Kingston Group Mbrs Plead Guilty to Massive Fraud Case

[smac97]

Wow:

Quote

Members of the polygamous Kingston family of Utah have pleaded guilty in a $512 million fraud case that ties the family to Turkey, U.S. news sources have reported.

Brothers Jacob and Isaiah Kingston are accused of running a fraud scheme through their energy company Washakie Renewable Energy by claiming tax credits on renewable fuels their company had never produced.

Instead, the company had been buying and selling diesel fuels and claiming it had produced them to claim between 50 cents and $1 per gallon, depending on the fuel’s quality.

What?  A government subsidy program resulted in fraudulent behavior?  Who could've seen that coming?

Quote

Prosecutors say the brothers had attempted to defraud the U.S. government of $1 billion, and had received $512 million before they were caught in August, 2018.

Phew!  It's a good thing the Feds were able to stop the theft of a second half a billion dollars!

Quote

They were arrested while attempting to board a plane to Turkey, where the brothers are said to have stashed at least $134 million in accounts and business ventures through a partner company, SBK Holding.

I'm sure we'll be able to get back every penny of that $134 million.  Meanwhile, the remaining 378 million dollars these guys stole is . . . where?

Quote

Jacob Kingston was photographed meeting Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in September 2017, and the judge overseeing the brothers’ case denied a motion for bail in February due to their links to the country.

“Jacob O. Kingston, the company’s CEO, pleaded guilty Thursday to 41 charges including money laundering, fraud, conspiracy and witness tampering and obstruction of justice, according to a court docket. His brother and the chief financial officer, Isaiah E. Kingston, pleaded guilty to 17 counts,” the Salt Lake Tribune reported on July 19.

Their mother, Rachel Ann Kingston, pleaded guilty to five counts, while Jacob Kingston’s legal wife, Sally Kingston, pleaded guilty to two counts, the Tribune said.

On a non-sarcastic note, I am curious as to how these folks rationalized the theft of this money.  I had never understood the Davis County Cooperative folks to subscribe to the "Bleed the Beast" doctrine espoused in some other polygamous groups (and they have also recently denied such a doctrine - see here).

So was it simple greed, then?  On an obscene scale, to be sure.  But just greed?

Quote

Jacob Kingston “faces up to 30 years in prison, according to his plea agreement. His brother faces up to 20, and Rachel and Sally Kingston each face up to 15 years in prison,” the newspaper reported.

The Kingstons’ guilty pleas have set U.S. authorities on the trail of properties obtained with the proceeds of the fraud scheme, and some properties owned by wives of the Utah brothers’ polygamous Mormon sect’s leader, Paul E. Kingston, are reportedly included on the list to be confiscated.

Other properties set to be seized include businesses owned by the Mormon sect.

Hmm.  I wonder if this might lead to the disintegration of the Kingston Group.  I am not sure what Jacob and Isaiah's relationship is to the group's heirarchy.

I am sorry to hear about this.  Much sorror and pain will attach to the families of those who have done these things.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited July 31, 2019 by smac97

[strappinglad]

Is this one reason to no longer be called Mormon ?

[JLHPROF]

2 hours ago, strappinglad said:

Is this one reason to no longer be called Mormon ?

I don't see how anyone could consider them Mormon.

I don't care about their polygamy.

But last I checked - theft, money laundering, incest, physical abuse, sexual abuse, child labor violations - have no place in the restored gospel of Jesus Christ.

That's the problem I guess.  The majority of fundamentalist groups don't actually follow any principles of Mormonism.  Which in the end makes their practice of polygamy basically irrelevant.

[sunstoned]

You can find corruption,  money laundering, MLM, incest, and child abuse by spiritual leaders in any organization, religious or otherwise.  

[Calm]

8 minutes ago, sunstoned said:

You can find corruption,  money laundering, MLM, incest, and child abuse by spiritual leaders in any organization, religious or otherwise.  

The question is how systemic they are, are they rare or relatively common. 

Edited July 31, 2019 by Calm

[Calm]

4 hours ago, smac97 said:

.  I am not sure what Jacob and Isaiah's relationship is to the group's heirarchy.

Sons of the Kingston patriarch (who has over 300 kids, so not definitive indicator of leadership)

More info on group

https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/inside-the-order-one-mormon-cults-secret-empire-244969/?source=post_page---------------------------

Case could lead to major exposure for the group

https://www.standard.net/news/government/kingston-criminal-case-exposes-thousands-of-documents-related-to-polygamists/article_51f938af-73bc-539e-b82b-b660cb63eb7a.html

Edited July 31, 2019 by Calm

[Tacenda]

I watched this awhile back, called "Whistleblower". It's mind boggling. Tons of abuse in this religion. And another bad fruit of polygamy started by JS.  https://www.cbs.com/shows/whistleblower/video/pVplXBWXqE_Mr8fv_30ySDTr95SiNBvj/whistleblower-polygamy-power-and-profits-the-case-against-the-kingstons/

When I was a child, there was a store in Bountiful, Utah that was ran by the Kingston group and we'd shop there all the time.

[Calm]

Are you going to blame the RCC for the Mafia?

https://www.cosanostranews.com/2014/06/by-condemning-italys-mafia-pope-knows.html?m=1

Quote

In Italy, there is not a single Mafioso who isn't religious," Padre Nino Fasullo, an anti-Mafia priest in Italy, once said.
 

"For a phenomenon like the Mafia, which has no intellectual justification at all, religion may represent the only ideological apparatus to which it can refer. ... We're all in the church. Even the Mafia. Unfortunately. The church is embroiled in it. But regrettably not everyone in the church is convinced that opposition to the Mafia is necessary."

As noted, Toto Riina never sleeps in his prison bed without pictures of the saints pasted on the wall around his head...and Bernardo Provenzano's knowledge of the Bible is legendary. When he was finally arrested police found four bibles on his bedside table complete with annotations and underlining...

The Mafia turned to religion, using components of the Catholic Church to reconstruct a false version of the Catholic God to justify itself, as noted in The Honored Society, by Petra Reski. This is the God of the Old Testament: the God of an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth; the bloodthirsty God who destroyed mankind with his great flood, who easily annihilated Sodom and Gomorrah.

That criminal groups try to justify their crimes with religion is nothing new. 

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, sunstoned said:

You can find corruption,  money laundering, MLM, incest, and child abuse by spiritual leaders in any organization, religious or otherwise.  

Thst's like saying all organizations and individuals are equally corrupt, and that anything goes.  Very cynical, but is it true?  Are all groups and individuals equally corrupt, everywhere and in all situations -- bar none?  Are the leaders of all groups hypocrites, and no one can ever be trusted?

One often hears that the police and the criminal street gangs are both just gangs, with certain kinds of internal, unwritten rules of loyalty.  Thus, the Sicilian Mafia is really no different than the Jesuit Society of the Roman Catholic Church, that the Masons are no different than the Knights of Columbus, that the Church of Scientology is no different in morality than the Church of Jesus  Christ of Latter-day Saints.  Undifferentiated corruption everywhere and at all times.

An example of this cynical theory is contained in the Federalist Papers, in which the basic notion is that men are not angels, and that the U.S. Constitution is designed to deal with that fact.  For, if men were angels, there would be no need for checks and balances and division of powers.  Does this mean that everyone and every group is equally corrupt?

[sunstoned]

33 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Thst's like saying all organizations and individuals are equally corrupt, and that anything goes.  Very cynical, but is it true?  Are all groups and individuals equally corrupt, everywhere and in all situations -- bar none?  Are the leaders of all groups hypocrites, and no one can ever be trusted?

One often hears that the police and the criminal street gangs are both just gangs, with certain kinds of internal, unwritten rules of loyalty.  Thus, the Sicilian Mafia is really no different than the Jesuit Society of the Roman Catholic Church, that the Masons are no different than the Knights of Columbus, that the Church of Scientology is no different in morality than the Church of Jesus  Christ of Latter-day Saints.  Undifferentiated corruption everywhere and at all times.

An example of this cynical theory is contained in the Federalist Papers, in which the basic notion is that men are not angels, and that the U.S. Constitution is designed to deal with that fact.  For, if men were angels, there would be no need for checks and balances and division of powers.  Does this mean that everyone and every group is equally corrupt?

Actually, that is not what I said (or ment) at all.  I said corruption can be found in all organizations. That is all I said.  Now, do you really want to argue that?  

[JLHPROF]

7 hours ago, Tacenda said:

It's mind boggling. Tons of abuse in this religion. And another bad fruit of polygamy started by JS.

Seriously?  This is no fruit of Joseph Smith's polygamy at all.  Other than the fact they use his name they are completely unrelated.  That's like calling Westboro Baptist a bad fruit of Christ despite their lack of Christianity.

Try again, because your comparison is wrong.

Quote

When I was a child, there was a store in Bountiful, Utah that was ran by the Kingston group and we'd shop there all the time.

There's still quite a few.  A hardware and printing store in Taylorsville, a restaurant supply store in Salt Lake.  Lots of Kingston businesses around.

And tons of other non-Kingston polygamist run businesses all over Utah.  You never know, your doctor, dentist, IT guy, builder, insurance guy, realtor, any of them might be.

[USU78]

13 hours ago, smac97 said:

Wow:

What?  A government subsidy program resulted in fraudulent behavior?  Who could've seen that coming?

Phew!  It's a good thing the Feds were able to stop the theft of a second half a billion dollars!

I'm sure we'll be able to get back every penny of that $134 million.  Meanwhile, the remaining 378 million dollars these guys stole is . . . where?

On a non-sarcastic note, I am curious as to how these folks rationalized the theft of this money.  I had never understood the Davis County Cooperative folks to subscribe to the "Bleed the Beast" doctrine espoused in some other polygamous groups (and they have also recently denied such a doctrine - see here).

So was it simple greed, then?  On an obscene scale, to be sure.  But just greed?

Hmm.  I wonder if this might lead to the disintegration of the Kingston Group.  I am not sure what Jacob and Isaiah's relationship is to the group's heirarchy.

I am sorry to hear about this.  Much sorror and pain will attach to the families of those who have done these things.

Thanks,

-Smac

But ... the tribe's royalties!

[USU78]

Let's talk about O-rings.

[Tacenda]

2 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Seriously?  This is no fruit of Joseph Smith's polygamy at all.  Other than the fact they use his name they are completely unrelated.  That's like calling Westboro Baptist a bad fruit of Christ despite their lack of Christianity.

Try again, because your comparison is wrong.

 

In my mind, if JS hadn't started polygamy, then none of these groups would be around. It's so simple to me. And Joseph went to the Lord and asked if it should be restored, that one gets me. The Lord didn't go to him first, so Joseph wanted to live it. And why is Joseph restoring all these things in the Old Testament, if Jesus is all that was needed, including the temple? But I know the answer is exaltation, that of becoming Gods. That's the center to all of it.

Edited July 31, 2019 by Tacenda

[Bob Crockett]

11 hours ago, sunstoned said:

You can find corruption,  money laundering, MLM, incest, and child abuse by spiritual leaders in any organization, religious or otherwise.  

Really?  I guess murder and mass shootings are justified because everybody does it.

[smac97]

24 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

In my mind, if JS hadn't started polygamy, then none of these groups would be around. It's so simple to me.

This seems way too reductionist.  

24 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

And Joseph went to the Lord and asked if it should be restored, that one gets me. The Lord didn't go to him first, so Joseph wanted to live it.

I don't think we can attribute such a thing to Joseph Smith given his reluctance to practice it.  Brian Hales addresses this at some length here.  Some excerpts:

Quote

The historical record indicates that Joseph Smith contracted his first plural marriage in 1835 or 1836 in Kirtland, Ohio, with Fanny Alger. Upon learning of the relationship, his legal wife, Emma, and close friend Oliver Cowdery rejected it, considering it adulterous. Evidence supports that afterward the Prophet taught no one about plural marriage or even mentioned the subject during the next five to six years.
...
As Richard L. Bushman has noted, “After this one unsuccessful attempt” of polygamous marriage with Fanny Alger, Joseph Smith “waited another fi ve years.  The delay showed an uncharacteristic reluctance, hard for one who feared God. . . . Joseph never wrote his personal feelings about plural marriage. . . . Everything on the subject comes from the people around him. But surely he realized that plural marriage would inflict terrible damage, that he ran the risk of wrecking his marriage and alienating his followers.”

Multiple documents support that Joseph Smith was hesitant to revisit the practice of plural marriage in Nauvoo. Helen Mar Kimball Whitney stated that “had it not been for the fear of His {the Lord’s} displeasure, Joseph would have shrunk from the undertaking and would have continued silent, as he did for years.”  She also said that “Joseph put off the dreaded day as long as he dared.”   Lucy Walker reported that Joseph “had his doubts about it for he debated it in his own mind.”

So in the face of multiple anxieties, what might have prompted Joseph Smith to move forward personally and once again marry polygamously and teach others to do likewise? Several writers left accounts from the Nauvoo period that Joseph told of an angel with a sword who threatened him if he did not proceed.
...
In all, twenty accounts from nine witnesses have been identified (see Appendix).
...
Perhaps this situation was unique in the Prophet’s life. Being imperfect, he admitted he had faltered on other occasions. He reportedly confessed: “I have my failings and passions to contend with the same as has the greatest stranger to God. I am tempted the same as you are, my brethren. I am not infallible. All men are subject to their passions and sinful natures. There is a constant warfare between the two natures of man.” It seems that in most instances, he immediately responded to the course corrections required of him.  The command to practice polygamy appears to be the only occasion where a forceful admonishment was required to elicit obedience.

Several accounts relate how Joseph appeared to have felt genuine fear at the time. Mary Elizabeth Rollins Lightner recalled that the sword-threat was not symbolic: “Joseph told me that he was afraid when the angel appeared to him and told him to take other wives. He hesitated, and the angel appeared to him the third time with a drawn sword in his hand and threatened his life if he did not fulfi ll the commandment.”  Erastus Snow claimed that Joseph had “to plead on his knees before the Angel for his Life.” On another occasion, Joseph reportedly affirmed: “God commanded me to obey it {plural marriage}. He said to me that unless I accept it and introduce it, and practice it, I, together with my people, should be damned and cut off from this time henceforth.”

The overall narrative seems to have been that Joseph Smith was very reluctant about polygamy.

Thanks,

-Smac

[USU78]

6 minutes ago, smac97 said:

This seems way too reductionist.  

I don't think we can attribute such a thing to Joseph Smith given his reluctance to practice it.  Brian Hales addresses this at some length here.  Some excerpts:

The overall narrative seems to have been that Joseph Smith was very reluctant about polygamy.

Thanks,

-Smac

Your facts are getting in the way of a perfectly charming misanthropist construct.

White Mormon Male bad, dontcha know?

[SettingDogStar]

8 minutes ago, smac97 said:

This seems way too reductionist.  

I don't think we can attribute such a thing to Joseph Smith given his reluctance to practice it.  Brian Hales addresses this at some length here.  Some excerpts:

The overall narrative seems to have been that Joseph Smith was very reluctant about polygamy.

Thanks,

-Smac

The narrative or Joseph being a serial adulter with a insatiable drive fails a little when you start to look at evidence like this. He was very obviously reluctant or an extremely genius liar.

[california boy]

58 minutes ago, Bob Crockett said:

Really?  I guess murder and mass shootings are justified because everybody does it.

That is not what he is saying either.  He is saying that there is no religious organization that can claim there will never be corruption,  money laundering, MLM, incest, and child abuse, because no one can guarantee that no bad apples will join their otherwise law abiding members.  Can you name any religious organization that has NEVER had any scandals?  If you can't, then you have proven Sunstone's point.

[ALarson]

26 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I don't think we can attribute such a thing to Joseph Smith given his reluctance to practice it.

Do you believe he was reluctant to court or marry Fanny Alger?  I haven't seen any evidence of this (just being honest).  

I think of Brigham Young when I think of a early Prophet who expressed much reluctance to practicing polygamy and then later became converted to the principle.

 

Edited July 31, 2019 by ALarson

[Storm Rider]

13 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I watched this awhile back, called "Whistleblower". It's mind boggling. Tons of abuse in this religion. And another bad fruit of polygamy started by JS.  https://www.cbs.com/shows/whistleblower/video/pVplXBWXqE_Mr8fv_30ySDTr95SiNBvj/whistleblower-polygamy-power-and-profits-the-case-against-the-kingstons/

When I was a child, there was a store in Bountiful, Utah that was ran by the Kingston group and we'd shop there all the time.

You tie this to Joseph Smith? Tacenda, do you ever think you might just be stretching things? Was JS the only person to ever practice polygamy? Do you think these abuses might have nothing to do with polygamy and everything to do with greed? Just maybe?

Edited July 31, 2019 by Storm Rider

[california boy]

29 minutes ago, smac97 said:

This seems way too reductionist.  

I don't think we can attribute such a thing to Joseph Smith given his reluctance to practice it.  Brian Hales addresses this at some length here.  Some excerpts:

 

Quote

 

Quote

The historical record indicates that Joseph Smith contracted his first plural marriage in 1835 or 1836 in Kirtland, Ohio, with Fanny Alger. Upon learning of the relationship, his legal wife, Emma, and close friend Oliver Cowdery rejected it, considering it adulterous. Evidence supports that afterward the Prophet taught no one about plural marriage or even mentioned the subject during the next five to six years.
...
As Richard L. Bushman has noted, “After this one unsuccessful attempt” of polygamous marriage with Fanny Alger, Joseph Smith “waited another fi ve years.  The delay showed an uncharacteristic reluctance, hard for one who feared God. . . . Joseph never wrote his personal feelings about plural marriage. . . . Everything on the subject comes from the people around him. But surely he realized that plural marriage would inflict terrible damage, that he ran the risk of wrecking his marriage and alienating his followers.”

Multiple documents support that Joseph Smith was hesitant to revisit the practice of plural marriage in Nauvoo. Helen Mar Kimball Whitney stated that “had it not been for the fear of His {the Lord’s} displeasure, Joseph would have shrunk from the undertaking and would have continued silent, as he did for years.”  She also said that “Joseph put off the dreaded day as long as he dared.”   Lucy Walker reported that Joseph “had his doubts about it for he debated it in his own mind.”

So in the face of multiple anxieties, what might have prompted Joseph Smith to move forward personally and once again marry polygamously and teach others to do likewise? Several writers left accounts from the Nauvoo period that Joseph told of an angel with a sword who threatened him if he did not proceed.
...
In all, twenty accounts from nine witnesses have been identified (see Appendix).
...
Perhaps this situation was unique in the Prophet’s life. Being imperfect, he admitted he had faltered on other occasions. He reportedly confessed: “I have my failings and passions to contend with the same as has the greatest stranger to God. I am tempted the same as you are, my brethren. I am not infallible. All men are subject to their passions and sinful natures. There is a constant warfare between the two natures of man.” It seems that in most instances, he immediately responded to the course corrections required of him.  The command to practice polygamy appears to be the only occasion where a forceful admonishment was required to elicit obedience.

Several accounts relate how Joseph appeared to have felt genuine fear at the time. Mary Elizabeth Rollins Lightner recalled that the sword-threat was not symbolic: “Joseph told me that he was afraid when the angel appeared to him and told him to take other wives. He hesitated, and the angel appeared to him the third time with a drawn sword in his hand and threatened his life if he did not fulfi ll the commandment.”  Erastus Snow claimed that Joseph had “to plead on his knees before the Angel for his Life.” On another occasion, Joseph reportedly affirmed: “God commanded me to obey it {plural marriage}. He said to me that unless I accept it and introduce it, and practice it, I, together with my people, should be damned and cut off from this time henceforth.”

 

 

The overall narrative seems to have been that Joseph Smith was very reluctant about polygamy.

Thanks,

-Smac

I get that you firmly believe God commanded polygamy.  And I really don't like to get wrapped up in someone's personal beliefs.  But this narrative could simply be explained away as Joseph Smith using the angel/sword story to convince people that it wasn't his idea.  He also convinced the Kimball family that if they allowed him to marry their daughter, their salvation would be assured.  There is no way of proving that he didn't make the angle/sword story up or the promise of exaltation to the Kimball family.  

If polygamy was SO IMPORTANT to God that He was willing to take Joseph Smith's life if he didn't practice it, then where was the angel with the sword when John Taylor abandoned the practice?  Where was the power of God when Johnston's army invaded Utah?  If polygamy was so important to God then why isn't the church fighting to legalize polygamy today, when the possibility of making polygamy legal  is probably a real possibility if challenged in the courts?

Your "proof" will only affirm the belief of someone who already believes polygamy is of God, because it is no proof at all.  It is a narrative that Joseph Smith gave to justify marrying multiple wives. 

Given the history of polygamy, it is more likely that God could care less how many wives men have.  If a person's salvation depends on having multiple wives, as Brigham Young taught, then there aren't gonna be many returning to the presence of God.

[Tacenda]

56 minutes ago, smac97 said:

This seems way too reductionist.  

I don't think we can attribute such a thing to Joseph Smith given his reluctance to practice it.  Brian Hales addresses this at some length here.  Some excerpts:

The overall narrative seems to have been that Joseph Smith was very reluctant about polygamy.

Thanks,

-Smac

I just don't know, he may have been conflicted about possibly committing adultery, I can see that much. But honestly, if we are told we have free agency then what's up with the drawn sword from an angel? I don't believe it happened. Hope it's okay to express my honest feelings without offending. 

Edited July 31, 2019 by Tacenda

[smac97]

3 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Do you believe he was reluctant to court or marry Fanny Alger? 

Yes.

3 minutes ago, ALarson said:

I haven't seen any evidence of this (just being honest).  

I have not given this specific point much thought or study.  Richard Van Wagoner characterizes Joseph as having had "apparent enthusiasm for plural marriage" as pertaining to Fanny Alger, but I would need to review his research to see if this is borne out by evidence, or if it is editorial gloss.  Overall, my impression of Van Wagoner's scholarship on Joseph Smith's polygamy is . . . not very good.  See here for why.

3 minutes ago, ALarson said:

I think of Brigham Young when I think of a early Prophet who expressed much reluctance to practicing polygamy and then later became converted to the principle.

I am persuaded of Joseph Smith's overall good and decent character.  A sincere and devoutly religious man living in 19th-century America would, I think, be initially averse to the concept of polygamy, let alone the practice of it.

However, I am open to correction as to evidence of Joseph Smith's initial reaction to polygamy.  I think the historical record is fairly sparse, so we're left mostly to surmise and speculate.  That being the case, I'm inclined to give Joseph Smith the benefit of the doubt.

Thanks,

-Smac

[ALarson]

13 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Yes.

I have not given this specific point much thought or study.  Richard Van Wagoner characterizes Joseph as having had "apparent enthusiasm for plural marriage" as pertaining to Fanny Alger, but I would need to review his research to see if this is borne out by evidence, or if it is editorial gloss.  Overall, my impression of Van Wagoner's scholarship on Joseph Smith's polygamy is . . . not very good.  See here for why.

I am persuaded of Joseph Smith's overall good and decent character.  A sincere and devoutly religious man living in 19th-century America would, I think, be initially averse to the concept of polygamy, let alone the practice of it.

However, I am open to correction as to evidence of Joseph Smith's initial reaction to polygamy.  I think the historical record is fairly sparse, so we're left mostly to surmise and speculate.  That being the case, I'm inclined to give Joseph Smith the benefit of the doubt.

Thanks,

-Smac

I believe Joseph was a good man.  I also believe that polygamy was not forced upon him by an angel with a drawn sword threatening his life if he didn't practice it (especially since he already was apparently living polygamy and had taken a second wife prior to that time).  I know you can argue that it wasn't "force", but that's how he presented it to the women he was trying to convince (and others)....like he feared for his life if they wouldn't agree to marry him.

I've seen no convincing evidence that Joseph was reluctant to marry most of the women he married (possibly all of them).  I do see quite a few lies and a lot of deceit involved in what took place though.....so it is difficult for me to honestly determine what was the truth and what were lies during that Nauvoo period.  So much was done in absolute secrecy as well.  For me, it's a pretty ugly period of church history and also evidence to me that our leaders are also men and are definitely not infallible.

Edited July 31, 2019 by ALarson