Gowdy Nails Swalwell for Collusion Narrative: ‘President Swalwell’ Should Scare the ‘Hell Out of You’

Former congressman Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) is expressing his distaste for 2020 Democratic contender Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) once again, as he’s taking a sharp blow at Swalwell’s continued claims that the president colluded with Russia.

The former representative — who previously slammed Swalwell’s 2020 bid, telling viewers on MSNBC that Swalwell’s someone who “I’m sure none of your viewers are familiar with and they won’t be a year from now” — tore into the candidate’s constant calls against President Donald Trump.

Swalwell is convinced there was collusion between Trump’s 2016 campaign and the Russian government, even after special counsel Robert Mueller’s final report didn’t conclude collusion and Attorney General William Barr didn’t charge Trump with obstruction.

“I think he acts on Russia’s behalf, and I challenge him to show me otherwise,” Swalwell previously said during MSNBC’s interview on Wednesday, as IJR Red reported.

Donald Trump
Joshua Roberts/Reuters

On Fox News late Friday, Gowdy slammed Swalwell while noting the idea of “President Swalwell ought to scare the ever-living Hell out of you.”

“His last sentence is exactly the difference between a prosecutor and a politician,” Gowdy said. He continued:

“Prosecutors prove that you did something, politicians make you prove you did not. Did you hear his last sentence? ‘I challenge President Trump to prove that he did not do something.’ That’s what politicians do.”

Watch the video below:

During Friday night’s interview, Gowdy also offered praise toward Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein’s handling of Mueller’s final report.

As IJR Red reported, Rosenstein slammed the Obama administration on Friday for choosing “not to publicize the full story about Russian computer hackers and social media trolls, and how they relate to a broader strategy to undermine America.”

Since the release of Mueller’s report, former President Barack Obama’s administration has come under fire for allegedly, “on his watch, the Russians meddled in our democracy while his administration did nothing about it.”


  1. “Prosecutors prove that you did something, politicians make you prove you did not. ” Thanks for the perfect summary of the entire Dimocratic strategy Mr. Gowdy.

    1. As chairman of the 10th committee to investigate Benghazi, Trey would KNOW about proving what you did not do. 5 Republican controlled House committees disproved the conspiracies, but Trey pledged to prove them all true. 2 yrs later, he didn’t No one but the Republican controlled House referred Benghazi for the 10th investigation. IF you read the Mueller report, Mueller referred the obstruction charges to Congress & left the door open for Trump to be charged after he leaves office.

  2. Let’s not forget this is the same Eric stalwell who said he would arrest people and place them in prison if they didn’t willingly turn over their assault rifles, AND when someone responded with it would be a civil war he said the government has nukes it would be a short war. He casually tosses out there hey the government would nuke your asses if I was running it and had a majority who supported me. This is the Democratic party do what I say or I’ll force you to by threats of violence.

    1. Hmm…. wannabe mass-murdering tyrant seems an appropriate label for SwelledHead.

      1. He reminded the “civil war” proponent that they would be taking on a government that possessed nukes. Of course they also have tear gas, drones, tanks, F-35 fighters, long range strike bombers, Super Hornet fighters, attack helicopters—the world’s greatest weapons system. I can’t get Screw to say who HE plans to shoot in his “civil war.” Would be interesting to know who Swawell’s proponent plans to shoot. Does he plan to take on the US military in this civil war?

      2. Tyrant would seem to apply to any number of the demoncrap candidates.

  3. A man running for President of the United States holds a position that you’re guilty if he says you are, and that the burden is on you to prove your innocence. Exactly contrary to our long-upheld “innocent until proven guilty standard.

    The SCOTUS would have a field day with this asshat.

    1. “Innocent until proven guilty” turned on its head.

      I’m also going to object to your use of the term “man” in the case of SwelledHead. He’s a leech and opportunist. Like so many other of the other Dim candidates he’s also zero accomplishment.

      Your optimism and sense of justice are good. Unfortunately those attempting the recent bureaucratic-coup, i.e. the collusion delusion, completely ignored this basic tenet AND due process.

    2. Yeah, who does he think he is? Trump? Flynn? Those “lock her up” rally chanters? Just curious, how many folks have you prosecuted, Jeff?

      1. I never claimed to be lawyer – but since you seem to be struggling with this concept, here’s a link for you: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/presumption_of_innocence

        I never claimed (and I encourage you to attempt to find otherwise) that Hillary was not entitled to a presumption of innocence. Every citizen deserves a fair trial and I suspect that if you keep watching the news, you may soon get to see some of those judicial processes after the IG report is released.

  4. Does that fool Swalwell not know that one is innocent until proven guilty , which Trump wasn’t found guilty!! All of these Democrat losers running for President need to get over the fact that Trump won fair and square! With or without the Fake Dossier!

    1. “Innocent until proven guilty” only works IF you’re a member of the Dimwit Party. Otherwise as a GOP or NPA member, you are “Guilty until YOU prove you’re innocent even if you have to file bankruptcy.”

      1. Are you saying that YOU consider Hillary innocent until proven guilty? You don’t even consider her
        innocent when proven innocent. So you must consider her a GOP or NPA member. She’s been a registered D since 1969.

    2. What in the dossier was proven incorrect and what was proven as per the Mueller report as accurate? If you read both documents, you would know. One incorrect item does not make the entire document “fake,” even in Trumpism.

Comments are closed.