Link? Originally Posted by MojojoSorry, brah. Last time I posted a link, I got a buncha crap.
"Not gonna do it. Wouldn't be prudent."
It was a TV station. But I don't think it was local.
- Billogoods
- 10-10-2016, 11:46 AM
"Not gonna do it. Wouldn't be prudent."
It was a TV station. But I don't think it was local.
- WolfWhistle
- 10-10-2016, 04:17 PM
- Secret Baby
- 10-11-2016, 02:12 PM
- livinontheedge
- 10-12-2016, 11:07 AM
He has not plead guilty. He will fight. The charges are very loose and won't stick. BP has already beat all of these charges by the Feds. This is just two AG's running for re-election (Paxton) and Senate (CA) trying to boost their campaigns 30 days before election.
The site is still up and running. Money Laundering charges are hard to prove. Their contention is because BP works with law enforcement when they call, they know all content is illegal. This is an excerpt.
"Backpage acknowledges that pimps routinely pay Backpage for ads trafficking children for sex," Fichtner states. And how does he back up this outrageous claim? By stating that Backpage has cooperated with law-enforcement and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children in sex trafficking investigations—which does not really sound like an "acknowledgment" of wrongdoing from Backpage at all. Still, Fichtner offers no further evidence to support either the claim that "pimps routinely pay Backpage for ads trafficking children for sex" or that Backpage acknowledges any such thing.
BS charges that won't stick but will be a pain. Craig's list has adult ads but just doesn't have an adult section anymore.
A 3 year old case brought right before election time, sounds kind of fishy.
https://reason.com/blog/2016/10/07/c...age-ceo-listed
A good article if you want a different side of the issue.
The site is still up and running. Money Laundering charges are hard to prove. Their contention is because BP works with law enforcement when they call, they know all content is illegal. This is an excerpt.
"Backpage acknowledges that pimps routinely pay Backpage for ads trafficking children for sex," Fichtner states. And how does he back up this outrageous claim? By stating that Backpage has cooperated with law-enforcement and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children in sex trafficking investigations—which does not really sound like an "acknowledgment" of wrongdoing from Backpage at all. Still, Fichtner offers no further evidence to support either the claim that "pimps routinely pay Backpage for ads trafficking children for sex" or that Backpage acknowledges any such thing.
BS charges that won't stick but will be a pain. Craig's list has adult ads but just doesn't have an adult section anymore.
A 3 year old case brought right before election time, sounds kind of fishy.
https://reason.com/blog/2016/10/07/c...age-ceo-listed
A good article if you want a different side of the issue.