By The Signal Editorial Board
The liars and perverts in the state Assembly’s Democrat caucus almost got away with it.
Faced with a bill that would have made it a felony to buy sex from a minor, the Democrats, including one of our own state Assembly representatives, voted to remove 16- and 17-year-olds from the felony provisions of Assembly Bill 379.
That is, the liars and perverts in the Democrat Party of the California Legislature think it’s perfectly fine to traffic 16- and 17-year-olds for sex.
And then, when the liars and perverts of the Democrat Party got caught — pardon the expression — with their pants down, as a hue and cry arose over them gutting the bill, the California Democratic Party launched an ad campaign, which Sacramento TV station KCRA has linked to the campaign of Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, D-Salinas, falsely accusing Republicans of the dirty deed the Democrats had done.
Lies. Exposed.
Perversion. Exposed.
And then when they got called out on THAT lie, the liars and perverts of the California Democrat Party in the state Assembly reversed course, and a re-amended version of the bill passed the Assembly Appropriations Committee with the felony provision restored.
It’s headed for another Assembly floor vote.
Note, by the way, that AB 379 was originally authored by that endangered species, the Courageous Democrat, Assemblywoman Maggie Krell, D-Sacramento, whose name was removed from the bill by the much more common species, the Cowardly Democrat.
“I particularly want to thank Democrat Assemblywoman Maggy Krell for her extraordinary leadership on this issue,” Assemblyman Carl DeMaio, R-San Diego, who happens to be openly gay, said in a prepared statement. “She consistently put the interests of these children above politics — and was even willing to buck her own party to do what is right. I hope other Democrats learn from her example of leadership and are willing to do the same on other important reforms in the future.”
Yes, this was in fact a bipartisan bill, watered down by the misnamed “progressive” wing of the Democrat Party. And all of the so-called “regular” Democrats went along with it.
If this is what’s “progressive,” then society is, putting it most delicately, screwed.
One reason the Democrats wanted to exempt 16- and 17-year-olds from the felony provision of the bill was that it, supposedly, was somehow discriminatory against the LGBTQ community. As if trafficking minors for sex is OK, so long as the pervert is an LGBTQ pervert.
Apparently, to the Democrat supermajority of the California Legislature, being a “protected class” also means “protected from felony prosecution for sex trafficking minors if you are LGBTQ.”
Their other argument doesn’t hold water, either. “Sending an 18-year-old high school senior to state prison for offering his 17-year-old classmate $20 to fool around isn’t smart criminal justice policy,” Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, wrote on social media.
Wait. Paying for sex from a minor is OK, so long as you’re close in age?
The perverted sense of logic prevails among the Democrat leadership.
The liars and perverts of the Democrat caucus in the California Assembly eventually backtracked, and voted in favor of restoring the felony provision regarding the sex trafficking of 16- and 17-year-old minors, but only after immense — and justified — public backlash against their depravity.
“What heroes they are for boldly protecting sex trafficking victims,” said no one, ever.
The Democrats’ behavior on AB 379 was so outrageous, even Democrat Gov. Gavin Newsom called them out, saying, “The law should treat all sex predators who solicit minors the same, as a felony, regardless of the intended victim’s age. Full stop.”
We don’t say this often, but Newsom is right.
That brings us to the local angle.
Assemblywoman Pilar Schiavo, D-Chatsworth, has been “present” in the Santa Clarita Valley since she was elected to represent us. She shows up to all the ribbon cuttings and photo ops. She has taken up the cause of the victims of the Chiquita Canyon Landfill crisis. She’s done some good.
But, after her disingenous May 1 vote in favor of the watered-down version of AB379, Schiavo put out an equally disingenous press release May 2 in which she took credit for “defending” kids from pedophiles, after voting in favor of the amended bill that dropped such crimes to a misdemeanor, removing the felony provision for perverts who sex-traffic 16- and 17-year-olds.
Schiavo regularly contributes a column on our very own opinion page, as part of the rotation in our weekly column representing Democrats.
Here, Assemblywoman Schiavo, we’re calling you out, and inviting you to answer the call on our own pages:
Were you simply siding with the liars and perverts of the Democrat caucus because it was politically expedient? Or can you somehow rationalize that vote?
Why, exactly, did you vote to protect sexual predators from felony charges with your May 1 vote to make it a misdemeanor, rather than protecting the 16- and 17-year-old victims for whom perverts would pay to have illicit sex?
It seems indefensible to us. This not a “nuanced” issue, as some Democrats argue. It’s either OK to pay to have sex with a minor, or it’s not.
Which side are you on, Assemblywoman Schiavo? In your next column, we ask that you defend your seemingly indefensible party-line vote to protect sexual predators, those who would sex-traffic 16- and 17-year-old children.
We can’t imagine what would possess someone to side with sexual predators over children. But we invite your explanation.
We’ll print it.
