The Elitist Media’s Sunday shows wasted no time in giving airtime to the recent lurid allegations that have surfaced against Congressman and California Gubernatorial candidate Eric Swalwell (D-Fang Fang). But their coverage itself seeks to avoid some of the broader substance of the issues. Per The New York Post: Within 24 hours, the Bay Area congressman went from Democratic frontrunner for California governor to facing pressure to not only end his campaign but resign from Congress — while now being the subject of a criminal sexual assault investigation into allegations by a former staffer she was raped while drunk at an April 2024 charity gala. Three other women have made claims about sexual misconduct ranging from inappropriate messages or unwanted contact. The women have claimed they have documented visits to the hospital and contemporaneous messages with friends and family about the incidents. One staffer has also claimed she woke up naked next to him in a hotel room in 2019 after a heavy night of drinking and didn’t remember what happened but felt physically like they’d had sex. The Manhattan District Attorney’s Office launched a criminal probe into the woman’s rape claim. These are pretty serious charges, the specific details of which did not get mentioned on the Sunday shows. The most thorough recitation of the allegations aired on CNN’s State of the Union: WATCH: The most substantive Sunday show coverage of the Swalwell allegations was on CNN State of the Union- Dana Bash offered a brief recitation of the allegations along with Swalwell's denial as an introduction to the panel discussion segment. DANA BASH: A growing chorus of… pic.twitter.com/dzu0lzGbyx — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) April 12, 2026 DANA BASH: A growing chorus of Democrats are denouncing Congressman Eric Swalwell this weekend after CNN reported that four women made accusations of sexual misconduct against him. Those accusations range from inappropriate messages and pictures to unwanted kissing and touching, and, in one case, rape. Here's Swalwell's response. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) ERIC SWALWELL: These allegations of sexual assault are flat false. They're absolutely false. They did not happen. They have never happened. And I will fight them with everything that I have. I have certainly made mistakes in judgment in my past. But those mistakes are between me and my wife. And, to her, I apologize deeply for putting her in this position. This recent tranche of sexual allegations has been bifurcated from the allegations of financial impropriety which, along with his cease-and-desist letter to the FBI demanding the agency not release files detailing his interactions with the aforementioned Fang Fang. CNN’s Dana Bash centers squarely on the rape allegations. On ABC’s This Week, co-host Jon Karl closed out the show’s in-studio panel segment with a quick question to former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy on the anodyne and non-specific “serious sexual misconduct allegations.”  WATCH: The Sunday shows immediately cover the rape allegations against U.S. Rep. Eric Swalwell. Former Speaker Kevin McCarthy describes how he tried to get rid of Swalwell since the Fang Fang days. JON KARL: We don't have much time left, but I wanted the- the allegations against… pic.twitter.com/mFXWNaJ1RO — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) April 12, 2026 JON KARL: We don't have much time left, but I wanted the- the allegations against Eric Swalwell, which have not been independently confirmed by ABC, he's denied them all- but serious sexual misconduct allegations. And now you have a, you know, an army of Democrats, uh, abandoning his, uh, his campaign for governor. He was the leading candidate, uh, Democratic candidate for governor. And now he's facing calls to drop out from people like Nancy Pelosi. KEVIN McCARTHY: Listen, let me be very clear. I tried to get rid of Swalwell six, eight years ago when I got the briefing, when I became leader with the FBI- Nancy Pelosi was in the room. I turned to her and said, how can you keep him on Intel? Intel is a select committee that only the leaders put on, that you know all the secrets that the members do not. I made a motion... KARL: But- is this about sexual misconduct allegations or… McCARTHY: It was a combination with the Chinese spy and it led to all that. Every member in Congress knows not to- not to let any young staffer get around Swalwell or Matt Gaetz. It- it’s- it's not a secret there. There's a reason why you didn't want those two people around. He was the leading candidate for governor. He probably could have won the primary and gotten there. But this all came forward. And these young women deserve justice. DONNA BRAZILE: I agree…  KARL: Donna, should he drop out? BRAZILE: His campaign is in a free fall right now, with top staffers leaving. And let me just say this, as someone who knows at least one of the victims that have come forward, I’m very concerned. KARL: Thank you, Donna. Karl did not follow up on the obvious point made here, which is that Swalwell was a known quantity. What did Pelosi and other leaders know, and when did they know it?  On NBC’s Meet the Press, Kristen Welker both-sidesed the Swalwell allegations by adding the Tony Gonzales allegations into her questions. She first engaged Rep. Byron Donalds: WATCH: NBC's Kristen Welker addresses the Eric Swalwell allegations in a throwaway question to U.S. Rep. Byron Donalds- not on substance but via the whataboutism of whether he will also vote to expel Tony Gonzales. (Still no mention anywhere of Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick)… pic.twitter.com/1K7e00vVhW — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) April 12, 2026 KRISTEN WELKER: All right. Final question, I want to ask you about Democratic Congressman Eric Swalwell of California who is facing allegations of sexual assault and misconduct from former members of his staff, allegations he denies. One House Republican has filed a motion to expel Mr. Swalwell from Congress. On the other side, Democrats say they're going to respond with a motion to expel Congressman Tony Gonzalez of Texas who is being investigated for allegations of sexual misconduct. Will you vote to expel Congressman Swalwell and will you vote to expel Congressman Gonzalez? BYRON DONALDS: If the vote comes to the floor, I would be voting yes on both measures. These allegations are despicable and they demean the integrity of Congress. These things are just completely unacceptable and as far as I'm concerned, both gentlemen need to go home. WELKER: All right. Congressman Donalds, thank you for being here on a jam-packed morning. We really appreciate it. DONALDS: Thank you. Welker also engaged Rep. Pramila Jayapal on the Swalwell allegations: WATCH: Congresswoman Jayapal, on NBC's Meet the Press, is asked about the Swalwell allegations- says she would vote for expulsion of Swalwell and Gonzales. KRISTEN WELKER: I do want to ask you about your colleague Congressman Eric Swalwell. You heard me discussing this with… pic.twitter.com/o71vUIvGw7 — Jorge Bonilla (@BonillaJL) April 12, 2026 KRISTEN WELKER: I do want to ask you about your colleague Congressman Eric Swalwell. You heard me discussing this with Congressman Donalds. He's facing allegations of sexual assault from a former staff member which, we should say, which Swalwell says are completely false and politically motivated. Notable, though: House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, Senator Adam Schiff, Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi are calling for Swalwell to end his run for California governor. Do you think that Swalwell should drop out of the gubernatorial race? PRAMILA JAYAPAL: I absolutely do. This is- as you know, I've been very vocal on behalf of survivors of the Epstein scandal, and I think that what we are seeing now is an emergence of women across the country who have been dismissed, told to shut up, told to move on, who have been abused by men in powerful positions. This is not a partisan issue. This cuts across party line, and it is depravity of the way that women have been treated, and I'm just inspired by the courage and the bravery of the women who came forward. This is clearly a pattern. I've already called for Congressman Swalwell to drop out of the gubernatorial race, and I think we have to hold everybody accountable. WELKER: Do you think- you just heard Congressman Donalds say he would vote to expel Eric Swalwell. Will you vote to expel Eric Swalwell? JAYAPAL: And Congressman Gonzales. I would. I've already said that I think that these things, these charges and allegations and the pattern of abuse and in Congressman Gonzales' case he actually admitted to the affair with the- or to the, you know, harassment with his staffer. This is also important for staffers across the Capitol to see that their bosses don't get to do this to them. So I do think that both of them need to step down from Congress, let these investigations happen, you know, but I think that this is very important that we believe women and that we show people across the Capitol and across the country that we will not accept this kind of behavior. CBS's Face the Nation made no mention of l'affaire Swalwell. This narrow coverage begs the question: why now, and why is this (D)ifferent from the serious ethics allegations against Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-FL), which has drawn ZERO coverage whatsoever from the Sunday shows? The latter is not a top candidate for governor in California’s “jungle” primary, wherein the top two vote-getters advance to a runoff regardless of party affiliation.  A wounded Swalwell might manage hang on and draw votes from the Steyers, Porters, and Becerras of the world- and give a Republican a shot at winning the California governorship for the first time in a generation, which would be catastrophic to the left. Better to clear the deadwood and consolidate. The press aids and abets this ruthless effort against someone who was formerly one of their darlings. At the end of the day, this is not about journalistic integrity but about assisting Democrats in their efforts to seize and hold power.  

It didn’t take long for the tweeters to notice this New York Times book-review headline and insist it was the Real Deal, even if it seems like too bizarre for the Babylon Bee: To Topple the Patriarchy, These Women Have Sex With Vegetables Times book reviewer Sadie Stein underlined that this might be the next book that public librarians will champion as a “free speech” moment to influence your children: Let’s start with the content warnings. Hexes of the Deadwood Forest, the best-selling Polish author Agnieszka Szpila’s first book to be translated into English, includes the following: adult themes, adult content, adult language, violence, suicide, sexual assault, torture, murder, genocide, bestiality, cruelty to children, sex with moss, sex with grass, sex with mushrooms, sex with lichens, sex with feathers, sex with rotten vegetables and sex with frozen dirt. Your final warning? All this gets weirdly tedious. Europeans can be deeply weird people. The plot is something like this: “In a wealthy suburb of Warsaw, the monstrous C.E.O. of an equally monstrous oil company, Anna Frenza,” was living the dream of success. “But when Frenza is who goes viral for passionate, painful sexual congress with the trunk of an oak tree, she’s thrown into a mental hospital.” Transported by either psychosis or mystical connection to the 16th-century Silesian ecclesiastical duchy of Neisse, Anna finds herself inhabiting the body of Mathilde Spalt, leader of the Earthen Ones, a pagan sect devoted to replacing patriarchal penetrative sex with a devotion to Nature…. Back in her present-day psych ward, Anna/Mathilde rallies her fellow inmates (mostly troublesome feminists or environmentalists) against what the narrator calls “a Polish Gilead, but without any of the well-tailored red dresses and cloaks.” Since this uber-horny phantasmagoria is populated almost exclusively by grotesques — not merely the universally hideous men, but also women characterized only by their Valerie Solanas-level fundamentalism — by the novel’s end, the reader begins to understand the appeal of inanimate moss (if not bark). Solanas was a radical feminist who shot Andy Warhol in 1968 and was institutionalized for several years.  None of this sounds like a book you'd like to read over a weekend. But that’s not to say that Stein doesn’t love the book. This is the last paragraph: “I thank all women who, in their fight for equal rights and the well-being of our planet, are not afraid to use their madness as a political weapon,” the author writes in the acknowledgments. By these standards, this novel certainly deserves all the plaudits.

At the end of Friday’s Inside Politics with Dana Bash, there was a brief documentary feature from CNN’s John King, the former host of the show, from North Carolina, as he pushed Democrats to find voters in rural America. The segment acted as a lesson to Democrats, as the King segment made brief jokes about Democrats while he promoted rural-acting Democratic candidates. King reported from areas of western North Carolina hit hard by Hurricane Helene in 2024, with most of the segments off the farm taking place in Marshall, North Carolina. King introduced a farmer and voter, Ed Winebarger, who had a harsh reality for Democrats as he worked on a farm with his hands in dirt: “This right here, getting it under your fingernails. Democrats have a hard time with this. They can't show a connection to the working class.” At the end of Friday's Inside Politics, former host John King highlighted Democratic losses in Rural voters by going to western North Carolina. The segment acted as a lesson to Democrats from King, as the segment made brief jokes and promoted rural Democratic candidates. pic.twitter.com/4yccEAuhCX — Nick (@nspin310) April 10, 2026   King framed the Iran War as an economic hurt for rural North Carolina. He described how Democrats have lost much of the rural vote across the entire country since Jimmy Carter’s election: Here are 1322 counties where at least 75 percent of the population live in rural areas. 50 years ago, 1976, Jimmy Carter carried 798 of the 1322.  (...) And in 2024, a rural red tsunami. Kamala Harris won just 79 of the 1322 counties and just 25 percent of their votes. The then and now is stunning. Winebarger connected the Democratic losses to “anger” and said rural Americans “feel represented by that anger.” To end, King connected the reconstruction from Helene to the possible bud of growth for Democrats in the midterms if they court rural voters: “18 months of struggle and remarkable resilience. Seven months more until we learn if all the rebuilding here extends to the Democrats.” pic.twitter.com/QmgXpNiLpQ — Nick (@nspin310) April 10, 2026   King pushed for more Democratic outreach to rural voters, as he shared it would put more states in play and listed dream pickups for Democrats that they have yearned for years, with little success: Again, be skeptical, but even a modest rural rebound for the Democrats would greatly expand their map, their targets, the possibilities in this critical midterm year. House races here in North Carolina, for example, and in places like Texas, Montana, Iowa, and elsewhere. Another voter, Josh Copus, described as helping his old friend run for Congress in North Carolina's 11th District against GOP Rep. Chuck Edwards, said Democrats “have lost their way” and need to run people like his friend Jamie, “because he is off this place, like he is our people.” To end, King connected the reconstruction after Hurricane Helene to the possible bud of growth for Democrats in 2026 midterms if they court rural voters: “18 months of struggle and remarkable resilience. Seven months more until we learn if all the rebuilding here extends to the Democrats.” The rural voters of America have been ignored and, sometimes, attacked by Democrats for years, as it reminds of a book promoted on MS NOW (then MSNBC) titled White Rural Rage: The Threat to American Democracy. It was difficult to gain voters when they were called racist and threats to democracy. Nevertheless, John King has taken to the moment to promote Democrats in rural America and push national Democrats to the same. It is interesting how so many journalists fall into Democrats' dreams of winning elections in mostly rural states, like the dream of a blue Texas as seen in previous media surges for Beto O’Rourke and the current media push of James Talarico. The transcript is below. Click "expand": CNN’s Inside Politics w/ Dana Bash April 10, 2026 12:48:00 PM Eastern DANA BASH: The North Carolina Senate race is one of the seats Democrats are really pushing to turn blue in this year's midterms, but they're going to need to win back the rural voters who have abandoned the party during the trump era. CNN's John King went to North Carolina for his latest installment of “All Over the Map.” (...) 12:48:56 PM Eastern JOHN KING: The fall harvest will be not long before the midterm election, and North Carolina has a Senate seat within reach for the Democrats. Plus, maybe, just maybe, a House seat or two. But Weinberger sees the party as still missing a critical ingredient. ED WINEBARGER (NORTH CAROLINA VOTER): This right here, getting it under your fingernails. Democrats have a hard time with this. They can't show a connection to the working class. KING: Rural America is synonymous with Trump Country. But Weinberger says Trump policies are making a tough economy worse. First tariffs, now Iran. (...) 12:49:50 PM Eastern KING: North Carolina's success could help the Democrats make a good midterm year great. But it would require reversing five decades of rural decline. Take a look.  Here are 1322 counties where at least 75 percent of the population live in rural areas. 50 years ago, 1976, Jimmy Carter carried 798 of the 1322. See all that blue, and won 54 percent of the vote in them. In 2000, though, Al Gore carried only 213 of the 1322. His share of the vote in rural counties dropped to 37 percent. And in 2024, a rural red tsunami. Kamala Harris won just 79 of the 1322 counties and just 25 percent of their votes. The then and now is stunning. Here in North Carolina, that rural shift from blue to red looks like this. It's been 11 years since North Carolina was represented by a Democrat in the U.S. Senate. And the state's House delegation in Washington, right now, just four Democrats and ten Republicans. WINEBARGER: There's a lot of anger with, uh, with the voting base. And America has traditionally gone after the angry candidate. They feel represented by that anger. Democrats need to do more to connect rural America. KING: Again, be skeptical, but even a modest rural rebound for the Democrats would greatly expand their map, their targets, the possibilities in this critical midterm year. House races here in North Carolina, for example, and in places like Texas, Montana, Iowa, and elsewhere.  And the party is hoping to find Senate pickups, U.S. Senate pickups. Where would they look? Texas, Ohio, Alaska, Montana, Iowa, and right here in North Carolina. (...) 12:53:55 PM Eastern KING: So, why do Democrats struggle so much here? JOSH COPUS (NORTH CAROLINA VOTER): I think we lost our way. I don't know, like we got caught up doing something that didn't connect with the people in rural America. And that's why we need to run candidates like Jamie, because he is of this place, like he is our people. So, I don't think it's a lost cause. (...) 12:54:47 PM Eastern COPUS: I get it, you know, I know why people like voted for Trump around here because, you know, everyone feels like it's stacked against them. But that hasn't changed like that. I don't think any of those people are like, oh, we're doing better now than we were because we're not. KING: 18 months of struggle and remarkable resilience. Seven months more until we learn if all the rebuilding here extends to the Democrats. John King, CNN. Marshall, North Carolina. (...)

On Thursday First Lady Melania Trump shocked just about everyone with a nearly six-minute statement to the media at the White House, where she denounced what she called, "Lies linking me to Jeffrey Epstein," calling them "mean-spirited and attempts to defame my reputation," and also calling for Congress to hold hearings with Epstein's victims. Of course the left wing media almost immediately started questioning her motives for the announcement, while misrepresenting what she said, as was the case on CNN's The Arena: Saturday. CNN host Kasie Hunt and her panel either did not know about, or purposely left important context out of the segment. In July of last year, Michael Wolff -- the author of several trashy anti-Trump books that CNN celebrated in Trump's first term -- claimed that Melania Trump was involved in Epstein's social circle before her marriage to Donald Trump, and that's how she met her future husband. A month later, Hunter Biden also claimed that the couple met via Epstein connections. In September, Melania's lawyers had stepped in and there were several retractions of that story as a result. Last October, Wolff sued Melania, over her alleged threat to sue him over his claims.  Not only was none of the above mentioned on The Arena, but Hunt also left out the very reveling opening words of Trump's statement when playing a clip. MELANIA CLIP: I never had a relationship with Epstein or his accomplice, Maxwell.... . I am not Epstein's victim Epstein did not introduce me to Donald Trump....I have never had any knowledge of Epstein's abuse of his victims. I was never involved in any capacity. Trump's missing first few words made very clear why she felt the need to speak out. "The lies linking me with the disgraceful Jeffrey Epstein need to end today. The individuals lying about me are devoid of ethical standards, humility, and respect.  I do not object to their ignorance, but rather, I reject their mean-spirited attempts to defame my reputation." After choosing not to provide  Trump's clear explanation, Hunt speculated on why she chose now to speak out, and then played a Fox News clip from the First Lady's senior advisor, Marc Beckman. BECKMAN CLIP: Enough is enough. This has been ongoing and it's time for the public to refocus their attention on what achievements our first lady has done. She's helping people over and over again. We want to focus the attention on her good work and what she's accomplished as First Lady of the United States.  CNN legal analyst Elliot Williams was then asked to weigh in, and seemingly did not grasp what Beckman had just said. He just played up the "huge political vulnerability" for Trump. WILLIAMS: Now, what's remarkable here is the First Lady's advisor there saying enough is enough. Now, trafficking victims, survivors, sex assault victims are probably the one constituency in America that no one has an appetite for saying enough is enough around their handling. So the idea that they thought this was a good idea to send him out there to try to clear the First Lady's name, is even compounding the issue even worse. Beckman was obviously talking about the accusations against Melania when he said enough is enough, not about the victims of Epstein. In fact Trump called for Congressional hearings with the victims, to take place. But the most bizarre analysis was yet to come from CNN contributor Xochitl Hinojosa.     HINOJOSA: If you're trying to get ahead of something like a story or a book or something, of shoe is going to drop, that is going to be pretty bad for Melania Trump. You have now just given that story even more oxygen, and you have given that story even more credibility as the First Lady is coming out. What is the logic behind saying that? If Trump is aware of a false accusation or story on the horizon, how can a fair and impartial person interpret a blanket denial in advance as anything other than being forthright and exhibiting confidence in her innocence? But it's CNN, and they want to imply that professions of innocence equal guilt, and that professing your innocence only makes everything worse for you. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. 

Vanity Fair -- where the TDS level is so high that they actually wrote an overanalytical piece trying to figure out if South Park is sufficiently anti-Trump -- has just sunk what little credibility it had even lower by AGAIN performing over-the-top hype about the former royal couple, Harry & Meghan, that very few normal people have expressed any interest in. The former royal couple lost their "Sussex" title due to an inability to perform one of the easiest jobs on the planet, which consisted primarily of politely greeting people and not acting like complete jerks. The latter part of the job description appears to have been too much of a burden for the couple to accept, thus resulting in them become a pair of pathetic grifters constantly on the make for entertainment deals which would earn them maximum money with the least effort. The hype for the ingrate couple deservedly stripped of their royal ranks has been at fever pitch on the pages of Vanity Fair for several years. However, the latest incarnation promoting the deadbeats was so absurd as to result in hype on steroids as you can see in the Tuesday slobbering puff piece, "A Complete List of Meghan and Harry’s Creative Projects, From Documentaries to Unrealized Podcasts." The staffer who apparently drew the short straw and was stuck with this assignment was Erin Vanderhoof. Her latest effort is not to be confused with her March 27 tongue bath filled with deep concern over a couple few really care about, "Harry and Meghan’s Hollywood Dreams Hit a Speed Bump, but With Love, Meghan Isn’t Dead at Netflix Yet." Yes, hardly  a month goes by without Vanity Fair insistently promoting the couple. In fact, why wait a month because less than three weeks before that last effort, they published "Meghan Markle and Prince Harry Are Headed To Australia" on March 8. Vanity Fair might as well call themselves the "Harry & Meghan" magazine. One wonders what sort of "incentive" exists for this level of over coverage. In any case, the latest Harry & Meghan SlobberFest perfectly illustrates the absurd adoration extended to them by Vanity Fair which knocks their credibility from almost none down to less than zero. Vanderhoof seems to think the public needs to read about all the projects Harry & Meghan have been involved in (and even projects they haven't been involved in) starting with their Netflix shticks which appear to be about mercifully terminated: Harry & Meghan (2022, six episodes) Live to Lead (2022, seven episodes) Heart of Invictus (2023, five episodes) Polo (2024, five episodes) Please stop. Masaka Kids, a Rhythm Within (2025, 40-minute documentary) With Love, Meghan (2025, two eight-episode seasons and a holiday special) The reader has been spared the loving reviews Vanderhoof provided each of these Netflix projects but if you are a glutton for punishment you can read the full reviews at Vanity Fair. Vanderhoof bizarrely thinks interest in Harry & Meghan is so intense that the public would actually be interested in projects the couple haven't even attempted yet. I kid you not. Pearl (announced 2021, canceled 2022) Untitled “Sociopath Podcast” (never announced) Meet Me at the Lake The Wedding Date Untitled Archewell-Netflix Polo Drama And, yes, more background information than you would ever care about is provided for each of these non-projects at Vanity Fair. What Erin Vanderhoof and Vanity Fair don't seem to realize is that outside of their small liberal celebrity bubble, most people don't give a damn about the former Sussexes. In fact, there was really only one time the public in general really did enjoy a performance by the heavily hyped pair when they appeared (sort of) in South Park's "Worldwide Privacy Tour." Enjoy!