A top Democrat is thankfully clearing up Newsom’s lies.
A growing divide inside the Democratic Party is drawing attention after California Governor Gavin Newsom made controversial remarks about Israel during a recent podcast interview — comments that quickly sparked criticism from fellow Democrat John Fetterman.
The Pennsylvania senator openly rebuked Newsom after the California governor appeared to echo claims that Israel could be viewed as an “apartheid state,” a phrase that has long been used by critics of the Jewish state and remains highly controversial in Washington.
For many Americans — particularly longtime supporters of the U.S.–Israel alliance — the remarks raised serious questions about where parts of the Democratic Party stand on one of America’s closest allies.
Fetterman Says Newsom Repeated “Fringe” Talking Points
During an appearance on Cuomo with host Chris Cuomo on NewsNation, Fetterman said he was surprised and disappointed by Newsom’s comments.
“That’s a talking point of the fringe of my party, and that’s profoundly disappointing,” Fetterman said. “I was shocked.”
Fetterman emphasized that Israel remains a critical ally of the United States and warned that rhetoric labeling the country an apartheid state risks undermining the longstanding partnership between the two nations.
While acknowledging that Newsom is widely considered one of the more progressive voices in the Democratic Party, the Pennsylvania senator said he never expected the governor to adopt language commonly associated with the party’s far-left activists.
Newsom’s Podcast Interview Sparks Controversy
The controversy began during a recent appearance on the popular political podcast Pod Save America, where Newsom was promoting his new memoir, Young Man in a Hurry: A Memoir of Discovery.
During the discussion, Newsom spoke about the political situation in Israel and the leadership of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Newsom noted that Netanyahu faces domestic political challenges and an upcoming election, while also pointing to growing debate over Israeli policies regarding the West Bank.
Referencing commentary from columnist Thomas Friedman, Newsom mentioned that some analysts have begun describing the situation as resembling apartheid — a characterization that has been fiercely debated among policymakers and international observers.
The comments quickly circulated online and prompted immediate reactions from both political allies and critics.
Questions Raised About U.S. Military Support
During the same interview, podcast host Jon Favreau asked Newsom whether the United States should reconsider its military support for Israel.
Newsom responded that the issue may eventually require serious discussion, suggesting that current Israeli leadership decisions could put pressure on the U.S. to reassess its approach.
He also argued that Americans facing rising costs of living may increasingly question large foreign policy commitments overseas.
The remarks have fueled debate among lawmakers, many of whom strongly support maintaining the historic alliance between Washington and Jerusalem.
Fetterman Breaks With Democrats on Iran Vote
The dispute over Israel comes at a time when Fetterman has also taken an independent stance on another major foreign policy issue involving Iran.
Earlier this week, the Pennsylvania senator was the only Democrat in the Senate to vote alongside Republicans against a war powers resolution that sought to limit further U.S. military action against Iran without congressional approval.
The resolution received broad support from Democrats but was opposed by most Republicans. Libertarian senator Rand Paul was the only Republican who voted in favor of the measure.
During his appearance on NewsNation, Fetterman defended his vote and argued that confronting governments linked to terrorism remains a critical national security priority.
“I don’t understand why it’s outrageous to finally take out one of the world’s premier sponsors of terrorism,” Fetterman said.
Growing Democratic Divide Ahead of 2028
The clash between Newsom and Fetterman highlights broader tensions inside the Democratic Party as several prominent figures position themselves for the future — including potential candidates for the 2028 presidential election.
For many voters, particularly older Americans who have traditionally supported strong alliances with democratic nations like Israel, the debate reflects deeper questions about the direction of U.S. foreign policy.
As the political landscape continues to shift, disagreements like this may offer an early glimpse into the policy battles that could shape the next presidential race.
