When then-Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., announced his candidacy for governor of California, I was beyond surprised. Rumors of sexual misconduct, including allegations of blatant and serial infidelity, had been circulating for years. Having run for this very office, I experienced firsthand the intense level of local, state and national scrutiny one receives when seeking the top job in the biggest state in the country. The left-wing media treats liberal Democrat candidates different from how it treats conservative Republican candidates, but the media are not the problem if one’s candidacy starts to resonate. The heat comes from the same-party campaign rivals. When I decided to run for governor of California, I sought the advice of several experienced strategists, politicians, pundits and some professors. They all said the same thing, only worded differently: “Is there anything in your background that would be a problem?” These questions, they advised, include but are not limited to: Skeletons in your closet? What about your friends, associates, and family members? Taxes? Sexual harassment or misconduct or assaults? Any present or past behavior that could be deemed scandalous? Dating history, marriage, or divorce? Outstanding warrants? Traffic tickets? Unpaid traffic tickets? DUIs? Automobile accidents you caused or were involved in? Arrests? Misdemeanors? Felonies? Unpaid bills? Credit card debt? Lawsuits filed by or lawsuits against you? Drug use and drug abuse? Alcoholism? Abuse of prescription drugs? Sketchy business dealings? Bankruptcy? Inappropriate internet activity, including porn sites, other illicit sites or sending “compromising pictures”? Social media posts that could come back to haunt you? 911 calls from your home? Your work history? To what church do you belong? Who is your pastor? Ever been fired? If so, why? Is your campaign biography accurate, with no exaggerations or embellishments? Do your neighbors like you? And, for good measure, I was advised to hire a private detective to investigate myself. My experienced campaign manager took me on only after I addressed all those questions—and others—and obtained a report from a well-regarded private investigator. My campaign manager cautioned, “If you are accused of picking your feet in Poughkeepsie—especially if you DID pick your feet in Poughkeepsie—it will come out.” This brings us to Swalwell, who, according to a University of California, Berkeley poll conducted in March, was the leading Democrat in the primary. He was endorsed by Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., who, like Swalwell, served as a prosecutor in an impeachment trial against President Donald Trump. According to Reuters, “ … a fifth woman came forward to accuse Swalwell of unwanted sexual contact, saying the Democratic lawmaker drugged and raped her during an encounter in 2018.” Swalwell first denied the accusations. He then dropped out of the race for governor, followed by his resignation from Congress. Former House Speaker and Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., claimed she knew nothing about the rumors against Swalwell. But Willie Brown, once a mentor to former Vice President Kamala Harris and a former mayor of San Francisco, and who for 15 years served as speaker of the California Assembly, said: “No, I’m not surprised frankly because there have been rumors after rumors after rumors, his colleagues in Washington pretty much said that. That’s what Adam Schiff said, that’s what Nancy Pelosi said.” But Swalwell’s problems are just beginning. The sheriff of Los Angeles County has launched a criminal probe, as has the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office. Civil lawsuits may follow. Then there are Swalwell’s financial issues. Despite a combined income with his wife of over $400,000, he is deeply in debt. He owes $100,000 in student loans, borrowed against his retirement account to help fund his campaign and deferred paying income taxes to conserve cash flow. This is not exactly a good look for someone vying to be the chief executive of a state with a budget deficit and massive unfunded pension liabilities. On top of everything, these scandals could cost the father of three children his marriage. After all, Swalwell set the standard. During the confirmation hearing of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, Swalwell considered Kavanaugh unfit due to allegations of sexual misconduct. Swalwell tweeted: “Support survivors. Believe survivors. We are with you.” All of this raises a question. When Swalwell decided to run for governor, “What was he thinking?” COPYRIGHT 2026 CREATORS.COM We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post The Implosion of Eric Swalwell: What Was He Thinking? appeared first on The Daily Signal.

FIRST ON THE DAILY SIGNAL—U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers at the Hidalgo Port of Entry intercepted more than $1 million worth of cocaine, preventing tens of thousands of lethal doses from entering American communities. The seizure, which took place April 11 at the Hidalgo International Bridge, highlights both the scale of narcotics trafficking along the southern border and the Trump administration’s renewed enforcement focus at ports of entry. CBP officers referred a commercial passenger bus for secondary inspection after detecting anomalies during primary screening. During a canine examination and nonintrusive?inspection?system scan, officers discovered 36 packages containing 78 pounds of suspected cocaine concealed inside the seats of the bus. Authorities estimate the street value of the narcotics at $1,042,034. “This hard narcotics seizure exemplifies CBP’s steadfast effort to keep our borders secure,” said Carlos Rodriguez, port director at the Hidalgo Port of Entry, in a statement to The Daily Signal. “This poison will not enter our streets thanks to the enforcement focus of our frontline officers.” Homeland Security Investigations has launched a criminal investigation into the smuggling operation. The Hidalgo interdiction comes amid a sharp nationwide rise in drug seizures. In March alone, CBP seized more than 65,000 pounds of narcotics, including 613 pounds of fentanyl. Overall, CBP seized 27% more drugs in March than during the same month last year. The crackdown on illicit drugs extends beyond one month. Through the first half of fiscal year 2026, CBP has seized 24% more drugs than during the same period in fiscal year 2024, and 19% more than the four?year average over that timeframe. Under President Donald Trump and Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin, the administration has prioritized aggressive enforcement at ports of entry, expanded the use of nonintrusive inspection technology, and reinforced deterrence for smugglers and criminal networks. “The largest difference is in terms of enhanced enforcement focus and consequence delivery,” Rodriguez said. “Under the leadership of President Trump and Secretary Mullin, the administration has empowered our agents and officers to do their job again. As a result, CBP has delivered the most secure border in American history, setting border crossing records repeatedly this year.” CBP officials say that shift in enforcement posture has translated into stronger interdictions at ports of entry, where most hard narcotics including fentanyl are seized. During an exclusive interview with The Daily Signal, Rodriguez emphasized that seizures like this one carry consequences far beyond statistics. “Narcotics such as cocaine—and harder substances like fentanyl—are deadly,” Rodriguez said. “They lead to overdoses and addiction, and drug trafficking fuels cartel violence against anyone who stands in their way as they push drugs north.” “People who become addicted often grow desperate and resort to theft and violence to feed their habits,” he added. “Narcotics exact a human cost. They lay waste to everything they touch, and most people are unaware of the true human cost.” The post EXCLUSIVE: CBP Seizes $1M in Cocaine Hidden in Passenger Bus appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. appeared before Congress this week defending his department’s policy agenda. The secretary, who has been under sustained scrutiny from skeptics of his Make America Healthy Again mission, vowed to work with members on specific health legislation to secure wins promised by the administration. RFK Jr. spent almost 10 hours on Capitol Hill this week and is set to appear for four more hearings next week. “The secretary is looking forward to showing Congress how we are working to reduce prescription drug prices, make health care costs clearer for patients, and streamline processes like prior authorization,” HHS spokesperson Andrew Nixon told The Daily Signal. The new Food Pyramid is “one of the most important documents our government has issued in a long time.”All Americans should be able to agree on this simple message: EAT REAL FOOD.Find out more — take @RepKiley’s advice and visit https://t.co/a3BmtJNSkS! pic.twitter.com/RiOT8rTPwi— HHS Rapid Response (@HHSResponse) April 17, 2026 Kennedy touted early wins for the department, highlighting his focus on solving chronic disease and cleaning up the “fraudulent” health care system. He noted that HHS has been disbursing $135 million in rural health care funding authorized under the One Big Beautiful Bill and has identified 130,000 of the more than 400,000 children the Biden administration lost amid open-border immigration policy. Kennedy also vowed to expand funding and research for areas neglected by previous administrations, including autism, women’s health, and chronic disease. Promises made, promises kept:"We're also recalibrating @NIH spending, so $30 billion of it is going to chronic disease, which they've never studied before." pic.twitter.com/dUszpNjz9A— HHS Rapid Response (@HHSResponse) April 16, 2026 During the Ways and Means Committee hearing, Rep. Blake Moore, R-Utah, pressed Kennedy on whether Medicare could cover breakthrough medical devices temporarily if they have already been approved as safe and effective by the Food and Drug Administration. Moore pointed to delays in Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services coverage decisions that can leave seniors without access to life-saving technology already on the market. “I was thrilled to speak with Secretary Kennedy and hear of potential developments for CMS [Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services] rulemaking to expedite Medicare access to breakthrough medical technology,” Moore told The Daily Signal following the committee hearing. Moore called the legislation a “brainchild” of Trump’s first administration. It was great to be a part of the bipartisan roundtable with CMS Administrator Dr. Oz! We discussed health care innovation, helping Americans adopt healthier lifestyles, protecting taxpayers against waste, and my legislation to support access to healthcare and breakthrough… pic.twitter.com/dAyFCvY5sy— Congressman Blake Moore (@RepBlakeMoore) July 23, 2025 Moore told the secretary that he introduced the Insurance Ensuring Patient Access to Critical Breakthroughs Product Act, which builds on one of the biggest wins from the Trump administration. “We will have an announcement soon, and we’re happy to work with you on it,” the secretary confirmed. “If a treatment can meet the FDA’s burden of proof of safe and effective, and other requirements, for breakthrough designation, there’s no reason Medicare shouldn’t be able to provide temporary medical coverage while CMS completes its review for permanent coverage,” Moore told RFK Jr. “The vast majority of products that receive breakthrough designation are already on the market by the time they earn that label, yet Medicare delays patient access to these innovative treatments,” Moore told The Daily Signal. “I’m excited to continue working closely with the administration to ensure seniors have rapid access to the newest life-saving treatments,” he concluded. “We are also strengthening program integrity by preventing improper payments and addressing waste, fraud, and abuse. At the same time, we are investing in prevention, nutrition, addiction recovery, rare disease treatments, and rural health to improve outcomes for patients across the country,” Nixon concluded. The post RFK Jr. Defends HHS Agenda on Capitol Hill, Touts Early Wins and Future Reforms appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Editor’s note: This is a lightly edited transcript of today’s edition of “Victor Davis Hanson: In His Own Words” from Daily Signal Senior Contributor Victor Davis Hanson. Please note that it was recorded before Friday’s announcement that the Strait of Hormuz is open. Subscribe to Victor Davis Hanson’s own YouTube channel to watch past episodes.  Victor Davis Hanson: Hello, this is Victor Davis Hanson for The Daily Signal. I know a lot of you have been exasperated by the reaction to the Iran war, from the Democratic grandees in the House and Senate, the liberal media, The New York Times, particularly The Washington Post, NPR, PBS and network—even The Wall Street Journal’s news section. And then we have some people on the right who have also looked at the war and said it was lost, it went south, it was gonna—World War III, blah, blah, blah. All of them share one thing in common, excuse me, two things in common. One, they wanted it not to go well. Wanted it not to go well, because it would reflect badly on Donald Trump and his administration. And if you were a Democrat, that would give you some momentum going into the midterms. And if you were a disaffected former supporter, it would prove to the world that you were right all along, and Donald Trump is reckless and got us into a forever, unwinnable war. But whatever the particular reason was, both of them were not historical analyses. Both these people never were empirical. They were never historical. Had they looked at America’s wars in World War II, Korea, Vietnam, and more importantly, more recently, the bombing campaign in Serbia, or the bombing campaign in Libya, or the first Gulf War, or the second Gulf War, or the Afghan—they would’ve come up with some data, some information.  And then they could have compared this particular engagement and compared it with the others, or they could have said to themselves, I’m not going to prejudice what happens. I’m gonna look exactly what the data is on the ground. How many missiles were destroyed, who was taken out? Had they taken out the Israeli commander, command and control, have they shot down 45 planes as they did during the first Gulf War, U.S. craft? And then they could have come up with a reasoned analysis. But they didn’t do that. They didn’t do that. But the evidence was there. The evidence was there. In the first five weeks, the United States, with the Israeli Air Force, wiped out most of the top echelon of the four ruling cliques in the Iranian nation. That would be the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, the regular army, the theocratic apparatus at top and the elected politicians, such as they do have elections. All four of them were attrited. And right now they would also say to themselves that they are motivated by two or three catalysts that explain everything they say. One, they don’t know who is in charge, and they’re all grasping for power, and they’re all terrified somebody is in charge that they don’t know about. Two, they’ve seen 30, 40, 50 people taken out, and they don’t want to identify and be a leader and be dead. Three, they’re competing for power, and that manifests itself in two ways. Number one, they’re afraid of the hard liners. So they send out, communiqués, they freelance, not official all the time, and they wanna sound harder than the other person. So they’re not accused of being soft. Usually the, theocratic clique, what’s left of it, or the Revolutionary Guard, what’s left of it, accuses the politicians and the army of being too soft. And the final catalyst that explains this crazy stuff that emanates from Iran is they’re afraid of the Iranian people. The Iranian people are sick and tired. Before the war even started, the hyperinflation was strangling them. They couldn’t afford gas. They couldn’t afford food, they can’t go out of the country, they couldn’t get… and it’s 10 times worse now. And they’re gonna be restive just like during the fall of the Berlin Wall. You didn’t see a revolution immediately. It was weeks and months in Eastern Europe and two years in the Soviet Union before it became Russia again. That means in the next two years, I think, you’re going to see a lot of popular resistance, and these people know it and they know that if they go down, they’re going to be … they’re gonna have a Nuremberg war crimes trial, and the people are gonna take it out on them, so they don’t know where the nexus of power is.  So it is confused. But people couldn’t just accept that they had to say, Donald Trump got us in a forever war, even though, tragically, but, lost 13 or 14 or 15 depending on the calculus we use. We never have had a war like that before. We’ve never taken on a country of 93 million people that had the most fearsome, terrible reputation of being dangerous and unpredictable, and running the Middle East with a ring of fire proxies in Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Gaza, Lebanon, indomitable. They had terrified seven presidents. And yet in five weeks, we destroyed its ability to make war. Yes, they have a few drones, a few ballistic missiles that can cause damage, but not if that damage will be replied to as Donald Trump has warned them, by the destruction of their oil capacity or their electrical generation, which all presidents had done. We did it to Serbia, we did things to Libya. We did it in the first Gulf War, it, being dual-use. We took out bridges, we took out generation. We didn’t in World War II, we didn’t Korea, we didn’t Vietnam. Donald Trump’s the first president that hasn’t done that in a wide scale fashion.  So what has happened? It took four or five weeks in the country of that size, area and population, to find these tunnels, to find these hidden airfields, to find these silos, to find these people in bunkers, and systematically we got to the point where their military is almost gone. Then the next stage happened. Trump said to them: We can have a negotiation style if you meet our demands. And that was to, it was self interested in the sense that he wanted a peace, so the prices would go down, oil would be more available. The midterms are coming up, but it was also to let the regime, such as it was after this main luminaries had been killed, it was to give them a chance and show the world that Trump was not a madman. He was willing to negotiate. And they, of course, said no. They said no, because they hoped that popular resistance in Europe and popular resistance in the Democratic Party and on the left and on the old, some of the MAGA apostates on the right, they would so pressure Trump that he would give in to them. He didn’t. So that was obvious. He’s never given in to anybody. He’s always done what he thought was right, whether you agree with it or not.  So then we came into the third phase. We had the destruction of the military, number one. Number two, we had the negotiation cycle, and now it’s the ultimate and and finale to the war, and that is economic strangulation. Iran walked right, put their head right into a noose. They said, we’re gonna shut down the Strait of Hormuz, only us can determine who gets in and who gets out, and they have to be pro-Iranian. And we’re not gonna let Gulf states sell oil. Ha ha ha. We’re gonna, and everybody said, oh, that was brilliant.  The Left went crazy. It was delighted. Oh my gosh. The Pentagon was caught on unprepared … The Pentagon had been preparing that for 50 years. Under Reagan they opened it. They know how to do it. So all that Trump said is, that’s a good idea. Shut down the Strait. And let in the good guys and stop the bad guys.  But your bad guys are our good guys. And your good guys are our bad guys. So we’re gonna take a page outta your book, and we’re not gonna let in anybody anywhere near Iran, and we’re gonna let in everybody else. And the difference between the strategies is not just that we flipped it, but you have no wherewithal, PT boats, and a bunch of mines won’t stop us, but we have a huge fleet. And that will stop you from stopping us. And if you decide that you wanna send the remnants of your missiles into the Gulf or Israel, or at our fleet, go ahead. Because we haven’t even decided to hit dual-use targets yet. We’re not like Barack Obama and Libya and taking out television stations and ports.  We’re not like Bill Clinton and Serbia that destroyed every bridge on the Danube and took out their grid of a million and a half people. We’re not Harry Truman that destroyed all the hydroelectric plants in North Korea. We let you off easy. Well, it doesn’t mean there’s not an American tradition of hitting dual-use targets.  So we’re gonna hit your electrical and put you in darkness and we’re gonna hit Kharg or take it. We’ll either take the oil and rob it from you or take it. And what was the result of all that in the last 48 hours? Ships are coming in that we let, and ships are not coming in, that we don’t let, and people, economists at the major research universities in Europe, the United States, have now flipped on a dime and they’re actually looking in empirical fashion, at last, at what this means. And the ranges are absolutely stunning. $400 million, and more, per day lost economically to Iran, whether that’s lack of oil sales or petrochemical sales, or lack of key imported mechanical goods, electrical goods that keep their infrastructure running or food. They’re in dire straits.  They’re losing all of their income from the Strait of Hormuz and they’re losing all of their income from the petrochemical and oil. And they were broke to begin with and they can’t do anything about it because Trump did it sequentially. Military, first, chance of negotiation, second, put the boot on the neck, third.  So what is gonna happen now? You’ll see two things. Two things, possibly three. They may decide they want to go down in a blaze of glory and empty their arsenal of remnant ballistic missiles and drones. If they do that, they will be in darkness and they will have no oil for the next 10 years. So that we’ll see if there’s saner heads among them.  Number two, they have a choice to agree to negotiations and this time they’re not gonna have every clique saying 15 here and 10 demands here, and no, no, they’re just gonna have 10. And if they don’t abide by them, the United States can force them to abide by them. Or. They can just simply give up, give up, no demands, nothing.  Just say we’re done. And they’re gonna have a … and what I meant by give up is the regime gives up. I don’t know if it’s gonna be immediate, but the people take over. All of those are favorable results for us. And so to conclude, I don’t think that it’s a very wise thing every 24 hours to be gued to your computer or the television and whatever. A pundit on the left or a Democratic senator says, or disgruntled person on the right says, then take that as gospel and not look at the data, and not look at the evidence that’s out there to examine both, as I said, empirically or historically.  ’Cause if you did do that, you could see there was very, very little chance of winning. There’s only one last caveat: Iran is ruined militarily and it’s going to be ruined economically if it doesn’t give in, and they they’re now going to negotiate with a different attitude. If you believe that they will abide by a demand that we’ve given them, no nuclear material for 20 years, whatever it is, then you have to believe that they will never break their word.  I don’t think they’ve ever kept their word. And number two, that there will be a president someday, like Kamala Harris, Gavin Newsom, Pete Buttigieg, Cory Booker, and people of that caliber and mindset would enforce every one of those negotiated demands. And I don’t think they will ever tell the truth or honor any of their commitments.  And I don’t think that the next left-wing or Democratic president would ever force them to, which means we better get them to surrender unconditionally or [have them] face economic ruin which will usher in a regime change. Thank you very much. This is Victor Davis Hanson for The Daily Signal.  The post Victor Davis Hanson: They Said ‘Forever War’—Reality Says Trump Just Crushed Iran in 5 Weeks appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The United States faces a profound national security and civil liberties challenge—one driven by a loss of trust in the intelligence community itself, warned the Daily Signal’s Senior National Security and Legal Analyst Mehek Cooke. “The biggest scandal is the intel community blew up its credibility,” Cooke said on Newsmax TV, arguing that intelligence abuses have placed everyday Americans “in the crosshairs” of surveillance authorities never meant to target them. While Cooke said she supports strong intelligence capabilities to confront foreign threats and terrorists, she stressed that those powers must come with firm protections for U.S. citizens. “We want to make sure Americans have some type of warrant and protection,” she said. “These tools are supposed to target terrorists—not law?abiding Americans.” Cooke addressed the ongoing debate over an 18?month extension of surveillance authorities, noting that temporary extensions alone are insufficient if Congress fails to impose accountability. She warned that civil liberties remain vulnerable if abuses go unpunished. “If there’s an opportunity to add criminal penalties when civil liberties are trampled, that matters to me,” Cooke said. “What happens in the meantime if somebody is abusing that system?” According to Cooke, the moment is a defining one for Congress—especially Republicans, who currently control the House. While President Donald Trump supports extending national security authorities, Cooke emphasized that lawmakers must ensure those powers are constitutional and restrained. She praised the work of Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, on the House Judiciary Committee, but said stronger leadership is needed to move reforms forward. “We have a massive opportunity in national security to do both—protect civil liberties and get terrorists out of our country,” Cooke said. “Congress needs to do their jobs.” While Iran continues to pose a serious threat to the United States, Cooke said that restoring trust and protecting freedoms at home is inseparable from defending the nation abroad. The post Intel Community’s Loss of Credibility Is the Real National Security Scandal appeared first on The Daily Signal.