Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search

Josh & Anna Smuggar: A Series of Unfortunate Events

maraleia

By maraleia
in Counting On

  • Start Topic

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 39.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • GeeGolly

    1526

  • Churchhoney

    1075

  • JoanArc

    1061

  • Sew Sumi

    1049

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

hoosier80
hoosier80

New show title: 10 to 20 Years and Counting 

MargeGunderson
MargeGunderson

Someone on Reddit just described Josh’s face as a glistening glazed ham. I am considering divorcing my husband and marrying that poster. 

doodlebug
doodlebug

Well, for many of us, it's the difference between 'imperfect' and 'non-PC' and being a criminal.  Josh is a child molester and his parents actively intervened in his situation to avoid him being punis

Posted Images

Nysha

Nysha

9 hours ago, Scarlett45 said:

I don't think JB and Michelle blamed Anna for Josh's scandals. I just don't. Parents know their kids, and while they may have been surprised by the scoop of his behavior -he didn't cheat the "normal" way, met someone he clicked with and had an affair, he trolled the internet on various sites to collect scores and scores of sexual partners which was dumb as FUCK given who his family was, I just don't think they blame Anna at all. They couldn't control Josh when he was 14 and living in their house, I don't think they expected Anna to be able to control him. I honestly don't think she knew. 

 

I disagree. The girls were locked in their room at night and had to wear leggings after Josh's actions, instead of locking him in his room and keeping him physically away from them during the day. That tells me they believed that Josh was incapable of controlling his urges because of the behavior of the girls. JimBob & Michelle have downplayed, covered up, and made excuse after excuse for Josh and they already believe that if a woman isn't joyfully available for her husband, he will stray. Since that's what Josh did, it must be Anna's fault. I doubt they connect the "curious mistakes" of 14 year old Josh with the adultry committed by a clearly frustrated grown man who's wife was too pregnant or tired to submit to him.

  • Love 14
GeeGolly

GeeGolly

3 hours ago, Aja said:

"...and Pastor GeeGolly has a Divinity Degree from PTV Academy."

"I've never heard of it."

"I guess you aren't holy enough."

Jeremy, Derick and Ben ought to attend PTV Academy. The courses here are great - Religion, Lifestyle, Finances, Fellowship, Relationships and even Fashion. And I'm betting the religious education at PTV A is better than anything they're getting or have gotten.

  • Love 5
Mollie

Mollie

2 minutes ago, GeeGolly said:

Jeremy, Derick and Ben ought to attend PTV Academy. The courses here are great - Religion, Lifestyle, Finances, Fellowship, Relationships and even Fashion. And I'm betting the religious education at PTV A is better than anything they're getting or have gotten.

Of course you are joking when you suggest that they might actually want a religious education.  These three Bible Muskateers went straight from drinking the Kool-Aid to mixing and serving it.  As an afterthought, Ben and now Derick have taken some online Bible courses to fade a little heat about their lack of credentials.  Jeremy is still too arrogant to admit he is ill-prepared to be a preacher.  All three of them put TLC filming as the #1 priority in their lives and drop their "ministries" to change a diaper or decorate an apartment when the cameras are rolling.  Don't hold your breath waiting for one of them to preach a sermon about how it is impossible to serve God and mammon.  That's as unlikely as Derick giving up his big DONATE! button. 

  • Love 8
Marigold

Marigold

(edited)
On 4/4/2017 at 5:05 PM, Nysha said:

I disagree. The girls were locked in their room at night and had to wear leggings after Josh's actions, instead of locking him in his room and keeping him physically away from them during the day. That tells me they believed that Josh was incapable of controlling his urges because of the behavior of the girls. 

I think they locked the girls in their rooms and put leggings on them to protect them from Josh, who couldn't control his actions at all and it had nothing to do with the girls.

Jim Bob knew exactly what Josh was about and was considered a "bad seed".  He married Josh off rather quickly and hoped that Anna and married sex would solve the problem.  

 

Way, way back in my mind is the idea of a Generational Curse, that I remember from being IFB (lite).  Any other ex-Funds remember this?  Churchhoney? Aja?  (how do you tag someone?) @Churchhoney    @Aja

 It was trendy in the 70's and 80's.  Kinda died off lately. Jim Bob has hinted at some negative things about his own father.  Maybe Jim Bob, in his blame shifting mind, attributed Josh's behavior to a Generational Curse? Josh did say "Satan built a fortress in my heart".  A bit of hint right there. 

A generational Curse is a stretch but Gothard is a weird man and teaches/taught some very strange doctrine. Gothard did have a teaching about not adopting because of some "curse", right?  That's the same thing...

Edited by Marigold
  • Love 2
Zahdii

Zahdii

I don't know if it was called a curse, but there was something about not adopting because you'd never know what sins the parents carried with them, and if the children were inflicted with those same sins.  Which is stupid, because Gothard also taught that when a person sinned, a few prayers to God wiped the sin away and once God forgave the sin, mere humans should also do the same.  Gothard also taught that the father was the direct line to God for the family.  So adopt a child, then have Dad pray to God to forgive whatever sins the child carried and it should be all right, right?  Sure, at some point a child would have to confess their own sins, but their confession was to their parents and they'd pray together for forgiveness.  If it was a bad sin, the kid might have to confess to other church members, so everyone could pray together and forgive together, but still.  It doesn't make sense.

  • Love 5
Marigold

Marigold

3 hours ago, Zahdii said:

I don't know if it was called a curse, but there was something about not adopting because you'd never know what sins the parents carried with them, and if the children were inflicted with those same sins.  Which is stupid, because Gothard also taught that when a person sinned, a few prayers to God wiped the sin away and once God forgave the sin, mere humans should also do the same.  Gothard also taught that the father was the direct line to God for the family.  So adopt a child, then have Dad pray to God to forgive whatever sins the child carried and it should be all right, right?  Sure, at some point a child would have to confess their own sins, but their confession was to their parents and they'd pray together for forgiveness.  If it was a bad sin, the kid might have to confess to other church members, so everyone could pray together and forgive together, but still.  It doesn't make sense.

I think that's where the "curse" part comes in.  A sin is a sin but a curse can't be prayed away.

I think. :)

  • Love 2
Marigold

Marigold

IBLP Generational Curse

This should probably move to the religion section of the boards...if anyone wants to discuss it further.  I will post it over there too. 

I was just tying it in to Josh and his vile actions. Does Jim Bob think Josh has a generational curse? Jim Bob has lightly hinted his father wasn't "Godly" or something of that nature? Does this tie in to Josh or am I overthinking because I am bored typing reports for work.  :) :)

  • Love 2
MamaMax

MamaMax

(edited)
On 4/4/2017 at 5:05 PM, Nysha said:

I disagree. The girls were locked in their room at night and had to wear leggings after Josh's actions, instead of locking him in his room and keeping him physically away from them during the day. That tells me they believed that Josh was incapable of controlling his urges because of the behavior of the girls. JimBob & Michelle have downplayed, covered up, and made excuse after excuse for Josh and they already believe that if a woman isn't joyfully available for her husband, he will stray. Since that's what Josh did, it must be Anna's fault. I doubt they connect the "curious mistakes" of 14 year old Josh with the adultry committed by a clearly frustrated grown man who's wife was too pregnant or tired to submit to him.

 

On 4/6/2017 at 3:10 PM, Marigold said:

IBLP Generational Curse

This should probably move to the religion section of the boards...if anyone wants to discuss it further.  I will post it over there too. 

I was just tying it in to Josh and his vile actions. Does Jim Bob think Josh has a generational curse? Jim Bob has lightly hinted his father wasn't "Godly" or something of that nature? Does this tie in to Josh or am I overthinking because I am bored typing reports for work.  :) :)

All this stuff just points to the idea that Michelle and Boob want to deny all this because it reflects poorly on THEM. If there's something wrong with Josh, doesn't that mean they didn't "Train him up" correctly?  The only reason they have eleventy kids to begin with is because they think it makes them look holier. God sent us so many Blessings because we are BETTER THAN Y'ALL.

Edited by MamaMax
  • Love 8
queenanne

queenanne

17 hours ago, MamaMax said:

 

All this stuff just points to the idea that Michelle and Boob want to deny all this because it reflects poorly on THEM. If there's something wrong with Josh, doesn't that mean they didn't "Train him up" correctly?  The only reason they have eleventy kids to begin with is because they think it makes them look holier. God sent us so many Blessings because we are BETTER THAN Y'ALL.

Yes, I am pretty sure most logical people would assume that if there is something wrong with Josh, the "system has failed".  If Gothard/Duggar does not turn out perfectly trained little automatons contributing to making society better through evangelism, who never, ever give in to their baser impulses because they're Better Than That, the whole system is called into question. 

  • Love 2
  • Popular Post
Maharincess

Maharincess

  • Popular Post
On 4/4/2017 at 11:00 AM, Natalie68 said:

Someone says this to me ever:  “It is one of the greatest sins of women today, is a self-centered narcissistic view of how they are to have control of their bodies. The Bible says your body is not your own, sister. It is your husband’s.” might just get their nads torn off their body.  

Yes ma'am, same with me. 

Every time I read this thread all I can think of is, thank god I'm an atheist. 

  • Love 33
MamaMax

MamaMax

21 hours ago, queenanne said:

Yes, I am pretty sure most logical people would assume that if there is something wrong with Josh, the "system has failed".  If Gothard/Duggar does not turn out perfectly trained little automatons contributing to making society better through evangelism, who never, ever give in to their baser impulses because they're Better Than That, the whole system is called into question. 

The Gothard/Quiverfull people are essentially in competition with one another though.  The objective being to pump out the Blessings as a marker of success.  The children are treated less as people and more as trophies.  By producing so many children as a sign of the status of the parents, it essentially de-humanizes the children.  And a kid like Josh is considered defective and somehow a reflection of the state of his parent's souls. So they cover up for him and make excuses not for HIM, but for themselves. They take care of Anna and the M's  not for them, but for THEMSELVES.  They deny the damage done to their daughters because to admit the girls may have been damaged emotionally would add to the number of defective children and ergo, make them seem even less holy/blessed. It's so twisted. 

  • Love 20
Barb23

Barb23

2 hours ago, Readalot said:

http://people.com/crime/sister-confronts-brother-sentenced-for-raping-her-as-child-it-was-sexual-abuse-it-was-not-curiosity/

I wish Josh's sister victims were able to confront him like this girl did  "it was sexual abuse, not curiosity"  

Wow. Love all the comments referencing the Duggars (& People.)

  • Love 10
Natalie68

Natalie68

12 hours ago, Barb23 said:

Wow. Love all the comments referencing the Duggars (& People.)

I for one am glad no one is forgetting what Douchelord did to his sisters.  I was kinda shocked how many comments referenced them though.  I was virtual high fiving all of them!  I still think there is a reason Kim Jung Boob has married off all the victims (that we know about).

  • Love 4
Scarlett45

Scarlett45

3 hours ago, JoanArc said:

Josh is taking the stand!

Whelp, that lawsuit's getting settled out of court. Ol' Nancy herself will show up with a check if she has to.

I disagree with the article. I don't think this mans lawsuit is frivolous. Josh is a public figure and he used his photo without permission.....he should be paid for his trouble. 

  • Love 14
Maharincess

Maharincess

8 hours ago, JoanArc said:

Josh is taking the stand!

Whelp, that lawsuit's getting settled out of court. Ol' Nancy herself will show up with a check if she has to.

Who is Nancy? 

I read on Pickles that the plaintiff's lawyer is a woman named Michelle. I hope this is televized, I would love to see Josh have to answer to a lowly woman. 

  • Love 3
Churchhoney

Churchhoney

5 hours ago, Maharincess said:

Who is Nancy? 

I read on Pickles that the plaintiff's lawyer is a woman named Michelle. I hope this is televized, I would love to see Josh have to answer to a lowly woman. 

Nancy Daniels, head of the TLC Network.

10 hours ago, Scarlett45 said:

I disagree with the article. I don't think this mans lawsuit is frivolous. Josh is a public figure and he used his photo without permission.....he should be paid for his trouble. 

I agree. I'm not sure I would consider any lawsuit over any form of actual identity theft to be frivolous. You have no business using other people's stuff -- including their FACES -- for your own purposes. And of course that goes double when you are a public figure, whose misdeeds linked to the other person's identity are going to get publicity. Sue away, picture man.

  • Love 18
JoanArc

JoanArc

9 hours ago, Scarlett45 said:

I disagree with the article. I don't think this mans lawsuit is frivolous. Josh is a public figure and he used his photo without permission.....he should be paid for his trouble. 

I think the most credible argument the plaintiff has is that employers will be googling his name for the rest of his life. Even though he's totally innocent, his name is still tangentially attached to pedophic Molestation scandal. Imagine if it were your good name. Google is forever.

  • Love 12
Guest

Guest

4 minutes ago, JoanArc said:

I think the most credible argument the plaintiff has is that employers will be googling his name for the rest of his life. Even though he's totally innocent, his name is still tangentially attached to pedophic Molestation scandal. Imagine if it were your good name. Google is forever.

Also, when people google Josh's name his photo might still come up

Christina87

Christina87

On 4/4/2017 at 5:25 AM, GeeGolly said:

The article quotes the same Duggar spiel they've been touting for years. It sounds very much like the Pastor used the Duggars and Josh scandal #2 to gain more interest. Or the Inquisitr did. Or both

The Pastor's quote (also quoted by @JoanArc above) is so effed up. Looks like heaven is going to have low female numbers according to this guy.

“It is one of the greatest sins of women today, is a self-centered narcissistic view of how they are to have control of their bodies. The Bible says your body is not your own, sister. It is your husband’s.”

What happens if the guy won't put out? It is actually a lot, lot more common than most people think!

  • Love 3
Churchhoney

Churchhoney

10 hours ago, Christina87 said:

What happens if the guy won't put out? It is actually a lot, lot more common than most people think!

This is a patriarchal system. He can do anything he wants. If he won't put out, she's probably not doing things right. As people pointed out over on the Duggalo thread the other day, the guy preaching there conveniently skipped the bible passages that give husbands responsibilities toward their wives. Women have to take all sorts of responsibilities in their marriages, but the men are the bosses and get things their way, regardless of what they want. And if anything at all goes wrong -- such as the guy going after another woman or refusing to boink his own woman -- then it's definitely the fault of the wife or some other woman or both, according to this crowd.

  • Love 3
doodlebug

doodlebug

1 hour ago, Churchhoney said:

This is a patriarchal system. He can do anything he wants. If he won't put out, she's probably not doing things right. As people pointed out over on the Duggalo thread the other day, the guy preaching there conveniently skipped the bible passages that give husbands responsibilities toward their wives. Women have to take all sorts of responsibilities in their marriages, but the men are the bosses and get things their way, regardless of what they want. And if anything at all goes wrong -- such as the guy going after another woman or refusing to boink his own woman -- then it's definitely the fault of the wife or some other woman or both, according to this crowd.

Yes, if her headship doesn't want to bed her; it's because she has let herself go; probably gained weight and gotten flabby after the first 6 or 8 births.  Or, doesn't have time to get the perms he loves so much.  Or, pulls her long hair back into an unsexy ponytail while she's cooking and cleaning and taking care of his kids.  Maybe she made him wait until she was done breastfeeding the baby before making herself 'joyfully available.'  There are a million reasons why a man might not want to have sex and all of them are his wife's fault.

  • Love 16
luvmylabs

luvmylabs

On 4/6/2017 at 10:33 PM, louannems said:

https://m.facebook.com/duggarfamilyofficial/photos/a.516618088471845.1073741827.510067475793573/1016045938529055/?type=3&source=48&__tn__=E

Meredith is a cutie!

She looks just like the little girls Eloise Wilkin drew in the old Golden Books for children.  What a cutie!

  • Love 3
SMama

SMama

I would not like to see the victims' further humiliated, but I'm all for Boob and Mullet to take the stand. Because it was their protection of Josh, above their daughters, that started him on the road to think he could take awhat he wanted without consequences. And if they are trying to settle, that is another example that at almost thirty, with four kids and one on the way, his reprehensible parents are still doing their best to keep him from facing the consequences of his immoral behavior. He needs to be exposed for the amoral polecat he is. 

  • Love 12
Obsidian

Obsidian

On 23 April 2017 at 6:37 AM, lascuba said:

I will be devastated if they settle this lawsuit out of court. I need depositions, discovery, Josh and as many other Duggars as possible on the stand. I want dirt straight from the horses' mouths. I'm not the praying type, but I'm calling on every deity I can think of to make this happen.

Duggars, depositions, dirt and deity. They could launch a show with that name. I might like it.

  • Love 8
doodlebug

doodlebug

2 hours ago, JoanArc said:

Not a lawyer - could Michelle or Jim Bob even be fored to testify? It's all things Josh did. Maybe as character (ha) witnesses?

I'd give blood to see Jim Bob cross examined by a competent no nonsense female attorney. He'd shit himself on the stand and commit  perjury.

If they were subpoenaed, they'd have no choice.  However, they couldn't be asked about Josh' childhood or the molestations because they wouldn't be relevant to this particular case.  Same for Josh, perhaps they could try to get the molestations past a judge as evidence of Josh' previous criminal behavior, but Josh' lawyer would object strenuously and he'd probably win.  The only thing that Josh can be questioned about is the Ashley Madison stuff and how the other guy's picture was posted there.  Maybe, if it was a family credit card that paid the bill for the site, Jim Bob would have to testify to help set up the connection to Josh, but that's about it.  I think people who are expecting a major Duggar courtroom tell-all are going to be disappointed.  However, the media will be all over any trial and no way Jim Bob wants that past history brought back to sully the 'brand'.  They're just getting the TV show up and running again, cannot afford bad press right now, which is why he will probably settle. 

  • Love 3
doodlebug

doodlebug

1 hour ago, sometimesy said:

What if this guy says hs reputation is ruined because it's now associated with a child molester? Does that open the door for questions? 

Josh was neither prosecuted nor convicted of any crime, though, and he was a minor at the time those incidents occurred.  The other guy might try to bring it into the discussion, but I'd expect Josh' attorneys to object.  I'm no lawyer, but it seems to me that it is far from a sure thing that a judge would allow it.  The fact that Josh used the guy's picture on a website soliciting partners for married people is icky enough and, his main claim to damages is that Josh is somewhat well known and the publicity surrounding the Ashley Madison hack included Josh' name which, in searching the site, would lead directly to a picture of NOT Josh.

  • Love 1
GeeGolly

GeeGolly

On 4/21/2017 at 8:44 AM, JoanArc said:

I think the most credible argument the plaintiff has is that employers will be googling his name for the rest of his life. Even though he's totally innocent, his name is still tangentially attached to pedophic Molestation scandal. Imagine if it were your good name. Google is forever.

In his case Google might be his friend. Josh used his image and not his name so if they Google his name it will be about how Josh stole his pics.

5 hours ago, doodlebug said:

Josh was neither prosecuted nor convicted of any crime, though, and he was a minor at the time those incidents occurred.  The other guy might try to bring it into the discussion, but I'd expect Josh' attorneys to object.  I'm no lawyer, but it seems to me that it is far from a sure thing that a judge would allow it.  The fact that Josh used the guy's picture on a website soliciting partners for married people is icky enough and, his main claim to damages is that Josh is somewhat well known and the publicity surrounding the Ashley Madison hack included Josh' name which, in searching the site, would lead directly to a picture of NOT Josh.

Josh used his own pics on AM - with a mask on. He used this other guys pics on a regular dating site.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...