let's dance us out, guys. ♪ >> larry: you go, girl. you go, girl. >> she's fishing you in. tonight, profiting from pedophilia, amazon.com, after our report last night, they pulled a guide for pedophiles that they've been peddling. but today they were still showing other pro-pedophile books and they're ducking our calls for answers. john walsh with "america's most wanted" joins us. also tonight, new and troubling revelations in president bush's memoir. senator mitch mcconnell allegedly asking him to pull

troops out of iraq to save the elections for republicans but publicly mcconnell was very much behind the war efforts. and later, how much say should the government have over what you feed your kids? mcdonald's in san francisco are being totaled to take the toys out of happy meals that don't meet new nutritional guidelines. dr. phil says it's up to parents, not politicians, to police kids' diets. what do you think? we'll talk about it. we begin as always keeping them on e. with amazon.com profiting from pedophilia. last night we told you about a book being sold on amazon.com. a guide for pedophiles. a disgusting self-published e-book offered since late october. around the time our broadcast was done last night, amazon had suddenly pulled the book from the website. today we looked closer at what else amazon.com is selling. we were amazed at what we found. first, this is the book we told but last night, called "the

pedophile's guide to love and pleasure, a child lover's code conduct." it's hard to even say these words. he described it this way, the misspellings are his, this is my attempt to make pedophile situations safer for those juveniles that find themselves involved in them by establishing certain rules for these adults to follow. i hope to achieve this by appealing to the better nature of pedosexuals with hope that their doing so will result in less hatred, and perhaps lighter sentences, should they ever be caught. it gives advice, what kind of touching, kissing and fondling of children is legal, how far they can go without getting arrested. he also tells pedophiles if they're disease free they don't have to use a condom with a child. mr. greaves was clearly thrilled to be in business with amazon.com and wants his book to not only help pedophiles but

change people's attitudes about them. >> every time you see them on televisions they're either murders, rapists or kidnappers and that's not an accurate presentation of that particular sexuality. >> plenty of people complained to amazon.com. plenty of customers sent angry e-mails for days and weeks saying they shouldn't sell this book, but for days amazon refused to budge. last night the company removed that back from its website. but this morning we discovered amazon.com was still selling another pro-pedophilia book by mr. greaves, called "our gardens of flesh, from the seeds of lust to the harvest of love." clearly he's not a great speller, among other things. in fact, some of it is exactly the same content as his guide for pedophiles, with a section called consensual pedophilia. all day long we tried to contact amazon.com and tell them about another book.

maybe they didn't know about it. but they refused to take our calls and refused to call us back. it turns out mr. greaves isn't the only person selling propedophilia related books on amazon.com. there's another book, understanding boy loves and boy lovers by david riegel, telling stories of adults who loved boys, arguing these interactions can actually be good for the children. they also sell another book by the same guy, that one is titled, "we were not abused!" exclamation mark. it also claims an adult having a sexual experience with a child could be good for the child, quote, children exposed to premature sexual experiences, the author writes, frequently turn out to be is distinguished and unusually charming and attractive in their outward personalities, citing a study from 1937. so why are these books still for sale? originally amazon said they didn't want to censor. freedom of speech is vital in

this country. however, amazon does sensor some things. we checked their own policy. here's their content guidelines for digital publishing we found on their website. the policy says pornography, x-rated movies, home porn and hard-core material that depict graphic sexual acts and amateur porn are not permitted. what we deem offensive is probably what you would expect. this includes items such as crime scene videos, videos of cruelty to animals and extremely disturbing materials. let me row peat, they won't publish extremely disturbing materials. we started calling them last night around 6:00 p.m. we made a bunch of phone calls asking for a statement, an explanation. we wanted to talk to some human being. we left lots of messages last night. they never called us back. remember, the only statement amazon has ever made about this was to the website business

insider and they were talking about that first book. in part that statement read, amazon believes it is censorship not to sell certain books simply because we or others believe their message is objectionable. amazon does not promote or support hatred or criminal acts however we do support the right of every individual to make their own purchasing decisions. they took the book down last night, but what about those other books? as i said, all day today, not just last night, all day today, we tried to talk to someone at amazon. we literally made dozens of phone calls and we kept being directed to the media hotline which no one answers. so we just continued to leave messages. then we decided to actually send our seattle reporter, patrick oppmann, to amazon headquarters hoping someone would talk to us on camera. here's what happened. >> i'm looking for amazon.com? >> you what? >> looking for amazon.com. i'm in the right place? i'm with cnn, i was trying to reach somebody in your media relations department? >> yeah, we're not allowed to

have media in here. >> i'm in the lobby of the amazon.com head quarters in seattle. it's been about an hour. i got here, they wouldn't let me past security. they did send up my business card to the media relations department. i haven't heard any word back. i'm going to check again before i leave, but really i've just been waiting here for someone to come dawn and talk to us. >> it's been about an hours, there a way to check with them again to see if they'll talk to me or not? >> well i left the message with my boss. and that's the only think i can do. >> patrick waited two hours, never saw anyone from the amazon pr office. just after he left, about 6:00 p.m. tonight, we finally got a call from amazon.com, a guy named drew herdener, a spokesperson for the company, and all he would say on the record is that mr. greaves' guide book for pedophiles was pulled from the site, the book we were talking about last night. the book we knew was pulled from the site because we checked it after our show. we asked about the other book, he said no comment. we also asked about their guidelines for what books they

will sell. he had no comment. we wanted to know who actually screens these books. no comment. and what about all the people who now want to boycott amazon? as you might have guessed, he said no comment. so 24 hours after we tried to get a statement from amazon we finally hear from them, from one guy and they didn't have much to say. in case you think amazon doesn't have many people in their pr office, when it's a story they want to talk about, they seem very able to get their message out. their pr office isn't this slow when they want to promote something. take a look at this stuff. when they want to sell you something, earlier this month they sent out six press releases in one single day announcing everything from launching a sports and outdoors store to the hiring of holiday workers. by the way, an hour after we talked to that amazon pr guy at 6:00 p.m. we noticed that they suddenly stopped selling mr. greaves' other book, gardens of flesh, the one we asked them about. as for the other books we've also discovered, they're still for sale. john walsh has made it his

mission to change the way america protects kids. his own son adam was abducted and murdered in 1981. i spoke to him moments ago about the amazon controversy. no one wants censorship in this country, but to be selling a propedophilia book, a number of these books that justify pedophilia, doesn't that endanger kids? >> it absolutely endangers kids. what makes this country great are our freedoms. freedom of religion, freedom of speech and freedom of press. we're all about freedom of press. but when you give someone a platform to talk to other pedophiles, to teach them how to exploit children, how to hurt children and how to mitigate the punishments, how to get away with it, that would be encouraging the guy who kidnapped elizabeth smart and, you know, here's how you can get away with it and keep a 14-year-old girl out on the streets longer. >> this one book by this guy, greaves, which they've now

pulled, basically said you don't have to use a condom. if you're disease free, you don't have to use a condom with a child. it also went on to explain what touching, fondling and even kissing with a child would not get you arrested. >> it's disgusting. and i'm really, really appalled that amazon didn't saddle up and make that moral decision. it's not about freedom of press, it's about not giving other pedophiles the ability to learn -- they took it off and said people did the right thing saying we're going to boycott amazon. there will be a financial penalty for selling this book. >> we found this other book by the same author on the website all day today. they only removed it an hour after we told them about it when they called us back after 24 hours of trying to reach them and there's still other books on this website which are encouraging pedophiles, which are stories of, you know, adult/child -- they call them relationships but it's rape. >> it's illegal. it's illegal.

it's immoral. it's a judgment call by someone as big as amazon to say, even if they just said this, what if someone buys this book, they molest a child, the cops find this book in the house, and then the parents decide to sue the pedophile and amazon. all of those financial reasons are an incentive enough not to do it, but why didn't they do it just for the right reasons? >> right. they had hundreds of e-mails for days from customers saying, this is outrageous, you can't do this. they only pulled this thing last night, basically by the end of our broadcast last night, suddenly they pulled it. who knows what they'll do tonight. but we wanted to ask them, what is the screening process? because these are -- in a lot of cases, self-published books. these aren't great works of literature by an author, these are just guys who have written these creepy books. >> not credible research, not something that is productive to society, and again, it is

nothing to do with the rights or civil rights or freedom of speech or anything. >> you have a right to write whatever book you want to write but a company has a choice. they're profiting off these books by about pedophilia. i'm amazed, too, they're staying completely silent on this. this is a company which is very good at getting their ceo on television, he's been on oprah and other shows. they sent six press releases in one day promoting various things. it's not like they don't have a lot of people in their pr department. >> absolutely. and why not respond to you and say, why did it take you so long? >> the author of this book talked to a reporter yesterday, i want to play you what he said. >> every time you see them on television they're either murderers, rapists or kidnappers, and that's just not an accurate presentation of that particular sexuality. >> he's basically saying pedophiles are misunderstood.

>> someone explain to me how it's an equal power base between a 50, 45-year-old man and a 5-year-old boy or 6-year-old or 5-year-old little girl. where is the equal power base? >> and these books, i've read several of them today, they're disgusting. but they all justify this. they all say that the child wants it or is initiating it, or in many cases some of these books still on the site say it is good for the child. >> how could that possibly be? recently over 100,000 victims of pedophilia of catholic priests tried to get an audience with the pope and to a person they said, that exploitation by that pedophile priest destroyed my life. suicide, alcoholism, inability to have a sexual relationship with a man or a woman. it is a devastating, no-equal power base crime. and how anybody can justify it. but i've been catching these guys for years.

this narcissistic attitude that they are a victim of society, there's only one victim here. it's the child. >> john walsh. thanks. well, let us know what you think about this. join the live chat now at ac360.com. we hear kids being trafficked for sex in this country, tonight, what happened to one young girl, a teen sold for sex, her own mom found ads for her on the internet. >> they showed her face, it was in a hotel room. and she had on lingerie and a wig. she was in very sexual positions. >> reporter: and how old was your daughter? >> she was 14. >> 14 years old. plus the bombshell in president bush's new memoir. he says senator mitch mcconnell asked him to withdraw troops from iraq before the 2006 elections for political gain. we'll show you what the senator was actually saying publicly at the time, we can compare the two. is it hypocrisy? decide for yourself. [ k. tyrone ] i'm an engineer.

my kids say i speak a different language. but i love math and math and science develop new ideas. we've used hydrogen in our plants for decades. the old hydrogen units were very large. recently, we've been able to reduce that. then our scientists said "what if we could make it small enough to produce and use hydrogen right on board a car, as part of a hydrogen system." this could significantly reduce emissions and increase fuel economy by as much as 80%. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

[ male announcer ] at&t and blackberry have teamed up to keep your business moving. blackberry torch now just $99.99. only from at&t. rethink possible. another keeping them honest report tonight, this one is about a united states senator who seemed to say one thing publicly but privately may have been saying something completely different. you may be saying, so what? this is what politicians do all the time, but rarely do you have a senator being accused of double-speak by a former

president of the united states from the same political party. that's what's happening right now. the senator in question is republican mitch mcconnell of kentucky. back in 2006 before president bush started the so-called surge in iraq, mcconnell was accusing democrats of endangering america because some of them were calling for withdrawal of u.s. troops in iraq. listen to what he was saying publicly. >> the democrats in charge, saddam would still be in power, murdering his own people like he used to. >> i think this is a particularly bad time to be sending the message to the terrorists in iraq that we might be thinking of running just when they're running. and we're having considerable success in catching them and killing many of them. >> if we cut and run in iraq, they'll follow us here. and we need to remind the american people that the terrorists were at war with us before 9/11. >> so publicly saying no so-called cut and run, that's senator mcconnell's public message in 2006. now former president george w. bush claims in his memoir "decision points" that mcconnell

thought it would boost the gop's chances in the 2006 chances. here's what he writes about a meeting he had with mcconnell in september of 2006, the same month the last quote was from, two months before the midterm election. mr. president, he said, your unpopularity is going to cost us control of the congress. well, mitch, i asked, what do you want me to do about it? mr. president, he said, bring some troops home from iraq. bring some troops home. that is clearly much different message that what mcconnell was saying on tv months earlier and even that same month and now at the time he spoke with president bush privately he reportedly did not know mr. bush was considering the surge. a little more context about the debate, as you may recall, the surge was january 2007. that announcement came four months after this talk with president bush. later, the former president talks about a confession of sorts from the kentucky republican, mr. bush writes, led by senate minority leader mitch mcconnell who supported the surge and graciously later

admitted to me he had been wrong to suggest a withdrawal. we reached out to mcconnell to see if he would be on the program, he declined. he goes on to say, quote, but the public record is clear on his unwavering support for ensuring our troops in the field were fully funded and general petraeus was able to execute our counterinsurgery strategy on the ground in iraq free of arbitrary deadlines for withdrawal even when it was politically unpopular to do so. that doesn't address why mcconnell may have been saying one thing publicly and saying something privately if president bush is correct in his book, advising the opposite. not just for strategic reasons at all but for political reasons. senator mcconnell now finds himself under fire in his home state of kentucky. the courier journal entitled,

why does he place greater value on that purely political goal than on american citizens' well being? joining me now, cornell belcher, and dana loesch, tea party organizer and 97.7 fm. you have a busy day, dana. >> i do. >> if president bush's account of what happened is accurate and mcconnell's office isn't denying that, what does that say about him? >> it's an amazing story. only the story you just covered as troublesome as this story is, because at the same time he was attacking democrats he was behind the scenes talking -- telling bush we need to cut troops for political purposes. apparently it's okay to cut and run for political purposes. it really is kind of -- it really is kind of outrageous and it is sort of the sum of all voters' fears that in washington people really are cutting deals for purely political purposes

that have life and death consequences. voters always fear this sort of thing is going on but this is the first time we've got a president coming out and sort of saying it as a first account that this is what happened. it is the sum of all voters' fears and why they're so cynical about politicians in washington. >> john yarmuth says, this is a democrat, if the story is true, senator mcconnell will have to explain to the families of all the men and women who sacrificed in iraq why he was willing to play politics with their lives. is that fair? >> well, yes and no. first of all, i think that there's several things at play. i think mitch mcconnell has heinous, heinous political instincts. he should not ascend the office he is lucky enough to currently hold. but to withdraw troops and then wave the flag for retreat, he didn't call for retreat, he said let's pull out a few troops. i don't think it's any different than what any other politician in washington, d.c., has done. i think that they, quite

honestly, i think our men and women in uniform are regularly used as political pawned by both members of each party and it's one reason i just don't like either party but with the defense appropriation bill in december 2009, you had congressional members add tons of earmarks to a defensive appropriation bill that needed to pass, but then of course if anyone tried to stand up to it, then the opposition could say you're not wanting to fund the men and women overseas. they constantly play games. >> i hear what you're saying, but it seem there's is something different in this, because number one, we've heard time and time again from republicans, frankly both politicians on both sides accusing the other side of playing politics with u.s. troops and of not listening to commanders in the field and making decisions based purely on politics. this seems, if it's true, a clear cut example of that. the most mac vel yin sense, a few months before a midterm election, you're worried to lose, you say, just pull out a few troops, not for a strategic reason, just purely to help your

party. >> it's not the same. to say they're playing politics with an appropriation bill as opposed to saying pull out troops for political purposes, you know, when there's literally a life and death situation is very different. he crossed the line here. >> this is strategic implications. >> it is different. you were talking about life and death of soldiers. he's making a political calculation -- >> it's not life and death. >> go ahead, dana. >> my main point is you cross the line whether republican or democrat, you cross the line when you're making political calculations with life and death situations in war time. >> dana? >> right. life and death situations. let's talk about how we had democrats in congress that were looting military funding out of specific accounts that went towards ammunition, that went towards fuel, that went towards troop training and you know what they did with this money? packed it into earmarks.

we have an museum in louisiana, a visitors center in san francisco. that you could argue very well is life and death. [ advisor 1 ] what do you see yourself doing one week,

one month, five years after you do retire? ♪ client comes in and they have a box. and inside that box is their financial life. people wake up and realize i better start doing something. we open up that box. we organize it. and we make decisions. we really are here to help you. they look back and think, "wow. i never thought i could do this." but we've actually done it. [ male announcer ] visit ameriprise.com and put a confident retirement more within reach.

a lot more news we're covering tonight, randi kaye joins us. >> it is the 11th day of the 11th month, americans pay tribute today to veterans. joe biden laid a wreath at the tomb of the unknowns and called veterans the heart and soul of the nation. a potential power sharing agreement in iraq, a deal was cobbled together after eight months of bickering. the pakistani taliban is claiming responsibility for a suicide bomb attack, more than

100 injured. and in san diego, more than 3,000 passengers are back on dry land after their carnival cruise ship was towed to port. passengers spent three days without air-conditioning, hot showers, hot meals and in some cases no working toilets. one passenger said that before the navy provided relief supplies the ship ran out of food and then the crew started making those yummy mayonnaise sandwiches. >> just when you want when you've been out at sea for many days. >> and apparently they get a refund and then invited back for another cruise as well for maybe more mayonnaise sandwiches. >> that would -- >> they've probably had it. >> randi we'll check in with you later. fast food certainly helping

and later crime and punishment, selling kids and teens for sex, wait until you hear where it is happening, in the united states, and who's been caught doing it. you could never deliver this much power in a space this small until now. introducing the craftsman compact right angle impact driver. delivering powerful torque, and greater control in the tightest spaces more innovation. more great values. craftsman. trust. in your hands.

an accident doesn't have to slow you down. from new car replacement and guaranteed repairs to accident forgiveness, we do all we can to help you move on. liberty mutual auto insurance. responsibility. what's your policy? tdd# 1-800-345-2550 if anything, it was a little too much. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 but the moment they had my money? nothing. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 no phone calls, no feedback, tdd# 1-800-345-2550 no "here's how your money's doing." tdd# 1-800-345-2550 i mean what about a little sign that you're still interested? tdd# 1-800-345-2550 come on, surprise me! tdd# 1-800-345-2550 [ male announcer ] a go-to person to help you get started. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 regular detailed analysis of your portfolio. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 for a whole lot of extras at no extra charge, tdd# 1-800-345-2550 talk to chuck. tdd# 1-800-345-2550 [ male announcer ] an everyday moment can turn romantic anytime. and when it does, men with erectile dysfunction can be more confident in their ability to be ready with cialis for daily use.

cialis for daily use is a clinically proven low-dose tablet you take every day, so you can be ready anytime the moment's right. ♪ tell your doctor about your medical condition and all medications, and ask if you're healthy enough for sexual activity. don't take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. [ man ] don't drink alcohol in excess with cialis. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache, or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, seek immediate medical help for an erection lasting more than 4 hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, stop taking cialis and call your doctor right away. [ male announcer ] ask your doctor if cialis for daily use is right for you. for a 30-tablet free trial offer, go to cialis.com.

so i've got a question for you, should the government police what you feed your kids? i'm not talking about the government publishing recommended dietary guidelines, i'm talking about the government telling restaurants what kind of meals they can serve. city officials in san francisco clearly think the answer is yes, they voted to ban fast food restaurants from offering toys with meals that don't meet certain nutritional standards. happy meals are one of the primary targets. they can still sell it but without a toy, unless the meal has less than 600 calories, half a cup of fruit and three quarters cup of vegetables. that ain't a happy meal. mcdonald's says we're extremely disappointed with the decision.

it's not what our customers want nor is it something they asked for. parents tell us it's their right and responsibility not the government's to make their own decisions and to choose what's rathe for their children. gavin newsom also opposes the ban which he says is an unprecedented governmental intrusion into parental responsibility. he says parents, not politicians, should decide what their children eat, especially when it comes to spending their own money. mayor newsom says he'll veto the ban. reaction from the public has been mixed. >> i think it's ridiculous. i think that it's another case of san francisco going over board. >> i think it's probably a good thing. i know a lot of kids are innocented by the toy more than the food. >> the toys aren't the issue. my kid wants the hamburger. it's just an extra bonus that it has the toy. so it's not -- not having the toy and they're still going to have the happy meal.

>> let the parents make that decision, then. i mean, that's the bottom line. i mean, across the country everybody gets to have happy meals if they want to have it. >> we'll talk to dr. phil about what he thinks but let me give you background. it's a difficult issue for some people to decide on. the number of obese kids has tripled since 1980 and a study from yale shows kids are being bombarded with more fast food ads than ever. in 2009 according to this yale study, preschoolers saw 21% more ads for fast food than in 2003. older kids saw 34% more fast food ads. last year the fast food industry spent more than $4 billion on marketing and they're even targeting toddlers. i want to show you something here. according to the yale researchers, mcdonald's directs advertising to kids as young as 2 years old from websites like this. ronald.com. it's full of games, a lot of

images of ronald mcdonald, it's interesting. at the top of the screen, it says, hey, kids, this is advertising. i'm not sure a 2-year-old appreciates that, take a look what else this study found. 40% of parents reported that their kids ask them to go to mcdonald's at least once a week. 15% of preschoolers ask to go every day. and parents give in 84%, reported taking their child at least once a week. parents are under tons of pressure from their kids and their own busy schedules but does that mean that the government should start policing the stuff? i talked to dr. phil mcgraw about the ban earlier. so what do you think about this? this law does not ban happy meal it's bans the toys that go with the meals if the meals don't meet certain health requirements. does that make sense? >> i think it's along the same line of thinking when they banned joe the camel, which was

considered to be a cartoon, which would appeal to children, and i think they know that kids want those toys, and so by putting the toy in there they're enticing these children to buy these nonnutritious meals, so they're saying do we want to do that? and i agree that's not a good business practice. i've got to say, 25% of caucasian children are considered overweight and 33% of african-americans and hispanic children. so this is an epidemic level problem. make no mistake. i really applaud the fact that somebody's paying attention to this, but, anderson, this is the parents' job. it's the parents' job. they're the ones that buy the food, present the food, put food in the house, take kids to buy these things. this is the parents' job. and you don't turn that over to the government. you cannot abdicate, you can't even delegate this decision to the government. this gets back to the core level of parenting and i think it is

dangerous if we get the government involved in this way. >> you're saying it's an overreach, it's getting the government too involved in this sort of decision making which should be left up to parents. >> i think it is an overreach. if the government wants to be active in trying to do something about this epidemic of childhood obesity, then get involved with education. change the school lunch programs. my god, so many of the school lunches that are delivered around the country are so high in carbohydrates and so low in protein and so high in sugar and so high in sodium, that's contributing to the obesity. what are they worried about putting a toy in a happy meal? they need to be focused on the things they now fund. because this is a serious problem in america. but look. this is the parents' job. it's the parents' job to say no. it's the parents' job to say, this is not nutritious. it's the parents' job to decide where they take the children and what kind of eating patterns they develop. if we turn this over to the

government, what else are we going to turn over to them? this is way overreach. >> there are a lot of parents who say, we don't have a fighting chance against some of these huge companies and all the advertising dollars they pour in. $4.2 billion on advertising and marketing, the average preschooler saw 2.8 tv ads every day for fast food. kids age 6 to 11 saw 3.5 ads and 15% of preschoolers asked to go to mcdonald's every single day. i guess some parents will say, look, this isn't a fair fight. >> well, it may not be a fair fight because the marketing machine is huge. it is powerful. but if we're trading numbers, let me trade this one with you. 70% of overweight children are going to become overweight adults. for every 40 pounds you're over, your chance for heart attack, type two diabetes, go through the ceiling.

>> i was watching "food ink" which is a fascinating look at food around the united states and world and it gave the example of walmart which was pressured by customers to start offering healthier choices in some of their outlets, you know, healthier yogurt and stuff like that, and they actually did and that's been a huge deal for -- when walmart chooses to do something it's got a huge impact on the marketplace and that was based on consumers demanding something. >> we've got the real power here. and believe me, this turf war is fought at the local level. you get moms and dads talking to those managers and saying we're going to drive right down the street and we're going to go somewhere else, we're simply not going to come here, then that franchise will start doing something different. don't ever think we don't have the power of the dollar. where we go and where we choose to spend it, particularly during these tough economic times is something they pay attention to. and the reason they're selling

us what they're selling us is because that's what we've showed the willingness to buy. >> that's true. i must say i've switched to buying salads at mcdonald's, although it's hard passing up those big macs, but i force myself to do it. >> they look and smell good and once in a while they're okay. seriously. but you have to understand these kids, they get so focused on this and your eating habits are learned. people aren't born with a palate for this, if it's learned it can be unlearned. parents, don't give up the fight. >> dr. phil, thanks. still ahead tonight, tracking a sex trafficker in america. >> just what kind of a person would drug, then sell a 14-year-old for sex? we went looking. and what we found isn't what you might expect. >> well, what's even more surprising than who the person is is the punishment received. our investigation, next.

crime and punishment report, we've all heard statistics of kids being sold for sex in america. we wanted to find out who these kids are and how it's happening. the justice department estimates 300,000 american kids are at

risk of being pushed into prostitution. although the how the majority of victims are being trafficked isn't new, most are runaways or have been kicked out of their homes. the internet is becoming a bigger component of child prostitution. the national center for missing and exploited kids says the number of american kids that it sees being sold for sex on the internet is astounding. amber lyon investigates one horrifying story. >> come here, honey. come here, baby. >> reporter: what was your first reaction when you went on the internet and went and saw the ads with your daughter? >> i was heartbroken. i was scared. they showed her face. it was in a hotel room. and she had on lingerie and a wig. she was in very sexual positions. >> reporter: how old was your daughter? >> she was 14. >> reporter: 14 years old,

missing for nine months before a mother saw an ad selling her daughter for sex on backpage.com, giving police the break they needed to find the girl and bring her home. >> what's her name? >> cookie. >> reporter: we're not naming the 14-year-old nor her mother, to protect the family. but we can tell you that she loves to draw and has brothers and a sister. one night last year the girl ran away from home. she was angry that her parents had forbidden her from going to a party. the mother tells us the 14-year-old ran away from home and not only a day later was in this fast food restaurant and that's where a woman picked her up and found out she was a runaway and said, i have a friend you can stay with, she'll buy you clothes, give you a place to stay, and everything went downhill from there. according to court documents and the mother's account, a trafficker got the 14-year-old hooked on drugs. marijuana, codeine, ecstasy,

then sold her to men who would literally line up to take advantage of the girl. >> once i got her home and got her in the tub and stuff and, you know, i was trying to get her to take the wig off of her head. and she had those burns in her scalp. >> reporter: she had burns on her head? >> in her scalp. all her hair was gone. and maybe about six burn marks on the back of her scalp. she just said, i don't want to talk about it. mama, i don't want to talk about it. >> reporter: we're driving through the area where the girl lives, where some of the sex trafficking took place. i grew up in st. louis and i was very surprised to find out this was going on in this area of town. middle class families live here, there's nice neighborhoods.

i think when people think of sex trafficking of our youth, they think it only happens to poor kids in the city and that's just not the case. just what kind of person would drug and sell a 14-year-old for sex? we went looking. and what we found isn't what you might expect. she was a 27-year-old woman. latasha mcfarland, free at home with a daughter of her own. mcfarland admitted in court to selling the 14-year-old on backpage but denies knowing she was a minor. she was originally charged with three counts, including two of trafficking a minor for prostitution. a potential life sentence. but those more serious charges were dropped when she pled guilty to a separate prostitution charge that did not involve trafficking a minor. the maximum sentence on that charge?

five years. and until her december sentencing date, this woman remains free at home caring for her child. the last thing she said to me is i don't know anything about sex trafficking minors on the internet, then she started crying and slammed the door in my face. rich callahan is the united states attorney for st. louis. we asked him about the five-year maximum under this plea deal. it's the same sentence someone could get for trafficking a single marijuana joint across state lines. so it seems to me, i can't believe how, in the united states, someone can traffic a 14-year-old girl, sex trafficker, sell her like a slave, profit off it, and then get an equal punishment as someone trafficking a joint of marijuana. how is this possible? >> when you're dealing with runaway victims -- >> reporter: but she's not a runaway. >> i understand you keep saying that. but she wasn't always living

with the mother. >> reporter: callahan said because prosecutors couldn't count on the girl's testimony, they took the deal instead. >> under the circumstances. and five years in prison is by some lights at least better than getting nothing at all. sometimes have you to do things you don't think are -- you're not wild about doing. you'd like to get more time, but you can't always do that. >> reporter: you can't always do that. that's the reality this girl's family is left with, struggling to help their daughter salvage what's left of her childhood. >> i said, why didn't you come back home? and she said, well, mama, once i got to taking those drugs and having all the sex, then i didn't think that you would want me anymore. and she was wrong. she was so wrong. >> it's so fascinating to see, you walk up to that house and

it's so not what you expect to be the person who's trafficking an underage girl online. what now for this family? >> well, this family is really upset, as you can tell, they're worried that the trafficker is facing five years or less in prison. in addition, they're very upset with backpage.com. they say this website aided and abetted the sale of their daughter and they hired a lawyer out of st. louis who is suing backpage now for this family. >> it's going to be tough, because the argument that a lot of these websites make is we're

[ advisor 1 ] what do you see yourself doing one week, one month, five years after you do retire? ♪ client comes in and they have a box. and inside that box is their financial life. people wake up and realize i better start doing something. we open up that box. we organize it. and we make decisions. we really are here to help you. they look back and think,

"wow. i never thought i could do this." but we've actually done it. [ male announcer ] visit ameriprise.com and put a confident retirement more within reach. a body at rest tends to stay at rest... while a body in motion tends to stay in motion. staying active can actually ease arthritis symptoms. but if you have arthritis, staying active can be difficult. prescription celebrex can help relieve arthritis pain so your body can stay in motion. because just one 200mg celebrex a day can provide 24 hour relief

for many with arthritis pain and inflammation. plus, in clinical studies, celebrex is proven to improve daily physical function so moving is easier. and celebrex is not a narcotic. when it comes to relieving your arthritis pain, you and your doctor need to balance the benefits with the risks. all prescription nsaids, including celebrex, may increase the chance of heart attack or stroke, which can lead to death. this chance increases if you have heart disease or risk factors such as high blood pressure or when nsaids are taken for long periods. nsaids, including celebrex, increase the chance of serious skin or allergic reactions or stomach and intestine problems, such as bleeding and ulcers, which can occur without warning and may cause death. patients also taking aspirin and the elderly are at increased risk for stomach bleeding and ulcers. do not take celebrex if you've had an asthma attack, hives, or other allergies to aspirin, nsaids or sulfonamides. get help right away if you have swelling of the face or throat, or trouble breathing. tell your doctor about your medical history and find an arthritis treatment that works for you. ask your doctor about celebrex.

and, go to celebrex.com to learn more about how you can move toward relief. celebrex. for a body in motion. got a number of other stories we're following. randi kaye has the bulletin. >> three high school basketball players in mississippi have sued their coach for whipping them when they failed to run their plays correctly. the coach says he paddled them basically to make them better young men. an attorney for the students says the coach has been suspended. the school won't confirm that. nissan drivers take note, the company is recalling nearly 605,000 sentras, xterras and suvs, battery cables need to be fixed.

google has fired the employee who they say leaked information about big raises. they were notified tuesday of across the board pay hikes of 10%. the company says it won't discuss internal matters. and you probably didn't see this, tonight you got a shout out from john stewart on msnbc's "rachel maddow show." >> one of my favorite things, anderson cooper, he does a nice job, he's fun to watch. and you as well, and i like on an individual basis a lot of this stuff. again, i watch way too much of it. i really do. and that is in itself corrupting. but he's got a bit on his show called "keeping them honest." >> yeah. >> which is just so funny to me, which is, isn't that the subtext of -- it'd be like me introducing, i've got a new segment called, "telling jokes to an audience." >> true, you would think, yes, it is basically the subtext for

what we're all supposed to be doing, although frankly we don't do enough of. >> we're doing it right here. >> nice he said that.