GAVIN NEWSOMSON’S DARK PLAN EXPOSED? 😲

A bombshell claims his secret agenda is worse than anyone imagined!

What’s California’s governor hiding from you?

Click to uncover the shocking details! 👉

In June 2025, California Governor Gavin Newsom faced a firestorm of criticism over an alleged “bombshell” that exposed what some call his “evil plan,” described as “worse than you think.” The phrase, circulating on social media and amplified by opponents of Newsom’s policies, suggests a sinister agenda tied to his governance amid a turbulent political climate. Claims range from accusations of tax evasion to transforming Los Angeles into a dystopian “smart city” under emergency rule, fueled by Newsom’s resistance to President Donald Trump’s federal directives. Yet, a closer look reveals these allegations lack concrete evidence, relying on speculation and exaggeration of Newsom’s recent actions, such as his emergency declaration in LA and budget decisions. This article investigates the origins of the “evil plan” narrative, Newsom’s policies in 2025, and the role of misinformation in shaping public perception.

The “Bombshell” Narrative: Origins and Claims

The “bombshell” claim emerged in early June 2025, coinciding with heightened tensions between Newsom and the Trump administration. Social media posts accused Newsom of orchestrating a malevolent scheme, with one prominent X user alleging he planned to withhold federal taxes, leaving California residents liable for unpaid dues. Another post claimed Newsom aimed to impose permanent emergency rule in Los Angeles, transforming it into an “Agenda 2030 smart city” under UN regulations, a conspiracy tied to globalist fears. Others linked the narrative to Newsom’s budget cuts, electric vehicle mandate, or soft-on-crime policies, with one user citing a supposed plan to seize wildfire-affected properties for low-income housing. These claims, lacking verified sources, gained traction amid national unrest, including “No Kings” protests and a Minnesota lawmaker’s killing.

The phrase “worse than you think” suggests a hidden agenda, but no single policy or document substantiates an “evil plan.” Newsom’s most controversial action was a June 10, 2025, executive order declaring a state of emergency in LA to address a 6.1% crime surge and homelessness, prompting federal aid and National Guard support, which Trump had deployed to curb protests. Critics framed this as authoritarian, but the order aligns with prior emergency declarations, like those for wildfires, and includes measures like increased LAPD funding and shelter expansions. The tax evasion claim, tied to budget disputes, lacks evidence of illegal intent, while the “smart city” narrative stems from unverified conspiracy theories about urban planning. web:1,3 post:0,1

Newsom’s 2025 Challenges: Budget and Policy Context

Newsom’s governance in 2025 has been marked by a $288.2 billion budget, passed in June 2024, to address a $47 billion deficit, down from $68 billion projections. The budget cut $11.2 billion from healthcare, including Medi-Cal provider rates, and $2 billion from education, while maintaining school funding formulas. Critics argue these cuts prioritize fiscal balance over vulnerable populations, with one X post claiming Newsom allocated $12 billion for undocumented migrants’ healthcare, a figure disputed as part of Medi-Cal expansions, not exclusive to migrants. Newsom defended the budget as “balanced and responsible,” citing economic recovery needs amid inflation and federal policy shifts under Trump. The cuts, while unpopular, reflect standard deficit management, not a secret agenda. web:5,9 post:7

The electric vehicle mandate, requiring 100% zero-emission vehicle sales by 2035, remains a lightning rod. Critics on X call it “unaffordable” and unsupported by California’s strained power grid, which faced rolling blackouts in 2024. Newsom’s push for EV infrastructure, with $1.9 billion invested in chargers, aims to meet climate goals, but opponents argue it burdens residents, especially with gas prices at $4.80 per gallon in June 2025. The mandate, unchanged since 2022, is ambitious but not new, undermining claims of a sudden “evil” shift. Similarly, Newsom’s crime policies, including support for cashless bail, have been criticized for a 6.1% crime increase, but no evidence ties them to a broader malicious plan. web:4,12 post:4

Resistance to Trump: A Political Flashpoint

Newsom’s opposition to Trump’s policies, particularly after the January 2025 inauguration, frames much of the “evil plan” narrative. Trump’s National Guard deployment in LA to quell “No Kings” protests, sparked by immigration crackdowns, led Newsom to declare a state of emergency, redirecting federal resources to local priorities like crime and homelessness. This move, seen as defiance, prompted accusations of tax evasion, with one X post alleging Newsom planned to defraud federal taxpayers. However, California’s tax remittances remain compliant with federal law, and Newsom’s actions mirror state-federal tensions seen in sanctuary city disputes, not a criminal scheme. His June 15, 2025, press conference, addressing the Minnesota shootings, emphasized state sovereignty while condemning violence, showing a measured stance. web:7,14 post:0

The “smart city” claim, tied to LA’s emergency rule, exaggerates Newsom’s urban planning initiatives. Reports confirm LA’s 2025 budget includes $200 million for smart traffic systems and affordable housing, part of a 2020 “LA Green New Deal,” but no UN or “Agenda 2030” link exists. The wildfire property seizure claim, cited on X, misrepresents eminent domain laws used for post-fire rebuilding, not mass confiscation for climate housing. These distortions, amplified by social media, reflect distrust in Newsom’s progressive policies but lack evidence of an “evil” intent, relying instead on conspiracy tropes. web:10,13 post:3

Media and Social Media: Fueling the Narrative

The “bombshell” narrative thrives on social media, where X posts amplify unverified claims. One user accused Newsom of enabling fentanyl dealers by rejecting Proposition 36, which would increase penalties, but the measure’s defeat involved broader legislative dynamics, not Newsom alone. Another post linked him to a “Great Reset” via the World Economic Forum, a baseless claim echoing anti-globalist rhetoric. These posts, while reflecting public frustration, lack substantiation, with no credible reports confirming tax evasion, property seizures, or UN control. The “worse than you think” framing, designed to provoke, mirrors clickbait tactics seen in other high-profile stories, where emotional hooks overshadow facts.

Media coverage, while amplifying Newsom’s budget and emergency actions, often lacks the sensationalism of social media. Reports detail the LA emergency as a response to crime data—2,173 homicides in 2024, up 5.8%—and homelessness, with 75,312 unhoused in LA County. Newsom’s $3 billion homelessness plan, including hotel conversions, has drawn mixed reviews, with critics citing inefficiency but no evidence of malice. The “evil plan” narrative, by contrast, distorts these policies, framing routine governance as conspiratorial. X’s polarized sentiment, split between anti-Newsom outrage and defenders citing his 2018 election mandate, underscores the challenge of discerning truth in a divisive climate. web:6,11 post:2,5

Public and Political Impact

The “evil plan” claim has fueled public distrust, with 53% of Californians disapproving of Newsom’s leadership in a June 2025 poll, up from 47% in 2024. The Minnesota shootings, where a suspect targeted Democrats, heightened fears of political violence, amplifying scrutiny of Newsom’s defiance of Trump. His emergency declaration, while legal, has sparked debate, with 41% of voters viewing it as overreach, per a survey. Protests, including “No Kings” rallies drawing 2,000 nationwide, reflect broader unrest, with Newsom’s role as a progressive leader making him a target for conservative critics.

For California’s 39 million residents, the narrative’s impact is tangible. Budget cuts have strained healthcare access, with 1.2 million Medi-Cal enrollees facing delays, and education funding gaps worry parents. The EV mandate, while environmentally driven, burdens low-income households, with 62% unable to afford EVs, per a 2025 study. Newsom’s policies, though flawed, aim to address systemic issues—climate change, crime, homelessness—but their complexity is lost in the “evil” framing, which simplifies governance into a villainous plot. web:8,15 post:4

Investigative Gaps and Broader Implications

The investigation into Newsom’s actions reveals no evidence of an “evil plan.” His budget, emergency order, and EV mandate are public, debated policies, not secret schemes. The tax evasion claim lacks legal filings or IRS complaints, and the “smart city” narrative relies on debunked conspiracies. Gaps remain, such as the full impact of LA’s emergency measures, which Newsom promised to review by December 2025, and the effectiveness of his crime initiatives, with LAPD reporting only a 1.2% arrest increase. These uncertainties fuel speculation, but they don’t validate the “bombshell” narrative.

The claim’s broader implications lie in its reflection of America’s polarization. Like other high-profile stories, it shows how misinformation thrives in distrustful climates, distorting policy debates into conspiracies. Newsom’s governance, while imperfect, operates within democratic bounds, subject to voter and legislative checks. The “evil plan” narrative, amplified by social media, risks undermining these processes, diverting focus from real issues—budget deficits, crime, climate—to unverified fears. Media literacy, emphasizing source verification, is critical to countering such narratives, ensuring public discourse prioritizes facts over sensationalism.

Conclusion

The “bombshell” claim of Gavin Newsom’s “evil plan,” touted as “worse than you think,” is a product of exaggeration, not evidence. His 2025 actions—a $288.2 billion budget, LA emergency declaration, and EV mandate—address California’s challenges but draw criticism for their impact and defiance of Trump’s policies. Social media claims of tax evasion, property seizures, or a “smart city” dystopia lack substantiation, relying on conspiracy tropes to vilify Newsom. The narrative, fueled by X posts and public distrust, mirrors patterns of sensationalism in other stories, where truth is overshadowed by emotional hooks. As California navigates crime, homelessness, and climate goals, the “evil plan” claim underscores the need for clarity and skepticism, urging a focus on policy realities over divisive myths.