Jump to content
IGNORED

Lawson Bates 5: Thinking He Knows What He's Doing


Coconut Flan

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, Bluebirdbluebell said:

Duggar data asked yesterday for proof that Lawson and Tiffany are together. I thought I had found pictures of them together, but it turns the photos were of her and her brother. 

 

The better proof so far is this instagram story:

eq1on5zyer861.jpg

They were alone on that train too, so no chaperones!

There is also evidence he spent christmas with her and her family. He uploaded a photo of their christmas tree in the beach.

 

Edited by llucie
spelling
  • Upvote 9
  • Thank You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/8/2021 at 11:39 AM, BeccaGrim said:

Who are the advertisers for the Bates show? 

There aren't any. Disclaimer that I've never watched the Bates' show, so maybe "late night" programming brings advertisers... but everyday from 4-7 pm UP plays nonstop Gilmore Girls and I'd be lying if I didn't admit that a lot of my quarantine time was spent there. The "commercial breaks" consisted of advertising other UP programming, such as BUB, made for TV UP movies, and an occasional infomercial for bible recordings. (seriously.) Additionally, at one point they had ads begging you to contact your cable provider to let them know how much you loved UP tv if you wanted to continue to watch them (smells like they may not have a lot of longevity in their future.) 

However, from what I've gathered on FJ through the years, is that BUB does a lot of indirect advertising with product placements in the actual show. For example, Rent-A-Center furnishing Zach and Whitney's home. Compiling a list of those advertisers would be your best bet. 

  • Upvote 8
  • Thank You 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5782A2E1-6C27-414D-B3A8-A5E53BC88179.thumb.png.a9cd99ff755b5f70355e3b8709a1fc69.png
from the blog. Nothing to report here. It’s weird that there wasn’t an actual statement shown. The Bates Instagram has been very quiet. Guess they have nothing to post, say, or they are hoping to stay under the radar. 

  • Upvote 4
  • Thank You 5
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry Kelly, it was all one event so if they were in that crowd they absolutely had involvement with the people who stormed the Capitol. 

  • Upvote 10
  • I Agree 8
  • Thank You 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Melissa1977 said:

Bates boys worked from.early teen ages. Lawson was 13 and practically working full time.between his little.business and working for Gil. There is a video showing 13 (14?) years old Lawson shopping food for the family and Gil and Kelly explaining he feed the family often. It could have been fake, but who fakes that? It left Gil as a pathetic provider.

 

I don't think an uneducated 13-year old boy could earn enough to feed 21 people by mowing lawns and working for his cheap father.

Lawson was 13 in 2005, when the minimum wage in TN was $5.15. (For the sake of argument, I'm assuming Gil paid him minimum wage, but in reality I bet he got much less.)

If he worked 30 hours a week landscaping/tree work, that means he made $155/week. In today's dollars, that's $210, or maybe $190 net per week. 

At the time, there were only 15 Bates children, and it's fair to exclude the youngest 3, who probably didn't eat much. So 12 Bates children and 2 adults, or 14 people

Can you feed 14 people on $190 week? Even in rural TN, it would be hard. That's 294 meals per week, or 64 cents per meal per person. (Or 71 cents/meal per person, if you assume he was paid under the table)

And that's assuming Lawson gave all his money for groceries, every week. That didn't happen, since he had savings to lend to his siblings in later years.

Edited by Jackie3
  • Upvote 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Jackie3 said:

I don't think an uneducated 13-year old boy could earn enough to feed 21 people by mowing lawns and working for his cheap father.

Lawson was 13 in 2005, when the minimum wage in TN was $5.15. If he worked 30 hours a week landscaping/tree work, that means he made $155/week.

For the sake of argument, I'm assuming Gil paid him minimum wage, but in reality I bet he got much less.

In today's dollars, that's $210, or maybe $190 net per week. 

At the time, there were only 15 Bates children, and it's fair to exclude the youngest 3, who probably didn't eat much. So 12 Bates children and 2 adults, or 14 people

Can you feed 14 people on $190 week? Even in a rural area of TN, it would be hard. That's 294 meals per week, or 64 cents per meal per person. (Or 71 cents/meal per person, if you assume he was paid under the table)

And that's assuming Lawson gave all his money for groceries, every week. That didn't happen, since he had savings to lend to his siblings in later years.

I think he has his own lawn mowing business at the time. 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Lgirlrocks said:

I think he has his own lawn mowing business at the time. 

Yes, that's why I said "mowing lawns and tree business." I think he worked at both.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Jackie3 said:

I don't think an uneducated 13-year old boy could earn enough to feed 21 people by mowing lawns and working for his cheap father.

Lawson was 13 in 2005, when the minimum wage in TN was $5.15. (For the sake of argument, I'm assuming Gil paid him minimum wage, but in reality I bet he got much less.)

If he worked 30 hours a week landscaping/tree work, that means he made $155/week. In today's dollars, that's $210, or maybe $190 net per week. 

At the time, there were only 15 Bates children, and it's fair to exclude the youngest 3, who probably didn't eat much. So 12 Bates children and 2 adults, or 14 people

Can you feed 14 people on $190 week? Even in rural TN, it would be hard. That's 294 meals per week, or 64 cents per meal per person. (Or 71 cents/meal per person, if you assume he was paid under the table)

And that's assuming Lawson gave all his money for groceries, every week. That didn't happen, since he had savings to lend to his siblings in later years.

I don't think Lawson was the only provider, but it was Kelly and Gil themselves who say Lawson used his money to feed the family. Knowing how cheap Gil is and how poor there appear to be by then, I can believe the statement.

Anyway, did you read the old blog? The amount and quality of their food was awful. They were eating things like cheap bread with ketchup and cheese on top, as a diner! All their recipes were horrible, to the point that I feared those chidren were malnourished. 

 

  • Upvote 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Melissa1977 said:

I don't think Lawson was the only provider, but it was Kelly and Gil themselves who say Lawson used his money to feed the family. Knowing how cheap Gil is and how poor there appear to be by then, I can believe the statement.

Anyway, did you read the old blog? The amount and quality of their food was awful. They were eating things like cheap bread with ketchup and cheese on top, as a diner! All their recipes were horrible, to the point that I feared those chidren were malnourished. 

 

Hey now, those were their individual pizzas!

  • Upvote 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Melissa1977 said:

I don't think Lawson was the only provider, but it was Kelly and Gil themselves who say Lawson used his money to feed the family. Knowing how cheap Gil is and how poor there appear to be by then, I can believe the statement.

Anyway, did you read the old blog? The amount and quality of their food was awful. They were eating things like cheap bread with ketchup and cheese on top, as a diner! All their recipes were horrible, to the point that I feared those chidren were malnourished. 

 

I did. It's amazing those kids grew up so healthy. I think they still eat terribly. Kelly once posted a picture of "breakfast" and it was a basket full of instant oatmeal packages, or something like that. How hard is it to cook a big pot of oatmeal and leave it on the stove?

I'm sure they borrowed from Lawson from time to time, since he had ready cash. However, he did not "support them for years." Whether they paid him back, I don't know.  At the time, he seemed goodnatured and sweet, so maybe he didn't push it.

Edited by Jackie3
  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, lumpentheologie said:

Sorry Kelly, it was all one event so if they were in that crowd they absolutely had involvement with the people who stormed the Capitol. 

That blog post was from Lily and Ellie, not Kelly or any other Bates family member.

  • Upvote 4
  • Bless Your Heart 1
  • Thank You 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding the blog post from Lily and Ellie. Lawson honey,  we aren't stupid there was only one event, Trump's speech/rally. It was not peaceful. For anyone who didn't hear the speech, read Seth Abramson's Twitter roll where he disects it and how scary and propaganda filled it is.

I for one do not believe for once second the Hates boys didn't get swept up in the call to action. Its the kind of thing they live for. The deleted Tweets just add to my suspicion that they had a lot more photos they would have posted. Will I go so far as to say they brought guns and zip ties with them? No, but in no way are they innocent. They are complicit like everyone else who was there.

Some may feel this belongs in a different thread because of the politics but the hate this family has for others that don't think like them is too appalling.  Perhaps these two initally thought they would get a bunch of likes for being at the rally otherwise they never would have posted. Keep remembering the Bates = Hate and none of them at least right now, are inching towards anything progressive at this point. They may photograph better than the Duggars but that's it.  These fundies all carry the hate in the veil of "Christianity." 

*gets off soap box...for now*

  • Upvote 20
  • I Agree 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Lgirlrocks said:

5782A2E1-6C27-414D-B3A8-A5E53BC88179.thumb.png.a9cd99ff755b5f70355e3b8709a1fc69.png
from the blog. Nothing to report here. It’s weird that there wasn’t an actual statement shown. The Bates Instagram has been very quiet. Guess they have nothing to post, say, or they are hoping to stay under the radar. 

To give them the absolute benefit of the doubt - it is *possible* they only attended the incitement rally and did not actually storm the Capitol. I want to be fair.

We can all assess how plausible we think this defence is. I don't know.

Edited by seraaa
  • Upvote 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A bunch of people on twitter saying Lawson blocked them. Which I guess makes sense, since his comments have been getting nicer even though his actual tweets are going more and more into crazy-land. 

  • Upvote 4
  • Thank You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, seraaa said:

To give them the absolute benefit of the doubt - it is *possible* they only attended the incitement rally and did not actually storm the Capitol. I want to be fair.

We can all assess how plausible we think this defence is. I don't know.

I'm just gonna wait and see when the FBI are looking for them and more and more people are gonna get arrested. Even if you stayed outside the Capitol building, you deserve to have consequences for being a threat to our democracy. Even a potential threat. You already believe the same things that the idiots who had the nerve to storm into the building and damage it believe. I think just by being there and agreeing with what Trump has said about the election should warrant for arrests, but I don't think the justice system will go that far. 

  • Upvote 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am pretty sure it would be a 2nd ammendment violation to arrest people for believing Trump or gathering to march peacefully (key word) for him. I don't agree that the people in the crowd had zero blame, but it would not be right to arrest people who did not escalate or break any laws. If it were me, I would have left as soon as I realized what was going on rather than imply support by remaining in the crowd.

They are assholes imo, but it is a constitutionally protected right for them to be such. If someone is a degreed law professional I'll gladly take correction.

  • Upvote 3
  • I Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Judging by the Lawson/Trace photos - they appeared to be near the Washington Monument.  Which is a bit of a distance from the Capital Building.  Ditto with some of the other (cannot tell from all) of the other fundies we have seen there. 

That doesn't make them innocent of say blindly following along and not practicing a level of discernment regarding the craptastic level of rhetoric that Trump and his minions spewed.  But then, I suppose homeschooling in most of these families is such that the cult does not want them using independent, logical thought because they might do something like, realize the cult is a load of tripe and leave. 

  • Upvote 6
  • I Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, clueliss said:

Judging by the Lawson/Trace photos - they appeared to be near the Washington Monument.  Which is a bit of a distance from the Capital Building.  Ditto with some of the other (cannot tell from all) of the other fundies we have seen there. 

That doesn't make them innocent of say blindly following along and not practicing a level of discernment regarding the craptastic level of rhetoric that Trump and his minions spewed.  But then, I suppose homeschooling in most of these families is such that the cult does not want them using independent, logical thought because they might do something like, realize the cult is a load of tripe and leave. 

I had this same conversation with a former coworker who attended the speeches and was walking with others toward the capitol. She said she was innocent because she did not get to the steps or break/steal anything. However, her pics (since removed) show her with others who have been arrested prior to the actual onslaught. My response was that her guilt and innocence seem to stem from the fact that she is obsessed with taking selfies and walked slower than those who were the main part of the problem.

Her intentions in going there were spelled out in earlier social media posts where she said she was going to DC to take back the country and to stop the steal. She followed that up by saying she would do whatever she had to do to get the job done. Apparently, others were faster. 

Lawson and Trace have had no issue with promoting the idea of a government overthrow and physically fighting for what they believe to be right. That's where I have a problem believing them to just having been to a "peaceful" rally. You go to the symphony, the art museum, a quiet beach, etc. for peaceful and such as that. 

I love and support our first amendment, even when it protects the speech of those I don't agree with at all. However, those freedoms of that first amendment don't come without consequences. I attended a march and rally over the summer. Some individuals did vandalize private property. I have thought about my role in that (even though I was at least three miles away and only learned afterward that it happened). I cannot say that I would not attend another such event. However, I will say that I have worked hard to make sure that I do my part to make such marches, protests, etc. successful. 

Lawson and Trace seem to have either out of a change of heart (doubtful) or through logistics avoided the largest problems of the incidents of Wednesday. Yet they spread the message that was the rallying cry over social media with pics of themselves. I cannot say that makes them innocent. In my estimation, that makes them a participant at some level rather than simply a witness (their claim) or bystander.  

  • Upvote 16
  • Thank You 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, clueliss said:

Judging by the Lawson/Trace photos - they appeared to be near the Washington Monument.  Which is a bit of a distance from the Capital Building.  Ditto with some of the other (cannot tell from all) of the other fundies we have seen there. 

That doesn't make them innocent of say blindly following along and not practicing a level of discernment regarding the craptastic level of rhetoric that Trump and his minions spewed.  But then, I suppose homeschooling in most of these families is such that the cult does not want them using independent, logical thought because they might do something like, realize the cult is a load of tripe and leave. 

He's insisting he was a separate peaceful protest. The rally at the ellipse was not separate. The mob, under Trump's encouragement, went from the rally to the to capitol building. So while it's possible he left before the mob turned violent or reached the capitol building, him trying to pretend like he was not a part of it at all is lie.

  • Upvote 13
  • I Agree 4
  • Thank You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, TuringMachine said:

He's insisting he was a separate peaceful protest. The rally at the ellipse was not separate. The mob, under Trump's encouragement, went from the rally to the to capitol building. So while it's possible he left before the mob turned violent or reached the capitol building, him trying to pretend like he was not a part of it at all is lie.

Pretending that he was telling the truth for a moment...hard to do...He honestly went with the story that they were down the way from the capitol, saw people wearing MAGA clothing and screaming Trump slogans going by, and chose to ignore it all. Totally believable given how "lowkey" he is about everything. He totally saw people dressed in military type outfits and cos-playing militia and thought...just a few more selfies and I'm going home. 

This is a guy who claims he was asleep when his two younger brothers set the laundry room on fire, got up and dressed, and put on his gun to greet the volunteer fire department. He totally let everyone pass him by.

And if you buy that...

  • Upvote 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, GuineaPigCourtship said:

I am pretty sure it would be a 2nd ammendment violation to arrest people for believing Trump or gathering to march peacefully (key word) for him. I don't agree that the people in the crowd had zero blame, but it would not be right to arrest people who did not escalate or break any laws. If it were me, I would have left as soon as I realized what was going on rather than imply support by remaining in the crowd.

They are assholes imo, but it is a constitutionally protected right for them to be such. If someone is a degreed law professional I'll gladly take correction.

It's the First amendment, and it has limits.

For example, you can't protest peacefully at the emergency entrance to a busy hospital. Your right is limited in that way. Does the First Amendment protect your right to protest if you are carrying a Molotov cocktail in a cooler, or a sign that says "Kill Pence."? That's an issue for the courts (unless it's already been decided).

The crowd outside the Capitol? I'm pretty sure they broke those limits.

Edited by Jackie3
  • Upvote 13
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Duggar Data has posted some pictures from Lawson and Tiffany's Instagram accounts.  Apparently some think he's in California.  I can't view his profile, I guess I'm blocked? It doesn't even show up.  However Tiffany does have a story up of some Roses that says, My Heart when you know you know.

  • Upvote 3
  • Disgust 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Nashville92 said:

Duggar Data has posted some pictures from Lawson and Tiffany's Instagram accounts.  Apparently some think he's in California.  I can't view his profile, I guess I'm blocked? It doesn't even show up.  However Tiffany does have a story up of some Roses that says, My Heart when you know you know.

He posted some videos to his story of him playing the piano. There are also some photos. Nothing to indicate where he is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • nelliebelle1197 locked, unlocked and locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.