Google is alleged to be involved in the facilitation of sex trafficking even going so far as paying lobbyists in DC to oppose the crackdown on sex trafficking. As a note, Eric Schmidt, Executive Director of Google and its parent company Alphabet, stepped down and has distanced himself from Google.
Google paid Andriod OS creator Andy Rubin $90 million as left the company. Rubin received the payout after allegations surfaced of sexual misconduct, which includes claims looked into by Google made by a woman that Rubin forced her to perform oral sex. But, there’s more…
While at Google Rubin is also alleged to have engaged in human sex trafficking- paying hundreds of thousands of dollars to women to be, in Rubin’s words ‘owned’ by him”
From a 190 page shareholder complaint against Alphabet and it’s parent company Google. Insane.
What did Google do? They gave him a $90 million exit package. Another sexual abuser was paid millions and then went to Uber.
Google then covered up and shielded Backpage.com, a classified advertising website. Prosecutors have accused Backpage of permitting prostitution ads featuring underage sex trafficking victims.
Google found Rubin’s “bondage sex videos” and he had numerous sex slaves that he loaned out?
Eric Schmidt, who hand crafted Hillary’s campaign, fostered a culture that allowed rampant sexual harassment and discrimination and participated in the coverup.
More on Backpage.com
Despite widespread revulsion at its business model, Backpage has managed to elude a series of legal challenges and beat back legislative efforts to stop it from advertising children for sex. The sex trafficking hub has repeatedly cited Section 230 of the CDA, which protects an Internet site from liability for crimes by people using the site’s services, as its defense.
“Proponents have argued that it protects and promotes free speech on the Internet,” a report noted. “They have, however, ignored the devastating impact the law can have in its current form.”
In its successful efforts, Backpage has benefitted from the help of an all-star cast of lawyers and legal scholars, as well as significant political and lobbying muscle that it could not assemble itself.
“The common factor behind nearly all those forces: Alphabet Inc.’s Internet giant, Google,” the report said. Here are some of the worst examples of young girls being sold through Backpage that are cited in the report:
• A case in Atlanta, GA of a 12-year-old girl whose pimp regularly tasered her and even forced her to work while pregnant with his child.
• A New York City case of a 13-year-old girl who was regularly beaten and even kicked down a stairwell for trying to escape her pimp.
• A Miami case of a 13-year-old girl whose pimp had tattooed his name on the girl’s eyelids.
• A Seattle case in which a 15-year-old girl was sold for sex more than 150 times.
• A Chicago case in which a 16-year-old, suffering from depression, left home. Three weeks later, she was advertised for sex on Backpage and murdered at the hands of her Backpage buyer.
The report’s analysis of public records, tax documents and legal filings and other publicly-available documents shows Google has financed and supported a broad array of groups and individuals who have fought aggressively to thwart legal challenges to Backpage’s business model. Efforts have included:
• Legal scholars and groups supported by Google have written letters and amicus briefs in support of Backpage. More than half of the 42 signatories of a letter opposing a bill to tackle online child trafficking—22 in all—were either directly funded by Google, or worked at institutions that were funded by the company.
• At least four of Google’s lobbying firms have also worked to block efforts by the U.S. Congress to strengthen laws to prevent child sex-trafficking under the Stop Advertising Victims of Exploitation (SAVE Act) of 2014 that would have targeted Backpage and held it accountable.
• Google hired one of the leading campaigners for shutting down Backpage’s child-trafficking ads, who, after being hired, then changed her stance on the issue to align with her new employer. She now argues that it isn’t possible to shut down sites like Backpage and that laws should target buyers rather than websites that advertise children for sex.
Google’s financial support of EFF, CDT and dozens of other groups, has contributed to a string of legal successes by Backpage and complicated the quest for justice among its underage victims. Since 2011, the nonprofits have helped Backpage defeat several cases related to child sex trafficking by filing Section 230 briefs on Backpage’s behalf. Among the initiatives the groups have helped defeat:
• A legal case brought by three underage sex-trafficking victims who were advertised on Backpage and sold for sex in Massachusetts and Rhode Island more than 1,900 times over three years.
• Proposed state laws aimed at curbing Backpage’s child sex advertisements in Washington, New Jersey, and Tennessee.
• Efforts by law enforcement in Cook County, Illinois, to prevent the use of credit card payments to purchase ads offering children for sex.
• Efforts by 49 state attorneys general to amend Section 230 to give state and local law enforcement officials the authority to criminally investigate and prosecute companies like Backpage for promoting child sex trafficking.
• The “reckless” standard in early versions of Congressional legislation such as the SAVE Act, which strengthened child sex trafficking laws by making it illegal for online advertisers to recklessly disregard child sex trafficking occurring on their websites.
Defenders of CDA Section 230 claim it promotes and protects free expression on the Internet. Alphabet Inc.’s Google has another reason to protect Section 230: business. Google says the law provides it with almost unlimited immunity from liability for crimes committed using its services. That includes the posting of pirated movies and music to its YouTube service, fraudulent advertisements posted through its AdWords service or Google suggesting trademarked terms as advertising keywords.
“Section 230 has been central to Google’s stratospheric success over the past two decades,” the report said. “Partly as a result of the provision, a Harvard professor reported in 2011 that Google earned over $1 billion in revenue annually from Google advertisers posting unlawful material related to child trafficking, illegal drugs, and counterfeit goods.”