...dunno that I've heard either of these things. I want to say that one of the advantages of running a large-state Governor like DeSantis would be that he comes pre-vetted, since you'd guess there would've been large oppo-gathering operations during his campaigns and governorship, but then again given that nobody managed to find out during the campaign that Andrew Gillum did meth orgies perhaps you wouldn't expect that to be the case.
And you'd think that Hershel Walker's scandals would have come up during vetting, or Brett Kavanaugh, or Cal Cunningham, etc... Maybe the people who vet candidates are just bad at their jobs?
All of these scandals came up during campaigns (a Supreme Court confirmation process being kinda like a campaign) -- DeSantis has had two campaigns in an enormous state, the first of which was extremely competitive and the second of which, while less so, still received substantial national attention.
(This sort of logic isn't absolute -- Gillum's scandal never came up during his campaign. But I think DeSantis would be less likely than almost any other Republican to have something come up unexpectedly, bar people from larger states or who have already run serious presidential campaigns, like Abbott/Cruz/Rubio. On the Democratic side, I would say that this sort of thing is probably one of Newsom's strengths -- while he's not scandal-free I think it's relatively unlikely there's stuff about him we don't know, relative to someone from a smaller state or with a shorter political biography.)
