Megyn Kelly and Fox News Speculation: Where the Talking Hits the Road

[Twopper]

 

 

Josh is 27 years old.  If he can get married, move to another state and father 3, soon to be 4 children, he can drag his sorry butt into an interview and explain why he should be forgiven for molesting his sisters.

Grow a pair.

I think what is most important to his parents is not whether the viewers forgive Josh or not, but whether or not the show continues in some form. Plan A: everyone forgives Josh and show continues.  As that is very unlikely, Plan B: If they have to throw Josh under the bus to continue the show in a different format, I think they will be more than willing to do it.  I can't see the show continuing with any more seasons. Perhaps a special episode in a year or so about Jill and Jessa and how they are doing and maybe an appearance by the other older children except Josh and no Michelle and JimBob.

 

While I think Megyn Kelly has the capacity to do a killer of an interview,  I am not expecting it.  I did catch the segment last night on the legality of releasing the information where she played law school professor with two attorneys having them make their best arguments for whether or not the person (was it the police chief?) should have released documents.  I am a lawyer, too, but this is not my area and I am not in the mood to go look up Arkansas FOI laws and relevant cases. I am hoping she  covered that last night so as not to have the same discussion while meeting with the Duggars so when they start whining about the leaked info, she can say she already covered it on her show and now she has other questions for them.   I hope she had a marathon watching of the show over the weekend rather than assigning it to her staff so she can question them about their approach to women.  And I really hope she wears one of her more sexy outfits.  If I see she looks like a school marm, we know that she is in the tank for the Duggars.

[GEML]

I wonder if Michelle and Jim Bob sort of washed their hands of Josh when he went to DC. After all, he did that without their blessing. They couldn't just cut him from the show, because that would be too obvious, but it was moving in a different direction. Michelle has already demonstrated she can cut off family that gets in the way of her "religion" and Jim Bob can speak harshly publicly of his own father. So Josh and Anna can be cut off and cut out. If thine eye offends thee, and all that....

[NextIteration]

So, I think we need to worry less about logical fallacies in this interview than false equivalencies given what Ms. Kelly has telegraphed.

 

I sort of like the idea of a gofundme effort to drop quarters (or dollars) into as opposed to a drinking game so long as the proceeds go to a charity for survivors of child sexual abuse.  I won't be partaking though, I refuse to watch FNC, I'm relying on y'all for reviews and plan on checking out non-FNC related YouTube channels for clips, I refuse to give this dreck any ratings.

Edited June 3, 2015 by NextIteration

[hathorlive]

The Duggars are participating in a lose/lose situation.  They will lose a huge amount of people for refusing to use this interview to tell the "truth".  Or answer any real questions that the public has.  They would lose if they told the truth.  All they are going to do is infuriate people more and ensure that we spend a few more weeks talking about them.  One of the few shared culture norms is against incest.  Many people have issues with child sexual abuse.  Giving an interview that dismisses that will just make the angry people madder. 

 

So rock on Fox!  Either way you are serving to stir up people and keep this in the public eye.

[Darknight]

Cynically? So the producers at FOX news can have Thursday to see how the first part of the interview was received by the public and edit the second part accordingly.

Sad that a show is more important than a child's well being. All you have to so in this country is claim Jesus and all is Allright.

[Evagirl]

I would think they have enough money saved to not have to worry about being on TV anymore.  They also have property investments and probably other income as well.

 

For the sake of my children I would announce on this interview that it is our last interview.  I would also announce that we would no longer appear on television in any way, shape, or fashion.  The adult children can decide how they want to proceed, but as far as the homestead family - we're done.

 

There are too many minor children in this family to stay in the limelight over such an ugly and dispicable act.  Michelle and JB need to put these children first and money last.  They also need to monitor their children more closely.  Had they done this 12 years ago, perhaps things would be different today.  I look at how JB obsessively protected his ADULT daughters viginity.  But where was he when they needed his protection the most?

 

I am sooooo over both Michelle and Jim Bob.

[ChicksDigScars]

There's always the awesome Bill Maher and Jon Stewart, Jon Oliver, Larry Wilmore etc.

 

Trouble is, the bottom line is that these guys do their shows for laughs by skewering politicians, celebs and average Darwin Award candidates. They're not legitimate news shows. Incest and child molestation are not subjects that would get a big laugh. Maybe some awkward laughs from the audience (think Louis C.K.'s SNL monologue from a couple weeks ago. The audience gasped at the molestation jokes and then laughed uncomfortably).  Bill Maher is probably the one that doesn't give a fuck about always getting the laugh. He's said some shocking things that even his audience have gasped at.  But I really can't stand him. Jon Stewart and Jon Oliver, I like. I'd love to hear them rake JB and MEE-chelle over the coals after the interview airs. 

 

They'll wait for Jim Bob and MEE-chelle to say something ridiculous to Megyn, and work off that. What's the over-under on that one? I got the first stupid platitude out of JB's mouth clocked at about 12 seconds in.  For the tie breaker, I'll take the first fake tear drop dab from MEE-chelle at the one minute and 20 seconds mark.  

[Lemur]

Sad that a show is more important than a child's well being. All you have to so in this country is claim Jesus and all is Allright.

 

The show is their ministry, you know.  And Jesus comes first in JOY, so yes.

[Aja]

I'd like Michelle to be asked what the hell she was doing when her son REPEATEDLY assaulted her daughters. I mean besides staring at Jim Bob with lobotomized-puppy eyes. Where the hell was she? "Having this many kids isn't always easy, but somehow we make it all work." NO YOU DON'T. Where the hell were you, Michelle? Where was your wonderful husband? And every time her head would start to turn in a Jim Boberly direction, I would say "LOOK AT ME, MICHELLE! HERE! ME!" Sigh. It's not a friggin political issue. Maybe having 19 kids that you can't protect or properly look after isn't some kind of American ideal. Maybe just maybe. Ugh.

Edited June 3, 2015 by Aja

[Churchhoney]

Meanwhile, Fox News actually is reporting on the new In Touch story covering another police report.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2015/06/03/duggar-scandal-police-report-reveals-sister-was-5-at-time-sexual-abuse/

 

Last line makes me laugh:"An e-mail to Duggar's rep was not immediately returned".

 

Why'd you guys have to email their rep? You have a massive staff, including one of your top on-air anchors, in their house right now, ffs.

[bencr]

So Yahoo quotes Megyn Kelly as saying:

 

“I think this is the Duggars’ effort to try to get out from under that pressure cooker. They very much understand their show and reputation are on the line.” But, she said, the Duggars also believe the show “has a chance still. It’s not totally done. I think they knew they needed to speak to somebody and get their story out,” Kelly added — their story being that the information about their son and daughters was “released without their consent.”

 

With all due respect, this is not their story. Their story is about child molestation under their roof and it's cover-up, as well as the blatant hypocrisy of this family. The story of the release of the police report is a sidebar at best. But what the Duggars seem to be doing here is setting up a straw man (the unauthorized release of the report) to divert attention away from the real story (crime, cover-up and hypocrisy). Don't be surprised if the interview tonight is largely focused on the family's outrage at the injustice that has been done to them by law enforcement in cahoots with the liberal media.

Edited June 3, 2015 by bencr

[NextIteration]

If they were so worried about the police report (ahem, smart enough to ask to have it destroyed before the Arkansas FOIA requests were filed) why didn't they take care of this years ago?  It's pretty clear to me that they were tipped off by something, perhaps even a call from InTouch asking about - so then "the minor" filed a request for destruction of the police record.

[NEGirl]

Bencr - I saw her Fox show last night. One of the attorneys on the show  said the FOIA has loop holes where it would have been LEGAL to release the report. The police chief who released it first checked with the town attorney who ok'd the release. So, she can say whatever she wants - it appears the release was LEGAL. 

Edited June 3, 2015 by NEGirl

[GEML]

When a lawyer uses the word "loophole" that isn't the same as "legal". It means there isn't anything that is going to be done about it.

Given that the Duggars themselves have used personal favors and intimidation tactics to silence other people or get back at them (assuming some of the more outrageous stories about them on the web are true) then it's really not that hard to believe that they think someone is targeting them. It's how THEY would behave if the situation were reversed, after all.

[Kiss my mutt]

I wonder if any commercials will run during the interview and who will be advertising?

[Kellyee]

 

I'd like Michelle to be asked what the hell she was doing when her son REPEATEDLY assaulted her daughters. I mean besides staring at Jim Bob with lobotomized-puppy eyes.

 

I am not excusing Michelle's lack of action. However, I keep thinking of teenage Michelle, who was a normal girl from a normal but divorced family. She was a Christian, but she wasn't a crazy, breeding machine, fundie, passive woman. Somewhere along the line, something happened to subdue her, make her obedient, make her think Jim Bob is God, and make her think she has no right at all to self determination and personal happiness. She couldn't save her daughters because she is basically become like Theon in Game of Thrones. Castrated.

[GEML]

And we know where Jim Bob was - out politicking for God's greater glory.

[Missy Vixen]

I wonder if Michelle and Jim Bob sort of washed their hands of Josh when he went to DC. After all, he did that without their blessing. They couldn't just cut him from the show, because that would be too obvious, but it was moving in a different direction.

IMHO of course. I detest Josh Duggar. At the same time, parents who can and will turn their backs on an adult child for making life decisions they disagree with is a bit chilling. And I'm not sure why I'm surprised at this; the Duggars are the type of people who think with their wallets first.

[buffy11bnl]

Dumb question - I'm assuming this is airing tonight during the 9pm EST episode of  "The Kelly File" ?  It is listed as new but doesn't give an episode description.

[SoSueMe]

I am not excusing Michelle's lack of action. However, I keep thinking of teenage Michelle, who was a normal girl from a normal but divorced family. She was a Christian, but she wasn't a crazy, breeding machine, fundie, passive woman. Somewhere along the line, something happened to subdue her, make her obedient, make her think Jim Bob is God, and make her think she has no right at all to self determination and personal happiness. She couldn't save her daughters because she is basically become like Theon in Game of Thrones. Castrated.

You could be right-or- Michelle could actually be the power behind the throne.

I keep seeing the video of JB trying to campaign for Cuccinelli and Michelle trying to help him. He came off as not too bright and flailing.

[HumblePi]

According to a report by People magazine 2 hours ago, this is how the conversation will go;

 

"My goal going down there is to get the story," says Kelly.

 

"A first person account of what Josh did, who was involved, what the parents did about it, how they satisfied themselves that it had been resolved, what they did to help the victims and to answer some of the harder questions about whether they behaved hypocritically."

 

"They do not want to talk about the details of the molestation, and I understand that as the parents of those involved, and that's fine," she says. "I've been told I'm not going to get answers there."

But, outside of those specific details, Kelly says there will be no limitations on their discussion.

 

"I think people want to hear more about when it was reported, why that time was chosen as opposed to an earlier time," she says.

"And especially the Duggars' critics, whether they regret any of their strong comments on morality. In particular, with respect to certain lifestyles, now that they have been so hammered for their own sins. I think that is a fair question and they should answer that."

 

Kelly's interview with the Duggars will air on The Kelly File Wednesday at 9 p.m. ET. Additional portions will also air during a one-hour special on Friday at 9 p.m. ET

 

We can all pretty much guess what their answer to the highlighted question will be. They will calmly tell Megyn Kelly that they have asked for forgiveness from God because He's the only one that matters, and of course they will say they had been forgiven for any transgressions long ago.  This interview is going to be painfully and obviously slanted in favor of the Duggar's. Their entire futures as TV moguls depends on it.

Edited June 3, 2015 by HumblePi

[SoSueMe]

According to a report by People magazine 2 hours ago, this is how the conversation will go;

 

"My goal going down there is to get the story," says Kelly.

 

"A first person account of what Josh did, who was involved, what the parents did about it, how they satisfied themselves that it had been resolved, what they did to help the victims and to answer some of the harder questions about whether they behaved hypocritically."

 

"They do not want to talk about the details of the molestation, and I understand that as the parents of those involved, and that's fine," she says. "I've been told I'm not going to get answers there."

But, outside of those specific details, Kelly says there will be no limitations on their discussion.

 

"I think people want to hear more about when it was reported, why that time was chosen as opposed to an earlier time," she says.

"And especially the Duggars' critics, whether they regret any of their strong comments on morality. In particular, with respect to certain lifestyles, now that they have been so hammered for their own sins. I think that is a fair question and they should answer that."

 

Kelly's interview with the Duggars will air on The Kelly File Wednesday at 9 p.m. ET. Additional portions will also air during a one-hour special on Friday at 9 p.m. ET

Megyn does understand what "first person" means, right?

Wouldn't that have to come from Josh?

[JoanArc]

Megyn does understand what "first person" means, right?

Wouldn't that have to come from Josh?

Just to speculate - maybe Josh is going to be on, and they're doing a good job of hiding it. Unlikely, but not impossible.

[TomServo]

I keep going back to the fact that Megyn said on one of the clips that she doesn't watch the show.  A lot of the things that have been brought up in the discussions here are not things that she would be familiar with.  She just knows there is this family on television who is involved in some way or another in politics and supporting certain types of GOP candidates and somebody has gone back and dug up whatever skeletons they could find for some reason that nobody quite understands yet.  It's probably fair to say that she at least has some of the same questions that have already been batted around (in the Josh and Anna thread, maybe?) about who did this, did the police department fail to redact it better on purpose, why now, why not before now, what was the objective of the person who tipped off InTouch, etc?  And being more of a political junkie type reporter, that's of more interest to her than some of the questions that are of more interest to the types of people who read and post on the PTV forums.

[SoSueMe]

Megyn may not watch the show, but I bet she has a very well budgeted research dept. She has to know some of the more run of the mill criticisms of the Duggars.

[HumblePi]

I keep going back to the fact that Megyn said on one of the clips that she doesn't watch the show.  A lot of the things that have been brought up in the discussions here are not things that she would be familiar with.  She just knows there is this family on television who is involved in some way or another in politics and supporting certain types of GOP candidates and somebody has gone back and dug up whatever skeletons they could find for some reason that nobody quite understands yet.  It's probably fair to say that she at least has some of the same questions that have already been batted around (in the Josh and Anna thread, maybe?) about who did this, did the police department fail to redact it better on purpose, why now, why not before now, what was the objective of the person who tipped off InTouch, etc?  And being more of a political junkie type reporter, that's of more interest to her than some of the questions that are of more interest to the types of people who read and post on the PTV forums.

In 2007, a reporter for the Northwest Arkansas Times, who now works for the Democrat-Gazette, finds a court document for a case titled Josh Duggar vs. the Arkansas Department of Human Services. The Democrat-Gazette reports:

 

    A trial in that case took place Aug. 6, 2007, according to notes attached to the file. Sealed cases aren’t supposed to be left in public view, but the Duggar case file had been left in a stack of routine court filings at the circuit clerk’s office. The reporter saw no other information on the case at the time.

 

May 21:  In Touch Weekly publishes a follow-up to its original article, this time with a police report online that, it says, details the allegations against Josh Duggar. In Touch reports that it obtained the police report through a Freedom of Information request. The Democrat-Gazette is also able to obtain the document through an FOI request, but a Thursday FOI request from The Washington Post was answered on the same day with a court order, dated May 21, ordering that the police report in question be destroyed. The order was a result of a “motion to expunge” from one of the alleged victims.

[GEML]

But I do think it's fair to say she's going to be more interested in the politics and Politics of it than she would be if this were someone from CBN (more interested in the religious aspect) or Oprah (more interested in the self help aspect) etc. even here, we all have the things we focus on more. Not that the other things aren't important, but our backgrounds give us different priorities.

[Missy Vixen]

Megyn may not watch the show, but I bet she has a very well budgeted research dept. She has to know some of the more run of the mill criticisms of the Duggars.

If she has no idea what she's talking about, perhaps she's not the best choice to "interview" this family.

 

There, I said it.

[Cherrio]

The show......that is all they care about. Show aka money.

They never cared about their children, actions or actually the lack of action speak LOUD here.

    There isn't a website or forum big enough to list how bad these people are.

[Sew Sumi]

But I do think it's fair to say she's going to be more interested in the politics and Politics of it than she would be if this were someone from CBN (more interested in the religious aspect) or Oprah (more interested in the self help aspect) etc. even here, we all have the things we focus on more. Not that the other things aren't important, but our backgrounds give us different priorities.

We shall see. As long as SHE politicizes it, I think it's up for us to discuss as long as we don't skewer one another's political beliefs or Fox News. I do agree that making it an "us against them" scenario is the best route in attempting to put the Duggars in a better light (for their base, at any rate). I think the rest of us see it for what it is: lazy-ass reporting which will more than likely result in a lazy-ass, "feel good" interview. 

[truthtalk2014]

I wonder if any commercials will run during the interview and who will be advertising?

I can only hope that it is that birth control implant that lasts a few years.  

[HumblePi]

If she has no idea what she's talking about, perhaps she's not the best choice to "interview" this family.

 

There, I said it.

That would depend on who is doing the choosing. Considering what other reporters might do with a Duggar interview, Megyn Kelly is definitely the safest bet for a softer questioning of the Duggar family. Megyn Kelly has admitted to having had very little knowledge or exposure to their TV series. If I was the Duggar's and had to open up and be vulnerable to the public in an interview, FOX would definitely be the network I'd offer my interview to.

 

*addendum to my post. Will there be a forum to discuss the new format of PreviouslyTV?  I'll might be the first to snark in my own opinion. I don't like it.

Edited June 3, 2015 by HumblePi

[Missy Vixen]

Their loyal viewers, aka the Leghumpers, will continue to watch. I think that the Duggars could do just about anything, even on camera, and they would STILL watch, believing that whatever they did was all somehow faked; they seem to believe the police report was a creation of the liberal media. So, there's that. 

 

eta: Take a gander at the responses Gawker has gotten from that crowd and tell me if I'm wrong. :)

 

http://defamer.gawker.com/angry-duggar-fans-send-email-hellfire-leave-this-fami-1707773109?utm_campaign=socialflow_gawker_facebook&utm_source=gawker_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow

Those letters are almost enough to make one want to lose their will to live.

 

in other words, it's okay to molest your sisters. Because Jesus.

 

And there is no reasoning with those who believe this; it's a HOLY WAR to them and they believe their religion excuses any transgression against another person.

[Churchhoney]

Megyn does understand what "first person" means, right?

Wouldn't that have to come from Josh?

 

I beg to differ. "First person" obviously always means JImBob.

[Fuzzysox]

If she has no idea what she's talking about, perhaps she's not the best choice to "interview" this family.

 

There, I said it.

Nancy Grace would have made a better interviewer. She would have crushed them.

[funky-rat]

But, do most people know some of the victims were Duggar girls? The few mainstream articles I skimmed through did not say, I think. Perhaps they hope most of the people didn’t catch that and getting rid of Josh would be enough to get rid of the uncomfortable factor.

I'm thinking many don't.  I commented on a post someone made on FB about 14 being old enough to know better, and one of their friends fired back that 14 isn't old enough to know better when you're raised like he was.  So I said "I'm pretty sure that I knew before age 14 that it wasn't cool to touch your sisters" and she went ballistic, telling me to quit dragging his sisters names through the mud, and leave them out of it.  I replied back "Read the report.  Hard to leave them out of it when it was pretty clearly them".  She responded "No one is perfect.  Even Christians." and sped out of the conversation quickly.

[TomServo]

In 2007, a reporter for the Northwest Arkansas Times...

 

None of those things answers the questions I was talking about that Megyn is likely interested in (again, see the other discussion that happened in the Josh and Anna thread.  Somewhere in the 90-page range, I think).  

Those are points on a timeline, but it doesn't tell us who tipped off InTouch or why this is making national news NOW when if that reporter is to believed it was "the worst-kept secret in NW Arkansas."  The reporter had a number for a case file and that's it.  Apparently the NW Arkansas Times reporter did not do any follow-up on the case beyond trying to talk to Josh and JimBob about it.  Most likely he assumed that if there was a case file that was sealed that any related police reports were also sealed and therefore didn't pursue it.

[HumblePi]

None of those things answers the questions I was talking about that Megyn is likely interested in (again, see the other discussion that happened in the Josh and Anna thread.  Somewhere in the 90-page range, I think).  

Those are points on a timeline, but it doesn't tell us who tipped off InTouch or why this is making national news NOW when if that reporter is to believed it was "the worst-kept secret in NW Arkansas."  The reporter had a number for a case file and that's it.  Apparently the NW Arkansas Times reporter did not do any follow-up on the case beyond trying to talk to Josh and JimBob about it.  Most likely he assumed that if there was a case file that was sealed that any related police reports were also sealed and therefore didn't pursue it.

I hadn't heard that the reporter believed that this was "the worst-kept secret in NW Arkansas". I assume the reporter either took the report, made a copy of the report, or copied down the case file once he had read the report that was left on a desk. The tip-off to Oprah's people at Harpo came directly from someone who knows the Duggar family personally and may even be one of their own home-church people. The reporter that gave the information to InTouch who then obtained the report through the Freedom of Information Act was probably paid a hefty sum of money for disclosure of this information to In Touch. It's all speculation however, and all the 'where-whens-and hows' are really of no further pertinence. The information that IS pertinent is how and why the Duggars chose to handle the whole situation from the very start, and not even reporting it at first.

[Lemur]

None of those things answers the questions I was talking about that Megyn is likely interested in (again, see the other discussion that happened in the Josh and Anna thread.  Somewhere in the 90-page range, I think).  

Those are points on a timeline, but it doesn't tell us who tipped off InTouch or why this is making national news NOW when if that reporter is to believed it was "the worst-kept secret in NW Arkansas."  The reporter had a number for a case file and that's it.  Apparently the NW Arkansas Times reporter did not do any follow-up on the case beyond trying to talk to Josh and JimBob about it.  Most likely he assumed that if there was a case file that was sealed that any related police reports were also sealed and therefore didn't pursue it.

 

According to the article from the local reporter, he'd asked Josh what was in the sealed file and Josh directed him to Jim Bob.  From what I understand of these things and a bit of supposition on my part, I believe that sealed file is actually the court docket from when Josh petitioned though the court to have Arkansas FIN/CPS to close their case file on him.  

 

But yes, the grand mystery does continue of who leaked all of this to Oprah (the working theory has always been someone from inside their church due to the level of detail about Josh making a public confession) and who filed the FOIA paperwork to get their hands on the police reports.  We could speculate wildly to no end, I'm sure, but unless someone steps forward with a copy of the FOIA request, we'll never know.  

 

(And if we're going to have a wild speculation pool, I pick Harvey Levin from TMZ.) 

[Missy Vixen]

Those are points on a timeline, but it doesn't tell us who tipped off InTouch or why this is making national news NOW when if that reporter is to believed it was "the worst-kept secret in NW Arkansas."  The reporter had a number for a case file and that's it.

IMHO, of course.

 

I'd like to think that someone who knew told an InTouch reporter where to find the information. Off the record. And verbally, so there would be no paper trail. We might never know why that person or people decided to spill the beans.

 

And I'm throwing this one out here: I don't think this is the last of the "surprises" re: additional "mistakes". I don't believe it was an accident that the further report was discovered shortly after Megyn Kelly's insistence that it was "illegal" to release the first paperwork.

 

Again, IMHO, YMMV, and (OT) I am encouraged that so many here desire justice for the survivors. I do, too.

[TomServo]

The thing is, I'm a political junkie, but the political aspect is about the least interesting.

 

Yep, to me, too.  Your childhood background and your experience being a viewer of the show gives you a reason for that to be the least interesting.  If Megyn doesn't have the same background to pull from, the political parts are going to be more interesting to her and being in the environment she's in every day makes it more likely for her to have blinders on about it.

Because if you're not a viewer of the show and you don't hang out in places like this, you get a very polarized view about the show.  Your Facebook feed is filled up with show fans "liking" every puff piece link about the Duggars on one side vs. the people putting up hateful memes on the other (pictures of GOP politicians with fake quotes they never said about how it what Josh did was less offensive than what gay people do, etc).  Or plastering up pictures of every right-leaning politician Josh has ever had his picture made with, implying that they are somehow complicit in the whole thing even though those pictures were likely taken at some event where everyone there gets their picture taken with everyone else there (see also Alison Arngrim's twitter feed).

And I do think it is in play for a politically-inclined reporter to point out the hypocrisy of doing things like that IF the people who are making those implications are at the same time minimizing distasteful connections of people who agree with them politically (the Clinton family's connections to Jeffrey Epstein, for example.  I could give similar examples on the left, but I'll stop there because it makes the point well enough while still trying to stay out of dissolving into a political debate).

[Fuzzysox]

I would really like to know if the Duggars will have their lawyer sitting alongside them!? Hell I would if I was in the hot seat with a lawyer being asked questions that could lead to jail time. 

[Lemur]

And I'm throwing this one out here: I don't think this is the last of the "surprises" re: additional "mistakes". I don't believe it was an accident that the further report was discovered shortly after Megyn Kelly's insistence that it was "illegal" to release the first paperwork.

 

I concur.  This is one of those "Be sure your sin will find you out" deals.  You don't get to call that many people sinners without your own sins being thrown at you; or in this case, your own crimes and the resulting cover-up that continued to expose your daughters to a self-confessed child molester.  

 

And if Megyn (this spelling still makes my head want to explode) Kelly actually consults with an Arkansas lawyer about the legality of the FOIA request, I'll buy everyone in this forum yet another drink.

Edited June 3, 2015 by Lemur

[Skittl1321]

I would really like to know if the Duggars will have their lawyer sitting alongside them!?

I'd bet they have one off camera.  And we won't find out, because it is an edited interview, and they would just say they won't answer that question.

 

Now, if it was John Stewart we'd probably get a 5 minute montage of all the questions they refused to answer.

[Twopper]

Is this interview supposed to fill the whole show tonight?  I know they spent time last night on the issue of whether or not the release was legal under the Arkansas FOI laws, but whether it was or wasn't that ship has sailed and the info is out in the public now.  They can't unring that bell, so I cannot see that more that 5 minutes of the interview can go to their whining about it. And the Josh has repented line can be repeated only so many times, although they will probably try to run out the clock with that.  I just can't imagine what else they will say except maybe they will throw out some lines to the effect that it wasn't the girls' faults,but that flies in the face of what we know about how they think. I hope someone has filled Megyn in about "nike" and "defrauding."   I can't see that they will gain supporters from this and I think most people who hadn't a clue about the Duggars before will never become new supporters. I would think this would be a net loss for them, at worst, and retaining the status quo, the best. And the status quo  keeps the future of the show in doubt.  In one of the opening lines, one of the kids talks about how having a large family is different, but somehow they make it work. Well, we now know for certain that it did not work.

[kassa]

I still have hopes that at some point she's going to realize this is child molestation and react accordingly.

 

 

I fast forwarded through last night once I realized it was all about the evil release of the documents.

 

However, in the 4-5 minutes I did watch (a couple of segments, just in case the topic had changed), Kelly very clearly referred to the victims as molestation victims.  Victims of abuse.  I don't watch her or her show, but it seems to me if a complete puff piece were on order, she wouldn't blatantly be referring to the girls as victims of molestation, then accepting "he made a mistake" from the parents the next day.  She has basically already conceded that molestation took place.  

 

That's not to say that she won't dance around it and focus more time and questions on tangential issues, but I didn't get the impression that they will be able to pretend that what happened was anything but actual child molestation.

[leighdear]

I'm wondering if somebody here will be posting the highlights as the show is broadcast.  Or if that's against the forum rules. 

 

It was allowed for the award shows.  

 

Because I simply cannot bear to watch them.  But I would like to know what happens. 

[Wellfleet]

I wonder if Michelle and Jim Bob sort of washed their hands of Josh when he went to DC. After all, he did that without their blessing. They couldn't just cut him from the show, because that would be too obvious, but it was moving in a different direction. Michelle has already demonstrated she can cut off family that gets in the way of her "religion" and Jim Bob can speak harshly publicly of his own father. So Josh and Anna can be cut off and cut out. If thine eye offends thee, and all that....

 

Hmmm, an interesting take on things. I have to say this wouldn't surprise me - there certainly is Duggar precedent for it.

[frenchtoast]

I'm wondering if somebody here will be posting the highlights as the show is broadcast.  Or if that's against the forum rules. 

 

It was allowed for the award shows.  

 

Because I simply cannot bear to watch them.  But I would like to know what happens. 

There will not be a "live chat" topic for the interview or special. The topics will open once the interview has aired in the Eastern time zone and you can read the reactions to the entire interview there. Live chats are decided on a case by case basis and we felt it would be too difficult to handle for this topic.

 

Also, any live comments in this, the Speculation Topic, will be deleted as off-topic. Please compose your thoughts and wait until the topic is opened.

[Cherrio]

Sounds like "Dosie" took a pretty heavy dose.

Poor Dosie gets additional charges for endangering the life of a police officer by offering him a slice of her homemade pizza.