Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., spent more than $30,000 in campaign funds on limousine rides, high-end restaurants, luxury hotels and alcohol delivery in the second fiscal quarter, according to Federal Election Commission records reviewed by Fox News.
Additionally, more than $20,000 was spent at the Ritz-Carlton Half Moon Bay, where his wife has been director of sales since February 2015.
The charges include:
- $566 on ”food & beverage” through the alcohol delivery service Drizly.
- $1,151 on ”refreshments” from seven trips to Capitol Hill Wine and Spirits.
- Nearly $4,400 at two California wineries on the same day for ”catering” and ”refreshments.”
- More than $7,000 at luxury restaurants in Washington, D.C.
Hundreds of dollars were also spent at 1-800-FLOWERS. The report comes nearly two weeks after Business Insider published photos of Swalwell and Rep. Ruben Gallego, D-Ariz., posing shirtless while riding camels along the Persian Gulf in March 2020.
The 84,621.59 bill for that trip was picked up by the U.S.-Qatar Business Council, which describes itself as ”dedicated exclusively to enhancing the bilateral business relationship between the US and Qatar.”
Democrat Rep. Eric Swalwell (CA) was photographed maskless and shirtless on a camel in Qatar while scolding people for not following Covid rules.
The trip to Qatar was paid for by US-Qatar Business Council, a special interest group that spent more than $84,000 on at least 5 lawmakers’ travel.
The photos were posted to Instagram by Congressman Ruben Gallego’s then-fiancée Sydney Barron Gallego and have since been deleted.
The Democrat Reps were galivanting in Qatar maskless with their wives in March while the CDC was still urging everyone, including vaccinated people, to wear masks outside, according to Business Insider.
The Trump Justice Department in 2017 and early 2018 issued subpoenas to Apple to obtain the communications records of at least two Democratic members of the House Intelligence Committee, Reps. Adam Schiff (D-CA) and Eric Swalwell (D-CA). According to The New York Times, DOJ prosecutors attempting to determine who leaked classified information to the media about Russiagate suspected the two House Democrats were the culprits, and to prove that, they obtained their communications records as well as those of family members, including minor children.
A DOJ leak investigation aimed at sitting members of Congress is highly unusual. Both the Obama and Trump administrations, in a hunt for leakers, created controversy by obtaining the communications records of journalists, including — in the case of the Obama DOJ — the family members of those journalists. But investigating members of the House Intelligence Committee for leaking crimes — as opposed to corruption or other standard criminal charges — can present different dangers. Neither Congressman was charged with any crimes and the investigation reportedly bore no fruit.
The two House Democrats, among the most fanatical disseminators of baseless Russiagate conspiracies and long known to serve as anonymous sources of leaks to liberal media outlets, reacted with predictable outrage. “This baseless investigation, while now closed, is yet another example of Trump’s corrupt weaponization of justice,” Schiff intoned on Thursday night. As difficult as it is, Swalwell, as he often does, found a way to be even more melodramatic than Schiff: “Like many of the world’s most despicable dictators, former President Trump showed an utter disdain for our democracy and the rule of law.”
Investigating possible crimes — such as leaking classified information — is the job of the Justice Department. To accomplish that, FBI agents and prosecutors often obtain personal communications records about their suspects. But invading the communications records of journalists, as both the Obama and Trump DOJ did, can create serious threats to press freedom and the possibility of abuse and retaliation. The same is true for invading the communications records of members of the legislative branch, particularly ones hostile to the president. An investigation is certainly warranted to determine the propriety of these subpoenas.
But like so many politicians before them, Schiff and Swalwell have zero credibility to object to this targeting. When it comes to ordinary Americans, both have been long-time champions of expanding domestic spying powers and blocking efforts at reform designed to curb abuses of the type they claim took place here.
The House Impeachment team is being accused of doctoring evidence amid recent revelations involving a presentation by Rep. Eric Swalwell at Donald Trump’s Senate trial.
The allegation stems from a tweet by Jennifer Lynn Lawrence which was used by Democrats to allege she was calling for an insurrection. In reality, Lawerence says the tweet was a reference to a prayer vigil and had nothing to do with the violence at the Capitol.
She also makes another, perhaps even more damning charge that appears to be completely backed up by the facts. Namely, that the House impeachment team doctored her tweet.
California congressman Eric Swalwell has refused to say whether he had a sexual relationship with a Chinese honeytrap spy because it is ‘classified’ as he blames President Trump for the revelations.
Meanwhile, Donald Trump Jr described him as a ‘threat to national security’.
It was reported by Axios on Monday that a Chinese national named Fang Fang or Christina Fang – allegedly an operative for China’s Ministry of State Security – targeted a group of Bay Area Democrats – including the congressman.
Swalwell had immediately cut off ties with her in 2015 when U.S. intelligence officials briefed him on their security concerns.
The congressman said said he first became aware that Axios was looking into Fang’s activities in July 2019, around the time he was ending his brief bid for the Democratic presidential nomination – during which he was a strong critic of the president.
‘I’ve been a critic of the president. I’ve spoken out against him. I was on both committees that worked to impeach him,’ Swalwell said in an interview with Politico on Tuesday, questioning the timing of the revelations.