Duggar Fox News Interviews - Mild, Inappropriate Lying

[Pandie5]

Ugh. Bad trend started with all this bs. My community currently has a teacher/student accusation issue. No one knows what the issue is but the police are investigating and it is being handled correctly...The school issued a statement to all families about the ongoing investigation, but no comment on the issue to protect a minor's identity and the teacher against potential backlash. Cuz basically it is all based on vicious gossip, but they have to investigate.

The few reports I read all say , 'We filed a FOIA request...but were denied due to the ongoing investigation.. We filed a FOIA request for all emails sent by the school district to the community..." So In Touch seems to have started a very intrusive gossipy trend. Once you open yournlife the way the Duggars have, I think you are fair game. But this other crap can really hurt private people based on a witch trial by gossipy kids.

[JenniferJuniper]

Ugh. Bad trend started with all this bs. My community currently has a teacher/student accusation issue. No one knows what the issue is but the police are investigating and it is being handled correctly...The school issued a statement to all families about the ongoing investigation, but no comment on the issue to protect a minor's identity and the teacher against potential backlash. Cuz basically it is all based on vicious gossip, but they have to investigate.

The few reports I read all say , 'We filed a FOIA request...but were denied due to the ongoing investigation.. We filed a FOIA request for all emails sent by the school district to the community..." So In Touch seems to have started a very intrusive gossipy trend. Once you open yournlife the way the Duggars have, I think you are fair game. But this other crap can really hurt private people based on a witch trial by gossipy kids.

What crap specifically is hurting private people?

Freedom of Information requests have around a long time. Quoting from the Arkansas Freedom of Information handbook:

The intent of the Arkansas Freedom of Information

Act (FOIA) is to provide access to information in an

open and public government, one of the hallmarks of a

democratic society. On February 14, 1967, Arkansas

adopted one of the strongest and most comprehensive

Freedom of Information Acts in the nation. It gives our

citizens an opportunity to look at a broad array of information

at every level of government and to observe the

actions of our government leaders. It also promotes and

protects the right of individuals to attend the meetings

of policy-making, tax-supported bodies.

The FOIA is the people’s law, and as the people’s

lawyer, I feel that it is vital for us to be as well informed

about the workings of our government as we can be. I

hope that you find the handbook useful and informative

and that it will empower you as an active, involved citizen

In the case you cite above, it sounds like people are being appropriately denied information regarding an ongoing criminal investigation. People in towns are gonna gossip for sure, but that's got nothing to do with In Touch or FOIA.

[Hikernana]

(A side note, it really creeped me out the way Jessa had a sort of smile when she said Josh was 'sly' about how he molested them. Like him being smart or 'sly' was a good attribute to have, even in this context.)

I've never been a Jessa "fan". There is something about HER that is 'sly'. I also get the sense that she has a cruel and sadistic streak - even on their honeymoon in Paris, the girl shoved her new husband out on to a see through floor in the Eiffel Tower knowing full well his deep fear of heights.

There's something about her that screams "bully"....and dominatrix :twisted:

[halcionne]

http://www.people.com/article/jill-dugg ... e-festival

People mag is still trying it with the Duggars and TLC will read the comments and plan accordingly (comments are mostly negative at this time.)

Jill: "Hey we’re not a perfect family, we mess up"

Jessa still pretending they will adopt

From the article:

But either way, they'll be held up by the red tape – the state calls for couples to be married for a few years, and private agencies require that a baby in the house be at least 9 months old.

Nine months old for private adoption? What?

And Israel, who is right at 11 weeks old, is "a really good baby," Jill said. "He started sleeping through the night now, drooling, he’s teething.

He's teething at eleven weeks, you guys. Do we have another precious miracle baby in the familY???

ETA a funny sad ignorant leghumper comment from the concert:

Beth HousiauxSteward, 52, of Bedford, Ohio, shared her support for Jill and Jessa and echoed the sisters' frustration at having a juvenile's record released through the initial report in InTouch.

"I came to support Jill and Jessa," she said. "They had no business releasing sealed records … that was their private business. If juvenile records can be unsealed anytime somebody wants them, that's not right."

Reaction score so far: Love: 33 Hate:55. Your move, TLC.

[calimojo]

I think they mean that if the adopting parents have another baby, then that baby, the biological baby must be at least 9 mos old before they are able to adopt another child.

[halcionne]

I think they mean that if the adopting parents have another baby, then that baby, the biological baby must be at least 9 mos old before they are able to adopt another child.

Oooooh that seems reasonable. They will never qualify then, since she will be eternally pregnant. :lol:

[calimojo]

sorry to double post, but my daughter cut her first tooth just over 3 mos old, so it is possible that Izzy is starting to teeth. She had 2 teeth before she was 5 months, but then didn't cut any more teeth for a long time.

And though rare, there are babies born with a tooth that has already erupted from the gums.

And at 11 weeks post partum, Jill's tummy still looks large. I wonder what exactly the complications were that she had after the birth. She looks thin over all, but the tummy looks like a woman who is just a week or so after her delivery, not nearly 12 weeks post partum.

Goodness, most women are back to work by this point, and they don't usually return to work wearing maternity clothes. If they are carrying extra weight it is usually all over, not just the stomach

[calimojo]

Oooooh that seems reasonable. They will never qualify then, since she will be eternally pregnant. :lol:

I don't they will qualify with a reputable adoption agency due to their ongoing proximity to a confessed child molester. If they adopted, they might have to agree to never allow Josh near the adopted child.

[DuggarsTheEndIsNear]

http://www.people.com/article/jill-duggar-dillard-jessa-duggar-seewald-alive-festival

People mag is still trying it with the Duggars and TLC will read the comments and plan accordingly (comments are mostly negative at this time.)

Jill: "Hey we’re not a perfect family, we mess up"

Jessa still pretending they will adopt

From the article:

Nine months old for private adoption? What?

He's teething at eleven weeks, you guys. Do we have another precious miracle baby in the familY???

ETA a funny sad ignorant leghumper comment from the concert:

Reaction score so far: Love: 33 Hate:55. Your move, TLC.

Babies can start the process of teething as early as 2 months. It takes a few months for the first tooth to break through the gums, but the tooth buds start forming into teeth after birth and gradually move up the jawline. The kind of teething you're likely thinking about is cutting, but the teething process is a month or longer where the baby is uncomfortable because the teeth are moving. Most kids I know start the early stages of teething between 2-3 months.

[DuggarsTheEndIsNear]

sorry to double post, but my daughter cut her first tooth just over 3 mos old, so it is possible that Izzy is starting to teeth. She had 2 teeth before she was 5 months, but then didn't cut any more teeth for a long time.

And though rare, there are babies born with a tooth that has already erupted from the gums.

And at 11 weeks post partum, Jill's tummy still looks large. I wonder what exactly the complications were that she had after the birth. She looks thin over all, but the tummy looks like a woman who is just a week or so after her delivery, not nearly 12 weeks post partum.

Goodness, most women are back to work by this point, and they don't usually return to work wearing maternity clothes. If they are carrying extra weight it is usually all over, not just the stomach

"Most women" by your definition is not the norm. Especially for those who received c-sections.

[SassyPants]

"Most women" by your definition is not the norm. Especially for those who received c-sections.

Having worked with new moms, some for many months PP, I would say that Jill is atypical.

However, she was also huge, carried mainly in front and had a very large baby that apparently had room to flip 48 hours+ after ROM- I'd say she has a genetically large uterus.

[calimojo]

"Most women" by your definition is not the norm. Especially for those who received c-sections.

Yes, actually Most women, by nearly 12 weeks postpartum ( Izzy is 11 weeks) no longer have that much Post partum tummy. Most doesn't mean all. Sure there are exceptions, but as Sassy said, Jill's appearance nearly 3 months after giving birth is atypical.

Now, my statement doesn't mean that most women have a completely flat, ready for bikini season tummy. Again MOST women will retain some roundness to their abdomen for a long time, if not forever. But the way Jill's abdomen has looked in those recent pictures, it is more rounded than I would expect to see this far removed from delivery.

Obviously there are lots of variations on normal and so whose to say what is normal for Jill, but compared to MOST (Not all) young women, Jill's tummy seems larger than expected, especially since it is obvious that she did not gain a lot of extra weight over all.

I worked in OB for years, and I have known women to gain over 75 pounds or more during a pregnancy. Those women are probably not going to squeeze into their pre-pregnancy wardrobe in a few weeks time, but Jill is thin everywhere else, just not her tummy. I suspect that her abdominal muscles were really weakened by carrying the large baby and it will take her longer for them to recover. If she rushes into another pregnancy, those muscles will probably never recover and she will always have that kind of shape. Not that there is anything wrong with having a tummy. Lord knows I am in no position to be critical. And my comments weren't meant to be critical, just observational.

[halcionne]

Babies can start the process of teething as early as 2 months. It takes a few months for the first tooth to break through the gums, but the tooth buds start forming into teeth after birth and gradually move up the jawline. The kind of teething you're likely thinking about is cutting, but the teething process is a month or longer where the baby is uncomfortable because the teeth are moving. Most kids I know start the early stages of teething between 2-3 months.

I've never seen a new mom use 'teething' in the way you describe (doesn't mean they don't, or Jill isn't). My personal experience is that moms say their baby is teething when they're cutting teeth. It's not a big deal and yes I am poking fun at Jill.

I'm actually more interested in the turnout. It was a festival with multiple acts on different stages. I would love to know how many people were at the Duggar stage vs. another speaker at a different stage. FWIW, the main stage was dark, Seelards were on the Beach Stage, Kerrie Roberts was on the Woods Stage, and Cliff Graham was at the Family Fun Tent.

http://web.archive.org/web/201506051315 ... p/saturday

[Mama Mia]

I've never seen a new mom use 'teething' in the way you describe (doesn't mean they don't, or Jill isn't). My personal experience is that moms say their baby is teething when they're cutting teeth. It's not a big deal and yes I am poking fun at Jill.

I'm actually more interested in the turnout. It was a festival with multiple acts on different stages. I would love to know how many people were at the Duggar stage vs. another speaker at a different stage. FWIW, the main stage was dark, Seelards were on the Beach Stage, Kerrie Roberts was on the Woods Stage, and Cliff Graham was at the Family Fun Tent.

http://web.archive.org/web/201506051315 ... p/saturday

My experience is that moms generally will generally say their baby is colicky for a fussy newborn, teething for a fussy infant, going through the terrible twos for a fussy toddler, at a difficult phase for a fussy young child and hormonal for a fussy older child :lol: I'm only partly joking ;)

[halcionne]

My experience is that moms generally will generally say their baby is colicky for a fussy newborn, teething for a fussy infant, going through the terrible twos for a fussy toddler, at a difficult phase for a fussy young child and hormonal for a fussy older child :lol: I'm only partly joking ;)

This is also my experience, and what I was trying to say, basically (and badly :? ). People's writing is really awful, too, so they may have butchered her comment.

I don't particularly like it that sometimes Duggar discourse gets petty or devolves into something resembling team Jill against team Jessa, but it also doesn't bother or surprise me. The two women had the same basic plot outline at the same time on the show, and they have markedly differing personalities, so it's natural for posters to note the difference, perhaps develop a preference for one or the other, and even complain about the one they like less. I still hope they both, and their siblings, get out of this bullshit cult and live happy, productive lives.

But I'm team Jessa, and I will nitpick on Jill. :stir-pot:

[GiggleOfGirls]

From that People article quoted by someone else above:

Beth HousiauxSteward, 52, of Bedford, Ohio, shared her support for Jill and Jessa and echoed the sisters' frustration at having a juvenile's record released through the initial report in InTouch.

"I came to support Jill and Jessa," she said. "They had no business releasing sealed records … that was their private business. If juvenile records can be unsealed anytime somebody wants them, that's not right."

Some people really think that the records were actually sealed and then somehow unsealed? What the hell. People magazine should've put a qualifier on there instead of letting her remark stand like that :penguin-no:

[Four is Enough]

I don't they will qualify with a reputable adoption agency due to their ongoing proximity to a confessed child molester. If they adopted, they might have to agree to never allow Josh near the adopted child.

Wow. In our state, Mr. Four and I had to wait 18 months either after placement, or, if a biological child was born to us, 18 months after the child was born, to adopt. No placements before that.

AFA proximity to a child molester, I think they would have to treat this case as they would any other. How many times does a social worker know that there is a "funny uncle" (literally, in this case) in the family? Of course, Josh DID confess, and pretty publicly, so I suppose a social worker might have to voice concerns when doing the preparation work.

[LovelyLuna]

Wow. In our state, Mr. Four and I had to wait 18 months either after placement, or, if a biological child was born to us, 18 months after the child was born, to adopt. No placements before that.

AFA proximity to a child molester, I think they would have to treat this case as they would any other. How many times does a social worker know that there is a "funny uncle" (literally, in this case) in the family? Of course, Josh DID confess, and pretty publicly, so I suppose a social worker might have to voice concerns when doing the preparation work.

I thought that they were going with a private company, or thats what we are guessing for an adoption. a place like J&A visited in CA.

ETA I dont believe they are adopting, but that this is what they want us to think/ the appearance they are giving.

[Nic]

I thought that they were going with a private company, or thats what we are guessing for an adoption. a place like J&A visited in CA.

ETA I dont believe they are adopting, but that this is what they want us to think/ the appearance they are giving.

It's odd how often they make it a point to say it. Like yeah yeah yeah. We know.

Depending on the route the go, it might be a bit spendy to adopt.

[ShepherdontheRock]

http://variety.com/2015/tv/news/megyn-k ... 201525352/

http://www.inquisitr.com/2195979/19-kid ... interview/

Anyone seen this news?

[DuggarsTheEndIsNear]

Wow. In our state, Mr. Four and I had to wait 18 months either after placement, or, if a biological child was born to us, 18 months after the child was born, to adopt. No placements before that.

AFA proximity to a child molester, I think they would have to treat this case as they would any other. How many times does a social worker know that there is a "funny uncle" (literally, in this case) in the family? Of course, Josh DID confess, and pretty publicly, so I suppose a social worker might have to voice concerns when doing the preparation work.

The thing is, by legal definition, he wasn't a child molester. He had to be at least 16 for him to be legally qualified as a pedophile.

Not to mention, we still can't determine if his attacks were opportunistic or specifically targeting prepubescent children. the fact that the non-Duggar victim was old enough to be considered a babysitter AND was an adult during her interview suggests that he was merely opportunistic. Jana was probably not targeted because she was tending to infants during those years and made her a harder target.

[halcionne]

http://variety.com/2015/tv/news/megyn-kelly-duggars-interview-behind-the-scenes-1201525352/

http://www.inquisitr.com/2195979/19-kid ... interview/

Anyone seen this news?

I read the Variety one this morning. Kelly's patting herself on the back for her journalism skills, rme. One thing I noticed is that she said her people had to signal her to wrap the JB&M interview because they had to jump in the car and get to the J'slave interview. But they were all interviewed at the bar in front of the pretty kitchen, weren't they? Embellishing that story throws the whole article into doubt for me.

[Fascinated]

I read the Variety one this morning. Kelly's patting herself on the back for her journalism skills, rme. One thing I noticed is that she said her people had to signal her to wrap the JB&M interview because they had to jump in the car and get to the J'slave interview. But they were all interviewed at the bar in front of the pretty kitchen, weren't they? Embellishing that story throws the whole article into doubt for me.

Hmm. I think you are right. Mild, inappropriate lying?

[DeFrauder]

Hmm. I think you are right. Mild, inappropriate lying?

Actually, I do not think that her interviewing skills were that bad. Yes, it looked like she was their buddy and that she was helping them out, but that is an interviewing technique. They trusted her enough that they opened up and freely discussed all the stupid bullshit they did.

Kelly let them lie. She knew Jim Bob was lying. She let him implicate himself. She let them make ridiculous claims that there was a conspiracy against them.

She let Jim Bob go on and on about how the abuse was nothing. If she had challenged him they might have clammed up and they might have withdrawn from the Jslave interview. Instead she nodded and smiled like what they were saying made perfect sense. She kept them on track talking about what we all wanted to hear---what were his thoughts on the abuse and what did he do about it. They spilled their guts and what they had to say was pretty ugly and revealed way more about how fucked up they are then we ever imagined.

The one real fault with that interview is how she accepted that it was illegal to release the documents but I don't remember is that was in the interview or part of her short commentary afterward.

It was legal and mandatory to release the documents and all media does us a disservice by treating issues like that as if it is debatable. HOWEVER, it is a valid point that there is a contradiction in releasing documents about minor victims through FOIA and protecting the identity of victims. The redaction rules may have to be refined to protect victims. That report could have been released with nobody's names on it except for Josh's so that we only knew there were 5 victims, but had no idea they were sisters. I know they crossed out the names of all the victims but the other identifying factors should have been crossed out as well.

[DuggarsTheEndIsNear]

Actually, I do not think that her interviewing skills were that bad. Yes, it looked like she was their buddy and that she was helping them out, but that is an interviewing technique. They trusted her enough that they opened up and freely discussed all the stupid bullshit they did.

Kelly let them lie. She knew Jim Bob was lying. She let him implicate himself. She let them make ridiculous claims that there was a conspiracy against them.

She let Jim Bob go on and on about how the abuse was nothing. If she had challenged him they might have clammed up and they might have withdrawn from the Jslave interview. Instead she nodded and smiled like what they were saying made perfect sense. She kept them on track talking about what we all wanted to hear---what were his thoughts on the abuse and what did he do about it. They spilled their guts and what they had to say was pretty ugly and revealed way more about how fucked up they are then we ever imagined.

The one real fault with that interview is how she accepted that it was illegal to release the documents but I don't remember is that was in the interview or part of her short commentary afterward.

It was legal and mandatory to release the documents and all media does us a disservice by treating issues like that as if it is debatable. HOWEVER, it is a valid point that there is a contradiction in releasing documents about minor victims through FOIA and protecting the identity of victims. The redaction rules may have to be refined to protect victims. That report could have been released with nobody's names on it except for Josh's so that we only knew there were 5 victims, but had no idea they were sisters. I know they crossed out the names of all the victims but the other identifying factors should have been crossed out as well.

They only implicated themselves to people who actually read the police report. The average Fox viewer and the vast majority of the leghumpers did not read the police report. The average Fox viewer likely walked away with the same assumption my employer's father in law did -- that they were making a big deal out of nothing since it was all "over clothes, out of curiosity, and dealt with swiftly."