The Kelly File: Duggar Interview 2015.06.03

[Sew Sumi]

I'm going to jump into the shallow end of the pool for a minute....

When they showed the back of Megyn Kelly's head, all I could think was that those were some ratty-looking extensions (a la Britney Spears).

And why is the hair that frames Michelle's face so much darker than the rest of her hair? Is it supposed to be ombré but it just came out a mess? I'm so confused.

I think she's covering grays up top and letting the bottom run. It's what I do. That and the elliptical are the only two things I have in common with that woman. 

[photo fox]

We have no way of knowing if Jill and Jessa are being coerced into doing this interview. Since they are the victims, I feel I must respect their decision to speak. As victims, only they can decide how they feel and what they want to say. I realize because of the way they were raised, and the things they are expected to say, people are assuming they're being forced into this, but we can't be sure of that.

I hope this is their decision, I hope this isn't triggering a bunch of things for them, and I hope they're allowed to tell their own story without undue pressure from their parents or the public to react a certain way.

[rulesoftravel]

 

Megyn asks the Duggars if the backlash is greater because of their Christian beliefs. Michelle says yes.

 Christian beliefs?  Wow, just wow.

 

WWJD?   Well, He wouldn't molest sleeping children...

[pinguina]

Things I really disliked about this.

*Megan kept referring about the treatment center Josh was sent to - it wasn't a treatment center!!  They said, if i recall correctly, he (their "friend") did a good job of counseling young men

*Josh told them every time he "inappropriately" touched the girls. And not until the third time did they finally realize it was  serious problem.  

*But between each incident they put safeguards and were vigilant (but since it kept happening, I don't think that it worked)

*JB did say over clothes AND under clothes - and this wasn't a red flag??

*Seriously?? The girls were asleep so no harm, no foul??

*Didn't one of the girls tell the parents???

*They knew he had also touched a babysitter and still just nothing???

*Continued excuses for the son and it seemed no empathy for the victims (who are their daughters!!)

*Where is the son who began all of this??

I get that parents love their kids.  That parents always want to protect them and help them in any way they can.  My older brother was the one getting into trouble and my parents put up with ALOT of behavior that was so against their beliefs. He told them off and enlisted in the army.  Well, basic training kicked his butt, he called home to try to get out of it (apparently because of his age he could get out IF parents wrote a letter to his CO). My dad listened to him and said, "You said that you were a man, be a man."  It practically killed him to say that and then he hung up.  Guess what ?  My brother manned up.  It really was the making of him.  

[direpup]

I lasted about 20 minutes - until I realized my angry commentary was disturbing my dog's nap.  Grabbed the remote and sent those sanctimonious boxes of hair into electronic oblivion.

 

Jim Bob and Michelle clearly live on their own planet (more like a dumbass-teroid). A backward, soulless place where 1 is greater than 5.

[Darknight]

So if a woman is raped and is drugged does it mean that she wasn't raped since she doesn't remember it? Duggar logic?? I thought these people were horrible before but they're horrible horrible horrible parents and people

[Sew Sumi]

As a matter of fact, a criminal justice lawyer was on television talking about this and said that not only Josh was guilty of a crime but that the Duggars themselves and the other church members that they talked with also have committed a crime by not reporting this abuse immediately.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but pastors/priests (oh, irony) are mandated reporters. Goes to show that they were homechruching at the time. I know some people have been curious about that timeline, but this is pretty clear evidence that they no longer attended even an IFB church. However, it's clear that whoever leaked to Oprah was a member of that church and was probably excommunicated. I imagine the By Invitation Only church began in, oh, late 2006. 

 

See Boob, that's how you put together a timeline. 

 

I was disappointed that Megan took the show narrative all the way out to 2008, when the fucking debut special was taped barely 6 months after Smuggar came home from Little Rock. No "counseling" for the girls, no nothing. If it happened at all, it was out of context of the timelines that Boob was trying to feed us, like it was all done by 2003. 

 

I'm still so angry; it's going to take me some time to unpack all the bullshit.  That said, some credit to Megyn for the robocall question; Mechelle hung herself with the response. I'm shocked that the editors let that through, but cut her and Boob off quite abruptly when they seemed to veer off course, probably into religion. I forgive them the lame black sheep story; that one is told to five year olds. It shouldn't be an allegory to represent the Duggar Family Dynamics. Ugh. 

 

eta: Mechelle, you are not "at peace." If you were, you would have let Josh speak for himself and let the show go. Period. 

Edited June 4, 2015 by Sew Sumi

[Snowprince]

The teaser of the Jessa/Jill interview broke my heart. I have my doubts, but I hope they'll have as much free reign to tell their story as possible. At the end, I just wanted to jump through the TV and give Jill a hug and let her cry it out.

 

As a retired police officer I wasn't 1 bit surprised by the equivocation, rationalization, minimization and deflection by JB and Michelle. Saw it too many times over the course of my career to be surprised by it, the Duggars aren't the first. Considering it was Fox, Meg Kelly did a better job than I expected. It wasn't the total softball it could have been and she did try to broach some of the harder issues, but not enough IMO. I can only wonder how much more probing the questions would have been in the hands of a Charlie Rose or Anderson Cooper, for example.  As for the police report's release, I worked in California and can't speak to Arkansas with precision. That said, my experience has been that since there were no charges, no involvement with the DA's office and no court record, the crime report is a matter of public record and fair game. Only the names of minor victims, witnesses and subjects (minor/juvenile suspects are referred to as "subjects", not suspects) would be redacted.

 

As the father of a adult daughter, I could only sit in incredulous disbelief and quiet rage at the almost complete disregard JB and Michelle exhibited toward their victimized daughters. I don't know who I want to slap more, them or Josh.   

Edited June 4, 2015 by Snowprince

[Tunia]

But, but..."We took care of it."  "It was all taken care of."  No, Jim Bob, it was just the beginning.

 

The last few days have left me with the feeling that I'm watching the ending of The Wizard of Oz, where the curtain is pulled back and the truth is revealed.  I agree with others who have said that there's probably more to the story.  Sad.

 

Well, it surely explains the reason(s) for their repressive rules, doesn't it?  Sleeping in their clothes, the dormitory style bedrooms - safety in numbers, the youngest girls sharing a bed with an older sister, side hugs, NIKE...on and on.

 

Sure hope they have an ample supply of Tater Tots in their freezer!

 

I had blocked Fox news with parental controls for when my father came into town because he doesn't just watch it, he obsesses over it and I refused to let him do that in my house last time he came to visit.

 

 

sara416, you're today's Queen of the Internet today for this!  Gives a whole new meaning to the term "parental controls" - LOL.  Thanks for a good laugh in the midst of the Duggar misery.

[cheatincheetos]

http://www.rawstory.com/2015/06/final-act-of-patriarchy-twitter-erupts-in-horror-as-megyn-kelly-interviews-the-duggars/

[OpieTaylor]

sorry if this has already been said (not enough time to read every post), but just because Josh said it was on top of clothes, or only a few seconds, or that these were the only times he did anything, doesn't mean any of that is true. JB and M kept saying he came to them every time - how do they know that for a fact?

[cmr2014]

Obviously, I can't know what the Duggar girls were thinking, but I know what I'd think in their shoes.

 

Josh got away with EVERYTHING. He was the golden boy, and nothing he did ever had any consequences. Not only that, but he ended up with a cushy job in DC, a nice house, a nice family, and all kinds of respect.

 

Then, finally, the girls get a little taste of something.They get some attention, they start to build their own lives, and are beginning to plan for the future, and then Josh -- again! Because of Josh, their opportunity to cash out is gone -- poof!

[Sew Sumi]

Jim Bob: "None if the victims knew what Josh had done."

liar, liar, liar

Is he really this fucking stupid? I don't know if he's willfully spinning fallacy or if he is deluded. We have read the police report. Redacted or not! It's clear that at least two of the girls were wide awake and told Mom and Dad before Josh could. Have they really rewritten history so effectively that the truth is irrelevant? I'm watching this with my husband, who is in law enforcement, and he is sitting here telling me that, if Jim Bob were answering questions like this, we these mannerisms and obviousl fallacies, he would immediately stop the interview and Mirandize him. Jim Bob's body language is sketch as hell. Josh was 14 when it STARTED! 16 at the end.

I guess you missed when I posted a couple of days ago that I'd forego drinking to look for logical fallacies. 

 

OMFG. Megyn was also guilty with leading questions. 

 

Dear Boob/Mechelle, Education, even a real high school one, teaches aspects of critical thinking/debating principles. I guess their lemmings are really so blind that they cannot see?

[buddabing]

It seems like the tabloids got the story right in this case. I feel really bad for this family, they are just blinded by their brainwashing religion. Nothing they did is wrong because they are the chosen "enlightened" people. Yuck. 

[txvoodoo]

I think it's clear they didn't manage to find a crisis management PR firm to work with them.

Also telling that you can see flashes of anger and bitterness particularly in JimBob. These are not nice people.

Actually, they did. 

 

"The Duggars have a P.R. expert helping the Duggars tell their story: Chad Gallagher, the head of the Arkansas firm Legacy Consulting.

Gallagher is also a longtime adviser to Huckabee, and is the executive director of Huck PAC."

 

from http://money.cnn.com/2015/06/03/media/duggar-parents-interview-fox-news/index.html?iid=SF_LN

[Missy Vixen]

I couldn't watch.And now I can't sleep.

Thank you for being here, and thank you for your righteous anger.

Let's hope survivors will reach out for help.

[TomServo]

Wow they blatantly lied. The police report definitely showed that the sisters were aware of what was going on and that one of the sisters went to the parents first. 

 

People have been assuming that it was one of the daughters who went to Jim Bob based on reading between the redacted lines of the Springdale police report and because there were fewer victims at the residence than girls living at the residence.  However, there was another report that was made known today that was written up by the Washington County sheriff's(?) office that was much less redacted and as far as I could tell appeared to be a summary of the same interview.  The Washington County report definitely reads like Josh (rather than one of the girls) was the person who went to Jim Bob:

 

"James said that in March of 2002 ****, who had just turned 14, came to him very upset and crying.  James said that **** had told him that he had been sneaking into ********** room at night and had been touching ********** on the breasts and vaginal areas while they were sleeping."

Josh had just turned 14 in March 2002.  The Springdale report reads pretty much word for word the same except that the "turned 14" was redacted.

Edited June 4, 2015 by TomServo

[Sew Sumi]

So is any network that gives victims a platform to speak out revictimizing them by allowing them to speak? Should all victims be forced to sit down and shut up because the networks/media knows what's best for them? That's not right. I don't know if Jill or Jessa feel pressured to be interviewed, but they are both adults who can make decisions for themselves. If they choose to go out and talk about it, that's their choice. It's not the media's decision. They should absolutely have the platform to speak out. [snip]

I strongly disagree that the choice is theirs. If they want paychecks, they toe the party line

regardless of their feelings. Modus Operandi for these (crocodile tears of) clowns. 

Edited June 4, 2015 by Sew Sumi

[kalamac]

I took a look a the twitter hashtag, and saw someone defending the Duggars, saying that the people who were against them were ignorant and needed to learn the facts. We learned the facts, that's why we're against them.

[pennben]

 

I don't know what I was worse this interview with the Duggars or Bill Clinton's “define is" interview.

 

If we judge by someone "inappropriately touching" a child, a five year old, I'm going to go with the Duggars are worse.

Edited June 4, 2015 by pennben

[Gianthambeast]

No words. These two have sold their souls.

[Loves2Dance]

She wasn't a female judge.  She was the police chief.  Releasing the report was illegal. The law is crystal clear in Arkansas.  Sealed juvenile records are exempt from the FOIA without an order from a judge.  She did not have that.    It is claimed she consulted an attorney before she released it.  In that case the attorney should be disbarred.  As a parent of a child who had a juvenile record, I am appalled at what happened.  My child is not the same person he was then.  I thought Megyn's statistics about recidivism were interesting.  And I will state again that I believe those victims had come to terms with what happened and are being victimized yet again.  I share the opinion that most parents would have tried to handle such a situation by themselves.  Not unusual at all. 

The problem here is that it wasn't a record because Josh was never charged. What got released was a report; which according to a few legal experts, even under AR law, wouldn't have been protected. Legally, I doubt they have a leg to stand on. 

[NextIteration]

People have been assuming that it was one of the daughters who went to Jim Bob based on reading between the redacted lines of the Springdale police report and because there were fewer victims at the residence than girls living at the residence.  However, there was another report that was made known today that was written up by the Washington County sheriff's(?) office that was much less redacted and as far as I could tell appeared to be a summary of the same interview.  The Washington County report definitely reads like Josh (rather than one of the girls) was the person who went to Jim Bob:

 

"James said that in March of 2002 ****, who had just turned 14, came to him very upset and crying.  James said that **** had told him that he had been sneaking into ********** room at night and had been touching ********** on the breasts and vaginal areas while they were sleeping."

Josh had just turned 14 in March 2002.  The Springdale report reads pretty much word for word the same except that the "turned 14" was redacted.

 

That's not the instance that people are referring to.  Everyone is referring to the instance when the "little one" was sitting on his lap being read to and he stuck his hand in her panties, as in, UNDER THE CLOTHES, when one of the older girls ran to get help.

 

Lawrence O'Donnell was not having any of it, and the therapist he had on outright said (paraphrased) "Classical denial of an incestuous family, minimization, not allowing the survivors to feel."

 

I watched a clip or two - so while they were pointing fingers at people with an agenda, they outed "the little one" publicly for anyone that didn't read the first police report.  Was it made clear that Jill and Jessa were survivors or are they just spokesisters for Josh?  Absolutely pathetic and deeply disturbing.

 

Dang I forgot, isn't about the age of 6 or 7 a "young boy"?

Edited June 4, 2015 by NextIteration

[NikSac]

I watched a clip or two - so while they were pointing fingers at people with an agenda, they outed "the little one" publicly for anyone that didn't read the first police report.  Was it made clear that Jill and Jessa were survivors or are they just spokesisters for Josh?  Absolutely pathetic and deeply disturbing.

 

I did manage to watch the end and yes, they said several times that both Jill and Jessa were Josh's victims. (their word, not mine, I've been trying to stick with "survivor")

[ThinkerBell]

Jim Bob and Michelle suggest that Josh' s victims were less impacted by the molestation because they were apparently asleep when it happened. They need to realize that if their son did in fact molest the girls when they were asleep, he purposely crept into their room and took advantage of his siblings when they were most vulnerable. It sickens me to think that any adult who pretends to be a caring and concerned parent could ever think that a sleeping child who is molested is less traumatised. Those little girls were not even afforded the safety of their own beds.

[Wok Chop]

Lawrence O'Donnell was not having any of it, and the therapist he had on outright said (paraphrased) "Classical denial of an incestuous family, minimization, not allowing the survivors to feel."

I just googled "incestuous family," and the characteristics and dynamics of such a family are ...the Duggars. I have a feeling that Josh's repeated sexual abuse of his sisters is merely the tip of the abuse iceberg in that household (abuse in general, not necessarily sexual abuse).

ETA: This also helps me better understand why Jill and Jessa may be coming forward to defend their abuser...and makes it that much more heartbreaking.

Edited June 4, 2015 by Wok Chop

[pennben]

 

It's the 5-second rule.

 

Welp, I will never pick up food off the floor invoking THAT rule again. Thanks Duggars.

[Darknight]

I'm surprised Jim dim allowed an educated woman to interview him.

[Spencer Hastings]

I was surprised that she said "hell" in front of them. Some people are okay with saying hell in that context "You must be going through Hell" but I also know a lot of people (my own mother) who would have thrown her out for swearing in their home.

[graefin]

Actually, they did. 

 

"The Duggars have a P.R. expert helping the Duggars tell their story: Chad Gallagher, the head of the Arkansas firm Legacy Consulting.

Gallagher is also a longtime adviser to Huckabee, and is the executive director of Huck PAC."

 

from http://money.cnn.com/2015/06/03/media/duggar-parents-interview-fox-news/index.html?iid=SF_LN

I guess that explaints it?

 

From the little bit that I saw, Megyn Kelly asked more difficult questions than I expected her to--questions that at times seemed to throw JB off a bit. And I think the interview was good in the sense that it's even more clear how crazy these people are.

[sleekandchic]

If I'm understanding the sequence of events, the Chief of Police [ETA: Thanks to Nextiteration below for helping me get the facts straight. :) ] received a request from InTouch for a copy of the report of its investigation into Josh Duggar, pursuant to the FOIA. The Chief consulted wth the state's AG to make sure the release of the report was legal, then released it. Is my understanding correct? Because it sounds as though the Chief did everything by the book.

It would behoove the Duggars to be careful of wantonly accusing the Chief of Police of any wrongdoing, especially if they're brazenly accusing her of purposeful dereliction of duty. And when they spurt their nonsense that the Chief is some kind of enemy because she "bats for the other team," what do the Duggars even mean? Is she a liberal Democrat or a Catholic or a Jew or Muslim or gay or a humanist or a bartender? What is it that would push the Chief to betray her oath of office and jeopardize a career and livelihood?

See, I think Mr and Mrs Duggar are looking at the wrong scapegoat when it comes to Josh's exposure to the world. Because, to me, the real question behind the release of the report is who exactly tipped off InTouch that the report existed in the first place? That Josh Duggar had a history? To me, those are the pivotal questions. Who told InTouch where to look and why they should look?

Because I think the Duggars might be in for a surprise. From the moment this story broke, and Josh Duggar wasted no time in releasing a statement and resigning his position, I've believed that one or more people from the FRC were responsible for outing Josh and getting him out of their employ fast. Fellow conservative Christians, that is. Not all those fake bogeymen the Duggars so easily accuse.

PAC groups know where the bodies are buried and how to exhume and expose them. Either somebody on FRCs staff resented an uneducated, poorly-skilled guy coming in as the Executive Director with a six-figure salary, at the expense of other much-more qualified no-name staffers....or coworkers had had enough of his pompous, know-it-all asshatterry...or higherups decided he was a true liability, but were afraid to fire him outright...it's my opinion that the Duggars should look under the rocks in their own backyard for their "betrayer."

But, of course, the search for the leaker and the threat of lawsuits are nothing but pathetic efforts to switch the focus of this tragedy away from the Duggars' own dereliction of parental duty.

And tonight the Duggars continued on their myopic path of neglect, selfishness and greed, too. The elder Duggars not only did a grave disservice to the survivors tonight, they effectively emasculated their son by presuming to speak for him. Why don't they trust Josh to speak for himself? Where does he go from here? Why did the Duggars decide to out the survivors on FoxNews?

Edited June 4, 2015 by sleekandchic

[CofCinci]

Actually, they did. 

 

"The Duggars have a P.R. expert helping the Duggars tell their story: Chad Gallagher, the head of the Arkansas firm Legacy Consulting.

Gallagher is also a longtime adviser to Huckabee, and is the executive director of Huck PAC."

 

from http://money.cnn.com/2015/06/03/media/duggar-parents-interview-fox-news/index.html?iid=SF_LN

Explains why Huckabee was given a shout out during the interview.

[Brooklynista]

Megyn made a Sophie's Choice reference when talking about the Duggars protecting Josh vs protecting the girls.

I'm sure JimBob quickly thought Sophie was another one of those evil lesbians out to get him.

[NextIteration]

I did manage to watch the end and yes, they said several times that both Jill and Jessa were Josh's victims. (their word, not mine, I've been trying to stick with "survivor")

 

So in conclusion, it's JimBob and Michelle that have identified three of the survivors that most figured out from the original horribly redacted police report on national teevee, after they failed to protect three of them after Josh supposedly self-reported about the first two.

 

Does anybody really believe that everything that occurred was reported either time?  (Originally, to the PedoStatie or in conclusion in the police report?)

 

If I'm understanding the sequence of events, the Arkansas Sheriff's Dept received a request from InTouch for a copy of the report of its investigation into Josh Duggar, pursuant to the FOIA. The Sheriff consulted wth the state's AG to make sure the release of the report was legal, then released it. Is my understanding correct? Because it sounds as though the Sheriff did everything by the book.

 

The lady that they showed and went after was the Chief of Police, who released the document after consulting with her AG.  Yesterday, a second version of the report came out from the county Sheriff's Department - it was more of a summary so there were nowhere near the same amount of redactions.

Edited June 4, 2015 by NextIteration

[NikSac]

Megyn made a Sophie's Choice reference when talking about the Duggars protecting Josh vs protecting the girls.

I'm sure JimBob quickly thought Sophie was another one of those evil lesbians out to get him.

 

I think this was the only part of the interview where I half chuckled. I was way too angry the rest of the time.  I was thinking there was no way they understood that reference.

[OhioMom]

Michelle bugged the hell out of me, she spent the whole interview staring at Jim Bob. Grow up, show some accountability, look Megyn and the camera dead on.

....with her mouth gaping open, like a fish gasping in the air.

[NextIteration]

So when I was up in the middle of the night and posted, I had gone to the live twitter feed for #duggarinterview - in the two hours that I slept there are 1514 updates.  People are pissed, it's 90% scathing against the Duggars.

[sleekandchic]

Thank you so much, Nextiteration for helping me to get the Chief of Police vs Sheriff straight! :)

Yes, that Sophie's Choice reference made by MK made me laugh, too! I thought, are you kidding, Megyn? She really gives the Duggars too much credit.

[Tabbygirl521]

YES. Given all we know about the case, how molesters behave/develop, and 'treatment' Josh got, this was a complete crock. The opposite of what Kelley said is the truth. It's a lifelong problem, like addiction.

EDIT: Also, hearing Jim Bob say 'breast' was the lowest point of my life. So.very.creepy.

I think what Megyn said was that 90% (or whatever) are never ARRESTED again. I need to re watch to be sure but, sadly, I nuked this already. But I do recall that it struck me as a misleading statement. OTOH, I thought she looked like she wanted to barf as she said it.

I also thought they chose some very molestery images of Josh to run along with the intro narrative. Not all, but some.

This was my first viewing of an entire FOX news piece. Was wishing for Rachel Maddow.

Edited June 4, 2015 by Tabbygirl521

[mbutterfly]

Michelle, I agree with you in general that U.S. media is pretty awful, but in this case, it's possible - just barely possible - that your daughters wouldn't have been victimized by the media right now if you hadn't chosen to put your entire family on a television show.  

I agree, and even more -- you regularly appear on GMA, you have multiple exclusive contracts with People magazine, you write and publicize your books, you have a website that is basically advice for parenting, you tour the country lecturing on Christian behavior and you do political campaigning around the U. S. and the media shouldn't talk about you?

Edited June 4, 2015 by mbutterfly

[Albanyguy]

Fox News just had their resident psychologist, Dr. Keith Ablow, on to comment on last night's interview. Ablow is just another TV famewhore like Dr. Drew and Dr. Phil, but today my respect for him went up a notch because he refused to toe the official pro-Duggar line. He said that Jim Bob and Michelle are "in deep denial", "lack empathy for other people" and "should have known that having 19 children meant that they wouldn't be able to provide proper care and supervision for all of them or pay attention to them as individuals". He also blasted Jim Bob's self-serving definition of how old you have to be to qualify as a "pedophile".

 

Sensing trouble, Elizabeth Hasselback tried to deflect him by saying "But they said they put up safeguards!" and Dr. Keith shut her down on that one, saying "They needed to do a lot more." Elizabeth and her co-hosts then started tut-tutting about the leaked police report (because THAT's the only real crime here!) and Dr. Keith again blew right through that one: "Certainly, sealed records should not be leaked, but that's not the most important thing here. Did the Duggars warn the babysitters who later came into their home about the danger their son posed? Did they warn their friends who had young daughters who came into contact with their son?  Have they ever worried about the girls he's come into contact with as an adult?" He ended with "They handled this by sending him off to work construction for a couple of months? Give me a break!".

 

Unlike Megyn Kelly, Dr. Keith isn't going to risk his professional reputation by being an apologist for child molestation, even at the risk of displeasing his bosses at Fox. 

[NextIteration]

Ooooh, thanks for the recap @Albanyguy, and thank you for taking one for the team.  I hope the clip shows up on Newshounds.

[Churchhoney]

I strongly disagree that the choice is theirs. If they want paychecks, they toe the party line

regardless of their feelings. Modus Operandi for these (crocodile tears of) clowns. 

 

Also -- does any kid in that house (and the girls, especially) seem to have any real say in what they do or say about anything? The Duggar place is control-freak central. They even admit that it is. And the control clearly goes way beyond what they admit to. And in this case, doing that Friday interview or not doing it spells money to the family. And with 19 kids, no educations and the champagne tastes the whole gang has been developing for years now, money has got to be a powerful coercive force in the decision to do that interview, seems to me.

I don't know what I was worse this interview with the Duggars or Bill Clinton's “define is" interview.

 

When the outcome of your interview depends on your successfully redefining words like "is" or "sexual molestation," you're definitely in trouble out of the gate.

 

Maybe there's something in the water in Arkansas.

[Cherrio]

Where's Josh?

Gotta keep asking. Where's Josh?

[Churchhoney]

Explains why Huckabee was given a shout out during the interview.

 

Also may explain why Huckabee's presidential chances are pretty much on a par with JimBob's.

That's not the instance that people are referring to.  Everyone is referring to the instance when the "little one" was sitting on his lap being read to and he stuck his hand in her panties, as in, UNDER THE CLOTHES, when one of the older girls ran to get help.

 

Lawrence O'Donnell was not having any of it, and the therapist he had on outright said (paraphrased) "Classical denial of an incestuous family, minimization, not allowing the survivors to feel."

 

I watched a clip or two - so while they were pointing fingers at people with an agenda, they outed "the little one" publicly for anyone that didn't read the first police report.  Was it made clear that Jill and Jessa were survivors or are they just spokesisters for Josh?  Absolutely pathetic and deeply disturbing.

 

Dang I forgot, isn't about the age of 6 or 7 a "young boy"?

 

Naaa. 14/15 is the age of a "young boy." And, coincidentally, I think it's also the age when "courting" or "betrothal" or whatever becomes appropriate. Because isn't Josh rumored to have been involved in one -- or maybe even two? -- such relationships very shortly after all this? 

 

Little disjoint there, I'd say.

[dugie]

It seems like their message is- fear men!! They cant controlled their urges. Even though they know what their doing is wrong they cant help themselves. Woman!!.... don't entice these creatures. Stay indoors untill you are old enough to be the sacraficial virgin and then your parents will give you away to control these heathens sexual appetite and the world will be safe from them.

[Tabbygirl521]

Ma and Pa said a couple of times that eventually they had to move Josh out of the house. Is that when they foisted him onto Anna? Genuine question; I never really watched the show.

It is just sinking in with me that all their ridiculous restrictions for their daughters, which they would have us believe are to protect the girls against the ungodly sinners in the world, were really developed to protect against their brother. But it's the rest of us whom they scold and vilify. I am beginning to hate them. I always figured they operated out of ignorance and fear, whooped up by idiots like Bill Gothard. I now see them as much more calculating (and still ignorant).

Would love to give them some "training" about bearing false witness against their neighbors.

Edited June 4, 2015 by Tabbygirl521

[Churchhoney]

I just googled "incestuous family," and the characteristics and dynamics of such a family are ...the Duggars. I have a feeling that Josh's repeated sexual abuse of his sisters is merely the tip of the abuse iceberg in that household (abuse in general, not necessarily sexual abuse).

ETA: This also helps me better understand why Jill and Jessa may be coming forward to defend their abuser...and makes it that much more heartbreaking.

 

 

Fox News just had their resident psychologist, Dr. Keith Ablow, on to comment on last night's interview. Ablow is just another TV famewhore like Dr. Drew and Dr. Phil, but today my respect for him went up a notch because he refused to toe the official pro-Duggar line. He said that Jim Bob and Michelle are "in deep denial", "lack empathy for other people" and "should have known that having 19 children meant that they wouldn't be able to provide proper care and supervision for all of them or pay attention to them as individuals". He also blasted Jim Bob's self-serving definition of how old you have to be to qualify as a "pedophile".

 

Sensing trouble, Elizabeth Hasselback tried to deflect him by saying "But they said they put up safeguards!" and Dr. Keith shut her down on that one, saying "They needed to do a lot more." Elizabeth and her co-hosts then started tut-tutting about the leaked police report (because THAT's the only real crime here!) and Dr. Keith again blew right through that one: "Certainly, sealed records should not be leaked, but that's not the most important thing here. Did the Duggars warn the babysitters who later came into their home about the danger their son posed? Did they warn their friends who had young daughters who came into contact with their son?  Have they ever worried about the girls he's come into contact with as an adult?" He ended with "They handled this by sending him off to work construction for a couple of months? Give me a break!".

 

Unlike Megyn Kelly, Dr. Keith isn't going to risk his professional reputation by being an apologist for child molestation, even at the risk of displeasing his bosses at Fox. 

 

Good grief, they even lost Ablow? That actually kind of gives me hope that their goose is well and truly cooked.

[Maizie131]

 

4. At the end of every single excuse they make about what happened, someone should stand next to them and say, "and then you decided to do a reality TV show."

THIS is what makes me the angriest, and the bottom line to the whole mess.  Megyn Kelly's (terrific!) question was “What would make you launch a reality TV show about your family given this past?”  THEIR response was, basically, well, it was done, in the past, all was forgiven, and we thought it was all behind us.  Then for the next 10 years they portrayed themselves in a reality TV show to be the best God-loving, moral people on the planet.  Every time I think of the dozens & dozens of times they mentioned side-hugs, no kissing, etc. just pisses me off big-time.  I'm sorry - I think Megyn did the best job she could given the circumstances, she "lobbed" questions out & just sat back & waited for them to respond, which they did, and no question they dug themselves into a deeper hole.  They're toast. 

[xls]

Also may explain why Huckabee's presidential chances are pretty much on a par with JimBob's.

 

Naaa. 14/15 is the age of a "young boy." And, coincidentally, I think it's also the age when "courting" or "betrothal" or whatever becomes appropriate. Because isn't Josh rumored to have been involved in one -- or maybe even two? -- such relationships very shortly after all this? 

 

Little disjoint there, I'd say.

Takes a whole nother' year to be offically a pedopile. Does anyone here know any legal info about that age 16 rule JB claims?