MUST SEE: Treasury Sec. Scott Bessent Just Revealed Terrifying News for Democrats…
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent says working Americans will soon see tangible tax relief through larger refunds and higher take-home pay, a shift he says will drive down inflation and restore affordability after years of Biden-era economic pressure.
He said those refunds alone could inject tens of billions of dollars back into the economy in early 2026, directly benefiting middle- and working-class families.
Speaking on Mornings with Maria, Bessent said the Trump administration is focused on letting Americans keep more of what they earn instead of expanding federal spending.
“We should think that 2025 was setting the table,” Bessent said. “2026 is going to be a bountiful year, if the Democrats don’t shut down the government.”
Bessent said real disposable income is already rising, with Treasury data showing wages beginning to outpace inflation after years of negative real wage growth under Biden.
From 2021 through 2024, inflation averaged roughly 5 percent annually, while real wages were flat or negative for most workers, according to federal labor data.
Bessent warned that Democrats could derail progress by forcing a government shutdown in January, pointing to past shutdowns that shaved an estimated 0.2 to 0.4 percentage points off quarterly GDP.
The longest shutdown on record slowed investment, delayed federal payments, and disrupted private-sector growth, impacts Bessent said the economy cannot afford as momentum builds.
Despite lingering headwinds, Bessent said the U.S. is still on track to finish the year with approximately 3.5 percent GDP growth, well above the long-term average of around 2 percent.
He said that growth reflects a rebound in capital formation, with private investment increasing as regulatory burdens ease.
Bessent argued that Trump’s tax, energy, and deregulation agenda is reversing what he called the worst inflation in 50 years, which peaked above 9 percent under Biden.
Treasury and housing data show rent inflation slowing sharply, with some metro areas posting flat or negative year-over-year rent growth for the first time in years.
“Rents are down,” Bessent said, calling housing one of the clearest indicators that affordability pressure is easing.
He blamed Biden-era mass immigration for intensifying housing shortages, noting that millions of new arrivals increased demand without corresponding increases in supply.
Bessent said President Trump’s enforcement actions, including the removal of more than 2 million illegal immigrants, have reduced pressure on rental markets.
He said border enforcement is now functioning as an affordability policy by easing competition for housing, especially in working-class neighborhoods.
Energy prices have also fallen, with gasoline prices down significantly from Biden-era highs, feeding into lower transportation and shipping costs.
Bessent said energy accounts for a large share of household inflation, and lowering those costs has a multiplier effect across the economy.
Treasury data show that real wages for production and nonsupervisory workers are now rising, reversing years where inflation erased pay gains.
Bessent said that matters most for lower-income households, which spend a higher share of income on essentials like housing, food and energy.
He also pointed to broader stock market participation beyond Big Tech, with industrials, financials, and domestic manufacturing showing strong gains.
Bessent said that shift reflects renewed confidence in U.S. production rather than speculation tied to federal spending.
He rejected claims that economic growth itself drives inflation, arguing instead that inflation occurs when supply is artificially constrained.
“Growth does not create inflation,” Bessent said. “Friction creates inflation when demand outpaces supply.”
He said deregulation under President Trump is expanding supply across housing, energy, credit, and manufacturing, easing those bottlenecks.
Bessent concluded that if Republicans keep the government open and allow Trump’s policies to continue, 2026 could mark a return to sustained, non-inflationary growth.
Lower-income and working-class households, he said, are positioned to benefit the most as prices stabilize, wages rise, and tax relief reaches Main Street.
“Main Street and Wall Street can both do well,” Bessent said. “My guess is both have a very good year next year.”
IT ALL CAME OUT' – GAVIN NEWSOM BLOWS UP AFTER BEING EXPOSED LIVE ON AIR
SACRAMENTO, Calif. — As the 2028 presidential election cycle rapidly approaches, life is getting increasingly complicated for California Governor Gavin Newsom.
The ambitious Democrat, widely expected to declare his candidacy for his party's highest nomination, is currently drowning in a massive, rapidly expanding ethics scandal centered on hundreds of millions of dollars in questionable corporate donations. As federal investigators continue to circle both the governor and his wife, First Partner Jennifer Siebel Newsom, the sheer scale of his fundraising tactics is raising serious alarm bells across the political spectrum.
At the absolute center of this controversy is Newsom’s unprecedented and unapologetic use of "behested payments"—a controversial practice in California law that allows elected officials to personally solicit massive, unlimited donations from deep-pocketed corporations, wealthy individuals, and labor unions to fund specific charities or government initiatives.
While technically legal under the state's highly permissive rules, government watchdogs and ethics experts are fiercely arguing that these payments represent a glaring, dangerous loophole. It essentially allows special interests—many of whom have active, highly lucrative business before the state of California—to gain massive political influence and curry favor with the governor, entirely outside the strict boundaries of traditional campaign finance laws.
The $347 Million Man
According to official California disclosure records, the scale at which Newsom utilizes this loophole is utterly staggering. Since 2011, Newsom has reported soliciting more than $347 million in behested payments.
To put that massive figure into perspective, data from the California Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) reveals that all elected officials statewide combined directed roughly $556 million in behested payments between 2011 and 2026. Newsom alone accounted for nearly two-thirds—a whopping 62%—of that total.
By stark contrast, his predecessor, former Democratic Governor Jerry Brown, reportedly solicited a relatively modest $35 million in behested payments during his entire tenure.
"Behested payments are ripe for abuse," warned Sean McMorris of California Common Cause, pointing out the obvious ethical minefield created when powerful elected officials lean on organizations that have direct business before the government.
The Optics of Influence Peddling
The ethical concerns are not just hypothetical; they are rooted in a pattern of massive corporate donations followed by highly favorable state actions.
Public reports have raised serious questions about several major donors who opened their checkbooks at Newsom's behest and later benefited immensely from state contracts or policy decisions. For example, during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, the healthcare giant Blue Shield donated a staggering $20 million to initiatives heavily supported by Newsom. Shortly thereafter, the corporation was miraculously awarded a highly lucrative, no-bid state contract related to vaccine distribution.
Similarly, the Kaiser Foundation contributed nearly $10 million before securing a significantly expanded role in California’s massive Medi-Cal program. In another instance, the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria donated millions to organizations associated with the governor and his wife’s initiatives. Later, they benefited significantly from favorable state decisions involving tribal gaming matters, including efforts to block a rival casino from opening nearby.
While proving an explicit, legal quid pro quo is notoriously difficult, critics argue that the actual transaction is irrelevant. The concern is that the system inherently encourages and rewards a "pay-to-play" culture. Assemblyman David Tangipa slammed the practice, describing behested payments as a blatant form of "political influence peddling," boldly arguing that just because the system is legal does not mean it isn't deeply corrupt.
The Family Business and Federal Heat
The issue has drawn even fiercer scrutiny because millions of these corporate dollars have been funneled directly into organizations tightly linked to the governor’s inner circle. Approximately $4.8 million in behested donations were routed to the California Partners Project, a nonprofit organization co-founded by Jennifer Siebel Newsom. For many critics, corporate money flowing into a charity run by the governor's wife creates, at the very least, a glaring appearance of a massive conflict of interest.
The intense debate over this influence-peddling loophole comes at a highly precarious time for the governor. Newsom recently acknowledged that both he and his wife are currently the subjects of multiple, ongoing federal investigations. While neither has been charged with any wrongdoing, and the Department of Justice has remained completely tight-lipped about the exact nature of the inquiries, the specter of a federal probe casts a dark cloud over his 2028 presidential ambitions.
A "Laughable Slap on the Wrist"
Adding insult to injury for government transparency advocates, Newsom recently agreed to pay a $31,500 ethics fine handed down by the state's campaign finance watchdog, the FPPC. The fine was levied after the commission found that Newsom flagrantly failed to legally report 36 separate behested payments—totaling more than $5.6 million—within the required 30-day timeframe.
The late disclosures involved massive corporate donations solicited during the 2024 and 2025 Los Angeles wildfires, pulling in vast sums from corporate titans like BlackRock, Amazon, Lockheed Martin, and Anthem Blue Cross. While Newsom's office brushed off the violation as a mere paperwork oversight during an emergency, critics blasted the $31,500 penalty as a "laughable slap on the wrist" for a wealthy politician manipulating a quarter-billion-dollar shadow fundraising system. This marks the second time Newsom has been fined for late reporting of these payments, having previously paid a $13,000 fine in 2024.
Supporters of the governor are quick to point out that these behested donations have funded critical public initiatives, including wildfire relief and charitable causes. However, the public benefit of those projects does absolutely nothing to eliminate the massive concerns surrounding transparency, corporate influence, and the ability of powerful special interests to funnel unlimited cash into causes promoted by the state's most powerful executive.
As Newsom attempts to position himself as the future of the Democratic Party, the growing scandal surrounding his $347 million loophole is forcing a national reckoning. The American people are left to wonder: if this is how Gavin Newsom runs California, how exactly would he run the country?
