https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/civil-rights-icon-cesar-chavez-abused-girls-women-according-explosive-rcna264114
So, Cesar Chavez has been lionized and virtually deified for decades, schools, streets, and buildings have been named after him. I guess it'll be interesting to see how the ASPL handles these revelations. It is refreshing to see serious consideration being given to removing Chavez name from events and other things.
22 comments:
You see, unlike conservatives, IF there is credible evidence of a person being a bad person, we recognize that as a problem. THIS seems like credible evidence. No, there will be no criminal conviction, but still, Chavez looks guilty as hell and should NOT receive the honors he has in the past for the good things he's done.
Now, your turn.
Seriously: If and when the various places DO remove Chavez name from their schools and whatnot, will you THEN think that you should no longer support your personal favorite pervert/deviant/potential pedophile?
The thing is: SOMETIMES, there may not be sufficient evidence to convict someone BUT sufficient evidence to say, "Damn, this is almost certainly a bad person and while we can't/won't convict them, that doesn't mean we need to honor them with statues or public office."
This was the case for B Clinton for me and many of us, it's the case for me with Chavez (and I suspect many others) and it's the case with this current president.
In the past, the mere accusations were enough for GOP types to condemn B Clinton, but you all collectively give a pass to your personal presidential pervert because he is on the "right" partisan side.
Smells of hypocrisy, good man.
If nothing else, you can't say the same for me.
I guess we'll see if you really speak for the entire ASPL or not, won't we.
I guess we'll see if you really speak for the entire ASPL or not, won't we.
Regardless, I'm speaking for myself, just as I did when I refused to vote for Clinton. REGARDLESS of what the rest of liberal-dom, did, I wouldn't vote for B Clinton and I find it likely that the Chavez charges are true.
Now, speak for yourself and not the GOP: GIVEN the knowns we have about the man you voted for, do you think it's TOO likely that he's engaged in at least some varieties of sexual assault and/or defense of pedophiles and/or actual pedophilia/child-rape? And that you can no longer stand by him, given that likelihood?
Or is it the case that you are convinced by the TWO women who have, without proof beyond their testimony, charged Chavez with sexual assault/rape, but you are NOT convinced by the 20+ women/girls who have charged your president with sexual assault/rape/sexual misconduct/pedophilia?
And if so, WHY are you willing to vote for a man with so many allegations against him (including a finding in a civil case against him) but condemn Chavez with two charges against him?
Good questions to deal with in your soul.
When you keep spreading these "pedophile" claims (presumably about Trump) I simply can't take you seriously. There is literally zero credible evidence that Trump is a "pedophile", you continuing to engage in this slander simply makes you look desperate and pathetic. Unfortunately, "pervert" is not anywhere close to a crime, and if it was the list would be much longer than just Trump.
What an interesting notion. That someone should be "punished" even though there is not enough evidence to convict them. Hell, in Trump's case there isn't even enough evidence to charge him, even to consider charging him.
With Clinton, y'all excused his literal sexual harassment in the literal Oval Office, y'all didn't say a thing as Hillary went scorched earth on the "bimbos" and ignored the actual, contemporaneous accusations of rape against Clinton. Y'all elected Kennedy, tried to elect Ted, Clinton twice, tried to elect Hillary once, and now you don't want the standards y'all applied to your candidates to work both ways. Y'all made the distinction between personal and official and claimed that personal failings didn't count. Y'all made the rules, now you want to change them. Am I disappointed that the GOP has lowered it's standards to those of the DFL, yeah. Do I realize that it was probably necessary, also yeah.
Given how many examples of your hypocrisy I've pointed out this is hilarious.
Of course, once more, you've missed the point of the post which is also hilarious. Laughing at you is always enjoyable.
If only you were as vocal about the current wrongdoing on your side of the political spectrum as you are retroactively, and about Trump, I might actually believe you.
But you're not.
A quick check on this, lo, these few days after the report, and here's what I'm seeing:
"California Senate President Pro Tem Monique Limón and Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas issued a statement calling the allegations "devastating" and pledged to stand with survivors, according to this Politico article."
"The United Farm Workers (UFW) expressed deep concern over allegations involving the abuse of young women or minors, stating they are working to establish a confidential, independent channel for those harmed"
"These are heartbreaking, horrific accounts of abuse. I stand with the survivors, commend them for their bravery in sharing their stories, and condemn the abhorrent actions they described. The survivors deserve to be heard. They deserve to be supported. They deserve to be treated with dignity and respect," Sen. Alex Padilla wrote in a statement.
"Portland leaders are talking about renaming César E. Chávez Boulevard in view of allegations that the civil rights and labor leader abused multiple women and young girls throughout his career.
City Councilor Candace Avalos wrote on social media Wednesday morning that she had begun inquiring into the process of renaming César E. Chavez Boulevard to Dolores Huerta Boulevard in honor of the labor leader and feminist activist who co-founded the United Farm Workers union with Chávez. "
"Lubbock Democratic Party calls for renaming of Cesar E. Chavez Drive in response to sexual misconduct allegations"
"Prominent California Democrats, including Governor Gavin Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, released statements expressing horror at the allegations and offering support to the survivors."
Whoops. It appears that the Democrats/progressives ARE condemning Chavez based on these testimonies (of THREE women, not two, sorry I missed one). I can find no one defending him/his memory.
So, if it's the case that not only THIS liberal (me) will not defend Chavez, but that many/most liberals do not want to see his name honored because of the testimony of these three women, will you THEN start to see that the 20+ women testifying against your Felon + his own words + his connections to Epstein and even allegations that he raped a 13 year old... that ALL of that speaks to a man not worthy of a vote or of defending? That you might be shamed by the liberals response to sexual assault and believing women being a higher moral standard than your own?
Let me guess: No.
Craig:
There is literally zero credible evidence that Trump is a "pedophile"
That minor was allegedly introduced to Trump around 1983, when she was 13 years old.
“[REDACTED] stated Epstein introduced her to Trump, who subsequently forced her head down to his exposed penis which she subsequently bit,” a DOJ file on the alleged incident states. “In response, Trump punched her in the head and kicked her out.”
https://www.commondreams.org/news/trump-sex-assault-child
A testimony IS evidence. Do you believe these three women testifying against Chavez but NOT this 13 year old or the 20+ other women? PLUS the testimony of his OWN words? PLUS his connections to Epstein and the way he's fought having all the files released?
If so, why? Could your partisan bias be undoing you?
So when you refer to yourself as "we", is that because you have some sort of multiple personality disorder or is it just arrogance and hubris?
If there was credible evidence that Trump engaged in illegal sexual activity, he'd have been tried and convicted years ago. Biden was in office for 4 years and couldn't find anything credible enough to charge him. As Trump literally turned Epstein in, and is the president who's actually released the files, this charge is absurd and slanderous. Under what legal theory is the "likelihood" of something grounds to "punish", charge, or restrict someone? Innocent until proven guilty, right?
I'm not convinced about anything regarding Chavez. The fact that the MSM and some on the left are acting as if it is very serious is what I'm reacting to.
I must have missed something, I was unaware that Trump has been "charged" with "sexual misconduct/pedophilia". What jurisdiction have these charges been filed in? What are the court cases?
I find it funny as hell that we have, simultaneously, leftists arguing passionately that pedophilia is merely one more "sexual orientation" and should thus be normalized, while many of the same folx are arguing that Trump is a "pedophile".
I was forced to vote for the lesser of two evils, and I haven't condemned Chavez. That is, by my count, two strikes against you.
My soul belongs to YHWH, I trust in Him completely.
If only you were as vocal about the current wrongdoing on your side of the political spectrum as you are retroactively, and about Trump
Name ANY progressive currently with 20+ rape/sexual misconduct charges against them that I have NOT condemned.
Don't make stupidly false claims. It's easy to see when you're making false claims when you're called on it and just undermines your credibility.
The reality is that, when there were a handful of credible allegations against B Clinton, I did not vote for him.
With three credible allegations against Chavez, I am not standing by him.
And yet, with 20+ credible allegations against your president
PLUS his own rapey-words testifying against him
PLUS him boasting about sexual assault and using his power and privileges to get away with ogling teenaged girls which literally happened
PLUS his long relationship with a convicted pedophile
PLUS his fighting against the release of the Epstein files
PLUS his long and ongoing misogynistic words against women
... with ALL of that PLUS the latest charge of him raping and beating a 13 year old, you still stand by him.
We see. Your hypocrisy is revealed to all. Do you see it yet in yourself?
More Democrats speaking out against Chavez:
https://calmatters.org/politics/2026/03/cesar-chavez-california-democrats/
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/california-moves-to-rename-cesar-chavez-day-over-sexual-abuse-allegations
https://www.cnn.com/2026/03/19/us/cesar-chavez-allegations-name-honors
Look at that. Within TWO days of this news being released, progressives are pulling back their support of Chavez' memory.
And yet, years later, your president still holds general support from the whole maga wing of the GOP, in spite of many more allegations even after years. Even after the latest 13 year old rape allegations. There wasn't even a hiccup from your side about this.
The hypocrisy looms large and is now undeniable to all but the "true believers" in a very bad man.
If this was credible Trump would have been charged. It was dismissed as not credible at the time, and remains not credible. The very fact that Trump released this information indicates how credible this claim is.
A testimony may be evidence, as long as it's credible and backed up by other evidence. P-BO had access to this evidence for 8 years, Biden for 4, yet no charges were filed. But why let reality get in the way.
As noted earlier. I've literally never said ANYTHING about BELIEVING the claims against Chavez. You could have figured this out for yourself, had to actually read what I've written.
If "connections to Epstein" is such a smoking gun, why only focus on Trump? Why not Clinton and all the other DFL donors and power brokers with much closer Epstein ties? Trump severed ties with Epstein, is on record as reporting Epstein to law enforcement, and has literally released more of the files than anyone else.
Why did Trump release the files, good question. Why did I vote for the lesser of two evils, because it was exactly that.
Coming from someone who's partisan bias shows in your lack of interest in any of the rest of those connected to Epstein, I fail to see your point.
The problem with your claims about Clinton and how you acted when he was running is a complete and total lack of proof. Your tales may be True, may not be True, but there is no way to know. I suspect that you didn't vote for him, but that you also stayed silent about his actions. But, if you have proof of you going after Clinton as vociferously as you go after Trump, I'll be happy to take a look and adjust my conclusions accordingly.
I get it, you either didn't read the post or didn't understand the post.
It's great that some leftist are saying things. Actions speak louder than words.
I'm done with your unproven claims.
When the street signs come down, the murals get painted over, and the names come off of the schools and buildings, then you can brag.
Objectively prove your claims. I want jurisdictions where these charges have been filed. Testimony under oath by the alleged victims. Proof, not rumors and unfounded allegations.
I want to see the evidence that Epstein was convicted of "pedophilia".
What "charge"? Do you not understand that the term "charge" has a specific legal meaning? Where was this "charge" filed? What is the corroborating evidence? Why did P-BO and Biden ignore this accusation? How do we know about this allegation?
Do you believe these charges against Chavez should be taken seriously? That having three women testifying against him is damning?
Craig...
"When the street signs come down, the murals get painted over..."
And when you maga types FINALLY condemn your pervert's various atrocities, I'll believe you give a damn about rape victims and the victims of pedophiles. Until then, you're just using and abusing victims of sexual assault for your own partisan thrills.
If "connections to Epstein" is such a smoking gun, why only focus on Trump? Why not Clinton and all the other DFL donors and power brokers with much closer Epstein ties?
The Clintons HAVE testified. Let your pervert testify. Hold them ALL accountable for anything they've done, Democrat or GOP.
We're being consistent.
Join us.
There is much more evidence that Clinton was significantly involved with Epstein’s illegal activities than Trump, but you’re not nearly as vehement about Clinton as you are Trump. We’ve known about Clinton’s connections with Epstein for years, and you’ve said nothing.
By all means lecture me about hypocrisy.
Nice job changing the subject. It’s all performative BS without action.
I’ve criticized Trump for years.
It’s really irrelevant what I believe. The more I see the more questions I have. The problem with this attempt to change the subject it’s that I haven’t addressed the accusations. This post isn’t about the allegations, it’s about whether the ASPL will engage in performative hand wringing or whether they’ll actually do anything.
Your commitment to making this about anything but the topic of the post is impressive.
I’m sure that you are diligently researching the information I’ve asked for because I know how important it is to you to have specific, accurate information.
Post a Comment