Records Show ‘Bizarre Inconsistency’ Regarding Payments From Trump Foe Eric Swalwell
Newly unearthed Federal Election Commission records show that Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA), one of President Donald Trump’s most outspoken critics, has made more than $360,000 in campaign payments since 2021 to a California man for ‘bizarre’ reasons.
According to FEC filings, Swalwell’s campaign committee and his political action committee, Remedy PAC, have issued more than 75 payments to an individual named Darly Meyer, a North Hollywood resident who also operates a limousine business called CYD Global Car Service.
The payments, which span from 2021 through September 2025, vary from as little as $53 to more than $12,000 each. Filings list a wide range of descriptions for the disbursements, including “security services,” “salary,” “travel reimbursement,” “personal travel expense reimbursement,” “car service,” “event flowers reimbursement,” and “postage.” Individual payments totaled more than $120,000 in both 2024 and 2025 alone.
Hans von Spakovsky, a former FEC commissioner and senior legal fellow at the Heritage Foundation, said the pattern of inconsistencies should trigger a formal review by the agency’s enforcement arm.
“This is the type of bizarre inconsistency that should catch the attention of the FEC,” von Spakovsky said. “These kinds of irregularities should cause the agency’s auditing arm to investigate whether these were legitimate payments to a legitimate contractor.”
Swalwell’s campaign did not provide a detailed explanation for the varied classifications, Fox News reported.
When reached for comment, the California Democrat replied only, “Darly protects me and my family.” However, a search of the California Bureau of Security and Investigative Services database found no record of a state-issued security license for Meyer.
Public records show that Meyer’s business car service markets itself as a provider of “corporate shuttles and luxury chauffeur services” across California. He also serves as an administrator for a Facebook group called CaliHaitians, which describes itself as a “progressive community” for Haitian Americans living in the western United States.
The findings come as Swalwell continues to face scrutiny for his campaign’s history of lavish spending on travel, entertainment, and luxury accommodations abroad. Past FEC filings show that Swalwell’s campaign has repeatedly billed thousands of dollars for first-class hotels, private yacht charters, and luxury transportation services.
In October 2023, his campaign reported spending nearly $17,000 with Just Dreaming Yacht Charters, a San Francisco-based company that advertises “relaxing and luxurious” yacht outings for up to 40 guests. His 2023 year-end filing also showed nearly $1,700 in charges at Dubai’s five-star Burj Al Arab Hotel, along with additional expenses at 1 Hotel San Francisco, Austin Proper Hotel, and the Times Square Edition in New York.
In total, Swalwell’s campaign reported roughly $90,000 in travel-related expenses during the final three months of 2023 alone. Earlier filings from 2022 showed nearly $60,000 in travel spending over a six-week span, including a $1,752 charge at Hotel La Maison Champs-Élysées in Paris.
These revelations have fueled accusations from conservative watchdogs and critics that Swalwell’s committees function as “personal slush funds” under the guise of campaign expenditures.
Von Spakovsky said the discrepancies in the Meyer payments highlight a larger transparency problem. “When you see this kind of reporting pattern — different labels, inconsistent descriptions, and overlapping functions — it’s the sort of thing that absolutely deserves FEC scrutiny,” he said.
Swalwell, who serves on the House Judiciary Committee and has been one of Trump’s most combative opponents in Congress, has long been a target of Republican criticism over ethics and security concerns.
In 2020, intelligence officials confirmed that a suspected Chinese spy known as Christine Fang, or “Fang Fang,” had developed ties to Swalwell earlier in his career, including through political fundraising. House Republicans later cited that relationship when removing him from the House Intelligence Committee in 2023, calling him a “national security risk.” Swalwell denied wrongdoing, saying he cooperated fully with the FBI and was never accused of misconduct.
The new FEC irregularities are expected to draw further attention from federal regulators.
“If these payments were truly for security, then documentation should exist — invoices, contracts, service receipts,” von Spakovsky said. “If they don’t, that’s when you get into potential violations of campaign finance law.”
Nearly 150,000 California Mail Ballots Rejected In Primary
California election officials are examining why nearly 150,000 mail-in ballots were rejected during the state’s June primary, with late-arriving ballots accounting for most of the increase.
The higher rejection rate comes despite years of election law changes designed to make voting more accessible and ensure more ballots are ultimately counted.
According to data compiled by the California Secretary of State’s office, 148,241 mail-in ballots were rejected during the June primary, representing 1.73% of all mail ballots returned.
That marks an increase from the 2024 primary, when 108,982 ballots were rejected, or 1.56% of all mail ballots cast.
The largest reason for rejection was ballots arriving too late to qualify under California law.
State data shows that 93,479 ballots were rejected because they failed to meet the state’s deadline requirements.
California allows mail ballots to arrive up to seven days after Election Day, provided they are postmarked on or before Election Day.
Voting experts believe many of the rejected ballots received postmarks dated after Election Day, making them ineligible to be counted even if they arrived within the seven-day grace period.
Kim Alexander, president of the nonpartisan California Voter Foundation, said the timing of postal processing appears to be a significant concern.
“Ballots rejected due to lateness are caused primarily to being postmarked too late to count, not because they arrived too late to count,” Alexander said.
Election experts have questioned whether recent operational changes within the U.S. Postal Service may be contributing to delayed postmarks.
Earlier this year, a group of mostly Democratic U.S. senators wrote to the Postal Service expressing concern that mail-processing changes could affect ballot handling during federal elections.
Updated Postal Service procedures mean postmarks may reflect when mail is processed at regional facilities rather than when it first enters the mail system.
Because processing centers have been consolidated in some areas, election officials have warned that postmark timing could be affected.
Before the June primary, California election officials encouraged voters to mail ballots as early as possible because of potential postal delays.
The June election also featured a highly competitive race for governor, which some experts believe encouraged many voters to wait until the final days before casting ballots.
In addition to late-arriving ballots, approximately 44,000 ballots were rejected because election officials determined the voter’s signature did not match the signature on file.
Another 8,300 ballots were rejected because the return envelope did not contain a signature.
State records also show that 743 ballots were rejected because those voters had already cast another ballot.
Other rejected ballots involved missing ballots inside return envelopes or multiple ballots submitted in a single envelope.
The highest rejection rate in the state occurred in Tulare County, where 3.52% of returned mail ballots were rejected.
Alpine County and Merced County followed closely, each recording rejection rates of 3.36%.
California has frequently faced criticism for taking weeks to complete vote counting after major elections, largely because state law permits ballots meeting certain requirements to continue arriving after Election Day.
Following the June primary, President Donald Trump again criticized California’s election system, while the Department of Justice opened an investigation into election administration in Los Angeles County.
Election experts emphasize that the increase in rejected ballots should not be interpreted as evidence of widespread voter fraud.
A 2025 report by the Brookings Institution found documented cases of mail ballot fraud remained extremely rare, estimating roughly four cases for every 10 million mail ballots cast, The Associated Press reported.
State officials have not identified evidence of widespread fraud connected to the June primary, but the increase in rejected ballots is expected to receive additional scrutiny as election administrators evaluate whether changes in postal operations, voter behavior or election procedures contributed to the higher rejection rate.
