Gavin Newsom launches Substack to fight 'disinformation'
California Gov. Gavin Newsom already had a podcast. Now he has a Substack, too.
Newsom launched his own site Tuesday on the popular spot for independent journalists, calling it a way to "break through "the noise."
"We have to flood the zone and continue to cut through the right-wing disinformation machine," he wrote in the post that was accompanied by a video of the governor speaking.
"There's so much mis and disinformation out there, there's so much noise, I don't need to tell you that," Newsom said. "The question is, how do we break through all of that noise and engage in real conversations? And that's why I'm launching on Substack. I hope you'll follow me so we can continue to engage in a two-way conversation at this critical moment in our history."
Newsom kicked off his new project by sharing his Fox News Digital op-ed on Tuesday titled, "Trump is trying to destroy our democracy. Do not let him." He also posted an interview with Democratic strategist and TikToker Aaron Parnas.
He told Parnas that joining new media platforms like Substack was "foundational and fundamental" to Democratic strategy and outreach going forward and that his party must get more "aggressive" with their messaging.
Newsom launched his own podcast in March, "This is Gavin Newsom," where he's conversed with liberal allies but also pro-Trump figures like Charlie Kirk and Newt Gingrich.
The likely 2028 Democratic presidential candidate already has a high profile, but he's held the spotlight even more in recent weeks as California became the epicenter of the Trump administration's illegal immigration crackdown.
Newsom has spoken out harshly against President Donald Trump's deployment of the National Guard and Marines to Los Angeles to quell unrest generated by anti-ICE protests.
"With this act, President Trump has betrayed our soldiers, the American people, and our core traditions; soldiers are being ordered to patrol the very same American communities they swore to protect in wars overseas. The deployment of federal soldiers in L.A. doesn't protect our communities – it traumatizes them," he wrote.
Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta filed a lawsuit accusing Trump of overstepping his bounds by illegally deploying the National Guard to quell the unrest. Last week, a federal judge sided with California in his ruling and directed Trump to return control of National Guard troops to Newsom's command.
EXCLUSIVE: NEW 'GAVIN NEWSOM FILES' REVEAL CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR'S 'EXTREME' AGENDA"Defendants are temporarily ENJOINED from deploying members of the California National Guard in Los Angeles," U.S. District Judge Charles R. Breyer wrote in his ruling. "Defendants are DIRECTED to return control of the California National Guard to Governor Newsom."
White House spokesperson Anna Kelly blasted the ruling as an "abuse of power" that "puts our brave federal officials in danger" and said the Trump administration would appeal the decision.
A federal appeals court stayed the ruling and will hear arguments Tuesday to review whether Trump can keep using California's National Guard to protect immigration enforcement officials and quell protests.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Melania shows President Trump the contempt he deserves. What's her secret?
I want to know: What is Melania Trump's secret? The first lady seems to be the only one who can do anything she wants regarding President Donald Trump and suffer no ill will from him. She comes and goes out of Trump's life on her own schedule most of the time – and she shows complete and total disdain for the president when she is with him. She attended the disaster of a military parade with Trump June 14 looking as bored as one could possibly look – and then skipped the G7 conference, leaving him wandering around looking like a lost puppy. Most spouses of other heads of state attended. Others who have embarrassed the president publicly this way have disappeared, never to be seen again. What power does she hold over him? If she could bottle it, she could make millions. Felton Marans, Lakewood Ranch This article originally appeared on Sarasota Herald-Tribune: Melania shows President Trump little respect. Good for her. | Letter
Newsweek
31 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Anti-Trump Protests Update: 'National Day of Action' Planned for July 17
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Another round of national anti-Trump demonstrations is being planned across the U.S. for July 17 under the banner of Good Trouble Lives On, a reference to the late civil rights icon, Congressman John Lewis. Newsweek contacted Good Trouble Lives On for comment via email on Friday outside of regular office hours. Why It Matters On June 14,anti-Trump "No Kings" protests took place in cities across the United States on Trump's 79th birthday, which also saw the president attend a military parade in Washington D.C. to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army. The protests took place in hundreds of U.S. cities, with large-scale gatherings reported in major hubs such as Philadelphia; Los Angeles; Austin, Texas; Portland, Oregon; and New York. According to analysis by pollster G. Elliott Morris, they were attended by an estimated 4 to 6 million people. What To Know Good Trouble Lives On demonstrations are being planned for dozens of American cities on July 17 including the likes of New York, Washington D.C, Chicago, Los Angeles and San Francisco with attendees invited to "March in Peace, Act in Power." The name is a reference to Lewis, a Georgia Democrat and an advocate of peaceful protests, who famously called for "good trouble" during the civil rights era. Anti-Trump "No Kings" demonstrators pictured in Los Angeles on June 14. Anti-Trump "No Kings" demonstrators pictured in Los Angeles on June 14. Jay L Clendenin/GETTY According to its downloadable "Host Toolkit" for organizers, the protests have three main goals. These are demanding an end to "the extreme crackdown on civil rights by the Trump administration," "the attacks on Black and brown Americans, immigrants, trans people, and other communities," and "the slashing of programs that working people rely on, including Medicaid, SNAP, and Social Security." Good Trouble Lives On is being supported by a range of other groups including the 50501 Movement, which also helped organize the "No Kings" demonstrations. The 50501 Movement, short for "50 protests, 50 states, 1 movement" was formed in January 2025 to protest Trump and has been involved in organizing a series of national demonstrations beginning on February 5. A series of "No Kings on Presidents Day" rallies took place on February 17 followed by "Hands Off" demonstrations in April and May criticizing federal layoffs and immigration crackdowns. What People Are Saying Speaking to Newsweek, Lorella Praeli, co-president of Community Change Action, which has backed anti-Trump demonstrations, said: "Look around—Trump and his allies are deploying the tools of authoritarianism: silencing dissent, targeting immigrants, punishing oversight, and even staging military displays for personal glorification. These aren't isolated incidents; they're part of a broader effort to delegitimize democratic norms." On its website, Good Trouble Lives On, which "is a national day of action to respond to the attacks on our civil and human rights by the Trump administration," wrote: "We are facing the most brazen rollback of civil rights in generations. Whether you're outraged by attacks on voting rights, the gutting of essential services, disappearance of our neighbors, or the assault on free speech and our right to protest—this movement is for you. "Trump is trying to divide us but we know the power of coming together." What Happens Next It remains to be seen how many people will turn out for the "Good Trouble Lives On" demonstrations and what the organizers plan next.
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Ex-mayor, councilman sue to overturn CT town's controversial $117M budget referendum
The political atmosphere in Bloomfield grew even more contentious Wednesday when a former mayor and a former town councilman sued to reverse the controversial $117 million budget referendum. The lawsuit accuses Mayor Danielle Wong's administration of conducting a 'substantially false and misleading' referendum. It argues that the correct budget proposal was $113 million — but was bumped up to $117 million at the last minute only because Wong and her town council majority added $4 million that should've been sent to a separate public vote. The lawsuit by former Mayor Sydney Schulman, a Democrat, and former council member Rickford Kirton is the latest instance of an uncommonly public rift within the town's dominant political party. Suzette DeBeatham-Brown, another former Democratic mayor, had been clashing with Wong and her supporters long before the latest controversy. The plaintiffs in the lawsuit — including resident Lucy Hurston — are asking a Superior Court judge to declare the May 28 referendum invalid. They want the court to order a new referendum with two parts: One vote on the $113 million operations budget and a second on the $4 million fund appropriated for economic development. Republican Councilman Shamar Mahon has argued for two months that the council — including his two GOP colleagues — was wrong when it added those two together. 'The residents have been cheated out of a referendum vote due to the sudden change between the $113 million that was initially approved during our annual town meeting and the $117 million that came up when we voted to move forward with setting the referendum question,' Mahon told the council at its June 9 meeting. Mahon contended that the council endorsed a $113 million budget in mid-May, and then later added in $4 million for economic development. He complained that when he objected, the town attorney took several days to give an opinion saying the $4 million could be part of the overall budget vote. Critics have complained that the maneuver was a way for the council to work around a charter requirement that requires appropriations of more than 1.5% of the budget to be a separate referendum question. As has happened frequently this year, Wong and Mahon clashed during the June 9 discussion. She'd previously announced a two-minute time limit on his remarks, and then interrupted him mid-sentence to announce that another councilor now had the floor. Mahon and Wong talked over each other for the next 30 seconds, with Mahon insisting she'd cut him off too early and Wong demanding he stop. The meeting devolved into a raucous discussion between councilmen about whether to simply adjourn. Even though Mahon helped the petition drive to force a referendum on the budget, the lawsuit names him as a defendant along with each of the other council members, Wong and the town itself. Town Manager Alvin Schwapp Jr. and the town clerk are also listed as defendants. Bloomfield-centered community pages have seen frequent posts since early May complaining about the budget and the looming tax increase. Several commentors have defended Wong and her administration, but others have complained there's a pattern of high-handedness at Bloomfield town hall. 'They were given multiple opportunities to do the right thing, but they chose to ignore the will of the people,' James Biffer, a frequent critic of the administration, wrote soon after the suit was filed Wednesday. 'So now, there are consequences for those decisions.' The referendum itself passed, but narrowly and only because of an unusual charter requirement that 15% of all eligible voters must vote 'no' to reject it. The overall vote was 1,934 'against' and just 494 'for,' a four-to-one landslide. But opponents fell short of the 15% figure, so the budget was approved. Wong has said she's leaving when this term ends in November, and Democrats over the next few weeks are interviewing candidates for the council ballot going into the November election.
