Whistleblower hotline: (213) 785-6098

Monday, October 05, 2009

The real reason why Team Newsom unleashed the Clinton so early in it's campaign.

Background: San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom and President Bill Clinton are in Los Angeles today.

As we just witnessed in the Valley with the campaign of Krekorian and Essel – money does matter. And because it was a special election after Greuel won her Controller’s race money mattered very quickly.

And it is with that thought in my mind that I venture to delve into the Governor’s race:

Team Newsom unleashed Clinton because they might just have to fold up their tent in December.

You heard it here first on Mayor Sam – according to various accounts across California, Garry South has scolded Prince Gavin into a corner and is forcing him to finally fundraise if he wants to be viable. In fact, South has made his pronouncement to many outside of Team Newsom to the point that this old dead Mayor would now hear it. Either raise $5 million by December or drop out!

Some of you dum dums might demand that I back this up with some facts, so here you go.

Fact #1:

Garry South forced Eric Jaye Newsom’s longtime friend and strategist to quit http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/matierandross/detail?entry_id=44362

Fact #2 :

Typically a major endorsement by a former President would wait until voters pay attention to ensure massive media coverage, and that media strategists would be used to get this big endorsement out.

Yet we see that it was Newsom’s fundraisers who pushed Bill Clinton and forced the campaign to use him extremely early to meet Garry South’s demand.


Fact # 3:

Newsom is either broke, in debt or getting ready to have a fire-sale.

Since July Newsom has only raised a paltry $152,541.00 in donations over $5,000.00. In fact, since the announcement of the Clinton endorsement only one person from Los Angeles has even donated $5,000 (Jeffrey Kwatinetz) or more. That is going to make for a sad VIP area unless they open it up to smaller donors.

Now you might be claiming that perhaps Newsom gets most of his donations under the $5,000 limit and thus would not have to report those donations within the 24 hour period that these large donations require once received.

Want to see the proof? Look here.

Since the beginning of Newsom opening his account he has raised approximately $3.7 million dollars with approximately $1.3 million coming from donations larger than $5,000 but smaller than $25,900.00.

Which means Newsom on average gets nearly 36% of his money from large donors – something no political reporter has ever published. Which means if we follow the standard trend of 36% coming from large donations – since July 1st the Newsom campaign has raised…$423,725.00. Which is just a few thousand dollars short of the money pro-Essel committees spent to get her less than 5,000 votes in the Valley.

Yet from Jan 1 – June 30th of 2009 Newsom spent $1.5 million. Which is an average monthly expenditure of $215,000.00. The months of July, August and now September are done which would mean they have spent $645,000.00 a net lost of $222,000.00.

Not exactly close to the $5 million Garry South is demanding.

It appears the Newsom campaign is going to be folding up its tent really soon, whether they like it or not.

P.S. What is most depressing about all of this is that not a single fish wrap reporter has even delved into this, they just accept whatever the campaign says and call it news.

Labels: , ,


Blogger Joseph Mailander said:

An empty suit unleashes an empty soul.

October 05, 2009 4:19 AM  

Blogger Joseph Mailander said:

And in other governor's race news, Meg Whitman is quickly becoming the State's Walter Moore.

October 05, 2009 4:32 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Bill Clinton lost a lot of support during Presidential campaign when he came out with racist remarks against Obama. A lot of democrat friends in Los Angeles said they won't support anything he endorses in the future. Newsom is nothing more then a pretty boy with no experience.

Leave it up to the idiot Ed Reyes to make the taxpayers foot the bill for a man U.S. Attorney: Miguel Contreras, Late Labor Leader, Masterminded $50,000 Fraud

09-2413 CD 1 MOTION (REYES - ZINE) relative to declaring the Miguel Contreras Foundation Dinner September 24, 2009 a Special Event (fees and costs absorbed by the City = $1,650).

October 05, 2009 6:38 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

No, what is depressing is that this is the big Monday update we waited for. Your position on Gavin Newsom fund raising. Why do you say the real reason? Is there some huge story out there giving another reason?

October 05, 2009 7:18 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

"You heard it here first" has to be about something people care about hearing first. There's no "first" credit for you on saying his campaign manager says he has to raise money. You heard it here first would be if you announced he was actually dropping out because you heard he was actually dropping out. Not looking at clouds and saying it's going to rain.

October 05, 2009 7:23 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Good morning, Bill and Gavin from

October 05, 2009 7:55 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Newsom is finished. No one in their right mind will give this guy money when they see how far behind Jerry Brown he is in the money race.

October 05, 2009 9:47 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Will California become America's First Failed State?

London Guardian


October 05, 2009 10:23 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Pretty boy, yes. But no experience? He's the mayor of a major world city. Nitpick it to death, the city is well-run.

October 05, 2009 11:13 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Newspaper reporters don't "delve" anymore . . . the age of Woodward and Bernstein is long dead. Now they just take the press handout, interview one person who's "opposed" to whatever it is, get them to say a soundbyte, file the story, and head for the nearest happy hour.

October 05, 2009 11:16 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Cut to CD 2-

Shallman scolding Essel to raise more money to pay for his fat fees.

October 05, 2009 11:41 AM  

Blogger Phil Jennerjahn said:

Whitman and Poizner can both spend enormous amounts on their campaigns. I think they each have over 500 million dollars in personal funds.

I can't stand Whitman.

Not too thrilled with Poizner, either.

October 05, 2009 3:08 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

its campaign

October 05, 2009 3:27 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Has Noone weighed in on this?

October 05, 2009 10:10 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

First sensible thing Phil ever said, "I can't stand Meg Whitman." Never voted til very recently, doesn't say much about her civic activism, just how she's a good businesswoman and can create jobs. That's not guaranteed - she lucked into a growing business. There's a lot more to being a good public servant than making money for yourself. And she's in terrible physical shape for a woman that rich - too much time slumped behind a computer and ledgers maybe, not enough having a diverse enough life experience.

October 05, 2009 10:16 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home