UPDATE: Swalwell Suspends His Campaign For California Governor
“These allegations of sexual assault are flat false. They are absolutely false. They did not happen. They have never happened, and I will fight them…”
Federal authorities are now probing Rep. Eric Swalwell over allegations tied to his use of campaign funds and employment of a nanny without valid work authorization, opening a new front in a rapidly widening crisis that is no longer confined to misconduct claims.
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services has referred the allegations to the Department of Homeland Security law enforcement, escalating complaints that Swalwell paid a Brazilian nanny with campaign funds while she lacked authorization to work in the United States. The allegations center on whether payments continued after her work status expired in 2022 and whether those expenses were routed through campaign accounts under childcare designations.
Complaints reviewed by federal agencies allege tens of thousands of dollars were directed toward the nanny through campaign-related expenses, raising questions about whether those payments complied with federal law and campaign finance rules.
“These allegations are serious… No employer, including a member of Congress, is above the law.”
There have been no findings of wrongdoing tied to those complaints, but the referral to federal law enforcement marks a significant escalation, placing Swalwell under scrutiny that extends beyond political fallout and into potential legal exposure.
The federal probe lands as Swalwell is already under investigation by the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office over allegations that he sexually assaulted or harassed multiple women, including one who said he attacked her in New York while she was too intoxicated to consent. Additional accounts describe unsolicited explicit messages and unwanted physical contact, broadening the scope of the claims.
Swalwell has denied those allegations in a video posted to social media, attempting to push back amid mounting pressure.
Hear it directly from me. These allegations are flat false. And I will fight them. pic.twitter.com/bQSlCquD1U
— Rep. Eric Swalwell (@RepSwalwell) April 11, 2026
“These allegations of sexual assault are flat false. They are absolutely false. They did not happen. They have never happened, and I will fight them with everything that I have.”
That denial has done little to stabilize his position as political support continues to erode.
Democratic leadership has called the allegations “disturbing” and urged Swalwell to end his gubernatorial campaign, while senior staff in his office said they were “horrified” and emphasized support for the women who came forward.
Two California Democrats have called for his resignation, and members of Congress are now preparing censure and expulsion efforts that would force a direct vote on whether he should remain in office.
“Swalwell must halt his campaign, resign from office, and face the consequences of a full investigation.”
Labor unions have begun pulling endorsements, party leaders are distancing themselves, and lawmakers in both parties are openly weighing whether Swalwell should be removed from Congress as the investigations continue to build. The convergence of a federal probe, a criminal investigation, and mounting bipartisan pressure has fundamentally altered the trajectory of his campaign and his standing in Washington.
Swalwell is still insisting he will fight, but the situation has shifted beyond a single controversy into a layered crisis with legal, political, and electoral consequences closing in at once.
UPDATE: 8:55 PM EST
Congressman Eric Swalwell announced via Twitter/X he was suspending his campaign for Governor.
I am suspending my campaign for Governor.
To my family, staff, friends, and supporters, I am deeply sorry for mistakes in judgment I’ve made in my past.
I will fight the serious, false allegations that have been made — but that’s my fight, not a campaign’s.
— Eric Swalwell (@ericswalwell) April 13, 2026
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
No one will ever convince me that Dem leadership hasn’t always known about Swalwell’s “issues.”
He’s being cut loose.
But it does not extend to his current office. The Dems are okay with that.
If this were a Repub, his head would be rolling….
“Two California Democrats have called for his resignation, and members of Congress are now preparing censure and expulsion efforts that would force a direct vote on whether he should remain in office.”
Of course they knew. That’s why it was so coordinated. The Fang Banger was just stupid enough to think that he could say ‘no’ when told to drop out.
Exactly as predicted, they’re throwing the also-rans out of the field to rig it against Republicans, like always.
Steyer is next. The current Democrat Party will NEVER allow a Jew to be the California governor, much less a billionaire Jew.
1. That’s not rigging. That’s management, and is completely legitimate politics, so long as no knowingly false allegations are made.
2. Steyer is not a Jew.
Steyer’s father, not mother, was Jewish. Steyer was raised Christian. His father’s ethnicity isn’t passed down to him.
Do you think the DNC collects the blackmail file? I don’t., I think professionals in three-letter agencies do it for them. Or at the very least, somebody in there leaks it to the Democrats. Republicans never get that sort of a reacharound. Pelosi can have Mao’s grandson driving her limo for ten years and Republicans haven’t a clue.
They all knew about this especially the nanny. I wonder how many in Congress employ an illegal alien to be a nanny, housekeeper, gardener etc? Dems in CA have been trying to get someone to drop out of the race to try and consolidate votes preventing the 2 Republicans in the race from facing each other mostly because both have promised to dig into the fraud and waste going on in the state.
This guy is just a piece of work, isn’t he?
Is there a law he hasn’t broken or lie he hasn’t told?
Which laws has he broken? The campaign expenditures have been questioned, not determined to have been unlawful. Everything else is just allegations.
Using campaign money, any money, to employ a person with no work authorization is illegal.
That’s just an allegation. Nothing’s been proven yet.
And here we go again with Milhouse’s leftist lawyering in defense of democrats and specifically the scumbag Swalwell. Really Milhouse, it gets very tiring to have to skip over your idiotic comments over and over again. But here we are and there you go.
The freaking law he alleged to have broken is hiring an a nanny that didn’t have authorization to work in the United States and paid her monies out of his campaign funds.
How dare you call me a leftist?
That is a law he is alleged to have broken. As of now it’s nothing but an allegation. We are discussing ztakddot’s claim that he has broken many laws, to the point where it makes sense to ask whether there are any he hasn’t broken; whereas in fact, as far as I know, it has not been established that he has broken any laws at all.
Milhouse: To be fair to Diver64 and Ztakddot, they didn’t say proven or convicted of. An allegation at this point is enough to say what laws has he not broken colloquially given his track record. On its face, without some really, really obscure exception applying, the campaign expenditure stuff alone is blatantly illegal.
Lucifer: To be fair to Milhouse, that was uncalled for. Milhouse is many things: pedantic, sometimes frustrating and annoying, but he is most certainly NOT a Leftist. As near as I can tell, he is a Constitutional Orignalist Textualist. And while we all can argue about what the Law IS, Milhouse is very rarely wrong about how the law APPLIES.
My second thought was did he boff the nanny and was she a Brazilian spy?
This is a disaster for Republicans.
This is exactly why it’s being done.
Yes, it’s why Pelosi wasted no time calling the accusations “indefensible.”
I feel as though Commiefornia is a lost cause. Even Hilton, if elected, couldn’t fix the situation, because we’re talking about decades of profligacy, incompetence, corruption, fraud and illegal alien parasitism.
It’s better for the “red” states in the Union, if Commiefornia continues on its present course into the abyss. More companies, more taxpayers, more jobs and more wealth will flee this wretched state, moving to Texas, Idaho, Utah, Florida, etc.
Not to mention the fact that California has a permanent democratic majority in its legislature, so it would be difficult, if not impossible, to pass any legislation. Similar to Arizona, where we have a majority republican legislature, but our democratic governor vetoes everything that comes across her desk.
Leave Eric alone! We need him in the primary to ensure two Republican finalists!
No Eric! Fight On! Fight on the beaches! Fight in the hills! Fight in the fields! Fight in the streets! Never surrender!!
He must have been surprised to find out he wasn’t a “made man” like Newsom…. or even maybe Schiff. Keeping his D.C. gig may still be a problem for the rest of the Party… plenty of Karens and AWFULs from the other states. He may keep quiet to avoid meeting up with Seth Rich. Al Franken did far less…but that was Minnesota and , in retrospect, a harbinger of things to come.
As I recall, Al Franken’s downfall was when he prank molested a sleeping female soldier passenger on a military plane – and recorded the “prank” for further amusement.
Doubling down on his own stupidity.
As for the Seth Rich mention, like Jeffery Epstein’s very convenient and incredibly suspicious death (one had a mysterious disappearing/appearing “suicide” note, one had a mysterious and incredibly suspicious failure of multiple surveillance protocols), there’s insufficient proof that Hillary et Alia engineered those “suicides”.
Only really beyond-all-doubt prominent politician who committed murder to avoid scandal I recall is Ted Kennedy – evidence is that he waited to report a drunk driving accident until after it was far too late to save his female pretty passenger – or test his alcohol blood levels.
“As I recall, Al Franken’s downfall was when he prank molested a sleeping female soldier passenger on a military plane – and recorded the “prank” for further amusement. Doubling down on his own stupidity.”
To be fair, his lifelong vocation WAS professional comedian. Not lawyer or trust fund baby, like other senators. He was a natural clown, and it came back to bite him. I don’t believe he ever even actually molested the passenger — just posed as if he were about to molest her. It would have been one thing if the photo had been from BEFORE he was a senator but it wasn’t. Poor judgment.
The “molestation” consisted of him made childish gestures over her like he was grabbing her breasts when he was standing 3 or 4 feet away. He got railroaded.
Yeah. Couldn’t have happened to a nicer fella, though.
Well, you know. He was good enough, smart enough, and doggone it, people liked him. Til they didn’t.
Camera angle was unfortunate then, because the photos I recall looked like if he really wasn’t actually groping the sleeping soldier’s headlights he was close enuf to make it look like he was.
Railroaded? Pull the other one.
Faking a photo of someone being sexually assaulted is bad in its own right.
‘Poor judgement” understates it, it’s the term a defense lawyer uses to try to explain away “boys will be boys” crimes.
Had a coworker who got stinking drunk with some buddies and passed out on a “friends” couch. The buddies figured it’d be hilarious to shave off his eyebrows while he was asleep. He woke up before they finished shaving off the remainder of the second eyebrow. He was not amused.
I doubt this victim was either.
Well, it worked. Old allegations dredged up in the nick of time to force a Dem out of the race like the party has been begging for months to happen. I bet the women all refuse to have anything to do with the investigation and disappear now that the mission is accomplished. Couldn’t happen to a better guy.
Am I the only one that finds it suspicious that these years old charges were sat on all the time this sleazy was in Congress and are only now being mad when he is in second and might be California Gov?
Enough to get him out of the governor race, but not enough to get him booted from his congressional seat.
“Two California Democrats have called for his resignation, and members of Congress are now preparing censure and expulsion efforts that would force a direct vote on whether he should remain in office.”
To quote you:
“That’s just an allegation. Nothing’s been proven yet.”
When he gets booted, I’ll care.
It’s enough to discredit the claim that it’s “Enough to get him out of the governor race, but not enough to get him booted from his seat”.
But in fact the bar for losing support in a race for future office is and should be much lower than the one for being booted out of an office he’s been elected to.
All that’s required to make him drop out of the race is the prospect of not winning, while expelling him from the House takes a 2/3 vote, and few on either side will vote to expel a member without strong evidence of guilt.
Nasty Nanzi, of all people, got to him.
Fang Fang sends her support.
Aww, what a shame.
they’ve know about it for a long time
remember they had to make allll this sh up about trump when they were doing it themselves ….again..sop for dems
Everytime these allegations come up I always remind myself that Congress has an entire bank account just to pay off people who make these allegations. I also remind myself that it is not just used by Democrats, it is used by both sides of the isle.
We need to end the legal difference between ending a campaign and suspending one. By suspending he can still raise money and use remaining campaign resources (for example, to pay staff–perhaps even nannies).
Why do we need to end it? Why is it a problem that he can still raise money? On the contrary, if someone is no longer running then why is it any of our business who chooses to give him money? So long as they’re not being defrauded, who cares?
Why we should care: Ultimately it’s a form of legalized money laundering to be able to still make “donations” to a dead campaign, and it allows for all sorts of shenanigans in terms of legalized bribery depending on that candidate’s current office.
Employ a whole bunch of your family members in vastly inflated paid positions (that are actually doing some sort of recognized work, as opposed to “no-show” job positions): OK!
Create a “War Chest” for a candidate’s future election run! Oh, wait, that candidate will never actually run again for future office, they sit on it and then “donate” it to some OTHER candidate (bypassing ALL sorts of rules about individual or corporate hard donation limits) because it wasn’t donated to the NEW candidate, it just happens to be sitting around from an “old” donation.
And there’s a giant tax loophole as the candidate themselves doesn’t have to declare the payments to the campaign as personal “income” (unless their being paid by the campaign itself AS an employee), and can utilize the funds in certain … cash fungible … ways that can offset other expenses if they are careful about it.. And YES, a candidate CAN be paid a salary BY THEIR CAMPAIGN. It doesn’t make sense for current federal office holders because it is OFFSET against their federal employment income, but for non-officeholders it has been the case since the FEC approved it in December of 2023 and it took effect March 1, 2024, approved by a heavily-weighted Democrat majority Federal Election Commission.
See: https://rollcall.com/2023/12/15/fec-revises-rules-for-candidates-drawing-salaries-from-campaigns/
Because the ex candidate retains any perks of being a candidate, such as matching funds, write-offs for campaign expenses, a vehicle for raising money that might otherwise be fraud, and it is a weasel way of suggesting the candidate is no longer running. I perhaps misstated the legality issue: terminating a campaign is a legal act that requires the candidate to stop receiving contributions, stop expenditures (other than debt service), file a termination report with the FEC, dispose legally of remaining funds, and settle all debts. Suspending is just a political maneuver.