The Duggars' Megyn Kelly Lie-a-Thon Shit Show- Part 2

[justbecause]

Unless married, they'd have to list their parents' incomes to apply for aid until they're 25 (http://www.bankrate.com/finance/college ... ostly.aspx), and even with all the other children they probably make too much for the girls to receive anything more than a few thousand in subsidized loans (expected family contributions tend to be completely unrealistic). They'd probably need a cosigner for any other loans. It's a really awful system.

I believe that within the financial aid process, someone can distinguish between if they are receiving financial support or other support from their parents.

I don't believe that they would need their parents as a 'co-signer' on loans either.

Do you think that no other children have ever been in a situation where they are not receiving family support?

There is also the Technical College route that is a Liberal Arts and Sciences associate degree that if they take college transferable courses from an accredited institution almost always transfer to a four-year college.

I don't buy this argument at all.

[nst]

I am wondering why Josh is not speaking up - he is getting trashed in the press - he throws his pregnant sister under the bus.

Also in clips we keep seeing in tonight's show - images of Megan talking to the howlers, Ben, Joy and Jinger

why wouldn't Jinger and Joy want to talk - why again throw their pregnant sister under the bus.

I wake up every morning wondering if Josh has killed himself

For me - I think the bottom line is they lied the last 10 years about the fact that they were so pure and virtuous - so perfect - not knowing they had this horrible secret - and why make the girls especially Jessa right now - go on camera...

[2xx1xy1JD]

The major WTF points for me were:

1. The notion that "precautions" like no boys babysitting are a sign of responsible parenting.

No, No, NO. Normal teen boys do not molest little girls, including their sisters. If they do, it means that something is very, very wrong. The NORMAL response to babysitting or changing a diaper is to have no sexual response, and to maintain appropriate behavior at all times.

If you have to take "precautions", then you need to prevent any single moment of unsupervised contact with minors, period. Casual supervision does not work. If someone wants to sexually molest a child, they will seek out an opportunity, even with others in the home/room. It was not safe to have Josh remain in the home. They had alternatives - after all, Grandma and Grandpa Duggar had their own home.

2. The notion that this happens in "lots of families"

Springdale is a small town, right? Exactly how many families like this would the Duggars know? There is no indication that they ever went to family group counseling for incest survivors. Now, I do know of similar situations, but that's because I've done child protection law and once did a year-long contract for a large agency. If it's normal for this to happen in your social circle, WTF is wrong with the families you know?

This is where some actual questions to the Duggars about whether they teach that there is a difference between non-consensual touching of another person, esp. a close relative, and esp. where they are a child and you are in a position of trust, and whacking off in the bathroom.

3. The notion that it's somehow less of a problem if the victims didn't remember much

News flash: The fact that one victim was really young, and that other victims were sleeping, is PART OF THE PROBLEM. See predatory behavior and lack of consent.

4. The "...but the real story is the release of the report" line

Seriously, WTF?

You are complaining that you are in headlines around the world? Guess what? YOU HAVE A TV SHOW! You give interviews to People magazine and land on the cover on a regularly basis. Clearly, you have no problem whatsoever with attention from people around the world. What bothers you is that you couldn't control the script this time, and people were appalled by the truth.

When you talk about "the real story", you make it clear that you (1) are pretty desperate to distract attention, and (2) have no sense of moral proportion.

5. The insistence that crying confession = proof that something is not a problem

Ok, awareness of guilt is a first step - but it's only the first step.

It is VERY VERY VERY common with all sorts of problems, including abuse and addiction, for someone to tearfully admit that they did something wrong, ask forgiveness and promise never to do it again. If nothing else is done, though, this promise will often be broken, because nobody is dealing with the underlying issues.

I have personal and professional experience dealing with this cycle. Someone can start to develop a bit of a split personality - there's the "good" side that knows that this is wrong and thinks that this behavior is terrible, and there is the "bad" side that is determined to do it anyway. All the promises and tears from the good side don't matter, because they don't address the bad side. Any counseling has to recognize that yes, the bad side is part of you, just like the good side. It's not some mysterious outside force. You need to take responsibility for what the bad side does too. You need to fully acknowledge it, even if you have been forgiven. In fact, forgiving and forgetting makes the problem worse, because it stops you from fully admitting the whole truth about the bad side and truly exploring why the bad side does things. One goal in counseling needs to be to end the split personality. The good side does not need to be perfect. Someone can admit to flaws and pressures, but they then need to have healthy ways to deal with those.

6. The complete lack of acknowledgement that they (the parents) did anything wrong, or that other families should take different steps in a similar situation.

Um, isn't acknowledging what you did wrong and making a sincere effort to change part of the whole repentance thing? And not saying, "but it was totally not a big deal and we thought we handled it well and dammit nobody should have found out about the whole problem in the first place"?

Re Dr. Glass - please, there is enough actual WTF from the stuff that we know, and from the ATI materials and philosophy that they follow. Let's keep the focus on that, without going off into mindless speculation from a shameless famewhore looking to expand her practice. FWIW, I have some friends who happen to have very high-pitch voices - it says something about their vocal chords, not their personality. Just like I know some feminine women with deep voices.

[FakePigtails]

I believe that within the financial aid process, someone can distinguish between if they are receiving financial support or other support from their parents.

I don't believe that they would need their parents as a 'co-signer' on loans either.

Do you think that no other children have ever been in a situation where they are not receiving family support?

There is also the Technical College route that is a Liberal Arts and Sciences associate degree that if they take college transferable courses from an accredited institution almost always transfer to a four-year college.

I don't buy this argument at all.

Uh, well, it's reality. I know people who've had to hold off on their educations until they can apply for aid without their parents income information. Regardless of whether parents provide anything to their child at all, their income must go on the form. Their actual contributions to their children are not part of the application. As it is, you cannot apply for federal aid (a form required by many schools for their own aid as well) without your parents' info unless you're 25 or have one of few other exceptions, which you can read about in the link I posted.

Do you think that no other children have ever been in a situation where they are not receiving family support?

It happens all the time, and huge numbers of young people in the country are screwed over by it because of our system.

I don't believe that they would need their parents as a 'co-signer' on loans either.

No, parents don't have to be the ones to co-sign, but someone capable of passing a credit check must be available and willing to take on the risk of the debt.

[SassyPants]

QUOTE TRIMMED

There is only ONE answer to this situation. "We were young, we were scared, and we failed our children. We know now that trying to handle this ourselves was a mistake and we ask forgiveness from ALL of our children for the harm that we have caused. We encourage families in a similar situation to call (insert number Megyn keeps flashing) or their local family services agency immediately."

Thats it. No blaming, no excuses, no deflection. The truth shall set you free.

[The Duggar's Mohel]

The whole notion that 14/15 is just a child an they may not have known better is complete crap!

Sure that might make him a minor in the eyes of the law, but my god if you're going to preach a higher standard of morality then 14/15 you damn well know insidious sexual assault is a freaking crime. I mean any 14'15 year old knows that setting fires,stealing, vandalism is a crime, and they also get punished for such behavior too. So to give sexual assault such a wide birth for someone that age is sheer lunacy.

[Alyciabaleesha]

I believe that within the financial aid process, someone can distinguish between if they are receiving financial support or other support from their parents.

I don't believe that they would need their parents as a 'co-signer' on loans either.

Do you think that no other children have ever been in a situation where they are not receiving family support?

There is also the Technical College route that is a Liberal Arts and Sciences associate degree that if they take college transferable courses from an accredited institution almost always transfer to a four-year college.

I don't buy this argument at all.

I think they could declare themselves independent students and receive aid without their parent's help... when I was a dependent, I was unable to receive any help whatsoever because my parent's incomes were "too high". I had to fill out the paperwork and declare myself an independent to receive aid. As long as someone explains that to them, it's a fairly painless process (or at least it was in my case).

EDIT: I saw the links another poster listed up the thread a bit. It looks like I was actually lucky and things just worked out for me - I was an older student (I can't remember if I was 25 or not, but probably close) and able to fill out the paperwork without issues. I guess I don't know if that would be the case for the Duggar girls.

[justbecause]

Uh, well, it's reality. I know people who've had to hold off on their educations until they can apply for aid without their parents income information. Regardless of whether parents provide anything to their child at all, their income must go on the form. Their actual contributions to their children are not part of the application. As it is, you cannot apply for federal aid (a form required by many schools for their own aid as well) without your parents' info unless you're 25 or have one of few other exceptions, which you can read about in the link I posted.

It happens all the time, and huge numbers of young people in the country are screwed over by it because of our system.

No, parents don't have to be the ones to co-sign, but someone capable of passing a credit check must be available and willing to take on the risk of the debt.

Taking credits at a Technical College are about $144.00 per credit. So that is a path. (I work at a college). There are many awesome colleges that are online so that is not so much of a problem anymore as far as location.

I don't see it. There is a way. Some may choose to follow a harder route, if they like and bump into all kinds of obstacles, but the fact remains that there are some VERY good options. Period.

[persephonepomegranate]

I have been reduced to yelling at the TV for the last two nights.

For instance when Megyn was yelling that "the media is feasting on the carcass of these girls' violated privacy..." (paraphrased) I screamed "BUT YOU'RE GOING TO INTERVIEW THEM, YA DUMB DRAG QUEEN*!!!!"

Her hypocrisy has reached Duggar level. "Oh, those poor girls should be left alone because...privacy. OH, they're willing to be interviewed?? Book it!!"

*Thank you to Bethenny Frankel for one of my favorite tag lines.

*Is "Hypocrisy of Duggar Proportions" worthy of becoming a post count title?

Don't call Megyn Kelly a Drag Queen, Drag Queens have more taste, class, and common sense than that woman ever will.

[jqlgoblue]

Unless married, they'd have to list their parents' incomes to apply for aid until they're 25 (http://www.bankrate.com/finance/college ... ostly.aspx), and even with all the other children they probably make too much for the girls to receive anything more than a few thousand in subsidized loans (expected family contributions tend to be completely unrealistic). They'd probably need a cosigner for any other loans. It's a really awful system.

Yup. I had friends who had to go to the school their parents wanted b/c their parents wouldn't fill out the FAFSA so they could get financial aid and go where they wanted.

[jqlgoblue]

The whole notion that 14/15 is just a child an they may not have known better is complete crap!

Sure that might make him a minor in the eyes of the law, but my god if you're going to preach a higher standard of morality then 14/15 you damn well know insidious sexual assault is a freaking crime. I mean any 14'15 year old knows that setting fires,stealing, vandalism is a crime, and they also get punished for such behavior too. So to give sexual assault such a wide birth for someone that age is sheer lunacy.

While I generally agree with this, where I see the board sort of spin in circles is how 14/15 is not 'just a child' but all these kids still act like children b/c they have maturity levels of 8-12 year olds. So while not defending Josh (b/c you don't do something at night while the victims are sleeping if you think it is OK), I'm a bit weary of this line of reasoning ... unless we want to grant the Duggar kids a higher maturity level. I'll grant it to SOME of them, but not the marrieds, interestingly enough.

[halcionne]

Also, religion was missing last night. They did not, not a one of them, come off as religious people who are leaning on their beliefs and faith during an extremely difficult time.

I pulled this over from part one because it's true and I missed it in the interview. They were remarkably light on the religious talk. Wow. Telling.

[pris257]

The major WTF points for me were:

5. The insistence that crying confession = proof that something is not a problem

Ok, awareness of guilt is a first step - but it's only the first step.

Am I the only one not buying the confession? I don't think Josh ran up to them, crying, and confessing his 'sins'. Rather, he got caught. Because instead of continuing to touch the older girls, he went after the younger ones. They are less likely to say anything and he has a better chance of getting away with it.

[Clementine]

I'm trying to get a view of the timeline of what happened, but it's hard to get one from the interview.

I'd love to get a view of what happened, according to JimBob and Michelle in the interview, and then compare it to what was said in the police report.

[SassyPants]

I feel like JB and JChelle have totally washed their hands of responsibility. They feel like they did everything "right" and everything they could raising their kids. If one of their kids "made bad choices", that's not their problem, because they raised their kids the best they could. If a lot of parents wanted to say that, that's fine. But not these people. This only happened because they were so isolated and raised by total creeps. In real life, Josh would have had a girlfriend or two by 14. He probably would have gotten a handjob. Admittedly, I live in a "liberal" area, but in my area that's common for 14. Instead, Josh had the natural urges, but the only girls he was exposed to were his sisters. Now, to touch your sisters is absolutely not okay, creepy parents or not, but fact that JB and M refuse to admit that maybe his choices had something to do with his upbringing? That's despicable. How arrogant. Like at least maybe let it run through your mind that maybe, just maybe, it was caused by something you did. Maybe there is NO STYLE of parenting that "keeps kids pure". Maybe that truly is a stupid fantasy.

Just using a little bit of common sense and logic...if your teen molested his sisters and you found that behavior immoral, and when you started talking to other parents in your isolated faith community about this issue, they reported the same thing or WORSE happening in their homes, which from what research reports indicate is entirely possible, wouldn't you, as the family headship, decide to severe ties with THAT COMMUNITY??????

It seems the parents are as brainwashed as the kids and if that's the case, maybe this family does need to be investigated by DHS-

[Alyciabaleesha]

While I generally agree with this, where I see the board sort of spin in circles is how 14/15 is not 'just a child' but all these kids still act like children b/c they have maturity levels of 8-12 year olds. So while not defending Josh (b/c you don't do something at night while the victims are sleeping if you think it is OK), I'm a bit weary of this line of reasoning ... unless we want to grant the Duggar kids a higher maturity level. I'll grant it to SOME of them, but not the marrieds, interestingly enough.

I think it's only a problem when, as you said, people use Josh being old enough to know better as a way to say that the kids are adults who are capable of making their informed decisions regarding their experiences and lifestyle. I do think Josh was old enough to know better, but I'm also part of the camp that thinks he and his siblings have been royally fucked over by their parents' beliefs, and don't have the maturity level corresponding to their ages. I would still say that Josh has had the life experience at this point to help him maybe reconsider some of his parent's beliefs, but I can't say the same about his siblings.

It's such a weird situation to try and articulate. I don't think people who say Josh was a child at 14-15 should be able to turn around then say that he morphed into an adult the second he was married. It just doesn't work like that.

[JenniferJuniper]

Josiah is courting a 17 year old (with the intent to become engaged), so it's hard for me to fathom them giving a pass to a 15 year old who had previously confessed to molesting girls the year previously and kept doing it.

[bellicosebroad]

I wonder if Josh is in any shape to appear on television, right now. I bet Josh looks likes hell right about now. He may need to be placed into a psychiatric facility by the time this is over with.

I haven't watched the show for a very long time (about the time Grandpa Duggar died and they used that for ratings; classy :penguin-no: ), so I was shocked when I saw recent pictures of Josh (taken before the fallout) on news sites once the scandal broke. He looks awful: Unkempt, very overweight, and a good 15 years older than he is. The weight gain makes some sense just because it was already happening when I was still watching and it's just continued, but something's wrong when people look like they don't even shower. My first thought was depression because FRC was a huge wake-up call for the coddled, sheltered prince. Executive directors have to be educated to handle that job, I'd imagine (even for a fundie organization), and SOTDRT obviously doesn't qualify as education. That plus these revelations coming out now? Oh, the house of cards toppled fast, didn't it? So I'd imagine it's no fun (to put it mildly) to be Smuggar right now, not that it should be.

[Hisey]

The whole notion that 14/15 is just a child an they may not have known better is complete crap!

Sure that might make him a minor in the eyes of the law, but my god if you're going to preach a higher standard of morality then 14/15 you damn well know insidious sexual assault is a freaking crime. I mean any 14'15 year old knows that setting fires,stealing, vandalism is a crime, and they also get punished for such behavior too. So to give sexual assault such a wide birth for someone that age is sheer lunacy.

This is something I don't get. If we are calling Josh an adult at 14, then his sisters (except JoyAnna) were adults too. They are all really close in age.

How can 14 be an adult but 12 be a child?

In reality, they were all kids. I dont hate the Duggars so much as to elevate a 14 year old to adult status just so I can hate on him more.

I feel terrible for the girls, but I also have some empathy for Josh. I'm trying to imagine what it was like to be a teen boy in that household. There were no other boys his age (other than JD, who seems a very different type). His mother is constantly distracted with babies and pregnancies. The house filled with little kids. Whether or not he liked little kids, he was with them 24/7. He had no sports, no camps, and very little school. No activities, other than Bible stuff. Very little sex education, other than the reminders to be pure. No electronics, no computer, no secular music--none of the things that make teens happy. It seems like a very boring, lonely, frustrating, confusing life. It doesn't surprise me that sexual abuse is rampant in such households.

I always felt Josh seemed disheveled and sad, especially in the last few years. He seemed to be just going through the motions. He definitely didn't seem to want so many kids. I never got the "smug" vibe that so many people seem to get.

I think his parents set him for this failure. Perhaps a TV show might've been OK, if they'd been honest. But to pretend to be perfect and pure when there was this dark secret is just setting Josh up for failure.

[Pandie5]

Josiah is courting a 17 year old (with the intent to become engaged), so it's hard for me to fathom them giving a pass to a 15 year old who had previously confessed to molesting girls the year previously and kept doing it.

And considering the rumor is that he was betrothed to Holt's daughter at 14. Someone who knew clearly didn't give him a pass.

[FundieFarmer]

I'm trying to get a view of the timeline of what happened, but it's hard to get one from the interview.

I'd love to get a view of what happened, according to JimBob and Michelle in the interview, and then compare it to what was said in the police report.

Here's my understanding (I took notes to make the truth analysis last night :lol: ). Let me know if you'd like me to put it into a new thread:

Sometime in early 2002: Josh Duggar enters his sisters' bedrooms, touches them over their clothes while they are sleeping. Sisters do not wake up, incidents occur 4-5x.

↓

March 2002: Josh Duggar reports his "mistakes" to his parents, who respond by praying for him, implementing "safeguards", and giving him more general supervision.

↓

Sometime between March-July 2002: Josh Duggar touches the babysitter as she sleeps on the couch.

↓

July 2002: Josh Duggar tells JB/M about the incident on the couch. Again, his parents respond by praying for/with him, implementing "safeguards", and giving him more general supervision. After time passes, they believe Josh has changed.

↓

Sometime early 2003: Josh Duggar touches his 4-year-old sister as he is reading a book to her. Additionally, he molests two sisters in the laundry room: one incident is not specified and he touches a second sister under her shirt.

↓

March 2003: Josh Duggar again confesses touching incidents to his parents, who are now forced to acknowledge the problem is bigger than they thought. Jim Bob Duggar calls for his friends and elders to come over, and collectively they decide Josh must be removed from the home.

↓

17 March – 17 July 2003: Josh Duggar spends time at Harold Walker's Basic Life Principles Training Center, which is neither accredited nor associated with the police department there, and is under the leadership umbrella of IBLP.

↓

Mid-July 2003: Josh Duggar returns home. According to the police reports and Duggar parents' interview, he has changed. He is "tamer". Sometime after his return, the Duggar parents, Josh, and a witness visit Cpl. Hutchins to report Josh's crimes.

↓

2004: The Duggars first appear on a TLC special.

↓

December 2006: Arkansas CPS receives a tip from the Oprah Winfrey Show after show producers receive an anonymous letter outlining Josh's story. The Duggars are interviewed and it is decided that the SOL has passed, and it is out of the law's hands.

↓

2009: FreeJinger followers and other Duggar websites become aware of Josh's molestation allegations from an online commenter. As no proof can be obtained, the allegations are discussed but largely ignored.

↓

May 2015: InTouch first publishes an article detailing Josh's crimes, then releases not one but two police reports affirming the statements. The Duggar family releases statements from JB/M, Josh, and Anna. Josh resigns from FRC, and TLC pulls re-runs of the show. The official report is destroyed by request of the remaining minor victim, but the damage is done.

↓

3 & 5 June 2015: Duggar parents and then daughters Jill and Jessa are interviewed by Fox News reporter Megyn Kelly.

The most information I could find regarding an exact timeline of the letter was that "during the time of these events", it had been slipped into a book and subsequently forgotten about, which was then loaned out.

[Season of life...]

This! This was the fibe they gave during the interview!

I agree.

I had an uncle who began to groom me when I was 8. He would stroke me over my clothes and his behavior continued to progress. I didn't tell, not because I was afraid that I wouldn't be believed, but because I knew it would change everything in our family. My mom and my aunt were extremely close, and my dad and uncle were good friends as well.

I felt guilt over the possibility of my parents losing that closeness with the rest of the family. I began to have nightmares. One night I swung my legs over the bed and almost stepped on my mom. She was sleeping on the floor next to me so she could be there if I had another nightmare. She knew something was going on and was determined to help me. This is what good parents do. I told.

My dad is soft-spoken and kind, but I'll never forget his reaction. He had to be restrained from driving over to my uncle's home. I had never seen my parents this upset. Not once, ever, was I made to feel it was in ANY way my fault. I was loved, I knew it, and I was top priority.

Life changed. Being around my aunt and uncle was uncomfortable since my uncle lied and my aunt believed him. We still saw him every so often for family events, but I knew if he even looked at me that my dad would hop to and make him regret even a glance. I know it was painful for my mom to lose the closeness with my aunt, but tough decisions had to be made and my needs came first.

I was empowered by my parents, and that made all the difference.

I'm sorry for the long narration, but my point is this: those girls were NEVER empowered to make their own decision on when, or if, they would forgive. The only concern shown was for Josh. Jim Bob and Michelle focus on his "mistake", but not on the effects it may have had on their daughters. Any damage done to them by allowing Josh to remain in the home, by not being willing to make a tough decision to place him elsewhere permanently, to do anything to ensure that the girls felt safe and comfortable in their own home, well, it was OK as long as Josh was coddled and protected. They can't wrap their minds around the fact that he committed a crime, and can't even call it sinning. He's so very sorry for his "mistake".

It was only ever about Josh and doing what was easiest for Jim Bob and Michelle and damn the consequences to anyone else.

[Pandie5]

I think it's only a problem when, as you said, people use Josh being old enough to know better as a way to say that the kids are adults who are capable of making their informed decisions regarding their experiences and lifestyle. I do think Josh was old enough to know better, but I'm also part of the camp that thinks he and his siblings have been royally fucked over by their parents' beliefs, and don't have the maturity level corresponding to their ages. I would still say that Josh has had the life experience at this point to help him maybe reconsider some of his parent's beliefs, but I can't say the same about his siblings.

It's such a weird situation to try and articulate. I don't think people who say Josh was a child at 14-15 should be able to turn around then say that he morphed into an adult the second he was married. It just doesn't work like that.

I think the whole + or - 14 is only important from a records stand point. It may have been an implusive mistake based on his sheltered upbringing. Or it may have been the beginning of a real problem. But the sexual assault records of a minor AREN'T sealed, unlike other crimes, to make sure to protect other children and make sure it wasn't the start of predatory behavior. Shoplifting, vandalism, sometimes even murder before majority can be seen as an immature mistake. If they repeat, they'll be caught later. But most types of sexual assault can't have the records covered up due to minority. It is too easy to repeat offend over and over, without getting caught. Our society decided that we don't want to risk those individuals having access to kids as part of their jobs or church work etc. So it is a searchable record. Churches and schools get sued if they don't seek this information out. Now maybe there should be a rule about who can access it and for what purpose. Not for me to say. And certainly not foe JB to decide that his son is exempt from reporting requirements.

I wonder what people at their church think? Did Josh work with kids? I'm sure most churches have safeguards in place. But if I was a parent at their church, I would want to know.

[halcionne]

All the people in the community knew they sent Josh away. Confided in several close friends, and that's probably how it leaked. Someone was "kind of out to get us". (More agenda bullshit.)

They say "kind of" when they're lying, lol.

[Snarkle Motion]

That is a false analogy in the context of Josh and the molestation, though.Josh was kid (I am sorry, 14 is not a young adult the way some here are claiming; it's a kid). There is evidence he asked for help. There is additional evidence his parents failed. The molestation is all on them.

The adults who stay in ATI? THAT is on them.

My take on the analogy was in regards to Josh's hate mongering. I do not excuse adult, 27-year-old Josh working at a hate group and spouting intolerance. He may have been brainwashed but he is fully accountable for his words and actions to oppress and limit the rights of others.

14-year-old Josh was failed by his parents. But 27-year-old Josh is an adult who should be able to explain how he has processed the actions of 14-year-old Josh, what steps he has taken to learn and make amends with the victims. Also, while I believe a 14/15 year old is still a child that doesn't mean they have NO responsibility or accountability for their actions. Yes, the parents were responsible for getting him help but that doesn't mean he is completely exempt from responsibility or accountability when he has harmed another person. A high schooler who gets in a fight an severely beats up his friend is still responsible for his actions even if he isn't an adult.