www.insider.com
"Newsom did not travel using state funds."More sequels to follow
Gavin Newsom takes vacation to Montana — one of 22 states that California bans state-funded travel to over anti-LGBTQ policies
Newsom departed for a vacation to the Treasure State on Friday but did not initially announce where he was going. He did not travel using state funds.
Neither did he when he dined maskless at a party at an expensive restaurant during the middle of the lockdown. Or Nancy who got caught getting her hair done in SanFrancisco. Or AOC who was caught partying and dancing in Florida maskless. Or the Dem Congressman from California who dated the Chinese spy who was caught vacationing in Florida maskless. On and on the hypocrisy
You make these stupid ass posts and threads as though only people in one party act like hypocrites. They both do, every day.
So you believe they are equally represented? There are bad apples on both sides but this whole Covid crisis exposed a higher percentage on the Dems side. Rules for thee but not for me is their motto
Why don’t you ever post about Democrats?
What does any of that have to do with him visiting his family in Montana? Did he declare that no one should visit Montana at some point in the past?
Lol Gavin is another Dem that doesn’t practice what he preaches. Odd that his office didn’t come right out and say where he was vacationing…
I’m sure while staying there he made sure everyone he interacts with are confirmed LGBT friendly. If it wasn’t clear I’m sure he gave them a rainbow flag to be displayed so they can prove loyalty to the cause
I’ll make it simple. He banned CA government from doing business in non friendly LQBT states. This means he is trying to punish these states from getting any money from CA but he travels to one of these states and spends his own money there thus financially rewarding Montana
Yeah, this is exactly what the article said, so you've not made the case any better that this is an example of hypocrisy. Did he ban people from spending personal money there? Because that's what he did; and that's not the same thing as not having CA government money spent there. Are you really suggesting that, in order for him to be true to his principles, he has to not visit his family simply because they live in Montana? Nothing that he did here conflicts with the CA state policy not to spend state money sending state employees to Montana. You're just really stretching.
Democrats (on a national scale) wouldn’t put themselves into these situations for easy criticism if they didn’t take such a “holier than thou” approach when they get behind a microphone. It’s so easy to see how hypocritical many of them are when they quietly do things like Newsom did here.
I guess we have to agree to disagree. Doesn’t the irony cause you pause? If it’s so important to him to establish policy for his government then it should be equally important for him to do the same in his personal life? It would be like a pro-life Republican sending a personal donation to Planned Parenthood
He knows. He’s just playing the semantics game to waste time while defending democrats. Some get pretty defensive when you call the BS out.
No, it'd be like a pro-life Republican buying dinner for a family member who worked for Planned Parenthood. The man is allowed to visit his family, despite the fact that they live in a state whose government he disagrees with on policy issues. By visiting Montana, even if he spent money there, he is not explicitly supporting the Montana government as would the person donating to PP in your scenario.
So you're the objective party that gets to decide? Do you have a running total for each side that you could show us?
Did he travel without security or did he pay for it out of pocket? Did he fly commercial or private? Private is the way to travel as long as he paid it himself and not rely on a political donor
