The votes from the June 6 primary election are mostly counted and Democrats, especially progressive Democrats, will continue to oversee California, even if the next likely governor, Xavier Becerra, comes across as a more cautious version of soon-to-be presidential candidate Gavin Newsom. Newsom, meanwhile, has accused Trump of directing the Justice Department to investigate him and his wife, Jennifer Siebel Newsom, in what he says is a Trumpian move intended to smear a political rival. Such a maneuver would be wholly in character considering Trump’s
history of vindictiveness toward perceived enemies. Still, it isn’t yet clear if Trump himself ordered this investigation, which may have partly begun during Democratic President Joe Biden’s administration and originated in a California U.S. attorney’s office. Newsom’s claims of a “witch hunt” (a term Trump himself has used regarding the many investigations into his corrupt dealings) might ring a bit more true except that his former chief of staff, Dana Williamson, pleaded guilty last month to conspiracy to commit bank and wire fraud, filing a
false tax return and lying to the FBI. Neither prosecutors nor Williamson, however, implicated Newsom. Closer to home, Siebel Newsom’s professional life also has drawn scrutiny and questions about the money trail at nonprofits she heads up. Separately, the governor solicited donations for Siebel Newsom’s nonprofits from entities with business before the state, which resulted in a state fine for violating campaign finance disclosure rules. Still, it is not Newsom’s responsibility to prove his and his wife’s innocence. Rather, the Justice Department should come forward
with what laws potentially were violated and with any evidence that exists. If this truly is an abusive investigation into a sitting governor and potential presidential candidate, it fuels more weaponization of the justice system and invites future abuse when the partisan roles are reversed. Meanwhile, Becerra’s opponent in the Nov. 4 general election, Republican Steve Hilton, is likely studying Democrat Tom Steyer’s incessant attack ads against Becerra, tying the former Biden administration cabinet member to a federal case where Becerra’s former chief of staff
and adviser pleaded guilty to siphoning $225,000 from a dormant campaign account. The ads claimed Becerra could be “indicted next,” warning this would hand the governor’s mansion to Hilton. Steyer’s campaign also ran spots framing Becerra as beholden to corporate interests, claiming Becerra took money from “Big Oil” and failed to investigate polluters. For his part, Hilton has been criticizing California’s notoriously slow vote-counting pace. Hilton, a former Fox News host, has labeled the state’s multi-week counting window as “absolute shambles” and a “humiliation for
California.” While he said his team found no evidence of any vote counting fraud, he’s also saying protracted ballot counting harms transparency and breeds suspicion within the election system. Hilton proposes that a state voter ID law would eliminate or reduce the time-consuming signature verification process on mail-in ballot. Critics counter that verifying ID numbers could introduce alternative delays. California’s slow count has also drawn criticism from election-data analyst Nate Silver and The New York Times’ editorial board, which contended that California’s delayed results were
“damaging faith in government.” State Democratic leaders say that because the slow count is mostly due to the high volume of mail-in ballots that come in on Election Day or the day before, speeding up the count could make voting harder for many Californians. Democratic Assemblymember Gail Pellerin, from Santa Cruz, is chairperson of the election committee and a former Santa Cruz County election registrar. She was quoted this week in CalMatters saying, “If you want results election night, you’re going to have to go
back to in-person voting, way earlier deadlines for returning by mail and you’re going to end up disenfranchising voters.” And, it’s no secret, many of these voters vote for Democrats. So while mail-in ballots require more time, labor and money to process compared to in-person ballots, Democrats, who maintain a huge edge in party registration and control state government, are unlikely to make any changes in voting. Copyright 2026 Tribune Content Agency. All Rights Reserved. This story was originally published June 23, 2026 at 2:17
AM.
California, June 6 primary, Xavier Becerra, Gavin Newsom, Jennifer Siebel Newsom, Justice Department, Dana Williamson, Steve Hilton, Tom Steyer, Nate Silver, voter ID, mail-in ballots, election transparency, campaign finance disclosure