<![CDATA[Kurt Eichenwald, Hustler Money-Lender - Gawker Comments]]> <![CDATA[Kurt Eichenwald, Hustler Money-Lender - Gawker Comments]]> <![CDATA[Kurt Eichenwald, Hustler Money-Lender]]> @pigfoot: @DavidWatts:

Also, he is of pure and noble breed

BTW, didn't Slate discuss the Eichenwald issue ages ago?

Seeräuber Jenny

]]> <![CDATA[Kurt Eichenwald, Hustler Money-Lender]]> @DavidWatts: Yeah, he's really only got two choices: he violated Times policy, or he wrote a tough-to-explain hefty check to a boy cam-whore. I'm pretty sure I'd want to cop to the buying-a-story one, but that's just me.

Also, you are the head boy at the school.

pigfoot

]]> <![CDATA[Kurt Eichenwald, Hustler Money-Lender]]> It was a good piece, though it felt a little pervy and exploitative. They're prosecuting some pretty heinous guys because of it, who cares if he had to pay a little up front for access? The Times should be sending the kid a check, too. All kids think about today is money anyway.

cdmunch

]]> <![CDATA[Kurt Eichenwald, Hustler Money-Lender]]> Kurt was simply trolling for young boys on the internet, like any horny middle-aged man, and found one he liked enough to send $2,000 to. Only then did he think, "That little bastard is bleeding me dry! You know what, this might make a good story. . ."

See, the journalism doesn't start until after whatever it was that made Kurt shell out that cash.

DavidWatts

]]>