Newsom turns – Gov. Gavin Newsom released a Monday video saying the FBI and Internal Revenue Service are investigating him and his wife, Jennifer Siebel Newsom—an announcement he made after agents visited friends and former employees last Wednesday. Supporters see political
For most politicians, the moment federal investigators show up at the door is supposed to be quiet—something handled in private, with lawyers and calendars. Gavin Newsom chose something else.
In a direct-to-camera video posted Monday, the California governor stood in front of U.S. and California flags and told the public that the federal government is investigating him and his wife, Jennifer Siebel Newsom. The video came after last Wednesday. when friends and former employees reported that the FBI and the Internal Revenue Service had knocked on their doors and asked about the couple.
“Mr. President, come after me,” Newsom said in the video. “I’m not going anywhere, and the country is watching.”
Newsom is in his final year as California’s governor. and he has not declared whether he will run for president in 2028. But the way he framed the inquiry—saying it is happening because President Trump is targeting him as he weighs a bid for the White House—was a clear signal of intent. By announcing the investigation before federal authorities could describe it publicly. Newsom positioned himself to get ahead of any findings and cast the probe as a “personal vendetta” before any charges could be brought.
Thad Kousser, a professor of political science at UC San Diego, said the move appears calculated in the rough-and-tumble politics of the Trump era.
“He seems to be wearing this as a badge of honor because his brand is being the strongest opponent of Donald Trump,” Kousser said. “The ability to show that you’re going on offense and that you know how to effectively fight back against this president is part of making your case for office.”
Celinda Lake, a Democratic strategist and national pollster, said there may be electoral upside to the way Newsom publicly defended his wife.
“He’s positioned himself as the front-runner because he’s the one who’s under attack,” Lake said. “Primary voters love it when he engages Trump. and I think the combination of engaging Trump and then also the sexism of going after your wife is just a real home run for a primary electorate that’s 59% female.”.
The video also echoed a strategy Newsom used after Trump sent federal troops to Los Angeles last summer. After that deployment. Newsom delivered a speech countering Trump’s version of events and challenging the president to come after him instead of women and child immigrants. The address helped Newsom cement his role as a prominent Democratic response to the deployment. and it ended his attempt to project the image of a respectful statesman and ease political tensions after the 2024 election.
Liberals, the article notes, have since seemed to relish Newsom’s near-constant derision of Trump on social media.
But the criticism surrounding this new probe is not limited to whether it benefits Newsom—it also turns on timing and origin.
David McCuan, a professor of political science at Sonoma State University, said Newsom’s framing as merely another case of Trump’s political weaponization can obscure murky details about when the investigation began and why.
Newsom’s aides point to Trump saying last summer that the governor should be arrested during anti-ICE protests as evidence that Trump personally called for the inquiry. The claim has gained attention and has been echoed by other Democratic leaders in California. while going largely unchallenged by federal officials. The Justice Department has declined to comment, as has the White House.
A source familiar with the matter. who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss it publicly. said two federal probes have been going on for about a year. The source added that they originated not from Washington. D.C. but from conversations between whistleblowers and federal prosecutors based in Sacramento.
Those probes, the source said, are linked to Newsom’s former chief-of-staff, Dana Williamson, and to Siebel Newsom’s taxes. Newsom’s critics also point to a different set of questions that federal prosecutors under the Biden administration pursued before Trump retook office—about his involvement in a state lawsuit against Activision Blizzard Inc. a major video game distributor.
“This is something that could lead to other elements that blow up, so there’s a risk,” McCuan said.
Newsom’s aides, however, describe the investigation as a fishing expedition—federal authorities searching for anything they can use against the governor.
They said investigators appeared to initially probe allegations that turned up nothing about the Activision case before refocusing their questions on nonprofits and other entities tied to the couple. Investigators also asked about personal information related to the family’s household, Newsom’s office said.
McCuan said three nonprofits that surround the couple have received millions of dollars from donors and political interests and are not subject to campaign finance limits. The California Partners Project is a nonprofit that promotes gender equity. The Representation Project is described as an avenue for Siebel Newsom’s documentary films. The California State Protocol Foundation uses private donations to pay for gubernatorial expenses and was founded under former Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.
“It’s a long-running game,” McCuan said. “It’s just the Newsom first couple has perfected it and moved it forward.”
That public stance—out ahead of prosecutors, framing the probe as a “witch hunt,” borrowing a phrase used by Trump during his own previous prosecutions—carries risk. If investigators turn up evidence of wrongdoing, Newsom’s decision to parade his indignation could backfire with voters.
There is also a strategic danger in challenging Trump openly. If prosecutors find themselves needing momentum—or if the political pressure changes the calculus—Trump could instruct the Justice Department to “dig in deeper” on an investigation that might have otherwise petered out.
Lake and others, though, said the idea of backing off is not realistic. They argue Trump is already targeting Newsom and other Democrats, meaning there is no reliable path to calming the situation.
Kousser put it bluntly: traditional political logic would suggest that facing federal charges could sink a presidential bid. But in this era of courtroom politics, he said, the incentives can flip.
“You know the last person who got tied up in courts on the campaign trail?” Kousser asked. “That was Donald Trump, and nothing elevated Donald Trump more than doing courthouse press appearances and being seen as the target of an unfair political prosecution.”
For now, Newsom is no longer waiting for federal timelines. He has already picked a fight—and he has already told his supporters, and his rivals, exactly how he plans to face it.
Gavin Newsom Jennifer Siebel Newsom FBI Internal Revenue Service federal probe Dana Williamson Activision Blizzard lawsuit California nonprofits Trump 2028 presidential run
Sounds like a stunt.
Wait so the FBI and IRS were at his friends houses and he made a video? Lmao like okay, privacy was never a thing. Also “Mr. President, come after me” is kinda cringe, but I get it I guess.
I don’t even know what they’re investigating, but Newsom always acts like everything is a persecution. If you’re innocent just let it play out quietly, not do a whole Trump fight thing. And the IRS showing up feels like taxes, like he’s hiding something with Jennifer’s stuff? idk.
From the headline it’s basically like he’s fighting Trump because the feds came knocking. But also I’m confused how the FBI + IRS is even connected to “friends and former employees”?? Like did somebody snitch or is this about campaign stuff? Either way the video in front of flags is just him trying to look tough, like he’s running for president already even though they said final year or whatever.