If there is reason to believe that outgoing California Governor Gavin Newsom, or his wife, has committed a crime, then it should be investigated. If probable cause is supported by evidence, then he, or she, should be prosecuted. Neither being a governor, a Democrat, nor a potential presidential candidate, means he is either above the law or immune from investigation or prosecution.

But the flow begins with a reason to believe a crime has been committed, not a person who presents a threat to Trump or the Republicans. You don’t first identify a target and then go in search of a crime, unless you’re Lavrentiy Beria. That’s what Newsom claims is happening.

There appears to be little doubt that he’s being investigated. Indeed, the handling of the investigation has hardly been discreet.

Federal agents have questioned friends and associates of Gov. Gavin Newsom of California and his wife, Mr. Newsom said on Monday in a video in which he accused President Trump of using the Justice Department to punish a political enemy.

The full scope of any investigation remains unclear. But Mr. Newsom’s aides say part of the federal investigation appears to focus on his wife, Jennifer Siebel Newsom. Former employees of the governor and people affiliated with his wife’s nonprofit groups are among those who have been questioned by agents, according to the governor’s office.

Ordinarily, the nature and scope of the investigation offers a fairly clear indication of why it’s happening and where it’s going. The questions focus on the conduct being investigated, and the choice of people to be questioned provides a clue, since the investigators question those with salient knowledge of whatever it is they’re looking for rather than random people in Newsom’s sphere. But that’s only if there is an offense under investigation, rather than the proverbial fishing expedition.

A person familiar with the matter confirmed that multiple federal investigations were underway related to the governor, including one looking at his wife’s finances. But the person disputed Mr. Newsom’s assertion that the investigations were politically motivated, and said they had been initiated by federal law enforcement officials in California, not launched by officials in Washington. The person spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss it publicly.

It’s unclear why claiming that the investigations being initiated in California, home to such legal luminaries as first assistant, and thus “acting” United States Attorney for the Central District of California, Bilal Ali “Bill” Essayli, who has shown no reluctance to do Trump’s bidding no matter what the law provides, somehow proves it’s not political. Whether it’s at Trump’s behest, or a demonstration of fealty by Essayli to gain Trump’s appreciation, it would still be political if it’s an investigation in search of a crime.

But is it?

An F.B.I. spokesman and a Justice Department spokeswoman declined to comment. A White House official referred all questions to the Justice Department.

There is a norm within the Department of Justice not to comment on pending investigations. After all, it could compromise the investigation, or publicly smear an individual before any determination has been made that a crime has, in fact, been committed. Then again, norms have no been high on the list of things the DoJ or Ka$h Patel’s FBI respect. Moreoever, once the investigation goes public, as is the case here, there is no longer any reason not to address it. If there was no investigation and Newsom was being paranoid, this would be the opportunity to say so. And if there is an investigation being charged as improperly politically motivated, this is when the government should deny any impropriety. The government has refused to do so.

“Donald Trump isn’t just coming after me because of my mean tweets,” Mr. Newsom said in the video. “He’s coming after me because I am considering running for president.” He added, “To get me, he’s coming after my wife.”

From all appearances, Newsom has a damn good point, that he’s being targeted because he presents a political threat, and that this is an effort to “get” him, whether directly or through his wife, by searching desperately for something to call criminal. Then again, a good offense is the best defense, and Newsom has gone on the offensive against Trump by making his video and accusing Trump of going after his enemy in search of a crime.

If there is a legitimate reason to investigate Newsom or his wife, should the DoJ say so? If it remains silent, which has rarely happened up to now, does it bolster Newsom’s accusation that this is a purely political “witch hunt” to dig up some dirt with which to taint Newsom? Will Trump’s supporters see this as fair payback for the way in which Trump was treated? Does it matter anymore?

*Tuesday Talk rules apply.