First, the indictment charges them with "money laundering" and "facilitating prostitution". The government won't have to proof that any sex trafficking happened

First, the indictment charges them with "money laundering" and "facilitating prostitution". The government won't have to proof that any sex trafficking happened, or that Backpage supported it, or how they collaborated with NCMEC. In fact, the indictment, on the very first page, makes it very clear that the governments claim here is that any website focused on prostitution ads is illegal. And indeed, plenty of other sites have been charged in recent years, from Rentboy to Redbook. The story is always the same: Insinuations of sex trafficking, but no charges. One important point to make here: People who claim to support these charges on the argument that "it wasn't just prostitution, they did other bad stuff" need to tread carefully: They are being charged with facilitating prostitution. You cannot support this charge, but then also claim you would be ok with a website publishing those kinds of ads. I've read through a bunch of the indictment. - The "500 per month" reporting limit is an incomplete, half-sentence quote from an email: "In one email, PADILLA instructed VAUGHT that "if we don't want to blow past 500 referrals this month, we shouldn't be doing more than 16 per day". That's all there is on this subject. There is no further information. It's not clear why they would limit them, or indeed if they did - for all we know this never happened. Who selected what is reported, and how? We don't know. Of course it doesn't matter either. It isn't really related to the charges. What would be more interesting is what NCMEC did with these reports, and how many victims it did identify. - The whole money laundering charge seems to revolve around the argument that we are talking about "proceeds from illegal activity". The indictment even says: Credit Card companies stopped to work with Backpage. "In response, the BACKPAGE DEFENDANTS have pursued an array of money laundering strategies." It then proceeds to explain how Backpage tried to get paid. I mean, read the charge: "On or about the dates set forth below, each instance constituting a separate count of this Indictment, in the District of Arizona and elsewhere, defendants LACEY, LARKIN, SPEAR, BRUNST, and HYER, and others known and unknown to the grand jury, knowing that the property involved in a financial transaction represented the proceeds of some form of unlawful activity, conducted and attempted to conduct such a financial transaction which in fact involved the proceeds of specified unlawful activity knowning that the transaction was designed in whole and in part to conceal and disguise the nature, the location, the source, the ownership, and the control of the proceeds of the specied unlawful activity". They very much are saying: What you did (facilitating prostitution) was illegal, therefore trying to get paid for it, and hiding the fact that this payment is for prostitution ads, that is money laundering. There is no claim that they tried to launder money from outside of their business, or that they didn't pay their taxes.