[CW: Child Sex Abuse] Josh & Anna 31: Charged on 2 LaCounts

[QuiverFullofBooks]

1 hour ago, onekidanddone said:

Forgive if this has been covered before. Why were Smuggar ,Anna and M6 living in a warehouse and not the huge ass house with the pool?  
 

They sold the pool house after Grandma Duggar drowned in the pool. Were Josh and Anna were living in the warehouse before that? The warehouse is closer to the big house, and they may have wanted to be nearby. It’s also possible that they thought that the M kids were in danger from the pool. Or JB decided that his worthless son didn’t deserve a nice house with a pool.

[amaznmom2u]

12 minutes ago, MamaJunebug said:

 

A thousand thanks to whoever brought his podcast to our attention. 

Most welcome!?

[choralcrusader8613]

36 minutes ago, Mrs. Kravitz said:

Leave-and-Cleave Duggar

I just heard that in the Smug’s voice. Someone send brain bleach lmao. 

[WarriorJane]

3 hours ago, Lady Grass Lake said:

My mother and her siblings were raised Catholic.  My uncle was a divorced, remarried man who was excommunicated back in the 70's.   Shortly before his death, he was inpatient for cardiac problems and his long term roommate was a Baptist Minister.   Apparently they had a lot of conversations about religion because my Uncle decided to convert to Baptist.  When he was failing in health, those old Catholic rites and rituals came forward and he voiced his disappointment that he was not able to receive last rites.  His second wife went to the local Catholic priest and asked if an exception could be made and was told absolutely not.  But, a few days later the priest called her back and said that an exception could be made if they would donate $5000 to some fund or parish need.   Uncle said Hell No.  The Baptist minister performed my Uncle's funeral service, and delivered a very hell and brimstone sermon about how corrupt other religions could be and that Uncle had been born again and was truly in Heaven.  It was kind of funny watching the family of Catholics, most of them lapsed but still Catholic squirm in their seats.    I went up to the pastor afterwards and told him I loved his sermon.    He laughed a little and said "Tough Audience."  

WADR, this sounds like one of those stories that gets distorted as it passes through the generations and is taken as family history.  The Church does not "excommunicate" divorced persons, nor does it deny them last rites.  It doesn't charge for sacraments.  There are so many issues and so many things about the Church that need to change, but that's about doctrine, not misconceptions that grow out of these wild stories about someone's cousin's neighbor's brother-in-law's coworker who can't afford to baptize her baby because the priest is charging $500 to do it.  Sorry if this sounds scold-y, it's just that there are enough real problems the Church has to solve.  

[JenniferJuniper]

48 minutes ago, MamaJunebug said:

I went ahead and listened to Justin’s podcasts #2&3 while helping with a small construction project - IOW, not real closely. And my wirk partner is half deaf, so I didn’t need to explain. 

 I got over my annoyance at Justin’s slight vocal fry (JMHO) and by the time he described the story of Josh’s betrayal I was feeling very tender-hearted toward Justin.

IIRC, He tried to call media attention to some part of the scandal but was stymied, maybe by lack of a second source for the info.

My cold old heart fairly broke when he expressed his frustration at how cavalierly TLC execs have made bank while giving vile fundamentalist doctrine wide exposure. 

A thousand thanks to whoever brought his podcast to our attention. 

I'd like to add my thanks.

I found Justin's honesty and earnestness both refreshing and charming.  This sessions are long, but recaps can't fully do them justice. His thoughtful perspective on the Duggars and fundamentalism in general was well worth my time.

[Dee-Dee]

36 minutes ago, amaznmom2u said:Most welcome!?

Yes I completely binged today! Totally fascinating and sad. I just want a tell all book so badly!

[viii]

1 hour ago, QuiverFullofBooks said:

They sold the pool house after Grandma Duggar drowned in the pool. Were Josh and Anna were living in the warehouse before that? The warehouse is closer to the big house, and they may have wanted to be nearby. It’s also possible that they thought that the M kids were in danger from the pool. Or JB decided that his worthless son didn’t deserve a nice house with a pool.

I think it’s more likely that nobody wants to live in the house where their beloved grandmother died. 

[HarryPotterFan]

5 hours ago, amaznmom2u said:

Am I recollecting wrong but didn't the Rebers say they only have dial up? How is the daughter able to conduct piano lessons via Zoom/FaceTime? I suppose she could have an unlimited data plan on her phone, but what prevents Josh from walking in on a lesson? 

  Hide contents

Sun Article on Douchebag Duggar

 

If they’re anything like other fundies and Trump lovers we follow, they probably pretended there is no pandemic and continued as usual. I’d imagine some parents would discontinue lessons and others would keep going. 

[AussieKrissy]

14 minutes ago, viii said:

I think it’s more likely that nobody wants to live in the house where their beloved grandmother died. 

Smugs to get out from jim boobs watchful eye would. windowless warehouse of shame didnt stop him though I suppose

[refugee]

On 5/11/2021 at 9:39 AM, AliceInFundyland said:

I think you have a skewed perspective of how easy it is to have certain state benefits. It doesn't "guarantee" that anyone is checking in on anything more often. That statement comes off as a little bit classist.

I hit the “I agree” reaction on the comment you were replying to because it brought up the memory of my first friend in college. I remember her telling me she thought everyone’s dad beat the crap out of their kids. Her dad was a highly respected professional and very skilled at making up excuses for injuries. “She tripped at the top of the stairs.”

The kids even thought the mom was okay with it—until the day she came home from work early (sick? I don’t recall) and caught him as he threw my friend against a wall. She scooped up the kids and walked out. Everyone took the husband’s side. He moved in the highest circles professionally and politically. The mom got custody but couldn’t get child support (it could be he threatened to get custody if she tried, I don’t remember anymore, but that would make sense to me. I do recall he trashed her reputation; everyone believed his side of the story and not hers). They lived below the poverty line, but my friend won a full ride to college.

I’ll never forget her telling me she grew up thinking it was normal for parents to beat the crap out of their kids—until the day her mom walked in on it and gave up everything in the same moment—money, security, reputation—to rescue her kids.

I think about this when reading about the various families discussed here. That maybe the kids think their condition is “normal” for families who are “pursuing righteousness”. That would make escaping even harder and rebellion unthinkable—as if it is only their own personal problem, that they try to hide so they can be as “normal” as possible in the culture.

2 minutes ago, refugee said:

I’m not sure what just happened. I tried to edit my post to add clarity, and it put the edited version in a text box. I came back and edited it again and removed the text in the box.

Edited May 13, 2021 by refugee
Tried to clarify something.

[EmCatlyn]

12 hours ago, Howl said:

Came across this on a Twitter thread discussing why Christians and Evangelicals in particular don't want to come to terms with why people really leave the church.  Then this exchange happens: 

The "Josh Duggar didn't do anything wrong" wing-nut brigade is marching briskly along. 

Okay, so according to these people, Josh had hundreds of pictures of innocent-babies-in-the-womb and the FBI considers these pictures pornography because babies-in-the-womb are naked????

Never mind that ultra-sounds don’t really give great pictures.  Never mind that there is no law against transmitting or viewing pictures of naked-babies-in-the womb.  What I want to know is what is Josh supposed to have been doing with those hypothetical ultrasounds?  I mean, who has hundreds of ultrasounds (other than a doctor’s office or research facility)? ?

The excuse is so absurd that it makes you wonder.  Is there a phenomenon called “fetus porn” that we don’t know about?  ???

 

 

 

 

 

[HerNameIsBuffy]

4 hours ago, EmCatlyn said:

The excuse is so absurd that it makes you wonder.  Is there a phenomenon called “fetus porn” that we don’t know about?  ???

I can't believe you find that funny.  Time to close my browser.

[WarriorJane]

5 hours ago, EmCatlyn said:

I mean, who has hundreds of ultrasounds (other than a doctor’s office or research facility)? ?

The Duggars do.

[Howl]

5 hours ago, EmCatlyn said:

The excuse is so absurd that it makes you wonder.  Is there a phenomenon called “fetus porn” that we don’t know about?  ???

Well, "porn" is used in many non sexual contexts to describe looking at something someone finds appealing, interesting, sexy, beautiful.   I'm a cyclist.  People posting pics of their new bikes on social media is sometimes referred to as bike porn (or pron, but the meaning is understood). 

With the Quiverfull pregnancy fetish + fj snark, ultra sounds could def be considered fundy porn and we'd find it humorous.  But with Josh casting a pall over everything... 

[Satan'sFortress]

Sorry if this has been addressed. If Josh does take a plea deal, what would the timing likely be on that?

[HerNameIsBuffy]

48 minutes ago, Howl said:

Well, "porn" is used in many non sexual contexts to describe looking at something someone finds appealing, interesting, sexy, beautiful.   I'm a cyclist.  People posting pics of their new bikes on social media is sometimes referred to as bike porn (or pron, but the meaning is understood). 

With the Quiverfull pregnancy fetish + fj snark, ultra sounds could def be considered fundy porn and we'd find it humorous.  But with Josh casting a pall over everything... 

With what is at the basis of this discussion, horrific violent sexual torture of an infant I don't see how any jokes about sexual abuse about any innocent child can be humorous.  

We all know what the word porn means in a non-sexual context, but given the circumstances of this discussion how anyone can use it to be funny is beyond me.  I think the post you're quoting is one of the most tone deaf, noxious things I've seen on FJ in any thread.  

[gustava]

I am mildly obsessed with Anna's LLCs.  From what several of you have said, she doesn't really control them; she's just a 'front'.  Might someone explain a bit more about that?  Who actually can get into them and spend the $$ or sell the property?  Could JB/Josh be using them for Josh's living expenses with the Rebers?  Could Anna take the contents herself?  Inquiring minds want to know.

[Phoenix]

I listened to the entire Justin and Julia podcast. I cannot verify the content but it sounds consistent with what we already know about IBLP, the Duggar's and Josh, plus a lot of additional details. If it is a fake the guy is a heck of an actor and writer. Justin's experiences sound raw and real to me. There are three episodes out with a fourth to come in a few weeks. The third episode wound up with a gut wrenching reflection on how much damage the Duggar's alone have done in spreading the cancer of IBLP and holds TLC accountable for their lucrative part in giving the Duggar's a platform. 

[quiversR4hunting]

1 minute ago, gustava said:

I am mildly obsessed with Anna's LLCs.  From what several of you have said, she doesn't really control them; she's just a 'front'.  Might someone explain a bit more about that?  Who actually can get into them and spend the $$ or sell the property?  Could JB/Josh be using them for Josh's living expenses with the Rebers?  Could Anna take the contents herself?  Inquiring minds want to know.

If Anna signed deeds or has her name on financial accounts associated with the LLCs, then I would say, yes, she could sell the properties or take the money in the accounts. Those are all big ifs. The LLCs might be in her name and all assets in other people's names which I would guess no she couldn't get to the property or money. But that is a guess, I am not a tax person nor attorney. 

[quiversR4hunting]

6 hours ago, EmCatlyn said:

Okay, so according to these people, Josh had hundreds of pictures of innocent-babies-in-the-womb and the FBI considers these pictures pornography because babies-in-the-womb are naked????

Never mind that ultra-sounds don’t really give great pictures.  Never mind that there is no law against transmitting or viewing pictures of naked-babies-in-the womb.

This is what I don't get; as you stated and I stated earlier 2-d ultrasounds are gritty and shapes of the baby but not much else. Many people can't even see the baby in an ultrasound. And the cognitive dissonance of these people to think they are just ultrasounds is just mind boggling. As you pointed out there is no law against transmitting or viewing ultrasounds also makes it just weird. These people are just grasping at straws. 

[HerNameIsBuffy]

8 minutes ago, quiversR4hunting said:

If Anna signed deeds or has her name on financial accounts associated with the LLCs, then I would say, yes, she could sell the properties or take the money in the accounts. Those are all big ifs. The LLCs might be in her name and all assets in other people's names which I would guess no she couldn't get to the property or money. But that is a guess, I am not a tax person nor attorney. 

If she's on them alone, yes, but I thought someone said she isn't on any alone?  Also, if she gave power of attorney to JB he could act without her consent.

[Tatar-tot]

21 hours ago, Jackie3 said:

Actually, the husband tells a story about that. His own father (not Jim Bob) was examining Josh's computer equipment and asks "What kinda filter you got on this?" Apparently, Josh noticeably jumps. Of course there was a filter, but Josh (and most of these kids, apparently) found ways to get around his parents restrictions, particularly in the area of technology.

Yes, I'm sure you are right, I just got it mixed up. I wrote it up late last night, sorry.

So far, on episode 2, he is talking about his reaction to Josh's bond hearing. Justin seems like a gentle, intelligent guy, not very good at showing his emotions. When the initial charges were brought against Josh, he felt disgust but not a lot of other strong feelings. However, once he read about the bond hearing, he says his feelings changed.  He said he wanted to see someone "run Josh over with a car." 

Anna doesn't look like she is experiencing "heart-pounding excitement." She looks miserable. It's far more likely that her training in submission and the covenant of marriage, plus her pregnancy and 6 kids, is causing her to stay. I doubt she's loving this and getting her fix.

I think Michelle is the CHAOS ADDICT.  Why else would someone thrive on having all the kids, star on tv, publicity tours, campaigns (JB) etc???

[Exchange Atheist]

3 minutes ago, gustava said:

I am mildly obsessed with Anna's LLCs.  From what several of you have said, she doesn't really control them; she's just a 'front'.  Might someone explain a bit more about that?  Who actually can get into them and spend the $$ or sell the property?  Could JB/Josh be using them for Josh's living expenses with the Rebers?  Could Anna take the contents herself?  Inquiring minds want to know.

We don’t know for certain that she’s jus a front. It is theoretically possible that she’s also one of or even the only shareholder. Without knowing any details about these specific LLCs (am attorney, but not in the US): generally speaking, profits made by a LLC can be paid out to the shareholders, who can then use them for whatever they want. The LLC can also make its own transactions and could generally make payouts to whomever it wants. There are usually restrictions on these transactions, e.g. the directors aren’t authorised to spend more than a certain sum (which must remain in the LLC’s books), must get shareholders approval for certain transactions or may only use LLC money for specific purposes. We can’t know for certain what those restrictions are without access to the LLC‘s corporate documents. It’s entirely possible that JB is using the LLCs to pay the Rebers, but (from a legal perspective) just as possible that Anna has sole access to all assets. 
Hopefully someone who knows more about the specifics of the applicable law can chime in. Corporate law is most likely not the same in Arkansas as in my jurisdiction, so this is mostly an educated guess.

[Tatar-tot]

13 minutes ago, quiversR4hunting said:

This is what I don't get; as you stated and I stated earlier 2-d ultrasounds are gritty and shapes of the baby but not much else. Many people can't even see the baby in an ultrasound. And the cognitive dissonance of these people to think they are just ultrasounds is just mind boggling. As you pointed out there is no law against transmitting or viewing ultrasounds also makes it just weird. These people are just grasping at straws. 

Ultrasound pictures would not been hidden behind a Lennox (?) partition.

Edited May 13, 2021 by Tatar-tot

[Jess]

48 minutes ago, gustava said:

I am mildly obsessed with Anna's LLCs.  From what several of you have said, she doesn't really control them; she's just a 'front'.  Might someone explain a bit more about that?  Who actually can get into them and spend the $$ or sell the property?  Could JB/Josh be using them for Josh's living expenses with the Rebers?  Could Anna take the contents herself?  Inquiring minds want to know.

So, basically the list of Anna’s LLCs are a list of companies for which she is the registered agent or a listed officer. Someone posted the list originally on reddit I think and thought registered agent =ownership. Registered agent just means the person designated to accept service on behave of the LCC. Basically it means if the LLC is sued this is the person who gets the paperwork to and they will pass it on to the attorney. The registered agent is not necessarily a shareholder. So, we do not know how many if any shares Anna owns in any of the LCCs. She could also have shares (even 100% of shares) in LLCs which she is not listed as the agent or officer. She could own 100% of the LCCs or 0% or anything in between. On all of them there is at least one other entity listed. If she owns 100% then she could do what she wanted with them they are hers. Even if she is a majority shareholder she still has a duty of care to the minority shareholder(s) which would prevent some actions for example she couldn’t drain the corporate accounts or transfer any real estate at below market value.