SouthernWorldwide.com – California Governor Gavin Newsom’s assertion that President Donald Trump’s Justice Department initiated a politically motivated “fishing expedition” against him is facing renewed scrutiny. Multiple reports suggest that key federal investigations predated Trump’s second administration.
The timeline has become a critical element in the dispute. While Newsom contends that the current Justice Department is weaponizing these investigations against a political opponent, several news organizations, citing sources close to the matter, have reported that at least some investigative activities commenced before Trump’s return to the White House.
According to CalMatters, at least two criminal investigations connected to Newsom’s associates have been ongoing for approximately a year within the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of California. The publication, referencing a Justice Department source familiar with the situation, indicated that these investigations originated from whistleblowers and local complaints in Sacramento. Furthermore, one inquiry involving former Newsom chief of staff Dana Williamson was reportedly initiated during the Biden administration.
CBS News, Axios, the Financial Times, and The Guardian have also reported similar timelines, drawing on information from sources familiar with the investigations. These reports collectively suggest a chronological narrative that challenges Newsom’s claims of a politically driven probe solely orchestrated by the current administration.
Newsom has consistently maintained that the present Justice Department has either expanded or politicized these investigations. This stance persists even as the reported chronology has raised questions about whether the inquiries themselves originated under Trump’s tenure.
WHAT TO KNOW ABOUT THE NEWSOM-LINKED CHARITIES REPORTEDLY CAUGHT IN DOJ’S SIGHTS
CalMatters also reported that one of the investigations, which involved Williamson, was opened during the Biden administration. Williamson subsequently pleaded guilty earlier this year to corruption charges in a case that did not implicate Governor Newsom. Similar to other outlets, CBS News, Axios, the Financial Times, and The Guardian have cited sources close to the investigations, indicating that at least one federal inquiry began roughly a year ago and originated in California, rather than directly from the Justice Department headquarters in Washington.
Despite this reported timeline, Newsom has maintained his position that the current Justice Department is weaponizing these investigations as retaliation for his criticisms of Trump and his national political standing. He has characterized the inquiry as a politically motivated “fishing expedition.” His administration has also pursued records through the Freedom of Information Act, seeking to identify who ordered or directed the current investigation.
ACTING AG TODD BLANCHE SAYS NEWSOM’S DOJ CLAIMS ARE NOT ‘GROUNDED IN FACT’
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche publicly pushed back against Newsom’s characterization this week. While he declined to comment on any ongoing investigations, Blanche informed reporters that he was “not sure [Newsom’s] words are in any way grounded in fact.” He added that the California governor “would have to address that.” Blanche did not confirm nor deny the existence of any specific investigation.
In response, Newsom’s office took to social media to mock Blanche. They posted a meme captioned, “Why you always lyin,” and the governor’s press office stated, “Trump goons know that it’s not a crime to lie to a reporter.” This social media exchange highlights the escalating public relations battle surrounding the investigations.
SIGN UP TO GET THE POLITICS NEWSLETTER
According to CalMatters, Newsom’s office contends that federal prosecutors broadened their inquiries after failing to build a case from the Williamson investigation. This expansion allegedly included scrutinizing the governor’s wife, Jennifer Siebel Newsom, the couple’s financial affairs, and their associates. The reports suggest a widening net of inquiry beyond the initial focus.
The publication further reported that investigators have examined the first partner’s tax filings, nonprofit organizations, and certain behested payments. However, it is important to note that these reports did not allege that these specific payments were unlawful.
