accusation

Why now? Why now?

Every time a woman comes forward with her story of sexual assault, this is the first question she faces. OK, maybe the second — after some variation of “Are you a lying slut?”

At least we are consistent. But on behalf of all survivors everywhere, of any gender, identity or age, let me give you some blanket answers to “Why now?”

Survivors come forward now, whenever now is, because they have reached the point in their recovery when facing the inevitable “lying slut” accusation is less terrible than watching their abuser strut around as if that person is not a dangerous, cruel predator who is almost certainly going to hurt someone else if they are not stopped.

Whether it’s in Congress, on a movie set, in the halls of their school — wherever that predator is just living their life without consequence — there is a survivor who has been cowering in the shadows of her own life, in pain, wanting to scream to the world that this person is not what they seem.

But the price of that honesty has always been steep. Too steep. Even after #MeToo.

Ask Cassie Ventura. Ask Jennifer Siebel Newsom. Ask E. Jean Carroll. Dolores Huerta. Simone Biles.

Even powerful women can’t escape the blowback, the fear. Even powerful women are steamrolled over and over again by the overwhelming presumption that they are lying, and there is an ulterior motive for coming forward at this particular moment.

Imagine just being an average person holding that secret. Who are any of us to stand up alone against a rich and powerful man whose very freedom will depend on crushing our credibility?

P. Diddy. Harvey Weinstein. Donald Trump. Cesar Chavez. Larry Nassar. Eric Swalwell.

Those men know power, and know how to use it.

“He thought he was untouchable. He acted with total impunity. He never thought that the consequences of his actions would follow him,” Ally Sammarco, one of the women who has spoken out about Swalwell (who has previously denied allegations of misconduct), told CBS.

It’s why the women of the Epstein files stayed silent for so long. It’s why there are thousands of rape survivors out there right now who have never said a word about what they endured, and maybe never will.

“Why now?” is just a more palatable version of “lying slut,” a question based on ignorance about how trauma — and society — works. A question meant not to elicit fact, but to feed the Jezebel frenzy men always use in their attempt to escape justice.

Here’s the truth about sexual assault: There is no right way to respond to it, no right time. There is no one reaction that proves it happened or that creates the perfect scenario that will protect the survivor’s reputation while delivering justice upon the predator. In fact, there is really no way at all to respond to a sexual assault that won’t bring secondary trauma.

Wait years and face disdain — that it didn’t happen, wasn’t serious, is only coming out now for some agenda, like politics or money.

Report it immediately and be prepared for every move, every smile, every sip of a drink, to be examined for signs that this was, if not consensual, somehow deserved — a gray area of shared responsibility.

Imagine, at a moment of crushing vulnerability, when your body has been violated and your mind is reeling trying to find safe ground, being bludgeoned by these accusations, stated or implied, that you brought this on yourself.

“Why now?” becomes “Why would you?”

Even when the scenario is one in which there can be no defense — such as the UCLA gynecologist, James Heaps, who on Tuesday pleaded guilty to sexually abusing five of his patients during exams — the cost of reporting is terrible. That case has wound on for years, leaving each of the victims to constantly relive their worst moments, constantly fear that all of their courage would come to nothing.

Which is why survivors don’t always come forward. Maybe they need time to put themselves back together, even just a little bit. Maybe the fear of all that societal scrutiny is just too much. Maybe they fear they won’t be believed, and their attacker will be free to harm them again.

Maybe they just want it to all go away. Maybe they do blame themselves, and are paralyzed by an unfounded shame.

There are so many reasons why survivors stay silent — and none of them are because it didn’t happen, or because they are lying.

Lonna Drewes, the Beverly Hills model who came forward Tuesday with an accusation that Swalwell drugged and raped her in 2018, summed up the experience of many, many survivors.

“I did not want to live anymore,” she said of how she felt after the attack. “I cried all the time for years.”

So here’s the real answer to “Why now?” from a victim’s statement that one of Heap’s survivors read in court.

“What you intended to break, you did not,” she said.

That is the answer to “Why now?” Because the bravery and courage at the heart of the survivor was bruised but not defeated.

Because she doesn’t want it to happen to anyone else.

Because she deserves to be free of his secrets: Ones she has been forced to keep out of fear of him, but also of us.

WASHINGTON — California Rep. Eric Swalwell resigned his congressional seat on Monday under intense pressure from lawmakers of both parties after several women accused him of sexual misconduct, including a former staffer who alleged rape.

Swalwell, a Dublin Democrat who suspended his campaign for California governor on Sunday, said in a statement that he was stepping down from the House, where he has served since 2013, and planned to continue fighting what he called “serious, false” allegations made against him.

“However, I must take responsibility and ownership of the mistakes I did make,” Swalwell wrote without specifying which mistakes those were.

His resignation came hours after the House Ethics Committee opened an investigation into the sexual misconduct allegations against him and as lawmakers from both parties threatened to expel him from the House if he did not leave his post. He said he was aware of the expulsion efforts underway and said that it was “wrong” to expel a member of Congress “without due process, within days of an allegation being made.”

“But it is also wrong for my constituents to have me distracted from my duties. Therefore, I plan to resign my seat in Congress,” he said.

Asked about replacing Swalwell, Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office said in a statement that it is “reviewing the matter. Once the seat is officially vacant, our office will make an official announcement.”

The allegations, detailed in reports by the San Francisco Chronicle and CNN last week, drew swift bipartisan condemnation, with lawmakers from both parties calling the accusations “disgusting” and demanding that he either resign or be removed from office.

Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) intended to lead the charge to expel Swalwell. In an interview Monday, Luna said she planned to file a motion as early as Tuesday on the grounds that he violated House rules over an alleged inappropriate sexual relationship with a subordinate. A House floor vote could have been held as early as Wednesday, she said.

Following Swalwell’s resignation, Luna said the Northern California lawmaker did “the right thing.” But she took issue with him saying that the allegations were not grounds for expulsion, noting that he was under criminal investigation.

In New York, the Manhattan district attorney’s office opened an investigation into sexual assault allegations against Swalwell by a former staffer and issued a statement over the weekend that urged “survivors and anyone with knowledge of these allegations to contact our Special Victims Division.”

After the sexual allegations came to light, Democrats called on Swalwell to resign, but when it comes to expulsion, they said they would not move against Swalwell alone. They were also pushing to expel Rep. Tony Gonzales (R-Texas), who last month admitted to a sexual relationship with a staffer who later died by suicide.

Late Monday, Gonzales said he too was stepping down. “When Congress returns tomorrow, I will file my retirement from office,” he wrote on X.

The push to get Swalwell expelled had gained traction even among his friends.

Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) wrote on X on Monday that Swalwell should be kicked out of Congress, saying he “trusted someone who I believed was a friend, but is now clear that he is not the person I thought I knew.” Gallego said the woman “deserves to be believed, to be supported, and to see justice served.”

Had Swalwell been expelled, it would have been the first such removal in congressional history on the grounds of sexual misconduct, and among the rare instances in the House’s 237-year history in which members ousted one of their own.

Only six members have been expelled from the House. Three were fighting for the Confederacy, two were convicted of bribery and one was the fraudster George Santos, whose sentence was later commuted by President Trump.

Now that Swalwell has resigned, he is still eligible for his pension and for a number of other perks extended to other former members, including the ability to enter the House floor and access to the congressional gym.

Swalwell said Monday that he is working with his staff to “ensure they are able, in my absence, to serve the needs of the good people of the 14th congressional district.”

While many of Swalwell’s staffers have already quit, remaining staffers not involved in constituent services would lose their jobs and receive no severance pay.

Daniel Schuman, executive director of the American Governance Institute, which is focused on congressional reform, argues that the practice is unfair.

“I think the House owes them a duty for what they’ve had to go through,” Schuman said.

Longtime ethics expert Meredith McGehee said that members have been reluctant to expel their colleagues in recent years because of the razor-thin majorities in the House, but that not doing so hurts the credibility of the institution.

“It’s really important at this moment that the House act to expel these men who have been seriously and credibly accused of wrongdoing,” said McGehee, a former executive director of the ethics watchdog Issue One. “To allow either one of them to stay in office and serve out their term would be a farce.”

The Swalwell scandal could still prompt an ever larger surge of expulsion calls. Some lawmakers called for two additional members to be swept into any expulsion vote: Rep. Cory Mills (R-Fla.), who has been accused of sexual assault, and Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-Fla.), who was indicted on charges that she laundered $5 million of federal disaster money and used it to fund a political campaign.

“Reps. Swalwell, Gonzales, Cherfilus-McCormick, and Mills should resign. If they refuse, they should be expelled,” Rep. Nydia Velazquez (D-N.Y.) wrote on X on Monday. “Americans deserve better and Congress must hold our members accountable.”

Any expulsion would require a two-thirds majority vote, or 290 of 435 votes if every House member participates. The Senate would not be required to concur with the House vote to make the expulsion effective, but it remains to be seen whether the House could meet the two-thirds threshold.

Times staff writer Melody Gutierrez in Sacramento contributed to this report.

For weeks, salacious talk swirled in campaign circles, ricocheted through email chains and was served up, like a buzzy side dish, over gossipy lunches from Sacramento to San Diego.

The talk revolved around Eric Swalwell, the 45-year-old congressman from the East Bay and one of the top Democratic contenders for California governor. The rumors involved allegations of inappropriate behavior with young staffers.

Pressed by rival camps, pursued by the political press corps, the claims were largely confined to unvetted corners of the internet until this week, when Swalwell’s campaign — knowing the whispers were getting louder — issued a public statement denying any wrongdoing.

The move was a prebuttal. Strategists figured it better to get out front of the chatter and address the online innuendo, even if it meant exposing the allegations to a much wider audience. The campaign’s statement was followed hours later by a categorical denial from the congressman.

“It’s false,” Swalwell told reporters Tuesday night in Sacramento. He said he never behaved inappropriately with female staff members or had a sexual relationship with any staffer or intern. There were no quiet legal settlements, he said. No hiding behind nondisclosure agreements.

Then, on Friday, the San Francisco Chronicle published a lengthy report — filled with highly specific and graphic details — quoting a woman who worked nearly two years for Swalwell, stating she had sexual encounters with him while he was her boss. Twice, she alleged, he sexually assaulted her when she was too intoxicated to consent.

The woman, who is 17 years younger than Swalwell, said the congressman began pursuing her within weeks of her hiring at age 21 to work in his district office in the East Bay Area. That was in 2019.

The woman said she largely kept quiet about Swalwell’s behavior out of fear she would suffer personal and professional consequences. She told the Chronicle she did not share her account with authorities because she was afraid they would not believe her. The newspaper said medical records show the woman obtained pregnancy and STD tests a week after one of the alleged assaults.

Swalwell issued another categorical denial.

“These allegations are false and come on the eve of an election against the front-runner for governor,” he said in a statement, somewhat overstating his status in the neck-and-neck gubernatorial race. “For nearly 20 years, I have served the public — as a prosecutor and a congressman and have always protected women.

“I will defend myself with the facts and where necessary bring legal action,” Swalwell said. “My focus in the coming days is to be with my wife and children and defend our decades of service against these lies.”

Even before the Chronicle published its article, once the privately bandied rumors were suddenly the open, you could almost hear the sound of a dam bursting. Swalwell’s competitors were quick to amplify the assertions, grappling for advantage in a race that remains stubbornly knotted up.

“Very, very troubling,” said fellow Democrat Katie Porter. “Deeply troubling,” echoed Betty Yee, another of the Democratic hopefuls.

A third Democrat running, Antonio Villaraigosa, was more inventive, accusing Swalwell “of skipping town” — he did not attend a Wednesday candidate forum in Sacramento — “as more and more women come forward with sexual harassment allegations.”

At that point no one with firsthand knowledge had come forward to contradict Swalwell’s denial of wrongdoing.

But with Friday’s article in the Chronicle, opponents escalated their attacks. San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan and state schools superintendent Tony Thurmond both called on Swalwell to quit the race.

One of his highest-profile backers, Democratic Arizona Sen. Ruben Gallego, withdrew his endorsement and expressed regret he had defended Swalwell on social media prior to the Chronicle’s account. Democratic Rep. Jimmy Gomez of Los Angeles also withdrew his endorsement and urged Swalwell to abandon his candidacy.

Behind closed doors, other major Swalwell backers were reassessing their support.

It’s understandable — and probably necessary — for the congressman to retreat, as he suggested, to spent time with his wife and family.

But in light of the Chronicle’s report, and its damning allegations, he’ll need to do more than issue strongly worded statements on threatened legal action if he has any hopes of salvaging his gubernatorial candidacy and political career. (Swalwell gave up his congressional seat to run for governor.)

If the allegations are false, he needs to refute each and every detail in thorough, incontrovertible fashion. If they’re true, then what could Swalwell possibly have been thinking — not just forcing himself on his alleged victim, but running for governor knowing what he’d done? Was he convinced his behavior would never come to light? Did he believe that adamant denials would allow him to brazen his way through?

Swalwell has a lot of explaining to do — about his behavior, his disclaimers, his judgment.

And even though the June primary is still many weeks away, he has very little time to do so.