Gavin Newsom is a Conman

By Patrick Nicholson

Introduction

During an August podcast, widely popular commentator Joe Rogan had some choice words to describe California Governor Gavin Newsom.

"Nobody believes in that guy. That guy’s a f---ing conman. Everything he did in California, from trying to mandate vaccines for kids, when it was totally unnecessary, to being caught out in public without a mask and lying about the fact that he was outdoors.  He's just a politician. Just a stone-cold narrative-driven politician."

Wow!  What a smackdown – from a long-time fellow Democrat no less.  With an introduction like that one would have to reasonably assume that Gavin Newsom is up to no good.  Let’s find out.

2024

Next year Gavin Newsom will term out as governor.  As a career politician he needs to find his next meal ticket.  For the past few months Gavin Newsom has been campaigning for President Joe Biden.  Given the uncertainty of Biden’s mental and physical health, many view Newsom’s traipsing as a thinly veiled excuse to set up his own run for president.  Although Newsom has denied this.  But Newsom is a calculating political animal.  And with only 13 months until the presidential election the governor of California would not be campaigning for Biden – especially in red states - if he wasn’t angling in, trying to establish his own political credentials at the national level.  However, riding on Biden’s coattails isn’t going to deliver Newsom the attention he craves.  He needed something bigger and bolder.  Enter his 28th Amendment invention.

Gavin Newsom’s 28th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

On June 8th, Gavin Newsom announced:

I’m proposing the 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution to … enshrine in the Constitution common sense gun safety…while leaving the 2nd Amendment unchanged ...”

Huh? Leave the 2nd Amendment unchanged yet enshrine into the United States Constitution open ended gun control language in direct defiance of the 2nd Amendment.  

Newsom’s press release went on to state:

“… respecting America’s gun-owning tradition, the Governor’s proposal guarantees common sense constitutional protections and gun safety measures that Democrats, Republicans, independent voters, and gun owners overwhelmingly support…”

Hardly. Perhaps in California where Democrats control power but not in the greater United States.

So how can Newsom hold the following contradictory positions?

1)     Keep the 2nd Amendment intact but have the 28th Amendment drastically change it.

2)     Respect gun ownership yet want to control and disarm Americans.

3)     California has more gun control laws than any other state - but if we just enacted one more gun control law, i.e., his 28th amendment, then we’d all be safe.

Contradictions? What Contradictions

Gavin Newsom is a master at ‘newspeak’, consistently utilizing ambiguous language and misdirection to obscure the truth.  But Newsom doesn’t see it that way.  A fundamental tenet of his postmodern philosophy is to deny that he is even constrained by reason itself.  To him, truth and knowledge are empty concepts. He is guided by social construction and relative feeling rather than reason and objective reality.  Consequently, to him - there is no such thing as a contradiction in his position.  To Newsom, language is just one form of social behavior - among many. And one’s understanding of his language is based solely on the listener’s group personal feelings and stereotypes – in other words: subjective.

California Has More Than 100 Gun Laws

California has more than a hundred-gun laws.  California bans:

·           Guns for domestic violence offenders

·           Guns for people deemed a danger to others or themselves.

·           Large-capacity magazines.

·           Noise-muffling silencers.

·           Semiautomatic guns (what liberals call “assault weapons”)

Additionally, California requires background checks with the aim of preventing people who might harm themselves and others from owning a gun. Felons have a life ban on gun ownership, and there is a decade long ban for certain misdemeanor convictions.  Yet, even with California’s voluminous gun control laws, the recent tragic shootings in Monterey Park and Half Moon Bay only serve to highlight the ineffectiveness of gun control.  The detailed investigation into these shooting reinforce the futility of state regulations.

Newsom’s 28th Amendment

The language of Newsom’s proposed 28th amendment states:

“The 28th Amendment will permanently enshrine four broadly supported gun safety principles into the U.S. Constitution:

•                  Raising the federal minimum age to purchase a firearm from 18 to 21;

•                  Mandating universal background checks to prevent truly dangerous people from purchasing a gun that could be used in a crime;

•                  Instituting a reasonable waiting period for all gun purchases; and

•                  Barring civilian purchase of assault weapons that serve no other purpose than to kill as many people as possible in a short amount of time – weapons of war our nation’s founders never foresaw.

Additionally, the 28th Amendment will affirm Congress, states, and local governments can enact additional common-sense gun safety regulations that save lives.”

Interestingly, when Gavin Newsom made his announcement to crack down on gun ownership, he was surrounded by at least three-armed security guards.  Newsom, true to form: rules for thee but not for me.  Nonetheless, let’s take a closer look at examples of Newsom’s indefinite language.

Gun Fetish Culture

To date, California’s gun control regulations have been implemented to chip away at your Second Amendment right.  However, do not be lulled into thinking that Newsom’s 28th Amendment is about balancing public safety and personal liberty.  Unlike the clear and succinct language of the 2nd amendment, the language of Newsom’s proposed 28th amendment - as the foregoing has demonstrated - is purposely vague and subject to wide interpretation.

When the 28th amendment was introduced to the California State Legislature, State Senator Aisha Wahab stated the true intention:

“A man of action, Governor Gavin Newsom has the backbone to actually do something about the gun fetish culture around weapons of war, and tackle the relentless problem of gun violence and mass shootings,”

Much to Newson’s chagrin, recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions have thrown key California laws into question.  And Newsom has said as much - claiming that his motivation to propose the 28th amendment was inspired by a rollback of gun control measures in the courts. In essence, he is tired of the current Fabian strategy of gun control regulation and is spoiling for a pitched battle to completely annihilate private gun ownership in the United States.

The 28th Amendment’s Chances for Success

There are only two ways for Newsom to add his 28th amendment to the U.S Constitution.  The first is to have two-thirds of all members of congress - in both the house and senate - vote in favor of this amendment.  Then at least thirty-eight states would need to approve it.  The second option is to have the state legislatures of at least thirty-three states agree to hold a constitutional convention.  At this convention of all the states, thirty-eight state legislatures would need to approve it.  Either way, Newsom would need to win over three-fourths of the states to get his amendment passed.

Based on how the government’s approach to gun ownership has evolved over the past 30 years – in states other than California - either of these two options seem very improbable.  In fact, what has happened is the complete opposite to Newsom’s way of thinking.  Meaning that more and more states have actually broadened their second amendment protections.  In 1986, Vermont was the only state in the nation to have constitutional carry.  In a constitutional carry state, you do not need a permit to carry a gun because essentially the U.S Constitution was your permit.  Since that time, twenty-seven states (the majority in the country) have become constitutional carry states.  A groundswell of constitutional carry laws started to sweep the nation in 2010. Where in the span of approximately ten years over half the country became constitutional carry.

Thus, the idea that Newsom could get two-thirds of these constitutional carry states to agree to even discussing his gun limiting amendment is highly unlikely. And then to subsequently have three-fourths of those states (a super majority) to agree to his 28th Amendment – is simply folly.

Conclusion

Newsom’s imprudence may play well with the kooks in California, but other states won’t fall for his folly. In his August podcast Joe Rogan summed up Gavin Newsom:

“Nobody thinks he’s a real human.  With Newsom, you’ve got this construct. This cardboard cutout of a person."