Philip La Scola, Livermore 

In the May 12 edition of The Independent, an editorial endorsed Eric Swalwell to be re-elected to the 15th Congressional district. The editorial states the reason for this endorsement is that Swalwell has been an ardent supporter of the Tri-Valley and beyond.  

I have no reason to question all of the support items listed by the Independent in this endorsement, as our representatives are supposed to advocate for the constituency they represent.

What I find lacking in this endorsement is any editorial comment on those running against Mr. Swalwell. My sample ballot shows six other candidates, one or more of which could be just as much an advocate for the constituency as Mr. Swalwell. However, there is no mention of any of these candidates and their qualifications. 

In concluding this editorial, The Independent states Mr. Swalwell serves with integrity, honesty and passion. I find that to be laughable.  

If The Independent makes the statement that Mr. Swalwell serves with integrity and honesty, where were these traits when he went on CNN, MSNBC, FOX and the major networks with the opinion that there was overwhelming evidence that Russia helped Trump win the 2016 election? He gave his opinion during these guest appearances, but when questioned under oath before a Congressional committee, he stated he had never seen any evidence of Russian collusion in the 2016 election. While it may be true, he has never seen any evidence of Russian collusion, so how does he know there was overwhelming evidence that it existed? 

Before The Independent made this endorsement, at a minimum, Mr. Swalwell should have been asked to explain his comments about Russian involvement in the 2016 election and why there has never been any documentation that it ever existed. 

Yes, Mr. Swalwell serves with passion: a passion for making false, irresponsible statements that he cannot support.