General Discussion

...except for this editor's word.

Maybe it was, but this article is gossip.

Author claims, "There is no believable way, given what I know about how news travels on Capitol Hill, that these people who backed Swalwell weren’t aware of at least rumors and more likely very credible information about this serial conduct."

Nothing but his word for charges that basically smear the entire Dem party, and he doesn't offer a speck of evidence. It's essentially just rumormongering, which I'd guess should be expected with this story going forward.

Not saying they aren't true, but a report like this with nothing but the author's word is weak sauce, and not the stuff of evidentiary reporting. Should get him some teevee appearances, though.

I think the charges that have come out are credible and devastating enough without resorting to smearing Democrats who worked with him.

The minute the woman came forward, Dems dissociated themselves with Swalwell's campaign and called for investigations. THAT'S the party's attitude toward these abuses, not this opportunistic swipe at the party by this 'Prospect' editor.

It reads like he wants to both sides the parties responses to sexual assault, and he's seriously demagoguing the only party that actually acts on charges instead of perpetually defending each and every perp, as republicans reflexively and repeatedly do.