152 Comments
User's avatar
Polly Frost's avatar

Henry, the only thing I disagree with you about here is when you say “His goal would be to make Democrats first.” The only thing that's first for Newsom is Newsom.

Expand full comment
Monica Bond's avatar

My thoughts exactly, Polly, about Newsom. It's all about him.

Expand full comment
Polly Frost's avatar

Did you ever see the Harper's Bazaar layout he did with Kimberly Guillfoyle where they're in high dress lying on a carpet? They look made for the White House! Just like John and Jackie! Newsom acts like he's doing more cocaine than Zelensky.

Expand full comment
Monica Bond's avatar

Must have been a lovely sight to behold. Ha ha.

Expand full comment
Polly Frost's avatar
Thomas John's avatar

I mean if we're going to be photo-shaming - let's break out the good ones of the naked first lady....

Expand full comment
Polly Frost's avatar

Naked is fine. Picasso, anyone?

Expand full comment
TVW's avatar

I am not convinced I would use the word "shaming" in context with a photo of the naked First Lady. Not even close. I am not familiar with such a photo, but by all means feel free to share.

Expand full comment
Thomas John's avatar

"I'm not familiar with such a photo" says a lot. Not good or bad, but it's interesting.

https://nypost.com/2016/07/30/melania-trump-like-youve-never-seen-her-before/

Expand full comment
Polly Frost's avatar

You first used the word “naked,” as in “naked first lady,” not me. So it does seem you've seen it or are you just fantasizing? It's ok. Melania's a beauty.

Expand full comment
Thomas John's avatar

I don't have a bank account large enough to attract her. But she is a looker. Good to have at least a god given talent.

Expand full comment
Polly Frost's avatar

Here's a link to Gavin debating Charlie, who was the first guest on Newsom's podcast

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9XJ6rQDRKGA

Expand full comment
rita murdoch's avatar

I’m mot leaving California until this terrible man is removed. It’s insane that even the liberals can’t see the damage he has done and continues to do on a daily basis.

I hope that the tragedy of Charlie’s death will unite our country to stop all this insanity. I’m not going to say it’s only the left but it’s primary these people that continue the hate if you don’t agree with them.

Los Angeles will never be the same until we get leadership that has experienced running a city and a governor that cuts out this extreme liberal agenda and starts running this state that promotes common sense solutions.

Expand full comment
elce's avatar

Term limits will remove Newsom after this current term; which is why he is salivating for his next port in the storm, unfortunately which is POTUS.

Expand full comment
GM's avatar
Sep 13Edited

I believe there will be a Federal Sweep for LA,including cleaning the homeless encapments and arresting criminals.

Grab your popcorn

Expand full comment
Thomas John's avatar

I'm sure the homeless will be happy to be cleaned.

Expand full comment
Chas McClure's avatar

LA could have had Rick Caruso, but chose not to.

Expand full comment
Montecito93108's avatar

“… Gavin is making a show of getting tough on crime.” How so? For starters, SB54 and sanctuary state status must be repealed! None of us are safe or benefit from any federal or local protection when 8-10M unknown aliens are encouraged to benefit from residency here, and CA is controlled by a Democrat cabal.

Regarding energy, no Californian would need to pay any CA state income tax, if Newsom & our dictatorial oppressors allowed oil extraction to benefit everyone (like in Norway, Alaska, Louisiana). Reactivation of CA nuclear plants would enable us to stop killing birds with windmills, subsiding others to drive electric cars, and end the latest, greatest plan for millions of seawall lined tubs to capture ocean water for hydro-power.

CA voters repeatedly elect incompetent Democrat leaders at every level. Our nation’s voters can’t possibly be as stupid, can they?

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Sep 13
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Montecito93108's avatar

Post Newsom’s specific *shows* on crime, Polly, rather than a distraction from the seriousness of Newsom’s self-serving leadership that has destroyed California as pointed out by Author Schulte.

Expand full comment
Polly Frost's avatar

I deleted my comment and I hope that makes your day. It's been a serious enough week, don't you think 93108? I see Newsom's only value right now as comic relief.

Expand full comment
Denice Adams's avatar

Your creative writing, your attempt at comic relief during a serious enough week can be misunderstood as confrontational awaiting a rebuttal

Expand full comment
Polly Frost's avatar

And E. Jean Carroll (yes, that E. Jean Carroll) wrote about my humor “Miss Polly Frost is so funny, so wildly intelligent, and so mean to the unfortunate half-wits who cross her path, she is the Edith Wharton of her generation." So even a celebrity lawsuiter against Trump with monumental TDS thinks my humor is important.

Expand full comment
Polly Frost's avatar

Denice, thank you for your input. I enjoy your comments as I do 93108. I'm mostly involved these days with my Sepsis Awareness Substack and yes, Sepsis is very serious and still, humor is important in my columns for that, too. I was very close to dying in January. https://pollysnewsletter.substack.com/

Expand full comment
Brent's Journal's avatar

Newsom, as bad as he is, is just the head of the dragon that could not survive without the support of the body.

Expand full comment
elce's avatar

The three-headed body that control's Newsom and all Democrats in this state: (1) the construction trades unions;(2) the teachers unions; (3) SEIU.

Hundreds of thousands of built-in California Democrat votes, all 100% dependent on tax dollars and control of the state legislature for their own survival.

The Big Three horsemen of the California apocalypse. They own Monique Limon and Gregg Hart.

Expand full comment
LT's avatar
Sep 13Edited

While studying Newsom’s body movements, when asked about the rebuilding of Pacific Palisades, one can only conclude he most likely has a personality disorder such as narcissism. Clearly, he seemingly uses his body movements frequently when discussing controversial topics in order to deflect and conceal. Specifically, when asked about rebuilding after the tragic fires in PP, he toggles his shoulders back and forth and indicates “we will move forward.” “Move forward” on what? Claiming the former homesites of burned out homeowners for public housing?

Newsom, clearly is a quirky and complicated individual and quite possibly has some underlying pathology. In other words, he’s an unrepentant, unapologetic, habitual liar with narcissistic tendencies.

https://www.unilad.com/news/us-news/california-governor-gavin-newsom-la-wildfires-interview-554946-20250115

Expand full comment
GM's avatar

Of course he's a narcissist but a drugged out narcissist is more likely

Expand full comment
SB Native's avatar

Like an apologetic dog, he wiggles hoping you don’t smack him. And the ever-present red eyes. 👀

Expand full comment
elce's avatar

Clue Newsom: Move backwards, and let previous homeowners in this area build back what they had. Stat.

Expand full comment
Dan O. Seibert's avatar

LT, no he looked okay to me. Unlike Trump, waddling down the red carpet in Alaska. Or the purple spots on his hands, let alone the rambling things he says in press conferences.

Expand full comment
elce's avatar
Sep 13Edited

Who has really been running the show in California, and pulling Newsom's puppet strings?

Look no further than the long-standing Democrat attempt to allow seven apartment story buildings in any residential zone in California, regardless of local zoning, if they were near even a bus stop.

These original demands recently were whittled down to only a few counties, and only if they have fixed rail transit. The area surrounding the Santa Barbara Amtrak station is now our only vulnerable area for this mandatory seven-story development .(NB: Granada Building is eight stories.)

But the real Sacramento vote sweetener ( that is Monique Limon and Gregg Hart), that put this final sweeping legislation on Governor Newsom's desk for his signature, is the mandate that ......only union labor.... can be used in the construction of any of these new transit-oriented seven story apartment buildings.

There you have it: (1) the construction trade unions, along with (2) SEIU and the (3) teachers unions, are the real powers behind the Sacrament throne of Governor Gavin Newsom. Follow the money from these Big Three to Gregg Hart and Monique Limon, just so you know who you are really voting for next election.

Nanny-state, unelected special interests in Sacramento knows what is best for you.

Bo Snerdly reports:

...."The legislation also comes with asterisks about the kinds of projects that can make use of its provisions. Developers, in select cases, must hire unionized construction workers — a provision that convinced the powerful State Building and Construction Trades Council to drop its opposition......

Expand full comment
ForestDi56's avatar

Good points. All logical and well thought out. The folks who vote for Newsome types don’t know how to use logical data. They don’t respond to anything but the emotional rhetoric he spits out. Trump hating is what they want to hear so that’s what he gives them. There has never been any factual data or arguments that has ever been able to pierce the indoctrinated-to-a cult mindset. Sadly.

Expand full comment
Mike's avatar

He is the devil incarnate-a narcissist in the extreme.

Expand full comment
Polly Frost's avatar

The Devil is a bush league narcissist compared to Newsom.

Expand full comment
Gary Simpson's avatar

Thanks Henry,

Spot on commentary about our nut job of a governor. While his school kids continued attending their private school he and his “special” cronies enjoyed their dinner unmasked at the French Laundry while all of us had to order out or cook at home….no no, no dining out for we common Cali folk during those days but he’s “special” and was above us all on that one

Expand full comment
Scott Lederhaus's avatar

Maybe the Dems will wake up once the Epstein pedophiles are announced and go to prison. Same with the corrupt and treasonous political leaders when they are tried and pay for their sins. Maybe a lot of them will take the easy way out. Only then will the Left wake up and maybe our country can get back to reality, family and God.

Expand full comment
Aaron Pa's avatar

I look forward to that! I hope the republicans stop voting to block the release so ALL perpetrators can be prosecuted and held accountable.

Expand full comment
Thomas John's avatar

100%.

Expand full comment
DLDawson's avatar

Good One! Methinks we’re in the Traitor’s Justice phase of the counter insurgency (Phase III), with extreme panic in DC & other seats of power…RATS EVERYWHERE…

For those who decide to save the taxpayers some money - There is NO ESCAPING GOD.

Expand full comment
Bill Russell's avatar

Great article, Henry. The masses of brainwashed Dems will undoubtedly vote for Newscum, even as unbelievable as that seems. Weak minded Dems will continue to refuse to see through their staggering pile of political narcissists. Schools need classes in training Common Sense and Connecting-the-Dots, Defining Integrity, etc.

Expand full comment
GM's avatar

Exactly. They also voted for Kamala. They don't look at policies only party or the person who can be held in their highest narcissistic esteem.

Expand full comment
Bill Russell's avatar

I think the first criteria for Dems is to only vote for Dems, regardless of whether or not the person they are voting for has any brains. With the Dems, a dumb Dem is regarded as more of an acceptable individual than a brilliant Republican. That's what I find to be frustrating.

Expand full comment
Thomas John's avatar

Bill, you are aware that any potential GOP candidate who does not show allegiance to MAGA gets threatened with being primaried, right?

I agree that the Dems can vote in blocks too - but where are you finding these individual Republicans in Congress now?? What, there are two or three that dare not fall in line 100% of the time?

Expand full comment
Santa Barbara Current's avatar

Appreciate your insights but think that may be too severe of a read. Much of what is happening within the Republican Party is a repudiation of that which has not worked for the American people(forever wars, playing along with Dems for power, unfettered outsourcing and immigration to suppress wages, etc) In politics everything above the surface is political, but look below the iceberg to see the real issues.

Expand full comment
Thomas John's avatar

I think we agree on many of the real issues. The ones you listed are my concerns as well. Like many of my posts, I'm just trying to point out the hypocrisy of the comments. This one in particular, yes the dems are voting for dems, but I would argue that the MAGA folks are in even greater lockstep.

Expand full comment
GM's avatar

And that's why they lost the last election

Expand full comment
David Bergerson's avatar

Says the party that had Sarah Palin. Democrats fall in love with a candidate. Republicans fall in line with the party. If a democrat doesn’t like a candidate they do not vote. A republican votes party first.

Expand full comment
GM's avatar

Other way around.

Expand full comment
David Bergerson's avatar

Yeah. Right. The current congress supports my assertion.

Expand full comment
GM's avatar

Looking through a liberal viewpoint

Expand full comment
David Bergerson's avatar

Trump is not a successful businessman. His track record proves that.

Trump has not cut waste. Trump has canceled congressional approved expenditures. Trump has not created jobs. All the things that you feel trump has done, the record shows that he has not

Expand full comment
DLDawson's avatar

Trump is not a successful business? you’re talking about the man with $$$Billions…maybe time to change the channel, you seem stuck in the Matrix…

Expand full comment
David Bergerson's avatar

Equating wealth to being a good businessman is a fallacy.

Expand full comment
Santa Barbara Current's avatar

How does one acquire greater wealth than their parents, if not thru some sort of business acumen, excluding of course, Nancy Pelosi's remarkable insider trading skills?

Expand full comment
David Bergerson's avatar

Put in a savings account.

If you feel compelled to discuss pelosi why not the same for Issa or Romney?

Expand full comment
Santa Barbara Current's avatar

Are you aware that savings accounts have underperformed inflation over the past 50years? A rich kid putting the family wealth into a savings account would lose wealth, not grow it. Since you mentioned Romney and Issa, neither of them employed the congress insider trading route nor the naive saving route to their wealth. Any idea how they did it?

Expand full comment
David Bergerson's avatar

You are equating buying power with wealth. Those are not the same. Trump could have taken daddy’s money and his properties and just taken the cash and put it in a savings account and some better than he has.

Expand full comment
David Bergerson's avatar

In regards to Issa he grew hundreds of millions since he went into Congress. Pelosi is a different beast because that is not her wealth but her and her husband. He is in the financial world. The wealth increase was mainly his positions. But that will not matter to you because you will say he was fed info by her. But you will believe the Ginni Thomas never talked to her husband about things.

Expand full comment
GM's avatar

Savings at 3% will not get you wealth. Maybe a few hundred a month. Have you not checked the rates for Savings lately?

Expand full comment
David Bergerson's avatar

Please, step away from the conversation. I can't help you if you do not know math.

3% can easily generate wealth. Wealth is a subjective term, but let's start with this premise, that being wealthy would put you in the top 10% in the us. That means you would need a net worth of 1.9mm. If I start with 10k, put 10k in per year for 45 years, I would need to average a little more than 5% interest per year.

Math is not hard.

One of the wisest things taught to me was a lesson a friend was taught by his father. His father said, "Son, chances are you will be getting a raise every year. Here is what you should do, live off the current wage for a year, take that raise money, and save it. Next year, when you get a new raise, you can set your spending to this years raise, but if you can live off off today's salary, stay there as long as possible." That was very smart. This man, by following that strategy since he was 18, at 65 had a net worth of 4mm.

Expand full comment
DLDawson's avatar

kinda like like being submerged in water & not thinking you’re wet…silly

Expand full comment
David Bergerson's avatar

I will try once to educate you. If you fail then that is on you.

If I inherited 5 billion dies it make me a good businessman? I am wealthy and one of 3200 in the world that are billionaires. Where does running or creating a business come into play?

Words have meanings. Learn the meanings. It is a lot easier once you do.

Expand full comment
DLDawson's avatar

bad premise = bad logic = wrong answer…

Trump didn’t inherit $5B. While he had a significant boost from his father, he turned a couple hundred million into becoming part of the wealthy elites…redo the math

Expand full comment
David Bergerson's avatar

You proved the point. You are not trying to learn and educate yourself. By definition, you are purposefully acting stupid.

Where did I say TRUMP inherited 5B? I never did. Yet, you felt to state that I did, then base EVERYTHING on that.

Again, the topic is that having wealth is NOT the same as having business acumen. If I inherit 350 billion, read the words, does that mean I have business acumen? I would be the 3rd richest person in the world, thus, looking up at 2 others in the world with more wealth.

Yeah, Trump was such a great businessman that his father bought 3mm in casino chips from Donald's casino so that he could avoid a bond default. Donald has been a horrendous businessman. His father bailed him out numerous times. At best, Donald was a friggin trust fund baby as well as a nepo baby.

Expand full comment
Dan O. Seibert's avatar

No DLD, you miss the point. Trump inherited, what $400 million? What does it matter, he blew it. I don't know about you but I would not have done that. And later on you can't say he didn't go bankrupt a few times??

Expand full comment
Steve Cook's avatar

Remember: the key to CA going red is a) cleaning up registrations; b) no mail in ballots; and c) getting out the young vote (Turning Point)

Expand full comment
Terryl Bunn's avatar

Thanks so much for sharing these details about California’s worthless governor. I definitely agree with you. The one thing I had not already known was where our gasoline was coming from. Special thanks for your detailed research!

Expand full comment
DLDawson's avatar

Good Article…sad to watch my home state taken over by the communists & their domestic minions…

WHAT IF states like California, Minnesota and Michigan and Illinois have not been having real elections for decades? Does it explain why absolute LUNATICS like numb-nuts Newsom keep 'winning' elections?

What if...the voters of those states actually HAVEN'T been voting for all the Luciferian policies that these lunatics have been inflicting on them?

What if you found burn bags full of documents that proved this & you were the President of the United States? What might you be able to do with the National Guard and the military…Especially if you could prove that fake elections were being rigged with dark money and orders coming from overseas to domestic traitors who've sold us all out?

Things to ponder when falling asleep at night…

Expand full comment
Calla Corner's avatar

Just having to watch him on TV makes my skin crawl. CJC

Expand full comment