137
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2026
137 points (97.9% liked)
United States | News & Politics
4241 readers
286 users here now
Welcome to !usa@midwest.social, where you can share and converse about the different things happening all over/about the United States.
If you’re interested in participating, please subscribe.
Rules:
Be respectful and civil. No racism/bigotry/hateful speech.
No pics of text
Memes are now allowed, as long as they're US centric, general political memes please see !politicalmemes@lemmy.ca
Post news related to the United States.
No NYPost, Breitbart, Daily Mail, Daily Wire
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
I zoomed in to see what they are saying and they're mostly talking about names, then one guy says something creepy in the middle about golden corrall. How do they know it's a pedo chatroom? Could it just be some IRC-style chat where someone said something obscene in the middle?
The full article has images that are MUCH more damning. They were discussing how risky it was for him to be in that chatroom in an airplane and discussing looking at and handling CP.
BARF
Could be a kid saying that themselves?
Nice try, guy who was in the chat
No, I seriously don’t see how that comment could be considered incriminating. That would mean that no adult could ever talk to kids. Which shouldn’t need to be explained just how stupid that is.
Little girls aren't hot. Not to normal people, anyway.
Mentioning seeing a "hot little girl" who is also a "kid" isn't incriminating? Maybe there's nothing immediately legally-actionable about it, but Wheel of Fortune was absolutely right to give him the ol' heave-ho over it. Best case (for them), it's the grossest sentence ever written. Worst case, there's about to be an investigation that will land him in jail for the rest of his life. Either way, firing him is a reasonable consequence for being odious.
"oh, maybe that person was just a random deviant and isn't connected to the rest of the chat." Then why didn't anyone call him out? Why wasn't he banned?
Even in the incredibly unlikely scenario that was written by a child, why is this grown man participating in the conversation?
Come on, have some common sense. It's quite obvious what's happening here. This is also not the only relevant piece of the transcript.
Stop communicating in life.
It was a dark web CP chatroom that he has admin rights to.
I can't believe I have to say this, STOP DEFENDING PEDOPHILES!
That would be an indicator of abuse of that child in itself.
Takes one to know one. Hopefully the person taking the photo works with law enforcement somehow and that's why they know.
I mean, or they just have two eyes, an understanding of English, and basic reading comprehension.
prolly from the url plus you could track his user there now
My eyes are getting worse, doesn’t it say Lifeline Chat? I would have assumed that was the suicide hotline chat.
I think that's what it says too. But I also wouldn't expect a child predator chatroom to be call something like "letstalkabouthavingsexwithchildren.chat"
You'd be surprised, do you remember the Trump epstein card?
He said in another chat window that he's obscuring the url with lifeline and all people could see was colourful lines anyway.
URLs compressed to shit
yeah...totally unclear of what they're talking about. /s