Tag: Governor Gavin Newsom

  • California to Redraw Congressional Maps After Trump Fails to Respond to Governor’s Letter

    Blue Press Journal, CA – In a move that could have significant implications for the balance of power in the US House of Representatives, California Governor Gavin Newsom announced on Tuesday that the state will redraw its congressional maps. This decision comes after President Donald Trump failed to respond to a letter sent by Newsom, urging the President to call off mid-decade redistricting efforts in Republican-controlled states.

    In his letter, sent to the President on Monday, Newsom warned that Trump’s efforts to encourage red states like Texas to redraw their maps could destabilize American democracy. Newsom argued that such actions would be a blatant attempt to gain an unfair advantage for the Republican Party in the 2026 elections. The governor cautioned Trump that “you are playing with fire, risking the destabilization of our democracy, while knowing that California can neutralize any gains you hope to make.”

    The White House has been actively encouraging several Republican states, including Texas, to engage in mid-decade redistricting in an effort to create more pickup opportunities for the GOP in the House. However, Newsom’s letter and subsequent announcement suggest that California will not stand idly by while these efforts unfold.

    By redrawing its own congressional maps, California aims to offset any potential gains the Republican Party might make through mid-decade redistricting in other states. The move is likely to be seen as a strategic response to the President’s efforts to influence the electoral landscape in favor of the GOP.

    The decision to redraw California’s congressional maps is expected to have significant implications for the state’s electoral representation and could potentially impact the balance of power in the US House of Representatives. With the 2026 elections on the horizon, the stakes are high, and the battle for control of the House is likely to be fiercely contested.

  • Fox News Hit with Another Defamation Lawsuit for Spreading Lies on Air

    In the latest blow to the network’s credibility, Fox News is facing a new defamation lawsuit filed by California Governor Gavin Newsom, who accuses the network of intentionally misrepresenting a phone call he had with former President Donald Trump. The lawsuit, which seeks $787 million in damages, marks the latest in a string of high-profile defamation cases against Fox News.

    At the center of the controversy is a false claim made by Trump on June 10, in which he stated that he had spoken to Newsom “a day ago” about deploying National Guard troops and Marines to Los Angeles in response to protests against Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents. However, Newsom quickly denied having spoken to Trump as recently as the former President claimed.

    In an attempt to bolster his claim, Trump provided a screenshot of a call log between him and Newsom to Fox News’ John Roberts. But the image ultimately corroborated Newsom’s account, showing that the two had spoken on June 7 – not June 9, as Trump had claimed. The call had lasted for approximately 16 minutes.

    Despite the evidence contradicting Trump’s claim, Fox News host Jesse Watters continued to spread the false narrative on his program, accusing Newsom of lying about the conversation. This deliberate attempt to cover for Trump’s distortion has now led to the defamation lawsuit against Fox News and Watters.

    The $787 million figure sought in damages is symbolic, mirroring the amount Fox News paid to Dominion Voting Systems in 2023 for spreading lies about the 2020 presidential election. The lawsuit highlights the network’s pattern of prioritizing partisan loyalty over factual accuracy, and raises questions about the consequences of spreading misinformation on a national platform.

  • Dictator Trump: Patriotic Americans Must Stand for the Constution

    Over the weekend, President Trump ordered the deployment of thousands of National Guard troops to Los Angeles in an effort to suppress protests against his aggressive and unlawful mass deportation campaign. This decision ignited a clash with California’s state government, which neither requested the military assistance nor supported the deployment.

    The largely peaceful protests in Los Angeles against the Trump administration’s deportation policies have now entered their fourth day, but the response to them is generating significant controversy. Specifically, the decision to potentially deploy up to 2,000 troops under federal control to the streets of LA has drawn sharp criticism, particularly from former top military figures. They argue that this move constitutes a violation of the military’s long-held commitment to remain separate from domestic politics, except in the most extreme and justifiable circumstances.

    California Governor Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, announced his intention to sue Trump, labeling the president a “dictator” who is deliberately “fanning the flames” of tension and potential violence in Los Angeles. Newsom also highlighted the broader implications of the June 7 memorandum Trump signed, emphasizing that its reach extends beyond California.

    The memorandum, titled Department of Defense Security for the Protection of Department of Homeland Security Functions, grants Pentagon Secretary Pete Hegseth the authority to “employ any other members of the regular Armed Forces as necessary to augment and support the protection of Federal functions and property in any number determined appropriate in his discretion.” This marks an unprecedented assertion of federal military power across the nation.

    The core concern is the perceived politicization of the armed forces. Critics argue that deploying troops against the wishes of the state’s governor, and in the absence of a clear and genuine civil emergency, appears to be a politically motivated action by the Trump administration. This has triggered alarm within military circles, where the ideal of remaining apolitical is deeply ingrained. As one source noted, the deployment “seems like a political forcing – a forced use of the military by Trump because he can.”

    Recognizing the profound and far-reaching consequences of Trump’s actions, courageous demonstrators across the United States—from Portland, Maine, to the vibrant streets of Houston, Texas, and the resilient heart of Salt Lake City, Utah—rallied with unyielding solidarity alongside the brave protesters in California who are courageously facing military repression.

    Governor Newsom underscored the illegality and immorality of commandeering a state’s National Guard without the governor’s consent, and he confirmed plans to file a lawsuit against the president on Monday in response to the extraordinary deployment. 

    Trump himself has previously made no secret of his willingness to utilize the military for domestic purposes. During his reelection campaign last year, he repeatedly told supporters that, if re-elected, he would deploy the armed forces against what he termed “the enemy within.” This history further fuels the perception that the troop deployment is not a response to a genuine emergency, but rather an attempt to use the military to suppress dissent and further a political agenda.

    Trump’s use of force and intimidation tactics reflects authoritarian tendencies, signaling a constitutional crisis in the United States.