admin
Gubernatorial candidate Tom Steyer just dropped a last‑minute ad saying Gubernatorial candidate Xavier Becerra “could be indicted next.” It’s the kind of political theater we expect in a tight California governor race — equal parts innuendo and late-night cable drama. But let’s be clear: an ad is not a charging document, and the facts on the record don’t back up the slam line Steyer is selling.
What’s happening?
The Steyer ad — bluntly titled “Risky” in coverage — seizes on guilty pleas in a federal corruption probe and then tells viewers, without evidence, that Becerra “could be indicted next.” Becerra’s campaign fired back with a cease‑and‑desist letter calling the spot “false and defamatory” and threatened to sue. Steyer’s team replied that they welcome litigation and said they’d subpoena witnesses, then kept the ad running. Translation: this is a political attack, turned up to eleven.
The legal facts, plain and simple
Here are the hard facts the ad leans on. The U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Eastern District of California has prosecuted a scheme it says diverted about $225,000 from a dormant campaign account. Two people tied to that scheme — former chief of staff Sean McCluskie and consultant Dana Williamson — pleaded guilty. DOJ press releases and indictments name the conspirators. They do not charge Xavier Becerra. In fact, federal filings treated him as someone the conspirators hid the scheme from. So no, there is no public indictment or formal charge against Becerra.
Steyer’s play: politics by insinuation
Steyer’s ad is a textbook political smear dressed up as a “gotcha” moment. It stitches together real guilty pleas and then leaps to a headline‑friendly warning that “Becerra could be indicted next.” That’s clever messaging, not legal proof. Steyer’s lawyers even invited depositions of witnesses and Becerra himself — a public relations flex aimed at looking tough. If the plan is to scare voters with what‑ifs, it’s working. If the plan is to present actual evidence, well, keep waiting.
Why this matters
Voters deserve facts, not hypothetical courtroom drama injected into the last days of a campaign. The guilty pleas in the federal probe are real and newsworthy. Using them to imply a pending indictment of a major candidate when no charging document exists is dishonest political theater. Both campaigns are playing hardball. But the difference between legal reality and campaign spin matters. If you want to know who to trust with California’s budget and public safety, trust the record — not a late ad designed to make your jaw drop and your civic pulse spike.
