Tangle - Swalwell, Gonzales resign after sexual misconduct allegations.

Episode Date: April 15, 2026

Last Friday, a former staffer for California gubernatorial candidate Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) accused the Congressman of making unwanted advances, sexual assault, and rape. Three other women also came forward to accuse Swalwell of sexual misconduct, describing a pattern of sending explicit messages through Snapchat. Swalwell denies the allegations, but apologized for “mistakes in judgment” and dropped out of the gubernatorial race after losing prominent endorsements. The Los Angeles and Manhattan District Attorneys are investigating Swalwell over the alleged misconduct.Ad-free podcasts are here!To listen to this podcast ad-free, and to enjoy our subscriber only premium content, go to ReadTangle.com to sign up!Isaac interviews Casey Newton.Recently, Isaac Saul sat down with journalist and Hard Fork cohost Casey Newton to unpack a major shift happening in tech: the growing legal and political push to hold social media companies accountable for how their platforms are designed. You can check it out here!You can read today's podcast⁠ ⁠⁠here⁠⁠⁠, and today’s “Under the radar.” story ⁠here⁠ and the “Have a nice day” story ⁠here⁠.You can subscribe to Tangle by clicking here or drop something in our tip jar by clicking here. Take the survey: What do you think are the implications of Hungary’s election? Let us know.Our Executive Editor and Founder is Isaac Saul. Our Executive Producer is Jon Lall.This podcast was Written by: Will Kaback and audio edited and mixed by Dewey Thomas. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet 75.Our newsletter is edited by Managing Editor Ari Weitzman, Senior Editor Will Kaback, Lindsey Knuth, Bailey Saul, and Audrey Moorehead. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From executive producer Isaac Saul, this is Tangle. Good morning, good afternoon, and good evening, and welcome to the Tangle podcast, a place where you get views from across the political spectrum, some independent thinking, and a little bit of our take. I'm your host today, senior editor, Will K back. Today's topic covers the recent sexual assault and misconduct allegations that have been leveled, against now former Representative Eric Swalwell, a Democrat from California. And it also touches on the similar sexual misconduct allegations and the subsequent resignation of Representative Tony Gonzalez, a Republican from Texas. Swalwell's story is the focus here as five accusers have now come forward alleging a range of

crimes and the Los Angeles and Manhattan District Attorney's Office have also opened investigations into those claims. So we'll be mostly focusing on Swalwell today, but in my take and some of the commentary that you'll hear from the right and left, we also talk about how these stories reveal some uncomfortable truths for both parties. Before we get into today's topic, we have a quick correction from yesterday's edition, which was about Hungary's elections. In the introduction to that edition, we wrote that neither Trump nor Vice President Vance has commented on the result of the election. On Monday evening, however, Vice President Vance did speak on the election in a Fox News interview, saying that he was sad about Hungarian Prime Minister Victor Orban's loss, but not surprised

by the outcome. Now, this is a difficult one, because we typically write the introduction to the edition the day before it publishes. And in this case, we wrote the introduction before Vance made those comments on Monday evening. Now, we also should have caught that on Tuesday. morning and we do have processes in place to make sure that we don't overlook updates like this to stories on the morning of when we're in our final production process. But we just missed the Vance interview during that process yesterday. So this is our 154th correction in Tangle's 359 week history and our first correction since March 31st. We track these corrections and put them at the top of every edition when they occur in an effort to maximize transparency with our audience.

All right, now I'm going to hand it over to Audrey, who's going to get us into the main topic for today. And then I'll be back to read my take. Thanks, Will. Now for today's quick hits. Number one, the United States and Iran have reportedly reached an in-principle agreement to extend the current two-week ceasefire to support ongoing peace talks. A second round of direct negotiations between the sides is expected to be held in the coming days. Separately, diplomats from Lebanon and Israel, met in Washington, D.C. for discussions hosted by Secretary of State Marco Rubio on a potential

ceasefire. Both sides said the discussions were productive, but did not announce any immediate agreements. Number two, the Justice Department requested a federal court dismissed the convictions of 12 people found guilty of crimes, including seditious conspiracy, related to the January 6th Capitol riots. Those people were members of the proud boys and oathkeepers, right-wing extremist groups, and had previously had their sentences commuted by President Donald Trump, the Justice Department's move would wipe their convictions. Number three, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that the producer price index, which measures how much it costs businesses to produce items before they reach retailers,

rose by 0.5% in March, below economists' expectations of a 1.1% increase. Number four, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky claimed that Ukraine, forces had captured a Russian position using only drones and an armed robotic defense system, a first in the war. Number five, Vice President J.D. Vance said he did not think President Trump's recent criticism of Pope Leo the 14th was newsworthy, but suggested that, quote, in some cases, it would be best for the Vatican to stick to matters of morality, end quote. Vance also defended Trump's now deleted truth social post depicting the president as a Jesus-like figure, calling it a misunderstood joke.

Breaking news, the stunning fall, and this scandal now widening tonight, Congressman Eric Swalwell resigning from Congress, it's now official, his resignation read before Congress. Swalwell forced to step down amid multiple allegations of sexual misconduct. The scandal already forcing him to drop out of the California governor's race. Last Friday, a former staffer for California gubernatorial candidate and U.S. House Representative Eric Swalwell, a Democrat, accused the congressman of making unwanted advances, sexual assault, and rape. Three other women also came forward to accuse Swalwell of sexual misconduct, describing a pattern of sending explicit messages through Snapchat. Swalwell denies

the allegations, but dropped out of the gubernatorial race after losing prominent endorsements. The Los Angeles and Manhattan District attorneys are investigating Swalwell over the alleged misconduct. On Tuesday, Swalwell officially resigned from Congress. Additionally, Republican representative from Texas, Tony Gonzalez, who was embroiled in a separate sexual misconduct scandal, later resigned on the same day. The two lawmakers were both the subject of House ethics probes and were reportedly facing expulsion votes if they did not resign. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, which broke the story, the former staffer said Swalwell first began sending her unsolicited graphic pictures over Snapchat in 2019, when she was 21 years old and working in the Democrats'

district office in the Bay Area. In 2019, she said Swalwell tried to kiss her in his car on one occasion and asked her to perform oral sex on him in a parking lot on another. The former staffer also alleged that Swalwell raped her after a charity gala in 2024. She said she became heavily intoxicated, but recalled trying to stop Swalwell from unwanted advances and waking up naked with the congressman the next day. Afterwards, she messaged friends to say she had been sexually assaulted and described experiencing vaginal bleeding. Hours after the Chronicle published its report, CNN released a separate expose

that included allegations from three additional women. One woman said she connected with Swalwell online and ended up drunk in his hotel room with little memory of what had occurred. Two of the women, Ali Samarko and Anika Aubrecht, came forward publicly to accuse Swalwell of sexual misconduct, including sending unsolicited nude photos. Samarko said she believed Swalwa was attempting,

quote, to save face by withdrawing from the gubernatorial race. Samarko also told CBS News, quote, but I also felt very vindicated that he realized it was over for him, end quote. On Tuesday, a fifth woman, Lana Drews, came forward to accuse Swalwell of drugging and raping her in a hotel room in 2018. Drew said she and the former representative were friends,

but believes he spiked her drink at an event and had non-consensual sex with her. Swalwell, who was 45 years old, married and has three children, has denied the allegations. In a post on X announcing his resignation on Sunday, Swalwell said, quote, I will fight the serious false allegations that have been made, but that's my fight, not a campaign, end quote.

California has the top two open primary for governor, where every voter can participate in the primary, and the two leading candidates proceed to the general election in November, regardless of party. Swalwell had been the leading Democrat in the primary field. With his campaign suspended, Republican Steve Hilton and Democrat Tom Steyer have become the leading candidates. Shortly after Swalwell's announcement, former Representative Gonzalez also announced his resignation from Congress. Gonzalez admitted to sending sexually explicit text messages to Regina Santos Aviles, a then-three-year-old staffer with whom he had allegedly had an affair in May 2024.

Santos Avilles killed herself in 2025. Gonzalez, aged 46, is married with six children. He was first elected to Congress in 2020. Next, we'll dive into what the left, right, and writers in California are saying about the accusations against Swalwell and the two congressman's resignations. Then, senior editor Will Kayback will give his take. We'll be right back after this quick break. First up, what the left is saying.

The left says concerns about Swalwell's behavior have long existed and that he should have been stopped sooner. Some argue Swalwell's rapid fall shows the Democratic Party can still wield power, but only when it wants to. In the American prospect, David Dayan explored Eric Swalwell and the death of accountability. The truth, which will be available for all to see before long, is that Swalwell's conduct with interns, young staff, and female fans was an open secret for a long time. And yet the party, if not Pelosi, in this case specifically, had been supporting him and raising money for him. That speaks to a larger problem.

There are public claims on social media going back to 2020. This more recent one is from an aide to one of his opponents in the governor's race, Antonio Villarigosa. There are more private claims that go back all the way to when Swalwell entered Congress in 2013. This information was suppressed by the congressman and a community of supporters in ways that make victims uncomfortable with emerging. If you are a politician who is aware of a serial harasser or even assaultor in your midst, there are steps you can take to encourage victims to speak out,

warn your colleagues about what he is doing and so on. The very least you can do is not endorse as attempts for higher office. That was an available path not taken in a Democratic Party that has a real problem with accountability, the same way the rest of our country does. In Bloomberg, Erica D. Smith wrote, ousting Swalwa was easy. Now comes the hard part. Swalwa's decision not only upends the race for Democrats ahead of the June primary,

given that Swalwell had recently emerged as the party's frontrunner to succeed a termed out. governor Gavin Newsom. Swalwa's decision not only upends the race for Democrats ahead of the June primary, given that Swalwell had recently emerged as the party's frontrunner to succeed termed out Governor Gavin Newsom. It also could upend Congress, given that Swalwell announced on Monday that he was resigning from the House ahead of a likely expulsion vote this week. However, the real takeaway of Swalwell's swift fall is what it says about the Democratic Party and how and when the establishment chooses to wield power. This flexed by the Democratic establishment represents a marked departure from what preceded it.

For months, while a crowded field of Democratic candidates increased the risk of a Republican candidate getting elected governor in November, the California Democratic Party largely feigned helplessness overshaping the race. Flexing power in this way is righteous and just, but it's also easy. It's just another example of what Democrats do best in the Trump era,

which is showing what they are against. Still, far less clear to voters is what the party stands for. Now for what the right is saying. Many on the right argue Swalwell's fall was coordinated by the Democratic Party after years of protecting him. Others highlight the lack of an investigation into Swalwell and question the criminality of some of the allegations against him. In Fox News, Jonathan Turley said, Eric Swalwell's enablers knew the truth and protected him anyway. Swalwell has spent his entire career protected by an enabling establishment and liberal media machine.

He was a made man in Washington. and those who made him protected him, despite years of rumors and allegations of misconduct. His greatest patron was former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who single-handedly saved Swalwell's career when he was found to have had an affair with an alleged Chinese spy. Pelosi told the media, I don't have any concern about Mr. Swalwell.

For most of the media, that was enough, and they slinked away. The congressman's alleged victims have lashed out not only at Swalwell, but also at many in the establishment. They alleged that they were rebuffed when they tried, tried to bring their allegations to reporters. If even half of these allegations against him are true, it shows the sense of license that Swalwell developed for years in Washington. He lost that political immunity this week and now faces real legal liability. That does not mean that Democrats will not try to control the damage. They want Swalwell to take a deal to avoid any investigations that will

pull other Democrats into the vortex of the scandal. In the New York Post, Baccia-Ungarsar Sarkin suggested Democrats hurt all women by covering up for Swalwell until now. What happened to Eric Swalwell was not a reckoning over gross behavior. It was a hashtag Me Too witch hunt, organized and motivated by the Democrats' desire not to lose the governor's race to either of the two leading candidates, both of whom happened to be Republicans. Let me state clearly that I'm no fan of Eric Swalwell. I find his political persona to be gross and divisive. Moreover, if he actually raped any of these women or assaulted them, he should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. But it's also undeniable that the allegations described by CNN and other outlets include a lot of

what seems like gray area. The women engaged in mutual, reciprocal, consensual flirtation in the DMs, followed by consensual heavy drinking. They may not have wanted to do it, but they did not relay those feelings to Swalwell because of his position of power. Beyond politics, it seems like we have lost the ability to distinguish between immoral behavior, like being a married man hitting on a young woman, and criminal behavior, like assault and rape. And that doesn't just hurt men, it hurts women. Finally, here's what California writers are saying.

Some writers in California note the timing of Swalwell's fall during a crowded race for governor. Others contend that the burden of shame has shifted from the accusers to the accused. In the spectator, Laura Powell said Swalwell's fall was electoral math, not morality. California's June 2nd primary uses the jungle system so that all candidates appear on one ballot and the top two regardless of party advance. Usually that benefits Democrats. This year it may not. That's because Democrats crowded the field, with roughly eight candidates splitting the vote,

while Republicans consolidated around two, Steve Hilton and Chad Bianco. Before the scandal broke, Swalwell was polling in the mid-teens, alongside Hilton and Bianco, with the other Democrats clustered just behind. That distribution created a reel, though still slim, risk of two Republicans advancing to November, shutting Democrats out entirely. Complicating matters, it is too late for Swalwell's name to be removed from the ballot. He will continue to draw votes from low-information voters, loyalists, or those casting protest ballots. His exit reshuffles the field, but it does not necessarily resolved Democrats' core concern about a split vote that could hand the governorship to a Republican. If this were purely about misconduct, there would have been immediate calls for him to resign from

Congress. There were not, at least from his former allies. The urgency was tied to the governor's race. In the Los Angeles Times, Katie Butler argued, Swawa's resignation shows that the default is no longer to shame accusers. Swalwell could not erase what had been said or avoid consequences of those actions. and without prejudging the particulars of his case, that's a good thing. Until a decade ago, shame was a weapon wielded widely against female accusers to shut them up. Rich and powerful men largely dictated the public narrative. When accused of acquaintance rape or harassment, they followed a simple playbook, declare innocence or argue consent.

In an era when the news was largely defined by male top editors at a few gatekeeper media like the New York Times and the television networks, the tactics often worked. To be sure, shame can be counterproductive. That is why we have courts due process and sober systems of fact-finding, none of which have yet rendered any verdict about Swalwell. For centuries, a small proportion of men, men we now call serial offenders, have sexually exploited and assaulted women

because they knew society would usually let them get away with it. Many of them simultaneously sought public agilation. If the threat of humiliation discourages only a few of the next generation of Weinsteins and Epstein's, and they are out there already operating in the shadows, shame will have proved its value. That's it for what the left, right, and California writers are saying. Now let's pass it over to Will for his take.

Thanks, Audrey. All right, this is Will back to read my take. Like anyone, now former representative Eric Swalwell retains the presumption of innocence, and we should wait to see the outcome of the investigation and any trial that may arise from them before rendering final judgment. But these accusations are detailed and numerous, and demanding that a representative facing these claims resign

doesn't require a legal burden of proof. Now, the details of former representative Tony Gonzalez's accusations are different but disturbing in their own way. He admitted to an affair with a staffer who later killed herself. He was also accused by another former staffer, making unwanted sexual advances over text. Now, he's not under criminal investigation, but after he admitted to the affair, I think he has no place in Congress either. I do imagine that it's difficult to give a satisfactory explanation or apology in a moment like this, even if you are innocent of the

most serious charges. But in this instance, both men offered wholly unsatisfactory explanations and apologies. When he admitted to the affair, Gonzalez barely acknowledged his behavior, alluding instead to a, quote, lapse in judgment. He then focused his comments on claiming the story's public release made him the victim of a, quote, very coordinated attack. That's hardly contrite. Swalwell, for his part, has engaged in a kind of double speak that honestly feels insulting to our collective intelligence. In announcing the end of his gubernatorial campaign, he apologized for, quote, mistakes and judgment that I've made in my past, but vowed to fight the, quote, false allegations against him. In announcing his congressional resignation, he again apologized

for unnamed mistakes in judgment, but again called the specific allegations false. And his attorney has also said that he denies each and every accusation made against him. I've seen enough PR speak to know a carefully crafted statement when I see one, but this is just incoherent. To be honest, though, these feeble statements and half-assed apologies aren't worth any more attention than I've given them. What's been seared into my mind since the Swalwell story broke last week are the stories of the women who came forward. The details are upsetting, but if you can, you should read the original San Francisco Chronicle and CNN reports and watch the videos of three of these women speaking about their experiences. Clearly, Swalwell's alleged actions

have caused years of anguish. Going public with these stories comes with serious risks to their personal and professional relationships, and it will invite scrutiny into their credibility. That scrutiny is inevitable, and some of it will be in good faith, but much of it won't be.

Personally, I find their accounts credible, regardless of whether they opted to identify themselves publicly or not, as some did and others didn't. And that's especially after reading in those Chronicle and CNN reports about how the outlets corroborated these specific claims. It can be difficult to balance the desire for consequences with the patience that justice often requires, but as with Gonzalez's case, the breadth and consistency of these stories should disqualify Swalwell from any position of power. In fact, depending on what the investigations

uncover, that could be just the beginning of his extended reckoning and the reckoning of others in his orbit. And that takes me to my next point, which is that Both political parties have questions to answer in each of these cases. Namely, why did it take so long for these accusations to come to light? Swalwell's Democratic colleagues spent years supporting his career and elevating him to powerful positions, even as his alleged misconduct reportedly became an open secret. Who knew about this? What did they know? And why didn't they speak up? The same questions can be asked of Republicans about Gonzalez,

whose relationship with his staffer was reportedly also regarded. as an open secret. Now, the timing of Swalwell and Gonzalez's resignations also invites questions. It seems blatantly like a backroom handshake deal between Democratic and Republican leaders to avoid messy expulsion votes, the kind of agreement where they say, we'll sacrifice one of ours if you sacrifice one of yours. Are we really supposed to believe that Gonzalez's colleagues, particularly on the Republican side, all became convinced that he should resign at the exact same moment when the accusations

against Swalwell became public. Again, that suggestion feels like an insult to our intelligence. Then there's the media. Over the weekend, a handful of posts from reporters previously in Swalwell's orbit suggested his alleged sexual misconduct was widely known for years. A CNN article from 2017 described, quote, more than half a dozen interviewees independently named one California congressman pursuing female staffers, end quote. Politico also ran a lengthy story about the whisper network surrounding Swalwell, writing, quote, warnings about the lawmaker had long circulated privately. Now, my immediate reaction to these posts was anger. What exactly is a reporter's job, if not to investigate these kinds of stories immediately as soon

as you hear of them? Why let them fester until enough accusations pile up that the dam breaks? Many writers on the right and a few on the left picked up on this dynamic and published forceful criticisms of what they called Swalwell's media enablers. A couple of theories from conservative writers caught my attention. National Reviews Jeffrey Blair said, quote, anyone who had the power to push it as a story had no incentive to make it into one. As long as Swalwell was content to play a replacement-level representative,

it apparently didn't matter whom he might victimize. He was useful. Jonathan Turley, who we quoted under what the right is saying, said, the media will cover a scandal involving a leading Democrat if there is no real alternative. I think each of these perspectives contains some truth. To Blair's point, Swalwell emerged as a TV-savvy critic of President Trump during the president's first term. As the congressman star rose, some insiders may have been more interested in building a rapport than digging into uncomfortable rumors.

To Turley's point, we've seen prominent Democrats receive fawning media coverage, only for the public to later discover years of misbehavior that seemed like an open secret among the media and insiders. New York's Democratic Governor Andrew Cuomo was one such media darling at the start of COVID, only to be brought down by widespread claims of sexual misconduct. And independent investigators later reported a pattern of this behavior dating back to 2013. However, Turley's condemnation of media silence

risks brushing over a more complicated reality of reporting on rumors like this. Now, a select few journalists did discuss these rumors openly when they knew about them. Others may have known but were unable to run with the story. The American prospects David Dayan wrote that he chased down some leads about Swalwell's misconduct after Swalwell entered the governor's race, but Dane found that alleged victims were already working with other reporters. He wrote, quote, victims decide when the story breaks, and it would actually be monumentally harmful and disrespectful

to jump out in front of them without the hard evidence. I think he's right. Turley claims in his piece that the media will only cover these stories if their hand is forced, but I don't think any reporter would ignore a story like this if they had the opportunity to break it. As for TV networks, to be blunt, a Democratic congressman willing to go on TV to trash the president isn't some rare commodity. The media wasn't protecting Swalwell because he was uniquely valuable to them. The standard to publish the story just wasn't met until the accusers came forward.

Remember, these stories have to go through rigorous scrutiny before they can be published, and having at least one victim willing to submit their story to media scrutiny and the discomfort of public attention is key, even if that person remains anonymous. That can take years of building trust, conducting interviews, and going through multiple layers of review. Serious stories like this require serious process. Now, that doesn't mean that the media should get a free pass, or that the journalists who knew about Swalwell's rumored behavior

acted perfectly ethically. It just means that scrutiny is better applied to political leaders who worked with and bonded with Swalwell over the years. Journalists have standards for what they publish and when, but virtually no one is in a better position to identify and call out misbehavior in their ran. than lawmakers themselves. All right, that is it for my take.

Associate editor Lindsay Canuth authored a staff concurrence today, so I'm going to pass it over to her, and then Audrey will take us home with the rest of the edition. Lindsay, over to you. Thanks, Will. This is Associate Editor Lindsay Canuth with a staff concurrence. More than anything, my heart goes out to the women who have leveled accusations against Wallwell.

I'm also frustrated by the same aspects of the story that Will is. both that people seem to know about Swalwell's allegedly inappropriate and potentially criminal, behavior long before news broke, and that Gonzalez's resignation was delayed until the same day as Swalwell's. As they look out at the media and pundits scrambling to cover what's next for the governor's race in congressional vacancy, I urge people not to gloss over what happened to these so far five women and which systems allowed it to continue. Thanks, and I'm passing it off to Associate Editor Audrey Moorhead, who has her own staff concurrence. This is Associate Editor Audrey Moorhead with another staff concurrence. By and large, I agree that Swalwell and Gonzalez should have resigned,

and I hope our court systems will bring justice in Swalwell's cases, whatever that justice may be. However, that Swalwell only resigned after public accusations of rape, and that Gonzalez appeared to resign only as part of some backdoor deal, reinforces my long-held belief that our society's increasingly relaxed standards of sexual morality only create opportunities for bad behavior to go unchecked. Swalwell was long known for his licentiousness, but non-consent is the only widely accepted standard

for which sexual behavior is punished. When Americans at large agreed that loose sexual behavior was a sign of greater moral failings, Swalwell's behavior and that of several other prominent politicians may have disqualified him earlier. Perhaps those standards could have prevented further harms and maybe we should give them another look. We'll be right back after.

this quick break. And I'm back again with our Under the Radar story. Recent studies and reports indicate that AI chatbots exhibit political biases that may be influencing users' perception of events. A new report from the America First Policy Institute recently found that various artificial intelligence systems show center-left political bias that influences the way their users think. Separately, a March study by Yale researchers found that chatbots exhibited liberal bias and that chatbot's biases were persuasive to users.

Fox News and Yale News have the story, and you can find those links in the show notes. And lastly, here's our Have a Nice Day story. The portal bridge over the Hackensack River in New Jersey entered rail service in 1910, serving as a key link in the journey between Newark, New Jersey, and New York City's Penn Station.

As the bridge aged, it became a source of congestion and delays on the railway. In particular, its low clearance over the Hackensack River required it to open to allow maritime traffic to pass through. But in March, New Jersey Transit and Amtrak placed the first track on the new Portle North Bridge, which rises more than 50 feet over the river and will not have to shut down for river traffic. A second track will go into service in the fall, completing the broader program to double rail capacity between Newark and New York. Amtrak has the story, and you can find

the link in the show notes. All right, everyone, that's it for today's show. If you you want to support our work, please go to reetangle.com, where you can buy a newsletter membership, a podcast membership, or buy a bundle that gets you discounts on both. We'll be back again tomorrow, but in the meantime, this was Associate Editor Audrey Moorhead, and for Isaac and everyone else, have a nice day and peace. Our executive editor and founder is me. Isaac Saul, and our executive producer is John Wall. Today's episode was edited and engineered by Dewey Thomas. Our editorial staff is led by managing editor Ari Weitzman with senior editor Will Kayback and associate editors Audrey Moorhead, Lindsay Canuth, and Bailey Saul.

Music for the podcast was produced by Diet 75. To learn more about Tangle and to sign up for a membership, please visit our website at retangle.com.