Tag: gavin newsom

Gavin Newsom solicited $340M in ‘behested payments’ from special interests, filings reveal

Gov. Gavin Newsom’s bid to seize control of the narrative around multiple federal investigations is backfiring, with critics using the governor’s accusations of Trump-led ‘lawfare’ to revive long-running questions about pay-to-play politics in California.

State records show Newsom has solicited more than $340 million in donations from wealthy donors and special interests — some of which have received preferential treatment and millions of dollars in state contracts — while also taking pains to prop up the political activities of his wife, Jennifer Siebel Newsom.

A review of state disclosure records shows Newsom has reported 1,325 behested payments totaling $347,240,506 since 2011, when he was serving as lieutenant governor.

The payments — legal under California law, but a controversial if not illegal practice in some other states — are reported once they hit $5,000 from a single source in a calendar year, and they must be for a charitable, governmental or legislative purpose.

Criticism and memes of Newsom’s habit of soliciting donations have been gaining steam since the governor announced on Monday he and wife are the focus of multiple federal probes.

Keep reading

How Deep Are the Newsoms in It? THIS Deep.

It seems impossible — or just too revolting — to keep up with the financial hanky-panky of California Gov. Gavin Newsom and First Partner (gag) Jennifer Siebel Newsom. But thanks to a couple of investigative reporters with stronger stomachs than I have, let’s see if I can’t put everything you need to know into one easily digestible column.

I love it when other people do my dirty work for me, so let’s get started.

“Today, my wife & I joined Donald Trump’s hit list,” Newsom practically boasted on Monday. “He has directed his Department of Justice to investigate us. They have not found a crime — they are simply trying to find one.”

Well, let’s see what Fox Business anchor Liz MacDonald and my old friend and Red State colleague Jen Van Laar have to say about that.

MacDonald said Tuesday that the DOJ probe “is about California Democrats’ modern-day machine politics,” which she described as a “feedback loop of Sacramento-corporate lobbyists-governor/wife nonprofit-behested nonprofit donations-lucrative state contracts-Sacramento.”

Don’t bother writing all this down — there won’t be a quiz at the end of today’s column. You’re welcome.

“The modern Sacramento machine trades corporate compliance and nonprofit funding/donations for policy access and state business,” MacDonald added, and then explained how that grift (allegedly!) worked for the Newsoms:

According to IRS Form 990 disclosures, her nonprofit frequently buys from Siebel Newsom’s for-profit film company—Girls Club Entertainment LLC—writer, producer and director services and the licensing and production rights for her documentaries. Then it sells the docs to the state and public schools. 

 IRS records show that her nonprofit has paid her Girls Club Entertainment LLC roughly $1.64 million for these production and licensing rights since 2012, which includes a steady annual contracting fee of $150,000 since 2018.

TL;DR: Siebel Newsom produced unwatchable propaganda videos for children, for which Democrat-dominated schools then paid her handsomely. Or as MacDonald summed it up, “Over the past decade, Siebel Newsom has collected over $3.7 million in combined personal salary and LLC payouts funded by the nonprofit.”

Then there are behested payments, which MacDonald explained are “a unique mechanism in California politics where an elected official asks a corporation, labor union, or wealthy individual to donate money to a specific charity, nonprofit, or government program.” Unlike campaign donations, there are no caps.

As governor, Newsom requested a record $226 million in behested payments in one year. “Hundreds of thousands of dollars went to the California Partners Project,” MacDonald wrote, “a nonprofit founded by his wife.”

Keep reading

Palisades Fire Victims Beat Gavin Newsom in Court AGAIN

California Gov. Gavin Newsom has been playing hide the ball with the truth about the disastrous and deadly Pacific Palisades fire and the state’s culpability in it since it rekindled on Jan. 7, 2025. This week, the governor lost another court maneuver in his attempt to deny Palisades fire victims the ability to sue the the State of California. 

On Friday, the California Supreme Court denied Newsom administration’s latest stall tactic, that would have required yet another “review and request to stay the Palisades Fire Litigation,” according to Trey Robertson, who represents 4,000 Palisades victims. If the court had decided differently, those victims would have been completely iced out of their efforts to seek relief… and discovery. 

We’ve already seen the state run from liability in the case, but the secrets that would pour out from discovery in a court case of this kind could fill that entire empty Pacific Palisades reservoir. It’s still empty, by the way. 

The State of California has the right to defend itself against liability in the fire, of course. But there’s something else at play here. Newsom’s administration has fought the thousands of victims every step of the way as they seek  what could be billions of dollars in damages from the state’s complicity.  

The decision means that “justice is coming for the Palisades Fire victims,” Robertson said in an X post. 

Keep reading

California Was a Paradise, Then Newsom Happened

People talk about the California disaster, but I don’t think we fully appreciate the severity and the manifestations of it. And the best barometer to discover that is how many people are leaving. It’s estimated that somewhere between 400,000 and 500,000 Californians left in ’25, ’26. 

Now, the problem with that is they’re not leaving a barren state. They’re not leaving a cold Alaska. They’re leaving the most beautiful state in the country that for years under a bipartisan system of Pat Brown, Ronald Reagan, George Deukmejian, Pete Wilson, and to some extent Arnold Schwarzenegger, it had wonderful governance. 

So, why are they leaving? Why have 11 to 12 million people, a quarter of the present population, left California?  

Well, the Reason Foundation just did a comprehensive study of all the roads in all the states and ranked them according to congestion, quality of roads, bridges, everything. California was 49th, 49th in the country. 

In terms of school scores, it’s down to about 40 to 41 in the nation, even though it’s 13th in the amount of money it spends. It’s got one-third of all the homeless people, maybe up to nearly a half in some studies.  

It’s got a third of all the welfare recipients. Twenty-two percent of the people live below the poverty line. 

Think of this. It has the highest gasoline taxes in the nation and the highest gas prices, and that’s a combination. It refuses to tap its considerable fifth-in-the-nation oil and natural gas reserves to the full extent that it could. 

It shut down the timber industry. It shut down the mining industry. 

So, we’re paying because of our green fanaticism on oil blends, and we’ve been driving out oil refineries, and we have these high taxes. 

We’re paying $7 to $8 a gallon right now for gas. We have the highest electricity rates in the continental United States. Only Hawaii has it higher. Think of that.  

We have some of the highest property crime rates in the country. San Francisco, until recently, was the highest property crime rate city per capita in the nation. 

Our sales tax is among the top 10. We have the highest income taxes. Now, we know why this is the problem.  

We know why, why this all happened. We haven’t had a Republican governor in nearly 20 years since Arnold Schwarzenegger left. We have no statewide offices that are Republican, no attorney general, no lieutenant governor, no state controller, nothing. 

We have 52 seats in the Congress. We only have seven, you know, it’s like 12% … We only have seven Republican congressmen, and yet Donald Trump almost got 30%, 40% of the vote. So, we have less than a third of what we should be proportionally represented in Congress.  

All of the state and local judges, after 20 years of governance by left-wing [officials], are left-wing themselves. 

So, the judicial, the executive, and the legislative branches are all one party, supermajorities in both legislatures. No statewide officer that’s a Republican.  

What do you do about it? Well, who is the iconic victim? Who has been at the center of this maelstrom for the last 30 years? One man, Gavin Newsom. 

Keep reading

Not Satire: Newsom Took Money That Could Have Helped Stop Palisades Fires and Spent It Teaching American Indians to Start Fires

Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom of California continues to light his constituents’ tax dollars on fire.

Moreover, he has done it in the name of cultural pandering and with dubious constitutionality.

According to the urban policy-focused City Journal, the state’s “Tribal Wildfire Resilience” program, overseen by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, or CAL FIRE, has distributed $24 million to “tribal groups and other nonprofits” to teach American Indians, identified as “cultural fire practitioners,” how to clear brush from forests in ways their ancestors would have found familiar.

Meanwhile, taxpayers have seen no appreciable return on that expenditure. How much brush have the tribes cleared? California has released no data.

Of course, this is not meant as an attack on the tribes — far from it. After all, one could probably find $24 million between the couch cushions at the Pentagon.

What makes this expenditure maddening is that it, like most things in California, is dripping with wokeness.

For instance, Natural Resources Secretary Wade Crowfoot, who effectively oversees the program, justified it not on fire management grounds but as a remedy for historical injustices. California, he said, originated in a “state-sanctioned policy of genocide.” Thus, Crowfoot made it sound as if the governor had a plan to return the land to the “leadership of California Native American tribes.”

Newsom, of course, has no such plan. But saying that he has one sounds good in upscale places like the French Laundry.

Worse yet, the “Tribal Wildfire Resilience” program engages in discrimination by allocating resources based on race.

“As part of this commitment to ‘cultural burning,’” the City Journal wrote, “California has created separate fire-certification processes for nontribal and tribal populations. White, black, Latino, and Asian fire bosses must receive technical certifications, including a 40-hour burn-boss course and, in some cases, a federal certificate. ‘Cultural fire practitioners,’ by contrast, are certified through simple tribal recognition that a person has ‘substantial experience’ burning for cultural purposes.”

Should anyone ever make a case of it, the U.S. Supreme Court almost certainly would find those race-based provisions unconstitutional.

Again, none of this reflects in any way on the tribes themselves. Perhaps some “cultural fire practitioners” really do have “substantial experience” in clearing brush via controlled fires. After all, early American history is filled with stories of Indians skilled in that practice.

In that case, however, why do they require public funding? Why must the privileged Newsom, one of the whitest of white men who ever lived, teach them traditional cultural techniques?

Keep reading

Calif.: Newsom signs bill limiting law enforcement access to ballots

Governor Gavin Newsom has signed legislation to tighten California’s election security, limiting authorities’ access to ballots, voter lists, rosters, or certified voting technology, ahead of the June 2nd state primary election.

The bill signed on Wednesday would prohibit anyone — particularly federal officers — from becoming involved in election administration, while allowing exceptions in cases of urgent public health or safety concerns.

Furthermore, the law states that if packages containing voted ballots are removed from the custody of election officials, civil penalties for ballot custody violations may still apply, with fines of up to $50,000.

“We have to clarify the rules of engagement. That’s why this legislation is important. There are fines associated with it, criminal fines, and jail time, three years,” Newsom (D-Calif.) said at Wednesday’s signing ceremony.

Senate Bill 73 — which will take effect immediately — follows Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco’s seizure of 650,000 ballots from last fall’s Proposition 50 Special Election. However, the probe was later stopped due to legal challenges from California Attorney General Rob Bonta.

Sheriff Bianco (R-Calif.) — who is running for California governor this November — said he seized the ballots as part of an investigation into alleged voting discrepancies, though election officials later disputed those claims.

Bianco had referred to the freezing of the investigation as “politically motivated.”

Meanwhile the measure also directs the attorney general to provide guidance to local election workers on responding to requests from law enforcement.

“SB73 puts in protections to ensure that ballots will be secured and that voters have confidence in our election system that their voices will be heard at the ballot box,” said California State Senator Sabrina Cervantes (D-Calif.), one of the primary authors of the law.

The signing of the bill came the same day Assembly Democrats advanced 23 separate bills related to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to the Assembly floor.

Keep reading

Gavin Newsom Vows To ‘Seize’ Money From California Republicans

Gov. Gavin Newsom is calling for California to slap a 100% tax on anyone in the state who collects money from President Donald Trump’s new Anti-Weaponization Fund, framing it as a way to block what Democrats say could become a payday for Trump allies.

“Anyone from California that receives any of those funds,” Newsom said at a Wednesday news conference. “We want to tax 100% of those proceeds and that’s an action the state of California can take. It’s an action we look forward to taking.”

Newsom’s move targets the $1.776 billion fund the Justice Department announced as part of a settlement tied to Trump and the Internal Revenue Service. Supporters say it is open to any claimant who can show the government unfairly targeted them. Critics call it a boondoggle and warn it could be used to compensate people convicted or indicted in connection with the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot.

Newsom leaned into that argument in a post on X, tying the fund to Trump’s sweeping pardons and commutations.

“He pardoned all of those folks that were beating up cops and absolved them, providing them 1.776 billion dollars. So not only do you get a pardon, you get rewarded,” Newsom wrote. “That’s why this is needed.”

Keep reading

Newsom faces backlash over $33K taxpayer-funded portrait amid state financial strain

California Governor Gavin Newsom is facing significant criticism after including $33,000 for a formal portrait of himself in the state’s proposed 2026-2027 budget, amid increasing concerns over budget deficits and rising costs of living in the Golden State.

The budget proposal prompted backlash from both Republicans and Democrats, with opponents arguing that Newsom (D-Calif.) is neglecting pressing issues such as soaring housing costs, high gas prices and expensive health care services.

The timing of the governor’s request adds fuel to the ongoing debate surrounding his final, record-setting $349.9 billion budget proposal. The $33,000 would allegedly be pulled from California’s General Fund.

While the administration maintained that the massive spending plan was designed to protect core state services and invest in California’s long-term infrastructure, fiscal critics argued that even small, symbolic line items like the portrait allocation represents an out-of-touch approach to government spending while ordinary residents face severe financial hardships.

The money is reportedly set aside for the “traditional painting of the Governor’s portrait” which would eventually hang inside the California State Capitol alongside portraits of previous governors. However, the proposal comes during a time when lawmakers remain extremely cautious about new discretionary spending due to the state’s long-term financial challenges.

State Senator Suzette Valladares (R-Calif.) sharply criticized Newsom’s budget and emphasized the poor timing of the proposal.

“Only in Sacramento would a governor look at struggling families and think, ‘You know what this moment needs? A painting of me,’” Valladares said.

Assembly member Alexandra M. Macedo (R-Calif,) also mocked the proposal while rebuking Newsom’s controversial high-speed rail project.

Keep reading

Newsom signs bill restricting law enforcement access to California ballots

Gov. Gavin Newsom signed legislation Wednesday aimed at tightening California’s election security rules ahead of the June 2 statewide primary.

Senate Bill 73 takes effect immediately. It limits when law enforcement can access ballots, voter lists, rosters or certified voting technology.

The bill comes after Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco seized more than 650,000 ballots from last fall’s Proposition 50 Special Election. The investigation was later halted amid legal challenges from California Attorney General Rob Bonta.

“We have to clarify the rules of engagement. That’s why this legislation is important. There are fines associated with it, criminal fines, and jail time, three years,” Newsom said at Wednesday’s signing ceremony.

The bill prohibits peace officers from interfering with election administration, except in urgent public health or safety situations. It also requires a court order before law enforcement can take possession of key election materials. Removing packages containing voted ballots from the custody of elections officials would also be a crime. The law allows civil penalties of up to $50,000 for ballot custody violations.

The measure also directs the attorney general to issue guidance to local election workers on how to respond to law enforcement requests.

“SB73 puts in protections to ensure that ballots will be secured and that voters have confidence in our election system that their voices will be heard at the ballot box,” said California State Senator Sabrina Cervantes, one of the primary authors of the law.

Bianco, who is running as a Republican candidate for California governor, said he seized the ballots as part of an investigation into claims of voting discrepancies. Election officials disputed those claims.

Bianco later called the effort to halt his investigation “politically motivated.”

The bill signing came on the same day Assembly Democrats brought 23 separate U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement-related bills to a floor vote.

That legislation includes restricting federal law enforcement presence near polling places, stopping ICE officers from becoming California peace officers, requiring hotels to notify workers and guests when ICE has a reservation on site and withholding state tax breaks from companies that contract with the Department of Homeland Security.

“Don’t do that, man,” Republican Assemblymember James Gallagher said. “There’s several people on that side of the aisle I’m looking at. You know that’s wrong.”

Keep reading

How Gavin Newsom Subsidized the Migrant Invasion

Former President Joe Biden’s administration oversaw an unprecedented wave of migration across the southwestern border of the United States. Migrants convoyed in “caravans” in hopes of overwhelming border authorities. Cartels trafficked drugs and people in droves. At some points, American authorities estimated that more than 130,000 people were crossing into the U.S. each month; arrivals came not just from Latin America but every corner of the earth.

At the height of this drama, some border states sought to stop the wave of illegal immigration on their own. Texas dispatched thousands of National Guard soldiers and spun razor-wire barriers across the desert. Arizona sent construction cranes to stack hundreds of shipping containers into a makeshift border wall near Yuma. Then-Arizona Governor Doug Ducey called it a “border crisis.” Texas Governor Greg Abbott called it an “invasion.”

California, on the other hand, welcomed the flood. In this City Journal investigation, we have traced the money and can reveal that Governor Gavin Newsom has granted approximately $1 billion to an army of nonprofits that has encouraged unchecked numbers of migrants to enter the country, fought deportation orders in the courts, and led street protests against ICE. These groups often operate under the guise of “humanitarianism” or “immigration justice,” but many, as we have uncovered, are in fact left-wing activist groups that use propaganda, lawfare, and street protests to transform America’s demographics and build political power for California Democrats—all on the public dime.

This is the story of how Gavin Newsom subsidized the illegal invasion and turned a wave of desperate people into pawns in his political game.

Keep reading