Posted on 06/08/2015 1:16:50 PM PDT by Pinkbell
In a minute, I will get to the two gay persons involved in exposing this and the porn history behind the magazine In Touch.
First, I of course want to say that Josh Duggar’s actions were inexcusable, lest anyone accuse me of supporting what he did. I realize the media would have had no “dirt” on them had this not happened. That said, I listened to the interview with his parents, and I listened to the interview with the victims. I do believe the parents tried to do the right thing. They ultimately did get him help and contact the authorities. Say what you will about the help that they got Josh, but it seemed to work. There has been no indication from even the media that he has ever done something since he was 15. If he has, then I take that back, but there is no proof that he has.
The thing that I am getting at is that this is bigger in the liberal media than I believe it would have been had this happened to a liberal family. When the news of this molestation scandal came out, the first thing that I thought is, "They finally got them." There are a couple different websites, one in particular, who have disliked the Duggars for years due to their conservative, Christian beliefs. The one thing the Duggars did which essentially "doomed" them was to speak out against the gay agenda. It's not that the Duggars have ever said they hate gay people. Michelle's sister happens to be a lesbian, and they still love her. The Duggars simply believe marriage is between one man and one woman and children need to have a mother and father. Michelle Duggar made a robocall against a transgender bill out of concern that a man could claim to "feel" he is a woman to be able to use the womens' room to prey on a woman or young girls. She never said that ALL or even a majority of transgender people are child molestors like the media is playing it off as.
That brings me to my point, one of the sites is a site where the majority of posters do not like the Duggars or "fundies" or conservatives in general. Anyway, this person was linked as the person who tipped off In Touch or at least helped. She and her partner are lesbians who gave the dirt to In Touch [no idea how she knew], but she has a history of not liking the Duggars. Michelle Duggar making a robocall arguing against transgenders in the bathrooms really set her and her partner off. They organized a gay "kiss in" in front of the Duggars home. She is very proud of herself, and here is a link to her claiming credit for the In Touch story:
http://imgur.com/QjT4Pwy
Second of all, the writer who broke the story for In Touch is a gay man who also broke the story of John Edwards with Rielle Hunter. I mention the latter because it does show he is willing to throw the other side under the bus for a good story, but I think he relished throwing the Duggars under the bus. He did an interview with The Advocate:
19 Questions With the Gay Journalist Who Brought Down the Duggars
Here are a few key questions I excerpted to illustrate my point:
The Advocate: Hi Rick. Congrats on the piece. How did you come to break this story?
Rick Egusquiza: Thank you. The rumors of Joshua Duggar being sexually inappropriate as a teenager were circulating for years, but no one could prove it until In Touch Weekly really started digging into it. My bosses received a tip and then sent me and a team to Springdale, Ark., to start digging around. One tipster led me to another, and then another. I have to say it was good old-fashioned reporting on the ground and a lot of door-knocking. Also a lot of leg work from our team of excellent reporters and editors. I'd love to take full credit, but it wasn't a one-man job.
Were you aware the family had a history of homophobia and transphobia?
I assumed they weren't fans of our community because they were such Bible-thumping conservative Christians, and I knew Josh Duggar worked for the Family Research Council. I learned a lot more about them when I was doing research for this story. I was disgusted by Michelle's robocall to the citizens of Fayetteville, Ark., regrading trans women and restrooms and comparing them to child molesters when she knew about her son’s actions.
Why do you think the Duggars are so popular?
Unfortunately, a lot of people in this country still have the same beliefs [as the Duggars] so they put the Duggars on a pedestal. On the other hand, I think a lot of the country and the world are very happy that their hypocrisy has been uncovered. Now, they’re more popular than ever though.
What's been your favorite response to the story?
When people thank me for doing God's work. Of course, now that the story is out, everyone I meet tells me the same thing, which is, "I knew it! I just knew something weird was going on in that family." Of course, "weird" is a major understatement; it was a crime.
Can't you dig up something good on that racist, antigay Duck Dynasty clan?
I’ll get on that, but I don’t think we’re done with the Duggars yet.
http://www.advocate.com/arts-entertainment/television/2015/06/04/19-questions-gay-journalist-who-brought-down-duggars
Here is some info regarding In Touch and its connection to porn as well:
The Wrap reported in 2013:
But an investigation by TheWrap has found that there is a darker side to the privately held company, including publication of at least one magazine appealing to neo-Nazis, as well as significant involvement in the distribution of pornography — including Nazi-themed porn movies.
These lend perspective to Bauer’s legal woes in the United States, including a $50 million defamation lawsuit by Tom Cruise, filed last October after two U.S.-based publications alleged he’d abandoned his daughter Suri. In fact, Bauer generates dozens of legal complaints worldwide each year about invasion of privacy or libel, according to a lawyer who has frequently opposed them.
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2015/06/06/meet-the-terrible-porn-publisher-behind-the-outing-of-the-duggar-abuse-story/
The two sites mentioned have a lot of posters who have wanted the Duggars off the air for a long time, and the bottom line is because they are “fundies” or very conservative Christians. They were looking for something, anything to get them, and they got it. I saw one post from a poster who said they were disappointed this had to be this type of scandal because it involved molestation, but they wanted something, and others agreed. Another poster on the second forum who was a liberal was actually disgusted that some liberal friends on Facebook were rejoicing over this because they hate the Duggars.
These people say they just care about the girls...all while bashing their family by calling them a cult, creepy, weird, etc. and then proudly calling for the show to be cancelled...what they've wanted for years but didn't have a valid reason to do so. This isn't primarily about the girls to them, and Jessa said so last night on Megyn Kelly. This is about taking this family down all the while trying to be sympathetic. Does this journalist care what he put those girls through? They say they feel worse now than when it happened? No. He's proud of himself, and he is still digging.
My final point is that people say the Duggars are getting more heat because they held themselves up as “moral arbitrators,” and therefore, they are hypocrites. Isn’t this always the spiel with the liberals regarding conservatives? If a conservative has sinned or has a bad past, does that mean that he/she can’t speak out for conservative, Christian issues today? Josh, by all accounts so far, has turned his life around, so it’s not as if he is saying one thing and doing another. If he was still doing it or it was done as an adult and covered up, I would agree with them. Do they ever so severely call out their own who act as “moral arbitrators” for the modern, secular humanist agenda that rules today’s society?
What's your point? Mine is the judge had no jurisdiction. The matter was never before him. It never reached court.
Is your empathy for all sex offenders or just this particular one?
If the judge acted on the case he must have known about it. If he knew about it it was before him. If it was before him he had jurisdiction.
A court case need not be filed for a judge to act. Often a judge will determine if a case may be presented. Judges may become involved before a prosecutor or other agent of the court files an action. Granting a warrant is a case in point.
Being thrown to the ground for being mouthy and refusing to obey lawful orders by a police officer, does not ruin ones life forevermore afterwards.
I have been made to lie down on the ground by police on more than one occasion. It had no continuous consequences thereafter. What is strange is seeing people putting forth the most Rube Goldberg chain of logic in order to create fake outrage over a nothing event.
And this was a point I was also trying to make. Not only does publication of this information harm the boy far more than he deserves, but it also harms the innocent sisters, and they don't deserve it at all.
The media needs to be punished for this, as does any law enforcement officials responsible for allowing this story to escape confidentiality.
I think you and I have a very different understanding of how the Juvenile court system functions. Protection for Juveniles is always foremost in these sorts of cases, and no order needs to be issued because all players know the rules.
You are arguing a pathetic technicality that would not last an instant in front of a judge. The judge would simply look at the violator and say "You know better."
I did some further digging. The judge acted on an expungement motion from one of the Duggar sisters. That's where the judge got jurisdiction.
Although the expungement is pretty much moot at this point. The reports are already out in the public. This just prevents further release.
The judge granted a motion for expungement filed by one of the Duggar sisters. That's how the judge had jurisdiction over the matter.
You are simply incorrect if you think a judge can otherwise (i.e. without the expungement motion/order) wave his hands & order something for a situation that was never before him in court.
Protection for Juveniles is always foremost in these sorts of cases, and no order needs to be issued because all players know the rules.
Once again, you're talking about court cases, not police records. Without the expungement motion & order, a court has zero jurisdiction over a matter never before the court. This is Government 101 stuff.
Everyone in the F***ing system knows better, and i'm quite tired of you trying to befuddle the issue.
There is NOBODY, and I mean NOBODY that thinks they can get away with releasing information about juveniles, with or without a judge's order. You do that, and your @$$ is toast.
I think before this is over, we are going to find some toasted @$$es of some officials.
Show me the citation to Arkansas law that demonstrates what the police did in releasing the reports was illegal.
If it was illegal, why has no one been fired or sued? Everyone (except for a few chowderheads on cable news) who has taken a look at Arkansas law on this matter has determined the police fulfilled their legal obligation under Arkansas's public records laws by releasing the records with required redactions.
I think before this is over, we are going to find some toasted @$$es of some officials.
Don't hold your breath.
I’m not interested in carrying on further exchanges with you on this topic.
Unless you are one of the girls, you really have no call to sit in judgment. He has been forgiven by the persons he harassed. What is your problem?
“I’m not interested in carrying on further exchanges with you on this topic.”
Translated: you won, gdani.
Defending a child molester isn’t my thing but if you want too...
He didn’t stop being a pervert? You know this how?
And you are privy to some explosive new info that is about to come out? Why not tell us? Break the story here.
If you can’t answer theses things than it at least it means you have a wild imagination, even is spurn on by hatred.
That makes what easy? How many hoops do you want him to jump through to satisfy your vengeful needs?
I’m sorry, I assumed everyone here was aware of “confessing your sins to one another”
I think it’s in corinthians.
Where is cast out the evildoer from among you located? Or the stoning stuff? That’s in Leviticus, right?
I thought pure religion was to defend the fatherless and widows - i.e. the defenseless. Josh isn’t defenseless, so why are you defending him? What about the three other girls? The ones who aren’t parading in front of the cameras to get a new show? Don’t they deserve protection from Josh since he is moving back to the neighborhood?
Yes, WAY WAY WAY before this, leftists have been after them.
No one is excusing. Not that I’ve seen. If so, please copy and paste the comments.
The only reason this came to light? What the heck are you talking about? This came to “light”over 10 years ago. Oh wait, you mean it didn’t make it into the tabloids until now, so they must have been covering it up? Lol. That’s just silly.
I encourage you to watch the interview with the victims. They address this. Pretty eloquently, I might add. Even for a couple of brainwashed twits /s
And I bet you my last dime that TLC also knew about it. I bet they disclosed it to them. Way back when they started.
Why is “gayjosh”a keyword? Just curious.
Spelling isn’t your thing, either.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.