I'd love to see that smug prick "liddle eric swalwell" get what's coming to him. Apparently he plays the pay to play game just like his california democrat congressional colleagues.
http://archive.fo/iTXVt#selection-1765.0-1765.266
>In a debate against Swalwell, Stark _ who is known as a volatile politician _ accused his young opponent of accepting "hundreds of thousands of dollars in bribes" from land developers in exchange for zoning privileges. Stark later retracted the charge and apologized
http://archive.fo/uVZ0K#selection-1159.0-1159.682
>On June 5, just hours after casting a vote for himself in the East Bay's 15th Congressional District primary against incumbent Congressman Pete Stark, Dublin City Councilman Eric Swalwell voted to approve a no-bid, monopoly contract to a local garbage company while members of that firm's upper management sat in attendance. Swalwell, however, never publicly disclosed that those four top-level employees of Amador Valley Industries were large contributors to his congressional campaign in the months before the deal. Also in attendance was a consultant for the garbage company who not only had recently donated to Swalwell, but also has a history of violating campaign finance laws
Fake news doing it's thing
>While the Bay Area news media, particularly the San Francisco Chronicle, has bent over backwards to debunk Stark's allegations, no one apparently has bothered to investigate the underlying claim — that much of Swalwell's nascent political career, which is devoid of any significant accomplishments, is funded by companies and individuals that are profiting by transforming vacant suburban land into housing developments in the East Bay's Tri-Valley area or are siphoning some of the residual dollars that come with Dublin's status as one of the state's fastest-growing cities
Another pay to play scheme
>Swalwell's conduct in the AVI deal also puts a new perspective on the allegations that Stark made previously. Stark claimed in April that Swalwell had taken "bribes," including payments in a deal in which he voted to rezone an area of Dublin for a development known as The Promenade. Stark later apologized, acknowledging that there was no evidence that Swalwell broke the law, but there was evidence of pay-to-play.
>In The Promenade deal, the Lin family, which owns a substantial amount of real estate in the Tri Valley, and the family's company, Charter Properties, began writing checks to Swalwell's congressional campaign last fall just days after Swalwell voted in their favor. Swalwell announced that he was challenging Stark the day after he voted for the Lins. According to Swalwell's FEC filings, two members of the Lin family each contributed the maximum $2,500 to Swalwell's congressional campaign
James Tong
>In addition, James Tong, an in-law of the Lins who is the company's point man in the Tri Valley, and four members of his family, also made donations to Swalwell around the same time, totaling $13,000. In addition, members of the Tong family contributed another $5,000 in combined campaign donations to Swalwell during the most recent reporting period, according to finance reports. At Swalwell's campaign party following his impressive second-place finish in the June primary, Tong was in attendance and was seen congratulating Swalwell for the night's results.
James Tong did you say?? https://www.eastbaytimes.com/2017/09/07/prominent-dublin-developer-slapped-with-federal-charges-again/
>DUBLIN — A prominent Dublin developer, who pleaded guilty last year to violating environmental laws, is facing federal charges again, this time for election fraud. James Tong, 72, was indicted last week by a grand jury for allegedly making illegal campaign contributions to an unnamed candidate running a re-election campaign for a seat on the U.S. House of Representatives.
>Election law in 2012 prevented one person from contributing more than $5,000 to a single candidate during an election cycle. Now, the amount is $5,200. The Election Act also doesn’t allow one person to make contributions to a candidate under another name, according to the indictment. But between March and December 2012, Tong allegedly made more than $10,000 in contributions to a committee for the candidate running for Congress, according to the indictment. Also between October 2013 and December 2013, he allegedly made another $10,000 in contributions to an authorized committee for the same candidate.
>The candidate is not named in the indictment.
I wonder which candidate that could've been?