Dana Williamson was Gavin Newsom’s chief of staff from early 2023 until November 2024, one of the most powerful positions in California government. She was arrested Wednesday on 23 federal counts including conspiracy, fraud, and obstruction of justice for allegedly stealing $225,000 from Xavier Becerra’s dormant campaign account and funneling it to his former chief of staff through fake consulting contracts. She also allegedly claimed over $1 million in fraudulent tax deductions for a $15,000 Chanel bag, chartered jets, a $170,000 birthday trip to Mexico, and no-show jobs for friends and family. Neither Newsom nor Becerra are accused of wrongdoing, but both are scrambling to distance themselves from a scandal that raises uncomfortable questions about oversight and accountability at the highest levels of government.
At a Glance
- Dana Williamson, Newsom’s chief of staff from 2023-2024, arrested on 23 federal fraud charges
- Allegedly stole $225,000 from Xavier Becerra’s dormant campaign account with his former chief of staff Sean McCluskie
- Also charged with claiming $1 million+ in fraudulent tax deductions for luxury purchases and fake jobs
- Allegedly created false, backdated contracts to justify COVID-era PPP loans after receiving subpoena
- At stake: whether executive branch oversight mechanisms can catch corruption before it runs for years
The Alleged Scheme
According to the 23-count federal indictment, the conspiracy began in February 2022 when Sean McCluskie, then serving as Xavier Becerra’s chief of staff at the Department of Health and Human Services, talked with Williamson about his “desire to have more money” without having to report it on his federal financial and ethical disclosures.
They allegedly devised a scheme: Williamson would bill consulting services to Becerra’s dormant “Becerra for Superintendent of Public Instruction 2030” campaign account, which McCluskie controlled. That money would then pass through several accounts before landing in an account controlled by McCluskie.
Starting in April 2022, Williamson allegedly paid $10,000 per month to a company controlled by co-conspirators that would then pay the money to McCluskie’s bank account. The payments were disguised as income to McCluskie’s spouse for work “supposedly done for Williamson” – even though McCluskie’s spouse never actually performed any work.
When Williamson became Newsom’s chief of staff in late 2022, she allegedly brought another person into the conspiracy so the payments could continue. Campaign finance records show that person was Alexis Podesta, a well-known Sacramento Democratic political consultant who inherited Williamson’s client portfolio. Records show $180,000 in payments, mostly in $10,000 increments, from Becerra’s dormant committee to “Podesta Company” between 2023 and 2024.
Prosecutors allege Williamson and co-conspirators diverted approximately $225,000 in funds from a dormant political campaign to an associate’s account for personal use between February 2022 and September 2024.
The Luxury Lifestyle Charged as Business Expenses
Beyond the campaign fund scheme, Williamson is charged with claiming more than $1 million in fraudulent business deductions on her tax returns for what were actually personal expenses. The indictment details an astonishing list of luxury purchases she allegedly disguised as business expenses:
A $15,000 Chanel handbag claimed as a business expense.
A $170,000 birthday trip to Mexico written off as business travel.
Private jet travel and luxury hotel stays claimed as business necessities.
Home furnishings and designer handbags beyond the Chanel bag.
Cash payments to friends and family for no-show jobs that never existed.
The scale and brazenness of these deductions is remarkable – claiming a Chanel bag and a $170,000 birthday vacation as business expenses suggests either extraordinary confidence she wouldn’t get caught or complete disregard for tax law.
The PPP Loan Cover-Up
Williamson is also charged with conspiring to create false, backdated contracts after receiving a civil subpoena in January 2024 from the U.S. Attorney’s Office regarding Paycheck Protection Program loans made to her business during the COVID-19 pandemic.
PPP loans were federal assistance designed to help struggling businesses keep employees on payroll during pandemic shutdowns. To qualify and receive loan forgiveness, businesses had to demonstrate they were using the money for legitimate business purposes.
When prosecutors started asking questions about Williamson’s PPP loans, she allegedly asked an associate to create retroactive contracts saying her company provided services to his company – contracts that would justify the loans and loan forgiveness she’d received. Those contracts were fabricated after the fact to cover up fraudulent loan applications.
This is obstruction of justice – not just committing fraud, but actively trying to cover it up once investigators started asking questions.
The Timeline and Newsom’s Response
The timeline is important for understanding what Newsom knew and when. The alleged fraud began in February 2022, before Williamson joined Newsom’s office. She became his chief of staff in late 2022 and served until November 2024.
According to Newsom’s office, Williamson informed them in 2024 that she was under criminal investigation. They immediately placed her on administrative leave. Her last day was November 2024, and she resigned in December 2024.
Newsom’s spokesperson was careful to note that “the alleged fraud did not take place while she served in the governor’s office” – technically true in that the initial scheme predated her state employment. But the indictment includes details of emails, calls, and meetings between Williamson and McCluskie regarding the alleged scheme and cover-up while she was Newsom’s chief of staff.
“At a time when the President is openly calling for his Attorney General to investigate his political enemies, it is especially important to honor the American principle of being innocent until proven guilty in a court of law by a jury of one’s peers.” – Newsom spokesperson
That statement is interesting – it correctly notes presumption of innocence but also takes a shot at Trump for politicizing Justice Department investigations. It’s defensive positioning that suggests Newsom’s team is worried about political fallout.
The Impact on Becerra’s Gubernatorial Campaign
Xavier Becerra is running to succeed Newsom as California governor in 2026. This indictment creates a massive political problem for him even though he’s not accused of any wrongdoing.
His former chief of staff allegedly stole $225,000 from his dormant campaign account. That raises obvious questions: How did Becerra not notice $225,000 leaving his campaign account? Who was overseeing the finances? How could his chief of staff authorize payments to fake consultants for over two years without anyone catching it?
Becerra called the news “a gut punch” and emphasized he’s cooperating with investigators.
“As California’s former Attorney General, I fully comprehend the importance of allowing this investigation and legal process to run its course through our justice system.”
That’s the right message legally and politically – express shock, emphasize cooperation, note his law enforcement background. But the damage is done. His former chief of staff allegedly looted his campaign account for years, and nobody noticed.
The Co-Conspirators
The indictment lists five co-conspirators beyond Williamson:
Sean McCluskie – Becerra’s former chief of staff who allegedly received the stolen money. He entered a plea agreement and is cooperating with prosecutors. He faces up to five years in prison and $250,000 fine but will likely get less for cooperation.
McCluskie’s spouse – Allegedly received payments disguised as income for work never performed.
Greg Campbell – A prominent Sacramento lobbyist who signed a plea deal admitting to conspiracy charges. His company served as a conduit for campaign money to obscure it was going to McCluskie’s wife.
Alexis Podesta – Former California public official and well-known Democratic consultant who inherited Williamson’s client portfolio when she became Newsom’s chief of staff. Her attorney says she didn’t know the payments were fraudulent and stopped them once informed. She hasn’t been charged and is cooperating.
The fact that two co-conspirators have already entered plea deals and are cooperating suggests prosecutors have strong evidence. They’re building cases from the bottom up, getting lower-level participants to testify against Williamson.
The Constitutional Oversight Question
Here’s the deeper issue this case exposes: how do we oversee the people who work at the highest levels of government?
Williamson was the governor’s chief of staff – one of the most powerful unelected positions in California government. She controlled access to the governor, managed his staff, and helped set policy priorities. If she was stealing campaign funds and claiming fraudulent tax deductions while serving in that role, what other ethical violations might have occurred?
The Constitution creates checks and balances between branches of government, but it doesn’t provide mechanisms for checking the personal ethics of senior staff within the executive branch. Governors appoint their chiefs of staff without legislative confirmation. There’s no independent ethics board with authority to investigate or remove them.
The only real check is criminal law – if they commit crimes, federal prosecutors can investigate and charge them. That’s what happened here, but only after years of alleged fraud.
When the governor’s chief of staff can allegedly steal campaign funds and file fraudulent tax returns for years before getting caught, that reveals a serious gap in executive branch accountability mechanisms.
What the Founders Would Say
The Founders worried constantly about corruption in government. They created separation of powers, checks and balances, and regular elections precisely to prevent officials from abusing power for personal gain.
But they focused primarily on elected officials and judges. They didn’t anticipate the massive modern administrative state where unelected senior staff wield enormous power. The governor’s chief of staff isn’t mentioned in any constitution – it’s an administrative position that’s evolved over time.
Madison would probably argue this is why virtue and character matter in government. All the constitutional structures in the world can’t prevent corruption if people lack basic integrity. He’d say the solution is better vetting and higher standards for senior appointments.
Hamilton would focus on the enforcement side – the fact that Williamson was caught and charged shows the system working. Criminal prosecution is the ultimate check on corruption, and it’s functioning here.
Jefferson would probably ask why government positions pay so much and attract people who allegedly need to steal campaign funds to afford luxury lifestyles. He believed in simple republican government with modest compensation that attracted people motivated by public service rather than personal enrichment.
The Political Fallout
The California Democratic Party is described as “reeling” from this scandal, and that’s not hyperbole. Dana Williamson was a major player in California Democratic politics for years – she served in Jerry Brown’s administration, ran Becerra’s attorney general campaign, opened her own political affairs firm, and became Newsom’s chief of staff.
She knew everyone, had access to everyone, and apparently was allegedly stealing and defrauding the entire time. The number of prominent California Democrats who will have to answer questions about their relationships with Williamson is substantial.
For Newsom, this is embarrassing but probably not devastating – he’s term-limited and isn’t running for anything. For Becerra, who’s running for governor, it’s potentially campaign-ending. His former chief of staff allegedly looted his campaign account while also serving in his cabinet.
The investigation began under the Biden administration and took three years, involving 27,000 pages of documents and 750 gigabytes of evidence. That timeline means investigators were building this case carefully and thoroughly.
The Constitutional Reality of Staff Corruption
The Constitution doesn’t provide specific mechanisms for preventing or punishing corruption by senior government staff below the level of elected officials. What it does provide is criminal law enforcement through federal prosecutors and courts.
That system worked here – eventually. But “eventually” means years of alleged fraud occurred before anyone noticed. Williamson allegedly stole campaign funds from 2022 to 2024, filed fraudulent tax returns claiming over $1 million in fake deductions, and defrauded the PPP loan program designed to help struggling businesses during COVID.
The fact that she could do this while serving as chief of staff to one of the most powerful governors in America suggests our oversight mechanisms for senior staff are inadequate. There’s no ethics board with authority to investigate, no independent watchdog reviewing senior staff conduct, and no requirement that chiefs of staff undergo the kind of scrutiny cabinet secretaries face during Senate confirmation.
Williamson pleaded not guilty and was released on $500,000 bond. She faces up to 20 years in prison on the most serious charges.
Two co-conspirators are cooperating with prosecutors. The case will likely take months or years to fully resolve.
But the constitutional question remains: when people at the highest levels of government allegedly engage in systematic fraud for years before getting caught, does that represent the system working (they eventually got caught) or the system failing (they got away with it for years)? The answer is probably both – and that’s the uncomfortable reality of trying to prevent corruption in modern government that the Founders never imagined.