Eric Swalwell, a California Democrat known for his relentless criticism of Donald Trump, now finds himself facing a wave of questions regarding his own financial dealings. A recent report has unearthed a series of unusual payments totaling over $360,000 made to a single campaign staffer over the past three years.
Federal Election Commission filings reveal these payments, ostensibly for services ranging from simple “flower reimbursements” to more substantial costs like “security.” The sheer scope and varied nature of these expenses have raised eyebrows, prompting a former FEC commissioner to call for a serious investigation.
The recipient of these funds is Darly Meyer, a Haitian-American who also operates a limousine company in North Hollywood, California. Payments to Meyer fluctuated wildly, from a minimal $53 to over $12,000, categorized as everything from travel and car service to salary and even “personal travel expense reimbursement.”
While campaigns inherently involve diverse expenditures, a particular detail stands out: payments specifically designated for “security.” Records indicate Meyer does not possess a valid security license in California, raising further concerns about the legitimacy of these charges.
This isn’t Swalwell’s first encounter with unwelcome scrutiny. He previously faced intense criticism for an alleged relationship with a suspected Chinese spy, a connection that ultimately led to his removal from the House Intelligence Committee. A widely circulated video of an apparent mishap during a live television interview also added to the public’s perception.
Swalwell’s response to the recent report has been characteristic – dismissive and combative. He mocked the inquiry on social media, claiming the expenses were a direct result of death threats stemming from negative coverage by the news outlet questioning the payments.
However, Swalwell’s reaction avoids addressing the core issue: the unusual nature and lack of transparency surrounding the $360,000 in payments. This isn’t an isolated incident either; past FEC filings reveal a pattern of significant campaign spending on luxury accommodations, dining, and travel, even internationally.
The irony is stark. Swalwell recently argued that Donald Trump should withdraw from the presidential race due to a conviction stemming from payments made to an adult film star. Yet, he appears to expect a different standard for his own, considerably larger, expenditures.
In 2019, Swalwell himself acknowledged that the public largely dismissed the payments made by Trump. Now, he demands a different level of scrutiny for a former president while offering little explanation for his own campaign’s financial activity.
Experts suggest the FEC’s auditing arm should investigate whether these payments were legitimate and properly documented. The situation underscores a familiar pattern: Swalwell has consistently demanded rigorous investigation of his political opponents while seemingly believing himself exempt from similar scrutiny.
The questions surrounding Swalwell’s campaign finances are mounting, and the call for a thorough investigation is growing louder. It remains to be seen whether the FEC will act, but the situation demands a level of transparency and accountability that has so far been conspicuously absent.
