Newly Minted Pool Safety Expert Newman Has No Pool Safety

The state Democrats are desperate to save State Senator Josh Newman from recall, so the tax-and-spend Newman needs to look real busy doing good things for his constituents. So the party in Sacramento has been throwing him all sorts of feel good bills to “author” so he can raise his public profile.

One of those bills is SB442, which requires homeowners to limit pool access with multiple layers of safety. Here’s Newman waxing about the importance of pool protection. As usual it’s all about the children.

But wait! We sent the FFFF spook drone over Newman’s ultra-posh Fullerton residence.

Casa de Newman

Guess what? It turns out that Josh Newman himself is deficient in pool safety.

Newman’s house on Domingo Road lacks any sort of pool fence or pool cover, which are strictly required by his own proposed law.

“Multiple layers of protection and multiple barriers of protection are critical,” said Newman at a June press conference.

He has a small child. He’s selling the bill on the safety of small children. Typical liberal. At least implement the most effective measures yourself before you legally require them of others.

Daddy Newman

More about

  1. #1 by James Cameron on July 7, 2017

    Sadly typical.

  2. #2 by Just Off Euclid on July 7, 2017

    Limousine liberals: do as I say, not as I do.

  3. #3 by just a guy on July 7, 2017

    Newman has been doing whatever the party bosses have been telling him since the day he got elected. That’s how he got into the recall/tax mess in the first place. The stupid pool law is another example. The guy can’t think for himself anymore.

    It will all be over soon.

    • #4 by Martin B on July 7, 2017

      Yes, this shows exactly how insincere Newman has become in order to preserve the party power structure and his own political career. It’s just sad really.

  4. #5 by Curious on July 7, 2017

    Newman thinks we’re all fools. Now with more mud on his face, it’s time to start back peddling. Great post!

  5. #6 by MS on July 7, 2017

    Wow. This is very dirty Republicans! Shame on you for publishing the Senator’s address. If something bad happens as a result, all eyes will be on you.

    • #7 by Public Data on July 7, 2017

      It’s on his 700 form you lunatic. He posted it. Take your complaint up with him.

    • #8 by Just Off Euclid on July 7, 2017

      Something bad already did happen. It’s called the Newman Gas Tax.

  6. #9 by Hero Hater on July 7, 2017

    What a Hero! Saving us and our “children” from ourselves. What about a fence around bath tubs?

  7. #10 by Nancy on July 7, 2017

    Why on EARTH would you publish someone’s address? What an ugly and underhanded thing to do.

  8. #15 by Bob on July 7, 2017

    Good God Almighty this is hilarious. Liberals at work!

    • #16 by nipsey on July 7, 2017

      Please, it’s just a different flavor of bullshit than the one from the other side of the aisle.

  9. #18 by Arlene on July 7, 2017

    The photo proves NOTHING and publishing his address is BEYOND DESPICABLE.
    Your group must be REALLY DESPERATE to resort to such a DIRTY TRICK.

    • #19 by T-REX on July 7, 2017



      • #20 by Just Off Euclid on July 7, 2017

        Poor Arlene caught the Barry Bug!

    • #21 by Facts is Facts on July 7, 2017

      Why is it despicable?Why is it a trick?

      Was Newman hiding where he lived? I don’t think so. It’s on all his financial interest forms.

    • #22 by nick on July 7, 2017

      Stupid people have such abhorrent reactions to common knowledge. IT’S PUBLIC INFO! Please realize what democratic super majority means, DOOM!

  10. #23 by Long time listener on July 7, 2017

    I heard about this on the John and Ken show today and I just came by to see the photo. Newman is negligent and arrogant at the same time. Can’t wait for the recall.

    • #24 by Facts is Facts on July 7, 2017

      FFFF was on KFI?

      Wait. Nobody reads the blog!

  11. #25 by Anonymous on July 7, 2017

    That photo of his backyard is a clear invasion of privacy.

    • #26 by Jack Daniels on July 7, 2017

      Ok, Barbra Streisand.

    • #27 by Law Professor on July 7, 2017

      Not if was taken from a public right-of-way.

      • #28 by nipsey on July 8, 2017

        Yes, note the hiking/biking trail a few yards away. I reckon hundreds of people a week see that.

  12. #29 by Sherri on July 7, 2017

    I’m sure the NRA would support the right to shoot down an overhead drone invading one’s privacy.

    A picture is worth a thousand words yet some were left out. This happens a lot with spineless reporting when you sneak pictures without talking to the subject.

    Is it possible the Newmans were about to have a party that included swimming? Or perhaps the pool had just been cleaned and its cover wasn’t put back on yet?

    You guys are getting desperate. Drones? Really?

    • #30 by Captain Kangaroo on July 8, 2017

      Uh, Sherri, you might want to stop commenting until you get a clue.

      That’s an aerial photo from Google Earth, NOT a drone.

    • #31 by Facts is Facts on July 8, 2017

      A drone?

      Jeezus you’re dumb!

  13. #32 by Sherri on July 8, 2017

    Captain Kangaroo, perhaps it is you who needs that clue. Either you didn’t read the FFFF article above or you did and are calling the FFFF spook drone pure fiction aka bs. Which is it?

    This is what my comment was referring to:

    “But wait! We sent the FFFF spook drone over Newman’s ultra-posh Fullerton residence.”

    Now, how about the rest of my comments that you ignored with your distraction of to drone or not to drone? Nevermind unless you actually plan to ask Newman himself.

    • #33 by Facts is Facts on July 8, 2017

      4 AM? Night owl. huh? If you’re going to stay up all night at least come up with something uintelligent.

    • #34 by McFly on July 8, 2017

      It’s from Google Maps you nitwit.

    • #35 by Captain Kangaroo on July 8, 2017

      The spook drone comment was made tongue-in-cheek. I have Google Earth opened right now and it’s the same image as posted here.

      Don’t be so gullible next time.

      • #36 by Sherri on July 8, 2017

        My NRA comment was also “tongue-in-cheek”, heavy on the sarcasm.

        • #37 by Facts is Facts on July 9, 2017

          You’re no good at sarcasm. Stick to sketching stick figures.

    • #38 by Anonymous on July 8, 2017

      FFFF just may have saved Newman Jr’s life.

      Why don’t you want babies to be safe?

  14. #39 by Johnny Donut on July 8, 2017

    Look at Newman reading a script that some party PR flack wrote for him 10 minutes earlier. He has no idea what he’s saying. Pool safety? Sure why not.

    Newman is the Dem party puppet. He doesn’t stand for anything anymore.

  15. #40 by streets of Fullerton on July 8, 2017

    This is some fine investigative reporting if I might say so .A breath of fresh air after hearing the fake news or trying to read a poorly written inacurate article out of the OCregister .

  16. #41 by Dan Chembielewski on July 8, 2017

    He’s the father of a toddler and it’s a legitimate issue.

  17. #42 by Tony Serra on July 9, 2017

    I remained stunned that NO ONE has ever called out Josh on his phony veterans charity. That was despicable. he went from claiming that he placed “HUNDREDS” of veterans jobs to helping a a dozen, to a “couple”. Of course he pivoted and claimed he was focused on the larger picture issue of jobless in the veterans community. What a bunch of Horseshit.

    This guy USED and LIED to and about veterans. He ran his “organization” from his investment bankers wife’s kitchen table. He should be ashamed and somebody should call him out.

    And before Sherri and the other idiots start defending this, I say simple produce his TAX FORMS and put forth those he has helped. Certainly they would speak out in favor of him.

    • #43 by Anonymous on July 9, 2017


      The million dollar home for someone running a non profit is also a red flag.

    • #44 by Anonymous on July 9, 2017

      The guidestar website has the 990 forms so go ahead and look them up

      • #45 by I spotted the old nag on July 9, 2017

        Newman created his “non-profit” after he beat Suckee in the primary.

        • #46 by Greg Diamond on July 17, 2017

          Bullshit. He’d run it for at least several years. I got recommendations from him for vets to help me with moves twice — one in January 2016 — and they were both great.

          • #47 by Newman Not Worthy on July 17, 2017

            All hail the self-titled “veterans advocate” Josh Newman for recommending ad hoc manual labor stints. At best, Newman’s nonprofit acted like a copycat Craigslist for Greg’s moving list rather than any legitimate resource to coach and connect those vets with long-term, meaningful career opportunities.

      • #48 by Suspicious on July 10, 2017

        Nothing comes up.

  18. #49 by Tony Serra on July 9, 2017

    Simply put. Josh Newman should provide details on his charity. This thing looks fraudulent on it’s face.


    Hey, take a look at: tell us how legit this thing looks with it’s stock photographs and whois identifiers?

    Josh Does give Veterans a link to DISNEYLAND discounts…..WTF


    • #50 by Hot Air Blimp on July 12, 2017

      Senator Newman is not encumbered by reality; he wears truth like an ill-fitted mesh tee–so full of holes it can barely support the weight of gross distortions. But unlike his ever-expanding waistline, there’s no excuse for Newman’s ongoing exaggerations about vet advocacy. Politician Newman continues to applaud his nonprofit web site despite knowing it’s an entirely redundant and thus irrelevant job aid for veterans. He excelled at rallying troops of supporters to invest resources of time, intelligence, and money into building his personal employment campaign for political office; yet he devoted no such effort into creating a meaningful, scalable solution for servicing vets who also seek career opportunities but lack access to the same network of assets that put Newman in office. His primary motive for the setup of a shell nonprofit is evidenced by the primary party it serves: him. There’s no altruism in exploiting the merit of a nonprofit as cause to champion oneself as an advocate for veterans, especially when the nonprofit functions in name only as an unfulfilled, phony promise to address a very real and still persistent problem for vets. The self-aggrandizing habits of Josh Newman have left him as bloated as his beloved, self-promoting blimp.

      • #51 by Facts is Facts on July 13, 2017

        Newman is not fat. You’re thinking of the guy on “Seinfeld.”

        • #52 by Yada yada on July 13, 2017

          Beauty, much like a double chin and bulbous belly, is in the eye of the beholder.

      • #53 by The Little Rascal on July 13, 2017

        Josh Newman’s job search site for vets is an idea as dated as his Alfalfa-cloned haircut. Original, game-changing concepts are not his forte. Newman’s character is more suited to reckless rule-changing, especially if the switcheroo involves tampering with a veterans-focused budget bill. Golly gee, that Newman sure is a swell mischief maker.

    • #54 by Truth Advocate on July 13, 2017

      Great questions to ask the “vet advocate” this Saturday, July 14, when Newman hosts a town hall from 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. at the Cypress Senior Center on 9031 Grindlay Street (just south of Lincoln Avenue and east of Moody Street). Would also be great to capture Newman’s response on YouTube for those of us who can’t attend.

      • #55 by Newman Nevermore on July 25, 2017

        ICYMI, there’s a telling account of Senator Josh Newman’s set-up for that community chat which apparently failed to meet even the basic expectations as advertised. It seems Sen. Newman chose to abruptly cut short the allotted time and, more importantly, did so without ever inviting people to directly voice their questions for true dialogue as promised. (Reporter’s full summary along with attendee comments published here:

        Essentially it amounted to little more than a heavily staged gathering under false pretenses, a platform for Newman and his staff to be heard instead of his constituents. With Newman’s boisterous crew planted in the front row seats, a cacophony of Pavlovian-style clapping punctuated each of his mini monologues. Another team member prompted him with carefully screened topics supposedly selected from the audience. All smoke and mirrors, all pretense followed by the usual disappointment one can consistently expect from Senator Josh Newman.

    • #56 by Greg Diamond on July 17, 2017

      He’s never taken a salary from it. That may explain some of the lack of forms.

      • #57 by Making Cents on July 17, 2017

        Newman could not qualify for a salary as his nonprofit raises absolutely no funds for him much less the veterans he purports to help via a web site that barely averages five unique visits on any given day.

        • #58 by Greg Diamond on July 17, 2017

          I don’t know that he’s actively managing it while he’s working in Sacramento. Most of the recommendations I know of have been people seeking him out personally, as I did. And he wouldn’t take a salary even if he could.

          • #59 by George on July 17, 2017

            It’s still an empty gesture whether you consider Newman not taking a salary from his failed nonprofit when in reality no such option exists for the taking or, per your hypothetical, Newman declining the possibility of an imagined income from that web site (which underperformed from the start rather than merely since he took office). The suggestion of magnanimity on his part sounds especially contrived knowing Newman has never refused his constituents’ generosity in affording him a six-figure salary and free transportation perks that effectively buffer Newman from the ongoing tax hike burdens he in turn chooses to bestow upon those same District 29 voters (and the rest of California).

  19. #60 by I spotted the old nag on July 17, 2017

    Wow FFFF sure got into their heads:

    Notice this woman’s self-serving pictures have no date. Hmmm. They look alwful recent given the age of the kid. She also doesn’t seem to understand that Newman’s posh residence backs up to a public right of way. She’s all lathered up over trespassing.

    • #61 by Greg Diamond on July 17, 2017

      Well, based on when Newman says, the pool safety equipment went in (before his daughter was walking around, by the way), your story was misleading. When he needed to have it, he installed it. No hypocrisy. You were wrong. Depending on when you took the photos — which YOU haven’t stated — even intentionally misleading. Own it.

      • #62 by Mr. Peabody on July 17, 2017

        The fact’s are simple. Newman had no protection on or around his pool on July 6, 2017 which is when that picture was taken – from a public rec trail. The pool was not in use as is obvious from the fact that no human beings are in the picture and there isn’t a drop of water on the pool deck.

        Too bad Nancy West didn’t share dates for HER pictures that were very likely taken last week.

        • #63 by Greg Diamond on July 17, 2017

          Thanks — not being sarcastic — for clarifying the time. From the shadows, I’m guessing not far from high noon? If I were being snotty, I’d try to explain evaporation to you — but let’s just say that *yes* there’s no one in the photo but *no* that doesn’t prove whether the pool was in use around then.

          You’re not close enough to see whether the anchors depicted in the story on OJB (in picture 3 at are present.

          You’re the one who raised this in the first place, so let me ask you about the proposed legislation over which you claim Newman is being hypocritical. What does it actually require of homeowners? That would have been good to know in this very story.

          First, does it impose requirements on ALL homeowners — or just those with kids below a certain age? (And probably able the age that they can toddle around, I’d think.)

          Second, the requirement could be as little as “you have to have these installed, but you don’t have to *use* them” in which event you’ve proven nothing. But I presume that it’s more than that. Does the law say how long, on an afternoon when one’s family is actively using the pool, an owner can actually leave the pool uncovered? I presume that, if the requirement is for kids up to, say, age 10, and who aren’t pool-safe, you might literally have to cover it up and tie it down the moment anyone is away. For a year old child continually being watched by parents, probably not.

          Do you know what those legal requirements are (or if they’re regulations to be established later, what agencies dealing with pool safety — maybe the Red Cross? — recommend?)

          You’re accusing him of hypocrisy, but you really haven’t nailed down that this photo of one instant of time proves anything. If it had an uncovered pool and the daughter teetering on its edge, you’d have something. But absent that, it just doesn’t clearly depict danger at all — let alone LEGAL peril.

          That’s why I think it’s a cheap shot. Come over to OJB — or send someone else to do it, to protect your precious anonymity — and ask the author whatever you’d like about when she took her photos.

        • #64 by A Little Help on July 17, 2017

          “Too bad Nancy West didn’t share dates for HER pictures that were very likely taken last week.”

          She has no idea when they were taken because the party has spoon fed them to the media and potentially helpful foot soldiers. They are very recent, but prove nothing.

  20. #65 by OCDEM on July 17, 2017

    Over at his blog, “Crazy Greg” Diamond has gone on a rant, along with some zany chick Nancy West.

    Knee jerk reactionaries to embarassing material on the REALLY REALLY weak Josh Newman.

    • #66 by Greg Diamond on July 17, 2017

      “OCDEM” — defender of the most corrupt members of the OC Democratic establishment — trying to drum up business HERE? Oh, THIS is going to be fun to watch.

      By the way, what he calls “Crazy” is clinical depression — which is controlled with meds. What THIS asshole has going wrong inside HIS pea-brain and pustular heart, though, is beyond treatment. Go read up on his comments of Liberal OC so that you can see who’s begging for your approval!

    • #67 by Joe Sipowicz on July 17, 2017

      Diamond is an insufferable clown. However he is not the subject of this post.

      I’m clamping down on hijackers.

      • #68 by Greg Diamond on July 17, 2017

        Not cowardly enough not to use my real name on my posts, though — eh, “Joe”?

      • #69 by Greg Diamond on July 17, 2017

        But sure — if I were you I’d spike this bullshit thread as well.

        • #70 by Just Off Euclid on July 17, 2017

          Please go elsewhere. And take your friend OCDEM with you.

          • #71 by Joe Sipowicz on July 17, 2017

            Funny you should mention that…

(will not be published)