WHAT A LOSER, HE G-D HIS G-D, HE IS DEMONIC; SATANIC NEWSCUM

“That's what I don't like about this son of a bitch. He calls me Newscum. How do I explain that to my kid?”

Gavin Newsom simple, tell your kid the truth, that you are scum.

THE VIDEOS THEY BANNED are dropping HERE. Truth Social is uncensored, join NOW before they wipe it:
HERE WE GO AGAIN: California Democrats are once again getting pulled into the sex trafficking quagmire — this time, though, it’s through legislation from one of their own.

And Gov. Gavin Newsom is again intervening at the eleventh hour, issuing a statement moments before publication of this edition calling out Assembly Democrats for maneuvering this week to exclude older teenagers from an existing law that increases penalties on people who solicit minors for sex.

It’s another example of Newsom seizing on an opportunity to present himself as a common-sense Democrat, one willing to check his own party in Sacramento when he believes lawmakers have strayed too far left. His move will likely force Democratic leaders to backtrack on legislative amendments they pushed over moderate and Republican objections.

“The law should treat all sex predators who solicit minors the same — as a felony, regardless of the intended victim’s age,” Izzy Gardon, a Newsom spokesperson, said in a statement. “Full stop.”

Newsom’s not-so-subtle demand followed several days of the Assembly Public Safety Committee playing so-called agenda chicken over a bill from Democratic Assemblymember Maggy Krell. Her legislation would criminalize loitering with the intent to buy sex and expand a soliciting law authored by state Sen. Shannon Grove to include 16- and 17-year-olds after Democrats carved the older teens out of the bill last year.

Although Chair Nick Schultz and the committee advanced Krell’s bill, the legislation still fueled the online conservative outrage machine that goes into overdrive every time a sex trafficking-related bill hits the Capitol.

Today, the anger was over committee amendments that once again cut from the bill the provision adding older teens back into Grove’s soliciting law.

“These are girls,” said Assemblymember Tom Lackey, a Republican on the committee. “These are people that our society should be doing everything they can to protect. So why are we protecting the predator by removing this tenet?”

As Playbook reported last month, it’s not quite that simple. Krell’s bill got caught up in co-author Grove’s latest attempt to score a victory with an issue she’s successfully used against Democrats for the past two years.

This is not the first time Newsom has elbowed his way into a legislative conflict over sex trafficking legislation. In 2023, the Assembly Public Safety Committee wouldn’t advance a Grove bill on child sex trafficking, prompting Newsom to tell reporters he was trying to “see what we can do.”

The committee then held a special hearing to advance the bill, which the governor eventually signed.

Newsom’s statement puts him at odds with progressive Democrats who supported Grove’s bill last year only with the carveout excluding older teens. They were not happy to see the age range reappear — even in a piece of legislation authored by their own member. State Sen. Scott Wiener told Playbook he was “just floored” by Grove trying to expand the law after agreeing to Democratic amendments last year.

As opponents to the bill reiterated during the hearing today, Democrats want to remove 16- and 17-year-olds in large part because they fear parents upset about interracial or LGBTQ relationships involving older teens could prompt them to weaponize solicitation laws.

Krell — a former prosecutor who has spent her career working on sex trafficking issues — told reporters she accepted the panel’s amendments because leaders had taken the bill off the agenda, and doing so was the only way to secure a hearing. When asked about Democrats’ long-held concerns about the age range, Krell still seemed surprised they wanted to maintain the carveout.

“I expected support on the totality of the bill,” Krell said. “I did. I thought people would understand it’s wrong to buy 16- and 17-year-olds for sex, that it should be treated as a felony.”

But legislative Democrats are tired of getting backed into a corner over sex trafficking — a GOP pet issue that also veers into conspiratorial areas of online discourse. Committee members were willing to advance the element of the bill criminalizing loitering for sex purchasers, even though some were not pleased with it and declined to vote. But keeping the portion already cut from Grove’s bill was a bridge too far.

Schultz after the hearing acknowledged trafficking is a “tricky issue for the Democratic caucus” and said his party needs to be “smart on crime.”

“I don’t think that we can avoid these issues,” he said. “We have to talk about sexual exploitation in our communities, getting tough on it and ensuring that we are detecting and deterring that sort of conduct. But we also have to have smarter, more balanced policy solutions.”