Newsom Get DRUNKS While California BURNS Alive

Man speaking with flags in the background

California Governor Gavin Newsom confessed to drinking tequila at home while Los Angeles burned in one of the state’s most devastating wildfires, revealing a stunning moment of leadership collapse during crisis.

Story Highlights

Newsom admitted to “nursing a bottle of tequila” during the January 2025 Palisades Fire crisis
The fire destroyed over 7,000 homes and businesses while killing 12 people
Trump aggressively blamed Newsom on social media, intensifying political pressure
This marks another instance of Newsom’s controversial behavior during public emergencies
The admission has reshaped Newsom’s political trajectory and Democratic Party positioning

A Governor’s Dark Night of Crisis

Newsom’s candid Bloomberg interview revealed the depths of his despair during one of California’s darkest hours. As flames consumed Pacific Palisades neighborhoods and emergency responders battled resource shortages, the governor retreated to his residence with a bottle of tequila. His friend Doug Hendrickson provided insights into Newsom’s emotional state, describing a leader overwhelmed by the magnitude of destruction and political attacks.

The timing couldn’t have been worse. With Trump’s inauguration approaching and California residents demanding accountability, Newsom found himself besieged from all sides. His admission of drinking during the crisis represents an unprecedented level of vulnerability for a sitting governor facing a major disaster.

Trump’s Political Offensive Intensifies Pressure

President-elect Trump launched a sustained social media assault on Newsom’s leadership, posting multiple Truth Social messages blaming California’s policies for the fire’s devastation. Trump’s criticism focused on water management controversies and accused Newsom of prioritizing environmental concerns over human safety. The attacks came as Newsom struggled to coordinate emergency response efforts while managing public outrage.

Gavin Newsom nursed bottle of tequila at home while LA burned and Trump lobbed blame: ‘Everything collapsing’ https://t.co/oDtVtsWsIv pic.twitter.com/F4OZL45ALG

— New York Post (@nypost) October 20, 2025

The political warfare escalated beyond typical partisan disagreements. Trump’s aggressive blame campaign amplified existing tensions over federal-state cooperation in disaster response. For Newsom, already facing criticism from fire victims and emergency responders, Trump’s attacks created additional pressure during the state’s most challenging crisis in recent memory.

Pattern of Controversial Crisis Conduct

This incident fits a troubling pattern of Newsom’s behavior during emergencies. In 2020, he attended the exclusive French Laundry dinner while enforcing strict COVID-19 lockdowns on California residents. More recently, photographic evidence showed him wine-tasting during Los Angeles riots in June 2025. These episodes have consistently raised questions about his judgment and leadership priorities during critical moments.

The pattern reveals concerning disconnects between Newsom’s public responsibilities and private choices. While Californians faced unprecedented challenges, their governor repeatedly chose personal indulgence over visible leadership. This latest admission of drinking during the Palisades Fire reinforces perceptions of a leader more focused on his own comfort than public service.

Political Fallout and Future Implications

Despite the controversy, Newsom has emerged as a leading Democratic figure positioned for 2028 presidential considerations. His combative response to Trump has energized some party activists, though his crisis management record remains problematic. The tequila admission has sparked renewed debate over his readiness for higher office and ability to handle pressure.

Recovery efforts continue across Los Angeles, with historic rebuilding programs underway. However, public trust in state leadership has eroded significantly. Newsom’s candid admissions about his personal struggles during the crisis may humanize him to some voters, but they also reinforce serious questions about his capacity to lead during emergencies when decisive action matters most.