The Duggars' Megyn Kelly Interview - MERGE

[Buzzard]

I was wondering if maybe this should be posted to Megyn Kelly's Facebook page, since Buzzard has done the thing properly, and Ms. Kelly has not bothered.

WAY too many words for the humpers to understand. Thats why she flashed a single sentence on the screen last night (that didnt say what she said it said) and then went off on her tangent.

Reading = hard.

[Rajah061014]

So lets see, we'll misconstrue the FOIA disclosures and then...

Likely find numbers that are favorable to the Duggars.

Here's what its really all about:

Right. They would still have a show if they were permitted to keep lying to the public. Lets distract away from that much and all will be well!

Yeah, I about lost my lunch when I got to the bolded paragraph. It just reeks of protecting Josh instead of protecting the girls. Ugg. Part of me wants to watch out of curiosity, but the other part of me is just disgusted by it all.

[mamallama]

I hate to say this but even with the names redacted the report does identify the victims.

ETA-I still don't think it makes the release illegal.

[JMO]

Did anyone else see the fox news online story that a "new police report " identifies one of the victims as 5 at the time? It was dated today. Besides the fact that it's too coincidental that it was posted today, is there really a new report or was it just posted by them today as if it was brand new?

[twinmama]

But, she said, the Duggars also believe the show “has a chance still. It’s not totally done.â€

This kind of blows my mind. WHY would they still want the show, other than being money grubbing famewhores? The show puts their daughters in a horrible position of having the world watch their every move and IMO it keeps the abuse front and center in their lives (bc it keeps them and the abuse in the news). If they all faded into the tv history books, the girls could move on with their lives easier.

[noisyboys_4]

If this has been mentioned before just ignore me. However I see cousin Amy is advertising the interview on instagram. From the comments it seems like she's deleting some.

[justoneoftwo]

Yeah, I about lost my lunch when I got to the bolded paragraph. It just reeks of protecting Josh instead of protecting the girls. Ugg. Part of me wants to watch out of curiosity, but the other part of me is just disgusted by it all.

It is protecting Josh, but it also is a valid question, particularly given the ages of the M-kids. On the other hand, should the victims who say it never happened again be believed? We know children are not the most reliable witnesses. Is this case different than others in that regard?

[Nishi621]

This is all so disappointing and disgusting, though, sadly, not unexpected

[DaysAgo]

I agree with Megyn here. The perpetrator and the victims were all minors when this happened. One victim is still a minor. If they don't want to talk about it that should be respected. I also agree that the report should have never been released (again, because everyone was a minor and one victim still is). Ethically it is just wrong. JB&M sought out fame but the kids had no choice in the matter.

HOWEVER, the story that still needs told is how the ADULTS handled the situation. Why did so many adults continuously fail Josh and the victims? It appalls me that Megyn will likely ignore this fact completely. There is no reason she couldn't conduct this interview focusing on this, while still making it clear that the release of the report is very wrong. But since she has come out and said that won't be happening, I see no purpose for even doing this fluff piece at all.

I suggest we keep track of all advertisers for this episode and future episodes of The Kelly File and write to them, letting them know we don't support them because they are supporting a 'journalist' who supports the cover-up of child abuse.

Excellent idea to keep track of the sponsors for this interview. Can someone start a thread that lists them?

[DaysAgo]

Just like Megyn, I am not an arkansas attorney. Unlike Megyn, I have the ability to read. (this is long, sorry)

Here is the FOIA statute that we are dealing with:

We know that there was no court order prohibiting disclosure. How do we know that? Because the order was issued AFTER disclosure. Courts dont issue duplicative orders.

Regarding Juvenile cases:

Troutt Bros., Inc. v. Emison, 311 Ark. 27 at 30-31

Josh was never part of a program. He was never arrested, charged, or found to be delinquent. He fits NONE of the exceptions that would prohibit disclosure under my reading of Arkansas law.

Now, she appears to be pointing to this statute as the basis for her argument:

But again, SUBJECT OF PROCEEDINGS is the kicker. Josh was never the subject of any legal proceeding. The FINS affidavit and recommendations are not "proceedings."

and to further confirm that point...

A police report is a public record.

No petition = no proceeding = police report is fair game

Sorry Megyn, your outrage is misguided.

A legal analyst online determined that the statute of limitations was not 3 years; it was 7 years because Josh was a minor.

[Buzzard]

Did anyone else see the fox news online story that a "new police report " identifies one of the victims as 5 at the time? It was dated today. Besides the fact that it's too coincidental that it was posted today, is there really a new report or was it just posted by them today as if it was brand new?

There is a new report. Its nothing we dont already know, though.

You can also see that entire pages are redacted.

[JChelle's Perm]

Have any of y'all seen the drinking game?

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/05/31 ... gulations/

Do you want alcohol poisoning? this is how you get alcohol poisoning.

[Hera]

This kind of blows my mind. WHY would they still want the show, other than being money grubbing famewhores? The show puts their daughters in a horrible position of having the world watch their every move and IMO it keeps the abuse front and center in their lives (bc it keeps them and the abuse in the news). If they all faded into the tv history books, the girls could move on with their lives easier.

Because Jim Bob and Michelle give zero fucks about their daughters. Or their son for that matter. The show keeps "Josh Duggar, Admitted Child Molester" in the news, too. I've run out of words for how disgusting these two are.

[DaysAgo]

I not sure where to post this, but this latest is about Bill Gothard and how his new website was taken down after only a couple hours of being open:

http://gawker.com/insane-duggar-cult-le ... 1708747235

[JessaJessa]

Looks like they left a "Josh" in that new report. Oops.

[twinmama]

It is protecting Josh, but it also is a valid question, particularly given the ages of the M-kids. On the other hand, should the victims who say it never happened again be believed? We know children are not the most reliable witnesses. Is this case different than others in that regard?

Didn't the shows start shortly after the last documented case of abuse? Or were they going on during the earliest specials? Because I would imagine it would be much harder to hide all evidence of abuse if it's occurring while there are constantly crew members throughout your house. Not that they'd see abuse happening, but catching bits of conversations and seeing devastated kids type stuff. I feel like if it was happening while they were being filmed, it would have come out.

But then, I also don't know how or why Josh would have stopped as he got older if he was given no therapy or help.

[gemma]

The Duggars think they can get out of the pressure cooker and save the show. What they can't get through their heads is that the vast majority of this country finds child molestation absolutely reprehensible. You'd think they'd have gotten a clue with all the sponsors pulling out.

[Mom23]

The Duggars just announced on their Facebook page that the Friday interview is Jill & Jessa telling their story?!?

[KSmom]

Posted about 5 minutes ago on Dugger Family Official on Facebook, that Jessa and Jill will be on the Friday interview.

I don't even.... :angry-banghead:

[twinmama]

Oh man... so JB & M defending Josh and making excuse left and right is one thing, but Jill and Jessa doing it (which you just know they will) is so damaging to other abuse survivors. UGH. I just hate these people.

But I guess that confirms that Jill and Jessa were abused, as was Joy according to the new In Touch. I so hope these young women are the ones who want their names out there (not that Joy had a choice) and they aren't being pressured to publicly forgive.

[Idolatry]

WHY ARE THEY MAKING JILL AND JESSA DO THIS?!?!? Oh wait, I guess they are the only ones who can't go to jail. Just make nice sweetie. Say it was no biggie. God healed it, right?

[YoshiCat]

Thank you for answering this.

There are established processes and procedures in place for dealing with requests. If the people who handle these requests have any question, they will refer it to an attorney.

I'm in a different state (Texas), but I have a FOIA request that's currently hung up in legal questions. I had to resubmit my request directly to a city attorney. The city attorney has made a request to the state Attorney General to withhold some of the information I've requested. They had to provide the AG with samples of what they want to withhold.

My point is that these requests are not handled casually by whoever happens to be in the vicinity. If this request went through a city attorney, it was probably released properly. If the city attorney was unsure, there would have been an appeal to the state Attorney General. They can get sued for not releasing records so they want to CYA if they're going to deny a request.

As for Michelle's statement that it was released without their permission, that's irrelevant. Their permission is not necessary nor would they even be consulted. The record does not belong to them, it belongs to the municipality that created it. I'm certain that the subject of my request doesn't want the information released but she doesn't have any say in the matter; she probably doesn't even know that the request has been made.

Attempting to claim it was released improperly is just going to bring out a parade of lawyers to state that it wasn't. And unless Megyn Kelly is a lawyer who has practiced in this area in the state of Arkansas, she's an idiot to try to interpret the law. It's not as simple as reading the statue. There are phrases that have specific legal meanings and there's case law that lays out judicial interpretation of the law. That's why you need a law degree and experience in that particular area.

[chelleinchicago]

I think my earlier prediction is likely to come true now that they've announced the interview with Jill and Jessa. This has to mean that Jim Bob will be falling on his sword tonight (with a whimper from Michelle) to make way for the new Brady Brides sequel.

Think about it: Why else hasn't TLC made a decision? They're letting them handle this themselves. Fucking hell. If I'm right TLC is even worse than I'd originally thought.

[jqlgoblue]

Not so sure TLC isn't exerting some pressure. The Duggars have managed to keep more composed than I expected.

I know folks have wondered why TLC hasn't done an interview on their own, but the fact is they don't have that capability (unlike Bravo) to do it and you can't build that fast, you need to oursource a la Erica Hill. None of those networks will touch it, Fox News was the best bet. It makes some sense.

[ILoveJellybeans]

I hope that Jill and Jessa chose to do this interview and tell their story, and that they feel comfortable enough to say what they really think, instead of being pressured into doing it and doing what their parents tell them to.

Come on Jessa, youre the outspoken Duggar (but only if you actually want to do this, if not tell them to fuck off)