it, if the story is false. It could land him with criminal charges, for a start. But he isn’t.

Bringing up Franken doesn’t help the argument. What Franken did was nowhere as serious, and there was no reason for him to lie about it. He didn’t. He had a couple options - stay in politics and let the voters decided if it was a big deal, or bow out because, if nothing else, it was not conduct many felt was befitting a man in high office. He chose how he chose. He was not in danger of criminal charges, etc.

We do not do ourselves any favors when we try to protect our politicians from accusations of misconduct and keep them on because… why? The other side has no shame? We want to assume women lie, especially when they come forward with stories that will tank their own careers? We get frustrated with the inconvenience losing a “good” candidate and having to work harder to bring us someone else who should be vetted even harder?

We need to stop making excuses or raising doubts to “save” politicians who are credibly accused. If the same level of evidence was raised with regard to abusing an elder family member or their child, the party would instantly turn against them. But a woman? “Oh, you know, women lie…”