Watch Bill Maher Trash Eric Swalwell: ‘F*cking Creep’

Comedian and HBO host Bill Maher joined in the wave of renewed scrutiny around former Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA), who he described as a “f*cking creep” — which has prompted fresh debate in Washington over how long allegations and rumors can circulate inside political and media circles before ever becoming public.

Swalwell, once a prominent Democratic figure and frequent cable news guest during the Trump era, saw his political career collapse in a matter of days earlier this month after a series of sexual misconduct allegations surfaced publicly, including claims of rape and sexual assault. He has since suspended his California gubernatorial campaign, resigned from Congress, and acknowledged “mistakes” while denying the more serious accusations.

The speed of that fall has only intensified questions about what was known, and when. That surfaced again on Saturday when Bill Maher addressed the situation on air, describing what he said was a long-standing perception of Swalwell that never made it into mainstream reporting until recently.

WATCH:

????NEW: Bill Maher on Eric Swalwell: “We had him on a couple of times. Ask my staff: I never liked him. I don’t have good gaydar — but I got creepdar. I always thought this guy was a f*cking creep. I never liked him.” pic.twitter.com/QCMWJoU0hw

— Jason Cohen ???????? (@JasonJournoDC) April 18, 2026

“Speaking of creepy stuff, have you been following the Eric Swalwell case here in California?” Maher said. “I got to say, we had him on a couple of times. Ask my staff. I never liked him. I don’t have good gaydar, but I got creepdar. I always thought this guy was a f*cking creep.”

Maher then broadened the point beyond Swalwell himself, arguing that similar patterns have played out repeatedly in American politics.

“I hear this so many times,” he said, pointing to figures like Bill Clinton, Bill Cosby, and Harvey Weinstein. “You know, it was an open secret in Arkansas. It was an open secret,” he said of Clinton-era allegations, drawing a comparison to other long-circulating claims that only later became public scandals.

“What is going on here, where it takes so long for the open secret to become public?” Maher asked. “I seem to remember that back in the old days … when JFK was President, we heard, well, the media used to protect politicians, and they knew what JFK was doing, but it was just something they didn’t report on. Is it any different now? Apparently not.”

The reference to John F. Kennedy underscored Maher’s broader argument: that media institutions, while more expansive today, still exercise selective judgment over what becomes public and when. Those comments come as new reporting and commentary continue to surface suggesting that concerns about Swalwell’s conduct were known inside political and media circles.

Former Democratic strategist Michael Trujillo warned in a now-deleted post that Swalwell’s past behavior would eventually surface during his gubernatorial run, referencing allegations involving interns and inappropriate conduct. Trujillo later said he removed the post after receiving a cease-and-desist letter from Swalwell’s campaign.

Separately, Politico reported that Swalwell had “developed a reputation for unsavory and sometimes unwanted behavior toward women,” citing what it described as longstanding “whisper networks” among political insiders that rarely extended into public reporting.

The result is a familiar pattern in which reputational information circulates informally inside elite political and media environments but remains unreported until it becomes politically unavoidable.

That dynamic is now drawing renewed attention as Swalwell’s career unravels in real time, with questions mounting not only about the allegations themselves, but about why they took so long to surface publicly in a sustained way. And as that debate continues to grow, one question is increasingly hanging over the story: if everyone in Washington and California knew, why didn’t anyone say anything sooner?