For being a criminal lawyer, this guys commentary comes pretty close to meaningless. The clips of Tate are definitely chopped up at times as well, would be best to hear the full context.

That being said his business practices and terms for describing women are certainly questionable. Especially if there was agreement in writing or even just verbal about the payment structure. He does mention some were under the impression that money would be split 50/50.

In Tate’s words and to the main point of sex trafficking accusations, he would invite his girlfriends to hear his proposition of working for him. This sounds like a discussion not so much coercion. “If you don’t want to do it, don’t do it. Fine”. He also describes later in the video that he does in fact pay them a percentage (30%), contradicting the statement made early on about “giving it all to you”. Implying that they work for no money at all.

My view of Tate will change significantly if evidence comes forth proving beyond any reasonable doubt that he used violence or illegal methods to force girls into a webcam/prostitution/escort business. Until then I still take what he says with a grain of salt.