Former Rep. Eric Swalwell used $40,000 from his now-defunct California gubernatorial campaign to pay a Los Angeles attorney who defended him on television against sexual assault accusations, a recent financial disclosure revealed.
The money went to Sara Azari, an attorney who specializes in defending clients against allegations of sexual misconduct. Azari appeared on NewsNation to push back on accusations from several women, telling the network, in effect, that regret does not equal rape.
That $40,000 didn't come from Swalwell's personal bank account. It came from donors who gave money expecting it would fund a campaign for governor. Instead, it paid for damage control on a scandal that has ended his political career and now threatens his legal one.
Azari's television defense of Swalwell was blunt. During her NewsNation interview, she framed the accusations as after-the-fact regret rather than criminal conduct.
Azari told the network:
"The fact that, you know, a day later, years later, or whatnot, you maybe had shame around what you did, or maybe you were in a relationship and shouldn't have done what you did, doesn't make it rape."
She also praised Swalwell's decision to step down from Congress, casting it as a sign of responsibility rather than guilt. Azari also contributes to NewsNation, and The California Post reported it contacted her for comment.
In a separate statement, Azari said Swalwell's resignation showed "a tremendous amount of accountability, not because he's done these things and he's stepping down, but because how could he properly defend himself and represent his constituency with these serious allegations pending."
On Swalwell's behalf, Azari has been even more direct. She told the Associated Press that Swalwell "categorically and unequivocally denies each and every allegation of sexual misconduct and assault that has been leveled against him."
The accusations against Swalwell are not minor workplace complaints. Multiple women have come forward with allegations of sexual misconduct, including claims of drugging and rape.
One accuser, Lonna Drewes, publicly alleged that Swalwell raped her in 2018 at a Southern California hotel after she believes she was drugged. "I did not consent to any sexual activity," Drewes said. Her attorney, Lisa Bloom, said Drewes plans to file a report with the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, supported by journal entries, text messages, photographs, and therapy disclosures.
An LA model also alleged that Swalwell drugged, raped, and choked her at a West Hollywood hotel. At least two other alleged incidents of nonconsensual sex have surfaced. Swalwell himself has acknowledged "mistakes in judgment I've made in the past", though he has denied all assault claims.
The distinction between "mistakes in judgment" and criminal conduct is one his legal team is working hard to maintain. But the weight of the allegations has been enough to collapse his career in Congress and his bid for the governor's mansion in a matter of weeks.
Swalwell now faces criminal investigations in both Los Angeles and New York. The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department and the Manhattan District Attorney's Office have opened separate probes tied to the allegations.
On top of that, the Washington Examiner reported that the Justice Department has opened its own investigation into Swalwell over the sexual misconduct allegations. That probe adds a federal dimension to what was already a sprawling legal crisis.
Swalwell suspended his California governor campaign and resigned from Congress under bipartisan pressure. He said he intends to "fight the serious, false allegations made against me" but acknowledged, "I must take responsibility and ownership for the mistakes I did make."
Gov. Gavin Newsom has set a special election for August to fill Swalwell's vacant congressional seat.
The $40,000 payment to Azari raises its own set of questions. Federal election law imposes strict rules on how campaign funds can be spent. Personal legal defense is generally off-limits unless the legal matter arises directly from campaign activity or official duties.
Swalwell's team has apparently treated the payment as a legitimate campaign expense, routing it through his gubernatorial account. But the nature of the allegations, personal sexual conduct, not campaign operations, makes that classification worth scrutiny.
Attorney Steve Roberts flagged a related concern. "If Eric Swalwell was campaigning for governor instead of his congressional seat while using his federal campaign to pay childcare expenses, he and his campaign could be on the hook for hefty financial penalties," Roberts said. The childcare spending question adds another layer to what is already a complicated financial picture for Swalwell's political operation.
Donors who contributed to a gubernatorial run may not have anticipated their money would pay for a lawyer to argue on cable news that the candidate's accusers were simply experiencing regret. That is not what people usually have in mind when they write a check to a political campaign.
The broader pattern of campaign spending tied to the allegations deserves closer examination. Swalwell's donors bankrolled hotel stays and other expenses now linked to the very incidents under investigation.
The consequences may extend well past the ballot box. Legal experts told Fox News that the mounting allegations could threaten Swalwell's California law license.
George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley put it plainly:
"If these rape and sexual harassment claims are established, he is likely to face disbarment demands."
That prospect means Swalwell's fall could be total, not just out of office, but out of the profession he would presumably return to. A man who once sat on the House Intelligence Committee and ran for president now faces the possibility that he cannot practice law.
Meanwhile, Swalwell has largely disappeared from public view. His wife and family were recently spotted at Mexico's Los Cabos International Airport after a week-long resort trip, without him. The former congressman, once eager for any camera, has hidden from the public eye since the allegations mounted.
The calls to expel Swalwell from Congress came from both sides of the aisle before his resignation. That bipartisan pressure tells you something about the gravity of the situation, this was not a partisan hit job.
The financial disclosure that surfaced the $40,000 payment is a public document. But key details remain unclear. The exact date of the payment, the specific filing, and the office that received the disclosure have not been identified in available reporting. Those gaps matter. Voters and donors deserve a full accounting.
What is clear is this: Eric Swalwell took money that people gave him to run for governor and used it to pay a lawyer to go on television and argue that his accusers were confused about consent. He did this while facing criminal investigations in two cities and a federal inquiry. He did this while his congressional seat sat empty and a special election was called to replace him.
Swalwell's defenders will say every accused person deserves legal representation. That's true. But the question isn't whether Swalwell can hire a lawyer. The question is whether campaign donors should foot the bill, and whether a man who built his brand on holding others accountable has any interest in applying that standard to himself.
Accountability, it turns out, is a lot easier to demand from a cable news desk than it is to practice when the cameras finally turn on you.