Snailracer

I wonder if KE's epilepsy is a symptom of multiple personality disorder.

DustiestRadio

Now is the time to post these videos and red pill as many people as possible because Eichenwald has lost his mind once again on twitter and is having his ass handed to him by pretty much everyone. He emailed Ben Shapiro a really bizarre email, a lot like the one in the second video here, and Shapiro posted the entire thing on his account. Now Eichenwald is saying he was “hacked”. If you have a Twitter, use it to spread these videos.

Podge512

Hacked by the Russians, no doubt!

Qualia

Mister Metokur makes the best videos. AFAIK he hasn't broken into the pgate realm yet but he's a staunch critic of the degenerate left. this 2 part on Eichenwald is great

Podge512

Part 2 of the story, featuring confirmation from Wikileaks that Eichenwald was an administrator of a CP website.

https://hooktube.com/watch?v=0y5ptWIDxhw

GreenDell144

Great story. This one is also useful because it gives more insight into the dynamics of kids running their own video channels and platforms. Predators preyed on this lonely kid and turned him into a social media star of pedofilia. Should kids be allowed to have YouTube channels and upload vids? They can’t buy cigarettes or drink or vote but they can have sex on camera for a private audience. What a system.

Vindicator

This was glorious. That guy's wry voice is fucking hilarious.

CheeseboogersGhost

These damn Baptists are out-of-control oy vey

Are_we_sure

Yeah, remember that time Kurt Eichnewald investigated child pornography and ended up convincing a victim to escape that world and inform on the predators who paid for child porn?

Remember when this led to Congressional Testimony by the vicitm and you can watch his testimony right here and Law Enforcement action against consumers of child pornography?

https://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/14/us/14porn.html

A Congressional subcommittee investigating the growth of online child pornography h as referred the names of hundreds of people who purchased illegal images to state prosecutors around the country, according to government officials.

The referrals for possible prosecution were made late last month to attorneys general in 46 states by the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. The information provided to prosecutors included names, credit card information and identifying details of the computers used to purchase monthly memberships at an illegal child pornography site.

The records were turned over to the committee by Justin Berry, a 19-year-old California man who, beginning at age 13, ran a pornographic Web site featuring images of himself streamed onto the Internet through inexpensive Webcams. Mr. Berry was the committee’s major witness in its opening day of hearings, during which he described his descent into Webcam pornography and his decision to turn against that business.

The subcommittee provided the attorneys general with records involving residents of their states,.....

Prosecutors from more than a dozen state attorneys general offices have already contacted the subcommittee, saying that they intend to pursue the cases, Mr. Whitfield said in an interview yesterday.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?191923-1/exploitation-children-internet-day-1

ben_matlock

Watch @matheasysolutions ' detailed breakdown of the Justin Berry case.

Are_we_sure

I've not found him to be a reasonable source. So no.

GreenDell144

It seemed great, but there is a lot to suggest that he also exploited the victim as a viewer, possibly even as a partner of the site. I wonder about his motivations for writing the story, given the incongruent events and his level of involvement. His financial contributions could have been explained as part of an undercover operation, but he chose to deny completely and took steps to cover things up. That’s just weird. I’m finding that complete transparency is the only option when one is faced with being implicated in something like this. Anything else just looks bad. I appreciate your skepticism, because if there is something to this report, it should be reasoned well. Also, thanks for useful the link.

Given the circumstances and comments of Eichenwald and NYT pedonormalizing articles, this is a post based on legitimate suspicion. No torches or pitchforks yet.

Are_we_sure

It seemed great, but there is a lot to suggest that he also exploited the victim as a viewer, possibly even as a partner of the site.

A partner? Wasn't the kid running the site himself? Are you saying Eichenwald parnered with the kid?

I wonder about his motivations for writing the story

Could it be the same as many of the people on this board?

Given the circumstances and comments of Eichenwald and NYT pedonormalizing articles,

examples?

GreenDell144

He made payments to the kid and to the site’s producers and denied it. I have doubts about his excuses for the inconsistencies It seems strange that I give you a synopsis of the video linked here; as any can watch the video and check the news reports mentioned therein. Did you do so, before responding?

Perhaps some reading the comments here did not, so I will clarify my point.

If it weren’t for those facts of payments and denials, one could ascribe reasonable motives for reporting in this case. With those facts included, and the timeline of events concerning Eichenwald’s involvement and denials, the door opens for several possible theories. Blackmail, coercion, payback... if he was involved, and had knowledge of a forthcoming exposure... it would behoove him to expose first and get in front of the situation. I will admit that it seems incongruent to imagine all of this to be true and still make room for the fact that he encouraged the kid to come forward and participate with law enforcement. I don’t have enough info to construct a theory that explains that. However, neither is there a reasonable explanation for these payments and denials.

As to the New York Times articles that pertain to pedonormalization, you should know perfectly well. You have been here long enough. Here is the result of a simple google search. Hopefully It will catch the attention of any that haven’t seen it before.

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/06/opinion/pedophilia-a-disorder-not-a-crime.html

Vindicator

Such passion, AWS! Must be for fairness, right. Riiiight.

Are_we_sure

Are you coming out against fairness and laying out all the facts?

Vindicator

When have you ever laid out all the facts, AWS? Eichenwald paid a source to reactivate a kiddie porn site, so he could do a story, and blamed (((epilepsy))) for failing to disclose multiple payments he gave to the kid running it. He is a despicable character who uses his (((esteemed journalist))) mask to cover his nasty activities. The fact that you would do PR for a guy like this is amazing.

Are_we_sure

When have you ever laid out all the facts, AWS?

I always argue for nuance.

why are you putting echoes around epilepsy? Are claiming he doesn't have epilepsy?

Let's lay out some facts

The pedophile Greg Mitchel got sentenced to 150 years due to Eichenwald's involvement.

The pedophile Timothy Ryan Richards was sentenced to 16 years due to Eichenwald's involvement.

The pedophile Ken Gourlay was sentenced to between 6 and 20 years in the Berry case and to 10 to 15 years in prison in the case of another boy that investigators discovered while looking into the Berry case due to Eichenwald's invovlement.

The pedophile Aaron Campbell Brown was sentenced to between 9 and 13 years due to Eichenwald's involvement.

Justin Berry credits Eichenwald with getting him out of the porn business and off drugs.

What do you have on the otherside of the ledger that lets you call him despicable and nasty?

Vindicator

So, you think it's okay for newspaper reporters to pay sources to engage in child porn, to set up a honeypot to bust pedos...and then blame their epilepsy for failing to disclose the money that changed hands and face no professional or legal consequences?

Are_we_sure

He did face professional consequences.

I think he is very volatile and super thin skinned, but I also think he's a gifted reporter. And I do think he was attempting to rescue the kid who was almost 19 when he got involved. He says this involvement and this impulse to rescue happened before he decided to write about it. He talked to his minister, not his editor early on. He was a business reporter. This wasn't his beat. And I do think his intention was trying to sting pedophiles. He was working with prosecutors fairly early on.

You seem to think he's lying about his epilepsy. I'm not convinced of that. His story was he had been lying that his epilepsy was under control when in fact it was still happening frequently and causing memory losses. He was lying because he was afraid he would lose his job. His neurologist said this was the case that his epileptic episodes were still frequent and still caused memory losses.

Given the kid was almost 19 what do you mean by paying sources to engage in child porn?

Vindicator

No, I don't think he is lying that he has epilepsy. I think he is lying that it caused him not to mention he was paying the guy, using it as a shield. Whether it was his beat or not, the fact that he was willing to create a story by giving money to a source, or even give the appearance of doing so, means he is absolutely NOT a "gifted reporter". He should have given the story to someone else, since he was involved in creating it.

what do you mean by paying sources to engage in child porn

According to what I've read, when the guy reactivated his porn site after Eichenwald gave him money, new underage performers got involved.

Are_we_sure

According to what I've read, when the guy reactivated his porn site after Eichenwald gave him money, new underage performers got involved.

The first time Eichenwald gave him money, the guy was still in the life. The money was an inducement to meet. It only after they met that he identified who he was and that the kid agreed to get out.

Eichenwald says only after Berry agreed to get out and to try to help was after that that he started seeing it as a story. This was was he met Berry for the first time. And then Eichenwald convinced Berry to go the FBI and called a federal prosecutor on his behalf. Eichenwald and the Times maintain he did nothing illegal as part of the article. I don't think the FBI would agree to do a deal with Berry that involved Berry getting new kids involved. The dates for Berry finally agreeing to get out is July 5th, then Eichenwald calls a federal prosecutor and by July 25th, the FBI Interviews Berry. So those 20 days would be the crucial dates.

I know that a lot of the info on Eichenwald comes from the discovery info given to one of the convicted pedophiles and was put online with all comments and speculation about this evidence intended to discredit Eichenwald. It would helpful to see what the full testimony at trial was, but I know the pedophile was convicted, appealed and lost his appeal.

I think he is lying that it caused him not to mention he was paying the guy, using it as a shield.

Could be. The Times said after they learned this that they should have given it to a different reporter. I'm not saying he did things perfectly. I'm saying I believe his intention was sincere. I have seen more exaggerated claims about this that Eichenwald was a pedophile himself or was a child pornographer that seem to be less about addressing the actual case than about going after Eichenwald for other reasons.

In terms of being a talented reporter, I was thinking about things like his Enron reporting where learned enough about complicated financial maneuvers to explain it others.

Vindicator

Interesting. I agree, access to the trial documents would be helpful. When people see

  1. Money being paid to a child porn maker
  2. that money being hidden
  3. Eichenwald getting a story out of it and
  4. Eichenwald accidentally leaving a tab open to hentai in the background of a screen pic,

they are going to conclude he is dishonest and likely a pedo. Especially if they have repeatedly watched this stuff be covered up by the media and LEOs in the past like with Epstein, Weiner, the Seattle mayor and that ambassador that the Obama State Dept covered for. The court of public opinion is real.

Also, if Berry was not a minor and didn't recruit and new minors when he reactivated his site for the sting after Eichenwald got involved, how is it multiple pedos got convicted as a result?

Are_we__sure

Also, if Berry was not a minor and didn't recruit and new minors when he reactivated his site for the sting after Eichenwald got involved, how is it multiple pedos got convicted as a result?

I'm not sure if any straight up customers got prosecuted. That information was shared with local prosecutors, but the 4 convictions I speak of were all for folks directly involved with Justin Berry. And the crimes went back years. Some were for abusing Berry himself. One of the reasons they restarted the website was to get access to the customer billing records I believe. So it did not need to involve recruiting new minors. It could just involve uploading previously made videos. Of course, once you go to the FBI that opens up other avenues of investigation.

Kenneth Gourlay was convicted of among other things molesting Berry in 2002 and also in 2002 helping Berry setup his earlier porn sites when he was underage.

http://publicdocs.courts.mi.gov/Opinions/Final/COA/20090303_C278214_68_278214.OPN.PDF

Timothy Ryan Richards who provided the info against Eichenwald ran several kiddie porn sites beyond site with Berry, handled the billing of still other kiddie porn sites and personally appeared in kiddie porn with 14 year old.

http://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/11a0282p-06.pdf

Gregory J. Mitchel convicted of running several sites beyond Berry's starting in 2003. He also abused an underage Berry, but that was in Mexico.

https://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/29/us/virginia-man-pleads-guilty-in-online-pornography-case.html

When Aaron Campbell Brown plead guilty, he admitted the "the conspiracy spanned more than five years and involved a number of commercial child pornography websites." I assume that the conspiracy was from 2002-2007.

https://www.justice.gov/archive/opa/pr/2007/May/07_crm_354.html

As for your 4 points. Eichenwald obviously was not about covering up the world on online child porn as his article was one of the first on the subject, led to congressional testimony and the pedophile convictions above. So I think you're twisting your reasoning around. And that hentai wasn't pedo-hentail was it? I haven't heard that it was.

Podge512

Remember that time Kurt Eichenwald openly admitted showing anime tentacle porn to his children to prove it existed? Remember those times the New York Times published articles attempting to normalise child rape/defending paedophiles?

gaystapo

I remember matheasysolutions did a great breakdown of eichenwald and his involvement with that live child porn site and the teenager that ran it.

ben_matlock

+1. Was just about to make the same recommendation.

Link

Podge512

It certainly brings the degenerate, pro child rape New York Times's "debunking" of Pizzagate without any kind of investigation and their subsequent push to normalise paedophilia and defence of nonces like Anthony Weiner and Woody Allen into sharper focus.

Vindicator

You should do a post on that.

LightlyToasted

THIS