Tim Ballard

[ttribe]

Meanwhile, the Cult of Tim Ballard is taking off:
 

 

Edited September 29, 2023 by ttribe

[smac97]

12 hours ago, teddyaware said:

If Tim Ballard Isn’t telling the truth throughout the following one hour long interview, the only explanation that makes any sense is he’s a bonafide sociopath who’s utterly devoid of human conscience. After intently watching and listening to how Ballard calmly comports himself, and confidently answers each question put to him, it will come as a genuine shock if it turns out he isn’t being honest. But if he is playing fast and loose with the truth, this video provides a textbook example of how the devil is able to transform himself into a an eminently believable angel of light.

 

Okay.  I think this is a very important piece of evidence.  Tim is, obviously, in a "friendly" interview, but it's an hour long, so it's hard to think of this as "scripted."  Parts of the first half seem a bit, shall we say, "rehearsed," but only in the sense that Tim has probably answered questions very similar to Corolla's a hundred times over, so he has talking points he has used and re-used.

The second half of the interview, though, seems more extemporaneous.  It is also much more valuable to this discussion because Tim is allowed to explain himself and provide context for his actions.  Whether or not that context and those explanations holds up is, of course, something yet to be seen.  We need more evidence.

I copied and pasted the automated YouTube transcript of this interview, cut it up as best I can to identify who is speaking, and bolded the parts of the conversation that I think readers on this board will find most interesting (though, honestly, the whole thing is worth listening to, regardless of what you currently think of Tim).  Boy, John Dehlin could really learn a lot from Adam Corolla as far as skills in interviewing.

Anyway, here's the transcript:

Quote

Corolla: 0:00 yeah get it on got to get on the church but get on mandate get it on thanks for tuning in thanks for telling a friend we 0:06 love that about you Tim Ballard is here you know well you've probably seen Tim 0:13 make the rounds sound of freedom is of course the movie 0:18 that snuck up on everyone and crushed all the big budget films at the box 0:23 office this year 212 million and Counting Jim Caviezel 0:29 plays Tim the story is about Tim and um trafficking and rescuing and uh good 0:36 to see you

Ballard: thanks for having me on

Corolla: all right so a lot of controversy involving 0:42 the film and then later on involving you and we'll get to all that but first if 0:47 you could just sort of walk us through the origin story here

Ballard: sure 0:52 so I I uh I grew up not far from from here actually and eventually made my way 0:58 to my first job was the CIA and ended up working at Homeland Security where I 1:03 became a special agent and an undercover operator working almost exclusively child crimes child trafficking 1:09 infiltrating child crimes networks around uh the United States and internationally in 2006 the law has 1:17 changed and allowed U.S agents for the first time to start going overseas and we could start looking for kids that 1:22 Americans were hurting and uh so that opened my eyes to the 1:28 international world of of child sex abuse and and child sex tourism uh and 1:34 in 2012 13 I ran into a couple of big cases that I got very connected to very 1:41 emotionally connected to one was in Haiti and one was in Colombia uh and something happened with the U.S 1:46 government in both instances I was told come home you can't have you don't have jurisdiction here we don't we're not 1:52 going to take this as a case but I mean there were there were already kids identified and that story's all told the 1:58 Columbia part in in the film sound of Freedom then the Haiti operation which was actually happening simultaneous to 2:05 the Columbia operation in fact the sound of Freedom had been a four-hour movie then you'd see I was bouncing back 2:10 between two countries uh that was also successful and We rescued 28 children there and two of which we adopted wow so 2:18 so anyway that's that's the origin story of of you know how how I have been 2:24 working for the last almost 20 years as an operator saving children

Corolla: who are the number one culprits in terms of child 2:30 trafficking in terms of countries

Ballard: well it's really everywhere it's it's difficult to say who who are in terms of 2:38 sex tourism or where the most abuse is happening but we do know this that the United States General generally is the 2:45 number one consumer of child sex material in in the world and and so we 2:51 we are definitely a major part of the demand uh you know there's a reason why unaccompanied minors by the thousands by 2:57 the hundreds of thousands are showing up at our Southern border and being released uh there's people that want 3:02 them in there and that's that's frightening um so we are we're a big part of the problem

Corolla: how big an industry is it

Ballard: it's a 3:10 it's a it's about 150 billion dollars a year is what is produced 3:16 um on on the backs of of of slaves human trafficking slavery

Corolla: 3:21 is it worse now than it was a decade ago have the 3:27 cartels and people like that become more sophisticated

Ballard: yes I think I think it's it's worse than it's ever been there's 3:33 more people in fact in slavery today than ever before in the history of the world we're about 27 million plus people 3:40 that are in one form of or another slavery

Corolla: and so walk us through a sort of typical 3:46 case I mean let's just use Mexico in this particular case 3:52 um how does it work

Ballard: so we we work we work with the authorities first and foremost we we find an Aftercare 3:59 solution first and foremost to make sure that if we do get a an extraction or rescue that this child has somewhere to 4:05 go and then we start working with you with the police and most of the police departments and agencies we work with 4:11 don't have the resources because these are very it's a proactive case right to find a kid these are hard cases they 4:17 don't the kids don't fall on your desk it's not like a homicide or a bank robbery where something happens and you 4:23 got to respond you got to go find it and so most most kind of developing countries don't have even in the U.S you 4:30 know the proactive groups are the least funded because you don't know what you don't know so you can kind of pretend 4:36 you don't know so uh we start there and then we get Intel we get Intel on you 4:41 know they say look we think this hotel the spa this strip club uh this we think 4:46 that kids are being sold out of these places based on reports we get so then we will infiltrate as clients as sex 4:53 tours and that's kind of where it kicks off

Corolla: what percentage is male versus female in 4:59 this game

Ballard: in terms of the bad guys

Corolla: in terms of the victims

Ballard: the victims you 5:06 know it's it's more it's more boys than you would expect um but the majority are are females yeah 5:12 80 20 something like that probably about 80 20.

Corolla: um so if you're working for a cartel in 5:19 Mexico and this is one of the tentacles you know because maybe you've got drugs 5:24 and maybe you've got firearms and maybe have human trafficking you know they're kind of Diversified 5:32 um how does it work if you're with a cartel and you're in Mexico 5:37 how does how does the process work

Ballard: so I mean the car the cartels are trans 5:43 are kind of transitioning into more human trafficking because the demand is going up it's it's 5:49 more lucrative or can be more lucrative they're starting to become because you you sell a bag of cocaine one time right 5:55 these children are sold uh and you can tell a child by the way for maybe three to four times what a like a an adult sex 6:03 worker would be sold for and so it's lucrative and these kids are getting sold I mean rented out whatever you want 6:09 to call it up 10 20 times over a 24 hour period so it's a very lucrative you know 6:16 Enterprise

Corolla: what's the average age of the child approximately

Ballard: so it depends where you're at in the U.S it's about 13 12 12 6:24 to 14. um I think in countries like Colombia Mexico you get down to 12 and uh the 6:30 average age uh Hawaii is actually one of the worst in the world if it were its own country would be one of the worst 6:36 um it's as low as eight to eleven as we're seeing average ages in Hawaii believe it or not so we're trying to do 6:42 some work out there

Corolla: how do you account for that I mean in Hawaii you know people people 6:49 is it a cultural thing is it is it is it a tourist destination that I was in 6:56 Hawaii two weeks ago saw a lot of tourists but I wasn't in Bangkok you 7:01 know like like maybe you go to Hawaii with less suspicious suspicion if you 7:07 are doing this practice if you're a consumer

Ballard: yeah so Hawaii is all sorts of 7:13 problems you know one of which is that it's very difficult to do undercover work out there because everybody knows 7:19 everybody it's almost you know it's it's every any kind of trafficker who knows 7:24 what they're doing is gonna have a cousin on the police force oh and so it's very tribal very close-knit and so 7:30 it's difficult to do undercover work and if you look if you can't do undercover work that's the key to the whole thing I 7:36 mean that's why I named my Foundation operation Underground Railroad you can't do this work without infiltrating it's 7:42 got to be undercover work

Corolla: so the movie comes out the movie 7:48 catches everyone sort of off guard the movie becomes a huge sensation and then 7:54 almost immediately the backlash Starts Now I'm still confused by how for instance 8:04 our I don't know how our society works like I do know Rolling Stone is going to 8:09 hate the movie and write all sorts of horrible things about the movie but I'm not sure why they have to because from a 8:17 Layman's standpoint I'm like well this guy's doing God's work and who wouldn't 8:23 be for this and who wouldn't applaud Tim Ballard but I know Rolling Stone and 8:28 Progressive Publications are going to be against it but is it just because the the people 8:37 are involved are religious is it because they assume they're conservative and then if they're conservative they must 8:44 be Mega voters or something like what is the inspiration behind 8:49 the left attacking this movie which there could be no 8:56 you know there's controversial subjects uh saving kids of of of the world from 9:02 being enslaved it shouldn't be one of one of them

Ballard: but you know what it is 9:07 actually controversial and that's why they're doing it in my opinion uh when we did the actual operation in Colombia 9:13 on October 11th 2014 Rolling Stone and the guardian and all those who are hating on the film they did glowing 9:20 reports about it right yeah nothing changed the story never changed but ten years later when it's on the big screen oh now there's a problem with it and 9:27 then the problems of course are all fabricated it's this it's it's Q Anon blah blah blah and then it's not anything 9:33 um it's a controversial topic because there's a movement right now and I don't this I don't want to sound conspiratorial but it's what I see 9:39 happening children are being targeted right now children are being in my opinion enslaved in the name of being 9:45 liberated by the left um they're they're being you know uh they're they're given sex material 9:52 pornography really I mean in in public schools I mean I could have arrested under certain federal statutes back when 9:59 I was an agent people could have arrested them for giving to children but teachers in California and other states 10:06 are giving them you know and then and then you have this issue with you know this the trans voice I call it on these 10:12 children I mean I have nine children you can't I wouldn't let my 13 year old consent to do what she's going to do on 10:17 a Friday night let alone you know have certain have genital you know surgery 10:23 removal um this is all puts children this forces a conversation about what is happening 10:29 to Children 85 000 unaccompanied minors 5 000 uh or thousands of them under five 10:35 years old just in the last two years under the binding Administration are lost into the belly so sound of Freedom 10:40 forces that conversation uh-huh and they don't want to have it

Corolla: right and it forces a conversation about the Border 10:47 yep and they don't want to have that conversation so I mean you can tell me 10:52 if you think this is accurate but um when trying to unravel the covid 10:59 chapter we just passed through I was sort of looking at it saying well 11:05 why does Rolling Stone magazine have such hot takes on Ivermectin or 11:12 hydroxychloroquine or how does when it when did it become sort of weaponized and politicized and then I 11:20 realized that there were so sort of crazed with Trump 11:26 derangement syndrome that if you said I don't think my 11:32 nine-year-old kid should get vaxed then you identified as a Republican and once 11:38 you identified as a republican you identified as a trump supporter and then you needed to be eliminated so even if 11:45 you're a virologist from Stanford and you said I don't think Shelton schools is a good idea you showed your hand in 11:52 their mind and I have no idea what these people you know to me they're just virologists who have experience and 11:59 don't think schools should be shut down but in the mind of Rolling Stone in the left they showed their hand as 12:07 Republicans and that's where the division started and I'm wondering if a 12:12 movie like this because you're moving what you're doing is is innocuous politically as Covetous it's 12:19 just here's a problem this guy's an expert we're going to try to fix it it's 12:25 just leave schools open and don't close the beaches that but you are identifying 12:31 is something in their mind I don't I don't even know if half the people were 12:36 but they identified them as that and then they went after them and they tried to de-platform them

Ballard: yes and the same 12:43 things happened here I mean I've I've worked under two I've spent 10 years on the southern border fighting human 12:49 trafficking and everybody knew that border enforcement rescues children it's a very simple concept right just as 12:54 simple as as Solutions being presented to the covet issues uh you know a wall 13:00 pushes traffic into a place where experts are waiting to find children so you want walls you want reinforcement it 13:06 saves children um and I worked under two administrations uh Obama and Bush and 13:13 there was no con everybody he was building the wall and doing more enforcement it was not political it was not partisan the Clinton Administration 13:19 actually has built more of the wall than anyone else it wasn't partisan it was a tool to rescue kids and see drugs and 13:25 and do good by by Americans and and foreign children as well uh when Trump 13:30 touched it I I would to your point Trump derangement syndrome when he touched it 13:36 now it's evil now it's bad now now it can't be a good thing border enforcement in the wall I think it's it's it's mean 13:43 it's cruel when in fact the only thing that's cruel is not enforcing the border and allowing children on a company to 13:49 just wander into our country that has that's producing and consuming more child exploitation material than anyone 13:55 on the planet so I think to your point they got political because because of the of the hatred of one man

Corolla: 14:02 yeah I you know I I'm a little bit of a broken record on this but 14:08 you know I've said for a million times you can't just do the opposite of 14:14 whatever Trump says because then you're going to be wrong a lot so if Trump says 14:20 I don't want to close the schools and I but I do want to close the border you can't say then open the borders and 14:27 close the schools you'll have differences with them but you can't just do the opposite of 14:32 everything he says because some of those policies might be effective and then we're going to end up where we're at now 14:38 but I'm still trying to figure out sort of the nuts and bolts economics of it so the cartel brings the 14:47 kids across yes they then come into the United States where are they stashed in 14:54 safe houses and then shipped out to Hawaii and other places or how does that 15:00 work

Ballard: so what happens is they come across the other company ones in particular and I've been there I've seen this happen 15:05 the cartels even put bracelets on them to kind of keep them organized like by age or group they get across and by 15:14 policy uh border patrol or Customs and Border Protection they have to turn the 15:19 kids over to Health and Human Services who then usually contract with some kind of a home or NGO that takes them in but 15:25 the kids often come with a name or someone calls in for the kids that's that person called the sponsor so the 15:32 kids you know they they have to call the number and if the person picks up and says hi I have a little you know Juanito 15:37 Gonzalez here oh yeah yeah I'm the sponsor of him okay well where where should I send him they used to have to 15:43 come pick him up now your taxpayer dollars send them there very minimal background checks very minimal vetting 15:50 if if any you know it's it's I've said this before and it's true it's more difficult to adopt a cat from a shelter 15:56 than it is to uh to to take one of these children out of HHS custody and so what 16:05 I believe is happening very easily is the United States government is wittingly or not I hope not but is 16:12 complicit with trafficking it's become you know HHS has become a child 16:18 trafficking delivery service and the cartels are utilizing it that way

Corolla: and so the kids then go to a safe house 16:27 for lack of a better term I guess um they think they're being delivered to 16:33 you know a church or an orphanage or a group a non-profit who takes care of 16:38 these kids but they end up with the cartels yeah on this side of the Border that's 16:45 right and then what

Ballard: well we just found out recently a hundred 16:50 kids were sent to the very same house in Austin Texas this a few months ago so 16:56 what can you do with a kid at this point you can exploit this kid for what is the fastest growing criminal Enterprise 17:02 whether it's slave labor whether or sex sex slavery and that's and that's likely 17:08 where where many are going now I hope that summer I I would love to know that the majority are going to maybe their 17:15 families who came out ahead and they're somewhere to give them some kind of a safety but we don't know because no one 17:21 vents it no one follows up now imagine Adam if you found it if any police officer found a child an American child 17:28 in New York City San Diego Glendale California what would happen to an unaccompanied child well that child 17:33 would give be treated precious that child would be given everything and the first person that shows up and says I 17:38 state claim on this kid isn't going to get the kid right background check DNA everything so you know I was two weeks 17:46 ago Congress and I was calling out the president like why why do you not afford the same Humanity to foreign children as 17:53 you would to an American child give them the same protection I was with the president of Honduras and Guatemala 18:00 three four weeks ago and they said the same thing like help us out like our kids our kids are just leaving and 18:06 disappearing and you're doing nothing to take care of them because border enforcement you know apparently is is is 18:13 is not very compassionate that's that's the idea the left is thrown out there and it's in fact it's the only thing 18:18 that's compassionate

Corolla: yeah it's in general that's kind of their mindset which is enforcement of 18:26 rules is somehow cruel but then you don't enforce the rules and then you end up with utter chaos so 18:34 what do you think the end game is for 18:40 maybe Biden is just completely gone and doesn't really have a handle on what's 18:46 going on on the border but there are plenty of people around him that do it's getting politically kind of unpopular 18:54 for them as these migrants show up into New York City and Chicago and places you know sort of blue cities and they're 19:00 dropped off and now there's some of the residents who had initially been all for the sanctuary State label Sanctuary City 19:08 on on these towns are starting to get agitated as well but what is the end 19:15 game are there people in power that are profiting from this is it pure asleep at 19:22 the wheel is it sort of are they stupid or is there sort of a nefarious 19:28 component to this

Ballard: it's hard to know exactly they're not asleep at the wheel because they've been called out 19:34 Secretary of my orcas for example um who is not you know he he does have 19:39 his faculties about him from all appearances and he's been called out so many times he's been called before the 19:46 Senate before the house and you want you can watch him learn if he doesn't already know how bad this 19:52 problem is and he he he he doesn't he doesn't change he doesn't act 19:58 um and so what is going on yeah could there be interest in labor like hey we want the cheap labor is it political hey 20:04 we're the Democrats letting you in so vote D and we're going to try to get you to to vote whether you're a citizen or 20:10 not I mean there's nine million people that have entered in I think over the last several years that that could swing 20:16 an election right right so I think that there's a component there that's that but but they're they're seeking to 20:22 achieve whatever it is they're saying to achieve on the backs of of children on really on the the sacrifice of of 20:30 children's safety and and well-being so it's it's it's really tragic 20:36

Corolla: yet to me the most telling part about the whole border crisis and you know 20:44 these are little things but they're tells I would say was I don't know two 20:50 years ago the whole Haitian horseback whipping thing and and 20:55 I I remember very clearly I was like well first off the photographer took the 21:02 picture says they weren't being whipped secondly these are these are men on Horseback that are 21:08 trying to enforce a chaotic border uh why is Trump uh sorry why is Biden and 21:15 mayorkas and all these guys running to a microphone to do the you know shades of Jim Crow and shades of slavery and and I 21:23 thought and I said to a progressive friend of mine I said um why you know these these These are 21:31 border patrol these are our people why are we throwing why are you guys running to a microphone to throw them under the 21:37 bus when it was clear that they didn't do it and you didn't investigate it or 21:42 vet it or maybe you did but you still ran to a microphone to cry racism and my Progressive friend said oh it's a 21:49 low-hanging fruit for them and I thought what does that even mean you mean it's it's low-hanging political fruit to call 21:57 your border patrol racist why why you jumping meaning They seized 22:04 it they jumped on it they made all kinds of horrible allegations and then when it 22:11 went away and they were proven not guilty quietly they they never followed up with a comment now that's a mindset 22:19 you know what I mean like that should not be your mindset is if you're Mayorkas or the president of the United 22:25 States your first impulse should be these are our people I want to protect them but not to go out and assassinate 22:33 their character and then later on when they're found innocent for whipping 22:39 Haitians and they're like well can't you find them bust them on some process crime or something like you want to bust 22:45 them for not filling out their time card correctly now so you can claim some sort of Victory and that's when I realized oh 22:53 okay you guys just showed showed your hand they there's there's show your hand moments when fauci was like uh all 23:01 Gatherings are bad well what about black lives matters rally I I don't know I got no thoughts about that I was like okay 23:07 you just showed your hand and the Biden Administration showed their hand 23:12 when they won after those border guards

Ballard: that's right yeah it's not the sad thing is it's not 23:18 about truth journalism is not about truth it's just it's just entertainment it's 23:23 not truth so we we we're blind it's so sad our country's blind to anything how 23:29 do you vet anything out all right it's very difficult you don't you can't trust anyone because it's just click bait 23:35 everything

Corolla: so what is your Take On the Border 23:40 should we put the national guard down there shall we build a wall shall we do both shall we 23:47 talk you know get back remain in Mexico you know what are some of the remedies 23:53 for the board

Ballard: all of the above um enforce that border and by the way it's not it's enforcing the border is 24:00:00 it doesn't mean you anti-immigration I have two children who are migrants that we've adopted like I'm very pro-immigration you can have big walls 24:07:00 and like tall walls and very wide ports of Entry there it's not a mutually 24:13:00 exclusive proposition and that's what they're making it out to be enforce that border National Guard remain in Mexico 24:18:00 was a great policy um an even better one because what we made in Mexico did was it said you can 24:26:00 wait here and if you're legitimate Asylum Seeker will get you in 24:32:00 um and so people stop coming because they weren't legitimate they're just they're taking advantage of our lack of 24:37:00 enforcement and kids get hurt in the process the ultimate solution would be to just put all our Asylum courts all of 24:43:00 our immigration matters as an attachment to our embassies in Central America and any other place so now there's the 24:49:00 traffickers have lost all incentive there's no loopholes to take advantage of and there's no dangerous two to three 24:55:00 Thousand Mile Journey that these women and children are going to make in hopes to take advantage of a loophole if 25:01:00 they're legitimate then get a man legitimately and make them travel a few miles to the nearest you know the 25:07:00 consulate or Embassy and have Asylum courts there and and that that would take care of this and we would save so 25:13:00 many children from being raped trafficked and women from from being abused in a similar way

Corolla: so walk me 25:20:00 through your process on a case you find out that there's something going on in 25:27:00 Central America or something that's going on in Haiti and it's time for you to assume an identity 25:34:00 and show up what is that how do you even begin that process 25:41:00

Ballard: so I'll take you through a real case in Mexico that was when I'm done doing undercover work after Santa Freedom came 25:48:00 out sure um so you gotta you gotta you gotta be sneaky right you gotta get in so we had Intel on a spa 25:55:00 a spa in in Cozumel Mexico which is connected to cartels in that region that 26:01:00 are very very dangerous so we have to go in there acting like sex tourists and get the get the people 26:08:00 in that spot talking about you know the kids that they might be selling right and so uh you know we we have disguises 26:17:00 uh we something that I've recently had to talk about which we'll get into we have to reveal a tactic that I didn't 26:22:00 want to necessarily reveal but it's been it's been hitting me squaring the face I've had to reveal it 26:28:00 um something called the couple's tactic or the couple's ruse which the left and others are trying to make something out 26:33:00 of which is actually this amazing concept which is look it actually is my wife who will tell you that she is the 26:39:00 one behind this concept if I walk into a spa that's selling children they're 26:45:00 going to offer me sex acts and if I don't participate in the sex acts do you 26:50:00 think I'm gonna get another opportunity to to talk about where the kids are no right I'm not the guy 26:57:00 they're looking for but I'm not going to expose myself to a sex act so I have an actor an operator slash actor female 27:04:00 operator who pretends to be my wife my girlfriend and she doesn't let it happen so let's say she starts the person who 27:11:00 knows they say it's an adult usually sex worker who's doing the massage or whatever they want to do and when she 27:18:00 goes for the you know she goes for the for the for the for the the sex act you 27:23:00 know I would say a key word to my to to my partner who's getting her own massage 27:28:00 on the other table and I'd say something like uh like oh heck yeah or whatever say 27:35:00 that alerts her and she'll be like what don't touch my man and then I can whisper I just we can do it later okay 27:41:00 so now I've maintained credibility I don't I I look like a sicko right and we 27:46:00 continue the conversation we've rescued hundreds of kids that way and So eventually in this particular case 27:52:00 that's what we did uh the the the topic comes up you have to be careful they bring it up but there's ways to you know 27:58:00 start talking about it where they bring up yeah we got 12 year olds too you know you gotta be very personable it's 28:04:00 undercover work it's Verbal Judo and and then she introduces me to the boss and the boss comes out and then that turns 28:09:00 into a meeting she this particular person she had the local police in Cozumel and payroll they were actually 28:16:00 giving her top cover at our undercover meeting and we have we have a house filmed from Seven angles and she 28:22:00 discusses how she's selling six-year-olds and then shows us pictures of the six-year-olds and the 12 year olds and so forth and then all all the 28:28:00 while we're getting this Intel feeding it to the quintanero attorney General's office or the federal police in Mexico 28:34:00 and they start running their stuff and then we just keep digging digging digging digging until ultimately we 28:40:00 discover all the evidence we need to take the place down and rescue the kids and get them into Aftercare so that's 28:46:00 like a real case that that happened and these cases can last anywhere from two 28:51:00 months to two years depending on on you know the things that go on 28:56:00

Corolla: and the kids are in some sort of safe house or something and they're shuttled back and forth to the spa every day

Ballard: 29:03:00 sometimes I've seen that I've seen cases where the kids are are like foster kids 29:10:00 almost like they're like if you're an orphan in one of these places it's very easy to take this kid I'm you know I'm 29:16:00 going to take care of this child or start my own orphanage and it's all just to employ sometimes the kids are it's 29:22:00 the family members often that are selling the kids you know and and uh but but one way or 29:28:00 another those kids are getting to the spine back or or it's not the spot they'll say hey we're gonna take you get 29:34:00 into our car we'll drive you down to a house and that's where you're gonna have sex with a child

Corolla: what is the typical American sex tourist 29:44:00 like what's the breakdown married single 40 25.

Ballard: that's the hard thing is is I 29:52:00 wish there were some kind of a profile and there's not

Corolla: there isn't a profile

Ballard: it's very difficult it's it's it's like 29:58:00 a porn addict like these are sex addicts porn addicts it's like how can there's no way to identify what that person is 30:04:00 or who they are they're they're people that got into a place where they want to engage in sex with children 30:11:00

Corolla: and it doesn't break down along race or you know gay straight or any of that 30:18:00 it's

Ballard: no

Corolla: which I guess makes your job harder

Ballard: makes it harder

Ballard: yep

Corolla: because it's 30:23:00 really you know you can profile see or serial killers for the most part yeah are there any 30:30:00 and have you ever encountered any female sex tourists 30:36:00

Ballard: very you know the females are involved in the recruiting and and sound of Freedom you see the the real story of uh 30:44:00 you know the females are the best recruiters because the kids trust women

Corolla: right

Ballard: generally which is another reason 30:50:00 why you want female operators because women can usually get information better and easier 30:56:00 in terms of the female sex tourists I've never seen one so it's always been it's 31:01:00 always been men who are who are the the perpetrators 31:06:00

Corolla: God I I think about you know I have a list of 31:11:00 jobs I couldn't do this is this is on that list you know I just you know I 31:17:00 couldn't drive an ambulance and go scrape guys up off the highway after the motorcycle accidents like it would I'd 31:23:00 wake up with night terrors I think I just can't imagine doing your job 31:30:00 and just being able to have your head hit the pillow at night and just you know let let it all let it all go and 31:35:00 get a nice night's sleep in

Ballard: yeah it's uh I do have night terrors 31:41:00 I've never I don't have a lot of Peace in my life and I haven't for the last almost 20 years because there's always 31:47:00 the next case even after you finish a case you know and I have two children the two kids we adopted are kids We 31:53:00 rescued and you can there's a whole documentary on that rescue out of Haiti and so it's a constant reminder go again 31:59:00 go again go again it almost becomes an obsession

Corolla: how are those kids doing psychologically because uh I used to do 32:06:00 a show called Loveline I talked to people that were abused molested sexually you know so so on and 32:14:00 I just a lot of them just seem like they just got scrambled and was so hard to undo 32:22:00 that kind of drama trauma I should say and what you're dealing with is that 32:29:00 times 10 or 100 you know in terms of traumatized kids is there a therapy that 32:38:00 can undo that to some some extent

Ballard: yeah I mean there there are tools and we 32:45:00 employ all of them my kids were very lucky um it was the only case that I ever 32:50:00 worked where it was a preventative strike um as you again the documentaries called operation to Saint that's on Amazon 32:56:00 Prime we were out looking for another child and that's what got us to the kids 33:01:00 and they sold us the kids but we were the first who were to sell them who were who bought them oh so it was a very 33:07:00 unique case because we were looking for another kidnapped child but for the for the most part you know you're exactly 33:12:00 right it's it's a mess they're rewired their heads are rewired they don't they think they're a commodity they think that they can't even have a favorite 33:18:00 color they don't even know that that's a thing

Corolla: you probably have some that don't want to go with you or

Ballard: yes

Corolla: don't want to 33:25:00 be liberated

Ballard: correct especially as they get older you know Stockholm syndrome is a very real thing and they know the 33:31:00 trafficker as the source of all things and they're they're afraid often to leave the trafficker aside uh you know 33:38:00 because the traffickers already told them that the police are bad you know everyone you know everyone's bad me so 33:44:00 it's uh it's like the movie Tangled if you've seen that movie how the how the mother treats you know Rapunzel it's 33:52:00 like it's it's this you got you need me I'm your I'm your life source

Corolla: yeah you know I was talking to some 33:59:00 people who are working on a Menendez brothers documentary the other day 34:05:00 and I said you know I think a lot of the problem is especially back when they got 34:11:00 busted and they were going through their court case especially back in the day when you 34:16:00 talked about boys being sexually molested by their dad most the public just didn't have a taste 34:24:00 for it they're just like oh please I don't want to I don't want to hear about it you know what I'm saying yeah and I 34:30:00 wonder if there's that element it's such an uncomfortable disgusting 34:36:00 Venture this human trafficking sex slaves and so on and so forth that I 34:41:00 think a lot of politicians and a lot of Americans just go I don't even want to think about it and that's a problem

Ballard: yes 34:47:00 that's been probably the most difficult problem in my fight these last 20 years uh to to fight John trafficking uh the 34:56:00 first time I've seen something change is out of freedom I don't know why I don't know how I credit God it's a miracle 35:02:00 that people showed up people said okay we're ready we're ready to have the conversation we're ready to see it uh 35:07:00 you know when these guys made the film like it was like eight years ago they started or something and I told them I 35:13:00 said are you sure because no one wants to hear about this believe me I try I've been here and they said we got to do it we got to do it so uh yeah you're 35:20:00 exactly right it's been it's been a taboo but it's I think sound of freedoms create a shift and there's a chance now 35:28:00 um

Corolla: any thoughts on Ashton Kutcher because he's involved tangentially uh in 35:35:00 this process he has a foundation that tries to help kids or some of the same 35:41:00 situations you're talking about he recently got canceled or had to step 35:48:00 down from his organization I the people are out there doing God's work that you're trying to get to step down as a 35:54:00 society it just first off you know you guys should get the keys to the city for what you've been doing not forced out of 36:02:00 your role as X Y and Z it drives me insane but do you know Ashton do you 36:07:00 speak if you've done work with his organization

Ballard: I have met I've met him in his his organization is called Thor and 36:14:00 it's amazing they build digital tools to help law enforcement find and rescue children and yeah I'll I can I can 36:22:00 definitely relate it's the hardest part of this job should be finding the 36:27:00 traffickers and finding the kids it's not it's hard that's not the hardest part the hardest part is fighting the 36:32:00 good guys back home that want to say you're not doing good work there's 36:38:00 something wrong with your tactics I it's it's so incredible to me and and kids 36:43:00 are getting hurt in the process as they continue to bring down the vehicles uh you know that are that are responsible 36:50:00 for rescuing children it's it's a bizarre thing this whole cancel culture

Corolla: I'm always curious what the Rotten 36:56:00 Tomatoes score is for a movie like sound freedom I think we could probably have our guys find it but it's always telling 37:04:00 to me when the the audience has it much higher than the critics now I don't know why 37:09:00 again I don't you know it's it's sort of like when that singer came up with that 37:15:00 rich men north of Richmond or whatever whatever song a few 37:20:00 oh good I love it when I'm right uh but I don't know I knew that guy would be 37:26:00 attacked by the left I just don't know why he's not he he's a guy who singing a 37:33:00 song that's heartfelt about uh this country and of course it had to be 37:38:00 destroyed I don't know why I have to take it off the screen by the way I they put it up on the screen for a 37:44:00 second and a half and then removed it it's probably not a great strategy uh 37:49:00 thank God I got a good memory 58 and rotten with the critics and 99 with the 37:56:00 audience they I know I I read these goddamn people like like the sports page 38:02:00 I know exactly where they're gonna be I you tell me the movie and then you tell 38:07:00 me the theme of the movie and then I'll tell you if the critics score is going to be higher or the audience score is 38:13:00 going to be higher in a movie like this yes rotten with the critics and 99 with 38:18:00 the audience 10 000 plus verified ratings from the audience I'll tend to believe 38:24:00 those people all right so oh yeah Oliver Anthony was the name of the singer I was 38:30:00 trying to think of um I know your wife's out there and I know there's some controversy 38:36:00 I think uh Vice magazine did a hit piece on you so several several trying to sort 38:45:00 of me to you kind of uh I looked into it I've heard a lot of the 38:51:00 official particulars seemed like Much Ado About Nothing but uh this will be your chance to sort of 38:58:00 address the allegations and explain some of them and interesting tactics and 39:04:00 whatnot and we'll bring your wife Catherine in and we'll yeah do a little round table about

Ballard: perfect perfect

Corolla: all 39:10:00 right we'll uh do that right after this {SNIP COMMERCIAL} 41:13:00 place to find a place Tim Ballard is hanging in he's brought his wife in 41:18:00 Catherine Ballard the non-profit is the spear fund and you can visit the 41:25:00 spearfund.org if you'd like to help with the anti-trafficking and I think you 41:30:00 should a good see you Catherine

Catherine Ballard: thank you for having me

Corolla: so the uh 41:36:00 there's a trend the trend is you run a foul of some bizarre narrative that the 41:43:00 government sets forth or the or the powers that be set forth I I saw it all 41:48:00 through Covid you just run afoul it happened to me you know 41:53:00 they go we're closing schools and now I got two kids who are sitting home for a year and a half and then I say you 41:59:00 should open the schools and then they attack me there's something going on it's it's it's not the direction to go 42:07:00 as a country it's very third world but we're we're living it and you ran afoul 42:13:00 of the the left essentially and now they have to take you down so there's a vice 42:18:00 article about you with lots of allegations but Anonymous women and 42:25:00 maybe you can speak to that

Ballard: yeah well I've been accused first of all 42:31:00 of everything like anything you name it I've been accused of it being a trafficker a pedophile uh you know 42:38:00 swindler I mean everything you can think of so and she always told me this one's coming and I said nah this one wouldn't 42:44:00 come you know um and and yeah it's it's it's it's allegations that pertain to we talked 42:52:00 about in operation how we protect ourselves by having female partners and 42:57:00 um you know we've rescued hundreds of kids doing that and so 43:05:00 it was the timing is so interesting I don't know who these people are they're they're they're they're they're 43:10:00 they're still Anonymous

Corolla: the people making the allegations

Ballard: people making the allegations I mean I've talked 43:17:00

Corolla: how many wives have you had in these operations over the years 43:26:00 operator

Ballard: so there's roughly five to six that I have seen work with 43:32:00 different operators in different operations and I'm talking to all of them in fact they're doing videos right 43:38:00 now and they're posting saying nothing ever happened this was completely professional We rescued kids 43:44:00 and so forth so it's it's a lot of it's very confusing to me because the numbers don't add up I don't know who who these 43:50:00 people are what the number is and

Corolla: because there's there's only a handful of women who have ever done this 43:56:00 that's a small it's a very small pool so if if there's five or eight and you've 44:05:00 spoken to them and they're not making the allegation then who are these women who are making the allegations

Ballard: that's 44:10:00 that's the question to remember that we need an answer to

Corolla: and what's in it for Vice

Ballard: well they've been after me for since the 44:18:00 beginning I mean these guys are after me the very first hit piece they did in 2020 on me had to do with the most 44:24:00 ridiculous thing I testified before Congress about the border wall and and I I mentioned the story of a girl who We 44:31:00 rescued herself but she she had been trafficked through a border a a wall-less section of the border and 44:37:00 ended up being raped for for years in New York City and she rescued herself uh 44:43:00 I wrote a not bad how she rescued herself I tested for congress how she rescued herself but in a fox said 44:49:00 op-ed that I wrote I said that we helped her out of her hell and that was written contemporaneous to the other uh 44:55:00 testimonies I gave and they said look Tim Balalrd taking credit for rescuing her when she rescued herself and they knew darn well that I hadn't clarified 45:03:00 they did a whole story just on that so that was 2020 they've never let up we got to find something wrong with this 45:08:00 guy um and I think it has to do with the fact that I showed up with Trump

Corolla: yeah well you said if we built the a wall at 45:16:00 the Mexican border then that would help this horrible uh process that you're 45:22:00 involved with and then they heard wall and now it's you and Trump and now the 45:27:00 Trump Arrangement kicks in and now you must be taken down even if your motives are to save children

Ballard: that's right and 45:34:00 every every story no matter what the allegation it seems like there's a picture when I was briefing Trump in the white house so once once you have that 45:40:00 picture up then the left or leftist they'll say you say anything 45:46:00 you want now right because he's sitting next to Trump talking to him

Corolla: yeah so 45:52:00 um the allegations were you showed them a picture view your tattoos and your 45:58:00 underwear um you insisted on sleeping the same bed with them and showering with them and 46:05:00 things of of that nature can you address that

Ballard: yeah the picture is so funny I I have it I'm talking to my team so we 46:12:00 just I'll show it to you it's it's it was taken by the tattoo artist 46:18:00 I'm I'm completely asleep on on a couch with my hands and arms propped with 46:24:00 pillows and it takes hours to do this it's like it's like an actor like a movie I have tats all over my body so 46:30:00 I'm in my underwear and I have tats on my leg I'm asleep it takes hours you got to lay there for like a couple hours 46:35:00 while it dries it's it's a henna tattoo

Corolla: oh it's a henna tattoo

Ballard: yeah it's henna tattoos I'm getting ready for an 46:41:00 operation so the tattoo artist named Katie who she's done a video and we haven't posted she took a picture 46:46:00 because I get it I have to go back many many times in that cover roll in that in that role so she took your picture while 46:53:00 I'm asleep it wasn't sexy or it wasn't anything it was just to take a picture and then she sent it to a couple people 47:00:00 and said hey keep this archived so that when Tim goes back into this case I can redesign it exactly the same we can't be 47:07:00 off here and that's that that's the entirety of the picture that's it

Corolla: so these 47:12:00 well can we see that picture sure well tell your team to send it to our 47:17:00 team and

Ballard: yes

Corolla: they'll put it up but I mean yeah so this is the kind of nonsense that you know again 47:24:00 you just have to I don't know it's a new world order we have to just deal with this on a daily basis 47:31:00 um so you would get tattoos as part of the role part of the character that 47:37:00 you're the kind of guy who would be into this would be the kind of guy who had tattoos is that is that why you did that

Ballard: 47:44:00 absolutely

Corolla: but you didn't want permanent tattoos

Ballard: no no we do we do we have it we 47:49:00 have a couple of tattoo artists and they get us they get us looking like crazy party you know Partiers and tourists uh 47:58:00

Corolla: the other was insisting on sleeping in the same bed

Ballard: no

Corolla: with the with the woman

Ballard: 48:03:00 no I mean the the closest that that allegation would come from is like the story I told you where we're getting a 48:09:00 couple's massage and she's or blocking for each other so no one's actually getting touched by the sex worker and 48:14:00 we're having credibility so that would be the closest to that you know like like

Catherine Ballard: you're on separate beds

Ballard: yeah you're 48:20:00 in Separate Tables yeah

Corolla: yeah but how would it work if you're posing with your wife and you come into town do you have 48:26:00 to stay at the same Hotel do you have to stay in the same room I mean you never know who's watching who's talking right 48:33:00 it makes certain degree of sense even that you sleep in the same bed I mean it's it's a little iffy but what 48:40:00 I'm saying is you definitely wouldn't check into the local hotel and then just go you go to 48:46:00 the right I'll go the left because the guy behind the counter may call in and go these guys aren't staying in the same 48:52:00 room

Ballard: so this is all thought out well in advance and we we get hotels that are 48:57:00 Suites or we're with where we there's multiple people renting a house and so 49:03:00 because we have to be careful it's true they could be watching us okay are they still a couple they're going into a 49:08:00 hotel where are they going so I have Logistics guys on the ground that they'll either get hotel rooms that are Suites and they're in there already and 49:15:00 you know I'm always hanging out with someone else like oh my buddies are traveling with me too right so yeah I 49:21:00 mean we we can consider ourselves Undercover the whole time and we'll go into what we call the you know the the 49:26:00 the the the the sting house and usually we do Airbnb because that's easier and 49:32:00 we just go in and so if they see us go in and there's five bedrooms in there right and the bad guys aren't coming in the bedroom into the house to see that 49:38:00 you're not in the same room

Corolla: so right and then hour together

Ballard: yeah that that came 49:44:00 that story is a is a true story that I've told um and I'll tell it again uh we'd rescue 49:52:00 27 kids uh it was all there's one time ever that this happened we were doing 49:58:00 the couples ruse in a spa called this and Dominican Republic and the Intel 50:04:00 said that kids were being sold out of that place so I was actually working with um uh a one of our operators her name is 50:12:00 Marisol Nichols she's actually an actress and an operator so she does a very good job and we were doing the 50:17:00 massage thing but I didn't I ordered a we ordered like a mud thing because I don't the massage thing leads to having 50:23:00 to fight the sexual touching stuff with the sex worker so we said let's start with the mud and I'll get the Intel 50:30:00 before it's over well I didn't get the Intel before it was over but I was this close she was about to tell me where they were so we said hey can you order a 50:36:00 different thing can you order a different a different uh uh service well all we have is a massage like all right 50:42:00 I had to stay there because I'm this close to getting them to tell me right where the kids are so they say okay so 50:47:00 they open this door and there's a there's a shower up and we're like are you gonna leave the room and I'm like no we're gonna we 50:54:00 gotta clean this mess up and prepare for the massage so we're like oh crap where here we go you know I told my wife about 51:00:00 it so we we went in there and you thought you think on your feet so I throw that I throw a towel over the 51:06:00 over the window so they can't see and we're you know we're wearing clothes we're wearing you're wearing your bathing suit you know you don't go naked 51:13:00 in these things and so she goes in I go in and we just we don't even touch each other and the towel conceals that we're 51:19:00 not you know right and so we've told that story like that was crazy that was awkward you just tell one person and 51:25:00 then it goes boom boom boom oh he takes showers all right and and I know that's where it came from you know I was like I 51:31:00 already took a shower and miracles yeah well not really this and and by the way the 27 kids who were rescued in this 51:38:00 particular case they were from Colombia Venezuela they were being kept in the chicken coop and this is the part that 51:43:00 Everyone likes to leave out of the story they're being kept in the chicken coop with a padlock on the outside of 51:50:00 of the chicken coop and that's where they lived and they're brought out at night and raped for money by sex tours 51:55:00 We rescued all of them and if I had not gone into that shower and stood in the corner and touched 52:02:00 nobody that wouldn't have happened I I you got to stay in {in the roll}

Corolla: you would have 52:07:00 been made if you said I'm not going to take a shower with my wife

Ballard: Correct

Corolla: that would have made it seem like you were 52:14:00

Ballard: exactly

Corolla: who you are exactly I it's I don't know how folks like from Vice and 52:21:00 many of these people that write these articles I just don't know how they sleep at night I I don't I don't know 52:26:00 how they call themselves journalists that's the part that drives me insane but all right so those were the three 52:35:00 or at least the big three um and then as as everyone and maybe Catherine you can speak to this 52:43:00 the saddest part about this is everyone's knee-jerk reaction oh oh boy 52:48:00 we gotta distance ourselves because some rag publication wrote a hit piece on you 52:55:00 because they think you voted for Trump and now people distance themselves you 53:02:00 know the church or the organization or what have you that's the scariest part and I think the people that write the 53:07:00 article know all we have to do is just float something out there and you know 53:13:00 if you're Russell Brand will float some stuff out there and YouTube will drop you and and your sponsors will drop you 53:20:00 and people will distance you before any vetting any any trial any conviction 53:26:00 just guilty until proven innocent Catherine any thoughts on that 53:32:00

Catherine Ballard: well it's definitely been very difficult we live in a very tight community 53:38:00 a very we are very a very faith-filled family and we've really oriented 53:44:00 ourselves around um being faithful to our religion and to 53:50:00 Christ and and these details about Tim are not 53:55:00 things that most people want to hear and I get that I don't like I don't like hearing about the work that 54:01:00 about what he has to do to rescue children but 54:07:00 he's rescuing children and I know that he has done it in a way 54:12:00 of complete faithfulness to me and so it's so hard and and I we have 54:18:00 this big family family of we're a family of 11. and it's so hard for these things 54:24:00 to be spread around like you said just someone just floating the idea without looking into the facts of it and 54:32:00 and people wondering wait so is Tim a good guy or a bad guy and 54:38:00 fortunately we have so many friends and so many people that are behind us but it 54:44:00 is out there those statements are out there floating these allegations against him when in reality he has worked so 54:52:00 hard and dedicated so much of his life to rescue kids and remain completely 54:57:00 faithful to me and to God

Corolla: I think we have that picture ready 55:03:00 well I heard it says on my screen it's it's ready

Ballard: I'm not embarrassed by it I 55:09:00 mean there it is

Catherine Ballard: oh dear

Ballard: sorry Catherine I mean look at my eyes zoom into my eyes 55:14:00 I'm I'm completely asleep

Corolla: right

Ballard: I'm laying there for hours

Corolla: right

Ballard: and the 55:19:00 person taking the pictures is Katie and she's she's took it and sent it to a few of the operators yeah and say hey keep 55:27:00 this archived so I'm going to go back in undercover with that luckily this case is this case is dead right this 55:34:00 particular case led to the the Rescue by the way of several many children who 55:39:00 were being beat up and raped by these Dutch pedophiles in Mexico and Ecuador 55:44:00 huge case so there's I had to keep going back and they only last a few days right the henna tattoos so yeah does that look 55:52:00 like I'm doing something sex pic

Corolla: no it's not

Ballard: like a sexy pic I'm sending to someone

Corolla: no but it does look a little 55:57:00 like Hunter Biden at his worst a little bit just Shades shades 56:02:00 not trying to draw a comparison I'm just saying there's a slight physicality there with the beard that's all so yes 56:10:00 make now it makes complete context yeah uh there's context to this and it makes 56:15:00 complete utter sense yeah you have a big uh heart on your right eye made out of 56:21:00 barbed wire it's the kind of thing that these guys oh and would help and that no 56:26:00 that's

Ballard: look and they this look at massage you're doing the treatment they see this they're like this guy's crazy 56:32:00 that's that that's the f word in Spanish

Corolla: above your groin there

Catherine Ballard: Timmy

Ballard:  oh sorry

Catherine Ballard: he 56:39:00 always he always washes it off before he comes home I don't like this side I 56:44:00 don't like this

Ballard: no I don't let her I feel bad she's seeing this because I I take time to do

Corolla: sorry

Ballard: but but they a bad 56:51:00 guy sees something like that and boom yeah yeah they I I've I've made a 56:56:00 million miles right there with them

Corolla: well what you're looking for and you can take the picture down before Catherine has to 57:01:00 uh lose her cookies into the trash can um you're looking 57:08:00 for tenths and percentage points every little thing adds up from the car you 57:14:00 pull into that who's playing your wife to or do you have a tattoo I mean it all 57:20:00 it all adds up to a number and you need that number to work

Ballard: that's right

Corolla: so any Edge you can get from even a piece of 57:29:00 jewelry to a way you say something to you know if they offered you a drink I 57:35:00 don't think you'd go no I don't drink you'd go yeah give me your best tequila you know or whatever that is it's all 57:40:00 part of it right yeah

Ballard: I mean I don't drink so I I I I actually look I've been doing this 57:47:00 for so long I'm just I'm really good at it so I don't you know I even have little things like I've because they're 57:54:00 watching but I've I've ordered like a rum and coke with the can and and you know my my operator better is like dude 58:00:00 who cares but you know just do what you know and I was like why not I can do this just as easily I take a sip you 58:06:00 know and then I take a sip of the coke spit it and then I throw the can away 58:12:00

Corolla: so you take a sip of the glass of rum and coke and then pretend like you're taking a sip out of the can and spit it 58:18:00 back in there

Ballard: I just throw a full can can of Coke and it's now 58:24:00 or whatever I mean

Corolla: I do drink I'd be the guy getting the can out of the trash can and drinking that on the walk back 58:31:00 to the hotel

Ballard: well they're just little things I've been doing this for so long it's like it's like it's like clockwork 58:36:00 our team knows we're going here okay I order the tats get the phones dirtied up you know you gotta dirty up these phones 58:42:00

Corolla: what do you mean dirty them up

Ballard: this is an important piece and traffickers if they want to find out who you are they 58:48:00 can if they grab your phone I've been with traffickers where they'll take your phone or they'll ask you for it if you don't give it to them

Corolla: it's a problem

Ballard: 58:54:00 it's a problem and they're just they'll go into the search queue and just say cop operation uh you know arrest 59:01:00 whatever to see if you're a cop right and and so we have like a thread where 59:06:00 we're we're we are communicating with our cover teams but it's all it's all cute code words like we're acting like 59:13:00 it's a party time going back to the party house we know at the party house that's that would be the safe house 59:18:00 um the imagine if I'm with my with my wife let's just say it's it's and I've asked her many times will you come on 59:24:00 operations with me because that and she just she doesn't have that in her to do that

Catherine Ballard: no

Ballard: but imagine if she's my wife and 59:31:00 operation and then the trafficker takes my phone and let's say her name is 59:36:00 whatever Kelly or the undercover name so they're going to look at that phone and look at hey 59:41:00 let's see how Brian talks to Kelly are they are they saying hey we got to meet with the DA's office tomorrow or 59:47:00 are they being is there is it a sex touristy

Corolla: right

Ballard: and so I literally have a 59:53:00 team that will pre-load my phones and so it's it's they'll have like weeks before the operation so the conversation didn't 1:00:01 just start yesterday you know when we met the traffickers and they're like oh yeah these guys are these are they're they're they're they're they're they're 1:00:07 sick twisted sexual people see what I'm saying so that can be used against me like oh look look what he wrote to me 1:00:14 you know

Corolla: yeah I think I I think there's a psychological Dynamic I think from a 1:00:20 lot of people but you can tell me if you've given this some thought I think there's a certain percentage of 1:00:26 people that hear what people like you are doing and they go he's into this somehow like there's something 1:00:32 compelling him you know he's he's I don't know if he's doing it but 1:00:38 who would be attracted to this not any normal person you know I wouldn't I 1:00:43 wouldn't be attracted to this so there's some reason he's attracted to there's something going on there I think that 1:00:50 could be some of it with some some people have you ever given that any thought I think

Catherine Bullard: I think that this is 1:00:57 just such a horrifying world and if you didn't know about child trafficking the very idea of it is 1:01:05 is horrifying how could someone do this to a child and then you hear that someone is 1:01:11 rescuing them and you're like oh great he must be the most perfect amazing heroic person ever 1:01:19 and then someone floats some of the tactics that they have to use in order to rescue 1:01:25 and and like you're saying it's like well wait a minute that doesn't look 1:01:30 that doesn't look clean and like he's sitting at a library you're reading good 1:01:36 books and then he rescues a child you know like that doesn't look that doesn't jive that looks dirty what he's doing 1:01:42 looks dirty so he must be a part of this dirty thing and I think that 1:01:47 I I can understand that I mean I I don't like looking at the pictures he likes to send me pictures of him in the wig and 1:01:53 it's just like nasty to me I don't even recognize him because

Corolla: {What’s the} wig for Wig is just more more cover

Ballard: I mean I 1:02:01 my my disguises got better and better because I was still doing media before sound of freedom I was still you know 1:02:07 I'd be on Fox News are doing different things and so we had to up the disguise 1:02:12 and we ended up getting into and oh I dyed my hair to the point that I think I wrecked it

Catherine Bullard: yeah it's still not the right 1:02:18 color

Ballard: yeah no it's never come back so I then then we got into that into into wig 1:02:23 so yeah I mean the skies just got better and better

Catherine Ballard: and he looks like a sicko yeah he looks like a sicko and and 1:02:30 anyone looking at that would think well I know what undercover work does so Tim must participate to a certain extent 1:02:38 in the name of rescuing children but the truth is that he hasn't and the movie is 1:02:44 is awesome and they've done such a good job but one of the things that they really misrepresent is 1:02:50 is um the team that Tim is always surrounded by in the movie it looks like 1:02:56 Jim Caviezel and maybe a couple guys and it's just him and then he goes out solo and and that is never 1:03:04 never the case they go in as a huge team there's multiple couples there's there's support 1:03:12 groups there's couples there's tons of police local law enforcement so that that's a 1:03:19 part that no one's thinking about as they float these accusations they're thinking about Tim as Jim Caviezel just 1:03:25 being out there solo doing his own thing and he's never alone he's never alone

Corolla: 1:03:30 um so the future Tim uh politics what do you think and 1:03:36 does the notion of you floating out that you may want to take Mitt Romney's place 1:03:42 is that you think the cause for some of this these hit Pieces by Vice and other 1:03:48 Publications

Ballard: well the timing was certainly interesting uh I was back in Congress 1:03:54 testifying before Congress about what the border wall and I did call out the president by name and said I asked do 1:04:01 you not care as much about foreign children as you do about about American children I believe you do 1:04:07 so let's treat them what you know I made a big I made a big deal about it I testified before two houses in Congress 1:04:13 that week and and it did leak that I was that we were prayerfully considering 1:04:19 a run for the Senate and it was five days later five days later all this hit

Corolla: right 1:04:27 that's the new world order so so sad but the sad part isn't 1:04:32 what what Vice is doing the sad part is the scared people that are going along with it this has all been my was my 1:04:39 covert theme it wasn't what's fauci and the LA Times doing it's what are all the citizens doing that's the part that 1:04:46 scared me well not that you need me to tell you but you're doing the Lord's work the spear fund is where you go the 1:04:56 spearfund.org is where you go and um Tim Catherine uh thank you so much for 1:05:02 coming in here and sharing your story was Illuminating and of course sound of freedom 1:05:08 probably not in theaters but VOD you can go rent it get it

Ballard: {It’s making its} run through Latin 1:05:14 America's hitting Europe next and at some point it'll be in you know I don't know the deal with the theaters but at some point it'll definitely be 1:05:21 available streaming

Here is a link (somewhat NSFW-ish) to the photograph of Tim Ballard discussed in the interview:

Thoughts?

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited September 29, 2023 by smac97

[MustardSeed]

40 minutes ago, ttribe said:

Meanwhile, the Cult of Tim Ballard is taking off:
 

 

Oh my.  I had to stop 3 min in.  What we have here is IMO this child watching her mother, soaking in all the insanity and I just can’t watch it happen. 
 

What is actually wrong with people?

[smac97]

18 hours ago, ttribe said:

Obviously, I'm talking about OUR's investigation since that's all I've mentioned thus far. 

Did you happen to see this statement issued by OUR?

https://www.deseret.com/utah/2023/9/28/23894444/operation-underground-railroad-tim-ballard-allegations#:~:text=At the conclusion of the,anyone who has been victimized.

I did.

Quote

Operation Underground Railroad received an allegation of behavior that violated company policy by then CEO Tim Ballard. The organization immediately placed Mr. Ballard on administrative leave and launched an independent, external investigation of the allegation. At the conclusion of the investigation, as previously stated by O.U.R., Mr. Ballard resigned. Mr. Ballard’s alleged misconduct does not represent O.U.R.’s values or others within the organization.

O.U.R. is dedicated to combatting sexual abuse and stands with anyone who has been victimized. O.U.R. is sensitive to the privacy concerns of any individuals affected by this and is committed to upholding our duty to protect their anonymity. O.U.R.’s mission does not change, and we are committed to continuing our domestic and international efforts, in collaboration with law enforcement, to rescue any and all from the scourge of human trafficking.

Note the wording here: "At the conclusion of the investigation, as previously stated by O.U.R., Mr. Ballard resigned."  OUR did not fire him "for cause" (that is, they found sufficient evidence to conclude the allegations had merit).  Rather, Tim Ballard quit.  Are you inferring from that (him quitting) that he was essentially admitting to the misconduct?  If so, why?

Here's the next bit: "Mr. Ballard’s alleged misconduct does not represent O.U.R.’s values or others within the organization."  Note that OUR is not claiming that it/they conclude that Tim did, in fact, engage in misconduct.  OUR is, instead, merely stating the obvious, which is that the behavior "alleged" against him - but which OUR has, AFAIK, never actually attributed to him, even after the "independent, external investigation" - does not mesh with OUR's values.

Construed carefully, OUR's statement is that A) allegations of misconduct arose, B) Tim was put on administrative leave, C) OUR ordered an "external" investigation, and D) Tim resigned.  Is any of this competent, probative, admissible evidence that the allegations against Tim are true?  I don't think so.  Regardless of whether Tim is guilty or innocent, OUR could have characterized A-D in the exact same way.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited September 29, 2023 by smac97

[smac97]

1 hour ago, ttribe said:

Meanwhile, the Cult of Tim Ballard is taking off:
 

 

They cite the abominations committed by the sons of Eli, and then say (speaking of the current leaders of the Church), "Based off the actions of them today, we can only assume they are up to the same stuff. ... They promote satanic things."  They cite, for example, the Church donating to the UN, the NAACP (which has apparently staked out a pro-choice/abortion policy, which these sisters note, saying it is even "violently pro-abortion and pro-homosexual" and has communist roots).  They even suggest that the Church is indirectly or directly funding child trafficking.

Poor reasoning.  No evidence.  They've whipped themselves into a frenzy.  Quite unfortunate.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited September 29, 2023 by smac97

[Vanguard]

1 hour ago, MustardSeed said:

Oh my.  I had to stop 3 min in.  What we have here is IMO this child watching her mother, soaking in all the insanity and I just can’t watch it happen. 
 

What is actually wrong with people?

I think that's the same kind of reaction I had. I find it to be a massive cognitive disconnect when someone says "Hello, we are faithful, practicing, temple-worthy members of the LDS Church but the entire general leadership is all evil" kind of thing. : ( There's something weird about that. How on earth do they get along at church?  To wit, "Good morning Sis. Smith. Your lesson on Christian charity was wonderful! You can't wait until next Sunday's General Conference to see if they have anything more to say about it? Oh, we won't be wacthing as the apostles are all wolves in sheep's clothing and evil to the core. But you have a wonderful Sabbath." ;o

 

Edited September 29, 2023 by Vanguard

[smac97]

1 hour ago, MustardSeed said:

Oh my.  I had to stop 3 min in.  What we have here is IMO this child watching her mother, soaking in all the insanity and I just can’t watch it happen. 

What is actually wrong with people?

A few thoughts:

1. History Repeats Itself: The early days of the Church saw a fair amount of infighting and turmoil, up to and including high-ranking members of the Church.  We ought to anticipate that it can, and to some extent will, happen again.  Michael Ash makes some good remarks here:

Quote

It is significant that we ask: Who are those members who could potentially fall away because of hostile “intellectual” arguments? The answer is: all of us. We are told that in the last days “the very elect” (Matt. 24:24)—even the “elect according to the covenant” (JST Matt. 1:24)—could be deceived by “false Christs” and “false prophets.”

When we think of false Christs and false prophets we may envision lunatics who claim to be Jesus or perhaps radical leaders who would try to draw us into a faith of their own making. A false Christ or false prophet, however, would refer to anyone (religious or secular) who falsely claims the power and/or knowledge that leads to ultimate happiness and answers man’s greatest questions: Where did we come from? Why are we here? Where are we going?

Basically, any belief system that attempts to lead us down a path of thinking or behavior that draws us away from returning to Heavenly Father would count as a false Christ or false prophet. It is important therefore to note that we are told that such false teachings would even deceive the “very elect” and even those who made “covenants.”

History relates the tragic stories of other “elect” who lost their way—including one third of our pre-mortal brothers and sisters, Cain, Laman and Lemuel, Judas, the Book of Mormon Witnesses (although two returned), Sidney Rigdon (who, with Joseph, saw the Savior), and others. It should become apparent that all of us need to be on guard. Having a testimony now, or having had spiritual experiences in the past, doesn’t guarantee safety.

According to a 2001 informal poll of over 400 former members of the Church,[i] nearly two-thirds of the respondents had been active church members for at least 20 years, 58% had been married in the temple, and 59% had served missions. Former-members, of whom I am aware, include Relief Society Presidents, as well as Elder’s Quorum presidents, Bishops, and even a Mission President. A large percentage of former members undoubtedly had real testimonies and were active in their wards.

In the dream given to Lehi and Nephi they saw that many who had already “commenced” on the path to the tree of life “did lose their way” because of the mists of darkness (1 Ne. 8:23).  An iron rod ran alongside the path to the tree and those who grabbed on to it were able to stay on the path even when blinded by the dark mists. Nephi saw that this iron rod represented the word of God (1 Ne. 11:25).

Those who stayed on the path, held on to the rod, and finally made it to the tree (the “love of God” [11:25]) and tasted of its fruit were not completely safe, however. Lehi saw that some of those who tasted the fruit did “cast their eyes about as if they were ashamed” (8:25). Why were they ashamed? They were scoffed at by those in the great and spacious building on the other side of the river (11:26-28). Nephi saw that his building represented “the world and the wisdom thereof” as well as the “pride of the world” (11: 35-36).

2. For Some, Everything is Political: For some, Paul Krugman's declaration that "everything is political" is an unspoken (and perhaps even subconscious) premise.  They let their sociopolitical views - often heavily influenced and engineered by social media and news media and such - predominate over everything else, including the Restored Gospel.  "Politics" becomes the lens through which everything - including the Church and its leaders and their actions - is viewed.  This is being done by people from all over the political spectrum (though I think there are concentrations of it happening at the margins).  

I think these sisters have let their sociopolitical views become the proverbial "tail wagging the dog."  That is:

Quote

If you say that the tail is wagging the dog, you mean that a small or unimportant part of something is becoming too important and is controlling the whole thing.

I think these sisters have succumbed to this tendency.  The specifics they point to - the Church working with UN organizations and with the NAACP - are, in my view, likely originating in their political dislike of, and disagreement with, these organizations.  

3. Tacit Notions/Expectations of Infallibility: I think a big error in these sisters' reasoning is that it appears to be premised on tacit notions of infallibility.  I have previously commented on this here:

Quote

Kevin asks (rhetorically): "So, how should I react if I discover that various LDS leaders made errors in assertions about the New York Cumorah, or what ever else bothers you?  Should I shatter like glass if I run across something that counters my traditions?  (That happens to be Joseph Smith's apt metaphor in discussing an LDS weakness in dealing with information that counters their traditions.)  Or should I first examine my own eye for beams, and consider not what I did expect, but rather always be willing to ask 'What I should expect?'"

Kevin's comments are in response to other comments made by California Boy, who is describing "a total collapse of faith in the trustworthyness of the Church and its leaders" for some members.  CB invokes, by way of illustration, various comments made about the location of the Hill Cumorah.

To the extent CB has a point (and he does), I think there is an implicit assumption in that "total collapse," a key ingredient that is common to most or all such faith crises: prophetic infallibility.

Without such an assumption/expectation/requirement, members of the Church seem to do just fine in accepting and living the Gospel.

But if and when such an assumption/expectation/requirement is present, it can lead to a "cascade failure" of the individual's belief system.

This is, i think, what these sisters are experiencing: a "cascade failure" originating from a likely unspoken and unrecognized expectation of prophetic infallibility.

4. Facile and Finite and Angry Perspectives: I think these sisters seriously err in condemning the Church because it works with organizations like the NAACP and the UN.  The Church is not adopting these organizations wholesale, but is instead working with them on issues where they and the Church have common ground and common interests.  This does not mean that the Church is adopting and endorsing and ratifying each and every facet of these organizations and their philosophies, and it is facile and unwise for these sisters to claim or infer otherwise.

The Church constantly works with other outside organizations, all of which have some divergence of viewpoints and objectives from the Church, all of which likely have some skeletons in their closets (as do the Latter-day Saints), all of which, nevertheless, have some nexus with the Church, some shared interests and objectives.  The scope and extent of the Church's interactions and collaborations with these other organizations is, of course, a judgment call.  I think the Brethren are working hard to "vet" such partners, and that we rank-and-file Latter-day Saints can repose some trust in their competency in this regard.

These sisters seem to have expectations that the Church can only work with other groups and organizations whose viewpoints align perfectly with the Church's.  That is an unwise and facile and finite perspective.  And these sisters seem . . . pretty angry.  Anger is seldom a good foundation for dealing with complex and difficult issues.  That these sisters have proceeded to blow up their relationship with the Church because of this perspective is quite unfortunate.  Their video is a social-media and political maneuver, not a doctrinal/scriptural one congruent with the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ.

5. Stewardship and Authority: As I watched the video I was reminded of several of these quotes: 

Quote

Teachings of Joseph Smith

Losing confidence in Church leaders, criticizing them, and neglecting any duty required by God lead to apostasy.

“I will give you one of the Keys of the mysteries of the Kingdom. It is an eternal principle, that has existed with God from all eternity: That man who rises up to condemn others, finding fault with the Church, saying that they are out of the way, while he himself is righteous, then know assuredly, that that man is in the high road to apostasy; and if he does not repent, will apostatize, as God lives.”

Heber C. Kimball, while serving as a counselor to President Brigham Young, reported: “I will give you a key which Brother Joseph Smith used to give in Nauvoo. He said that the very step of apostasy commenced with losing confidence in the leaders of this church and kingdom, and that whenever you discerned that spirit you might know that it would lead the possessor of it on the road to apostasy.”

Wilford Woodruff, while serving in the Quorum of the Twelve, said: “Brother Joseph used to counsel us in this wise: ‘The moment you permit yourselves to lay aside any duty that God calls you to perform, to gratify your own desires; the moment you permit yourselves to become careless, you lay a foundation for apostasy. Be careful; understand you are called to a work, and when God requires you to do that work do it.’ Another thing he said: ‘In all your trials, tribulations and sickness, in all your sufferings, even unto death, be careful you don’t betray God, be careful you don’t betray the priesthood, be careful you don’t apostatize.’”

Wilford Woodruff also said: “I remember Brother Joseph Smith visited myself, Brother [John] Taylor, Brother Brigham Young and several other missionaries, when we were about to take our mission to England. We were sick and afflicted, many of us. At the same time we felt to go. The Prophet blessed us, as also our wives and families. … He taught us some very important principles, some of which I here name. Brother Taylor, myself, George A. Smith, John E. Page and others had been called to fill the place of those [apostles] who had fallen away. Brother Joseph laid before us the cause of those men turning away from the commandments of God. He hoped we would learn wisdom by what we saw with the eye and heard with the ear, and that we would be able to discern the spirits of other men without being compelled to learn by sad experience.

“He then remarked that any man, any elder in this Church and kingdom, who pursued a course whereby he would ignore or, in other words, refuse to obey any known law or commandment or duty—whenever a man did this, neglected any duty God required at his hand in attending meetings, filling missions, or obeying counsel, he laid a foundation to lead him to apostasy and this was the reason those men had fallen. They had misused the priesthood sealed upon their heads. They had neglected to magnify their calling as apostles, as elders. They had used that priesthood to attempt to build themselves up and to perform some other work besides the building up of the kingdom of God.”

In 1840, a small, organized body of Church members continued to live in Kirtland, Ohio, although most of the Saints had gathered to Nauvoo, Illinois. In response to news that a Church member in Kirtland was trying to destroy the Saints’ confidence in the First Presidency and other authorities of the Church, the Prophet wrote to a Church leader in Kirtland: “In order to conduct the affairs of the Kingdom in righteousness, it is all important that the most perfect harmony, kind feeling, good understanding, and confidence should exist in the hearts of all the brethren; and that true charity, love one towards another, should characterize all their proceedings. If there are any uncharitable feelings, any lack of confidence, then pride, arrogance and envy will soon be manifested; confusion must inevitably prevail, and the authorities of the Church set at naught. …

“If the Saints in Kirtland deem me unworthy of their prayers when they assemble together, and neglect to bear me up at the throne of heavenly grace, it is a strong and convincing proof to me that they have not the Spirit of God. If the revelations we have received are true, who is to lead the people? If the keys of the Kingdom have been committed to my hands, who shall open out the mysteries thereof?

“As long as my brethren stand by me and encourage me, I can combat the prejudices of the world, and can bear the contumely [harsh treatment] and abuse with joy; but when my brethren stand aloof, when they begin to faint, and endeavor to retard my progress and enterprise, then I feel to mourn, but am no less determined to prosecute my task, being confident that although my earthly friends may fail, and even turn against me, yet my heavenly Father will bear me off triumphant.

“However, I hope that even in Kirtland there are some who do not make a man an offender for a word [see Isaiah 29:21], but are disposed to stand forth in defense of righteousness and truth, and attend to every duty enjoined upon them; and who will have wisdom to direct them against any movement or influence calculated to bring confusion and discord into the camp of Israel, and to discern between the spirit of truth and the spirit of error.

“It would be gratifying to my mind to see the Saints in Kirtland flourish, but think the time is not yet come; and I assure you it never will until a different order of things be established and a different spirit manifested. When confidence is restored, when pride shall fall, and every aspiring mind be clothed with humility as with a garment, and selfishness give place to benevolence and charity, and a united determination to live by every word which proceedeth out of the mouth of the Lord is observable, then, and not till then, can peace, order and love prevail.

“It is in consequence of aspiring men that Kirtland has been forsaken. How frequently has your humble servant been envied in his office by such characters, who endeavored to raise themselves to power at his expense, and seeing it impossible to do so, resorted to foul slander and abuse, and other means to effect his overthrow. Such characters have ever been the first to cry out against the Presidency, and publish their faults and foibles to the four winds of heaven.”

I think if some of the Lord's servants are "astray," He has in place mechanisms to address that.  I also think that the Lord's ways of correcting the Brethren do not involve self-appointed folks like these sisters posting bombastic YouTube videos accusing the Brethren from horrible atrocities based off mere assumptions.  I don't think the Lord called these sisters to call the Brethren to repentance via YouTube.  The scriptures speak of councils, not social media, as the proper mechanism for addressing disagreements in the Church. 

In D&C 85:8 God himself appears to metaphorically compare ark-steadying with those who presume to instruct the Lord's anointed regarding the leadership of the Church.  The Prophet Joseph Smith said of the direction of the Church in difficult and turbulent conditions and times: “… men cannot steady the ark—my arm cannot do it—God must steady it.” (Documentary History of the Church, vol. 5, p. 20.).  Presidents McKay and Taylor, and Elder Maxwell have all expressed similar sentiments.

On this point I encourage everyone to read Elder Oaks' 1987 article, Criticism.  In it he does a very good job of laying out how we as Latter-day Saints ought to behave relative to governance in the Church, disagreements (including with leadership), etc.  A key excerpt:

Quote

“The counsel to avoid destructive personal criticism does not mean that Latter-day Saints need to be docile or indifferent to defective policies, deficient practices, or wrongful conduct in government or in private organizations in which we have an interest. Our religious philosophy poses no obstacle to constructive criticism of such conditions. The gospel message is a continuing constructive criticism of all that is wretched or sordid in society. But Christians who are commanded to be charitable and to ‘[speak] the truth in love’ (Eph. 4:15) should avoid personal attacks and shrill denunciations. Our public communications—even those protesting against deficiencies—should be reasoned in content and positive in spirit.”

“Does the commandment to avoid faultfinding and evil speaking apply to Church members’ destructive personal criticism of Church leaders? Of course it does. It applies to criticism of all Church leaders—local or general, male or female. In our relations with all of our Church leaders, we should follow the Apostle Paul’s direction: ‘Rebuke not an elder, but intreat him as a father.’ (1 Tim. 5:1.)” 

“Criticism is particularly objectionable when it is directed toward Church authorities, general or local. Jude condemns those who ‘speak evil of dignities.’ (Jude 1:8.) Evil speaking of the Lord’s anointed is in a class by itself. It is one thing to depreciate a person who exercises corporate power or even government power. It is quite another thing to criticize or depreciate a person for the performance of an office to which he or she has been called of God. It does not matter that the criticism is true. As Elder George F. Richards, President of the Council of the Twelve, said in a conference address in April 1947, ‘When we say anything bad about the leaders of the Church, whether true or false, we tend to impair their influence and their usefulness and are thus working against the Lord and his cause.’”

“A different principle applies in our Church, where the selection of leaders is based on revelation, subject to the sustaining vote of the membership. In our system of Church government, evil speaking and criticism of leaders by members is always negative. Whether the criticism is true or not … it tends to impair the leaders’ influence and usefulness … [The Lord’s] servants are not perfect … [but] if we murmur against [them], we are working against the Lord and his cause and will soon find ourselves without the companionship of his Spirit.” 

“[C]ounsel against ‘murmuring’ is a teaching that applies uniquely to Church members and Church leaders.  Government or corporate officials, who are elected directly or indirectly or appointed by majority vote, must expect that their performance will be subject to critical and public evaluations by their constituents. That is part of the process of informing those who have the right and power of selection or removal. The same is true of popularly elected officers in professional, community, and other private organizations. I suppose that the same is true even of church leaders who are selected by popular vote of members or their representative bodies. Consistent with gospel standards, these evaluations—though critical and public—should be constructive.”

“So what do we do when we feel that our Relief Society president or our bishop or another authority is transgressing or pursuing a policy of which we disapprove? Is there no remedy? Are our critics correct when they charge that members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are ‘sheep’ without remedy against the whims of a heedless or even an evil shepherd? There are remedies, but they are not the same remedies or procedures that are used with leaders in other organizations.”

The whole article is worth a read.

6. Secrecy: I think another big component of these sisters' reasoning likely arose when they nursed disagreements, resentments, etc. in "secret."  Or else only shared these things with people they felt likely to already buy into such things.  I doubt these sisters started having concerns/questions about the governance of the Church and then, the next day, posted their YouTube video.  I suspect they let doubts, resentments, fears, suspicions, etc. fester for many weeks and months, long before they made and posted the video.

7. The Nirvana Fallacy: Further to my comments about about unspoken expectations of prophetic infallibility, I think these sisters have also succumbed to the Nirvana Fallacy.  I have previously commented on this phenomenon in 2019 here:

Quote

This fallacy is described here:

Quote

The nirvana fallacy is the informal fallacy of comparing actual things with unrealistic, idealized alternatives.
...
In La Bégueule (1772), Voltaire wrote Le mieux est l'ennemi du bien, which is often translated as "The perfect is the enemy of the good" (literally: "The best is the enemy of the good").

The nirvana fallacy was given its name by economist Harold Demsetz in 1969, who said:

Quote

The view that now pervades much public policy economics implicitly presents the relevant choice as between an ideal norm and an existing "imperfect" institutional arrangement. This nirvana approach differs considerably from a comparative institution approach in which the relevant choice is between alternative real institutional arrangements.

 

 

As I noted then: "My sense is that some members of the Church are harboring idealized, unrealistic expectations about the Church, and its leaders and members, and its history.  This is the "perfect" part of Voltaire's maxim."  I think these sisters have had these expectations, and have now encountered "big" things that the Church is doing, including working with organizations that these sisters - based on the sociopolitical views - dislike.  This flawed approach to the Restored Gospel, and the Church that houses it, appears to have culminated in these sisters creating for themselves a necessity to choose between two seemingly irreconcilable options:

• Option A: the Church is essentially good and decent and ordained of God (as claimed by the Church), or
• Option B: the Church is essentially flawed and corrupt, and even evil (as dictated by these sisters' sociopolitical views and preferences).

Applying Voltaire's maxim, the "perfect" (the idealized perception of, and expectations about, the Church and its members) becomes the enemy of the "good" (Option A).  Consequently, some folks go with Option B, because it seems the only plausible means of reconciling what they thought about the Church with what they now know about the Church.

The problem, though, is that what they "know" about the Church is being filtered through a dirty lens.  They are letting political ideologies and preferences predominate over the Restored Gospel (and I say this as someone who may well have a lot in common with their sociopolitcal views).  They are likely harboring deeply flawed notions of prophetic infallibility.  They are speaking from a blinkered and facile and angry perspective.  They have allowed grievances to fester for a long time, likely mostly in secret.  They are either unaware of, or are disregarding, the gospel principles laid out in Elder Oaks' Criticism article.  They have likely succumbed, at least to some extent, to the Nirvana Fallacy.

8. Moving Forward - Finding "Simplicity" on the Other Side of "Complexity": So what do we do?  Where do we go from here?  I laid out some thoughts back in 2019 that might bear some repetition:

Quote

First, we need to acknowledge that we have invited scrutiny of the claims of the Church.  Consequently, we need to accommodate the possibility of members of the Church coming to a conclusion that those claims are not what they claim to be.  We need to allow that.  Reasonable minds can disagree about all sorts of things, including important things.  We should also consider that "either the Church is true, or it is a fraud"-type statements can be compelling, but also risky, and those who have presented them likely did not contemplate the "glitch" described above.

Second, we also need to understand and respect the strong feelings and emotions that can arise when people become disaffected from the Church (or are heading down that path).  We need to reach out and communicate.  We need to let them give voice to their thoughts and concerns.

Third, we need to adopt more realistic, and less idealized, approaches and perspectives to each other, including past and present leaders of the Church.  However, such a process necessarily requires patience and forgiveness, and context and understanding.  Mormon told us: "Behold, I speak unto you as if ye were present, and yet ye are not. But behold, Jesus Christ hath shown you unto me, and I know your doing."  (Mormon 8:35.)  Let us consider that when we consider the following counsel he gave us in the next chapter: "Condemn me not because of mine imperfection, neither my father, because of his imperfection, neither them who have written before him; but rather give thanks unto God that he hath made manifest unto you our imperfections, that ye may learn to be more wise than we have been."  (Mormon 9:31.)

Fourth, we need to be having more discussions with loved ones.  With those within our stewardship.  We need to feel safe in expressing concerns and questions.  We need to dispel the secrecy and often precedes or accompanies faith crises, and foster candor and openness.  We need to do such things with tact and decorum and respect, pertaining to both the feelings of the individual and the sanctity of the subject matter.  We need to do all we can to help people give the Church and its message a fair hearing.

Fifth, we need to be more informed.  We need to do real research and real study of the Restored Gospel.  We need to sort out what we believe, and why we believe it.  We need to "be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear."  (1 Peter 3:15.)  I also think we need to differentiate our approach to the object of our faith (Jesus Christ), and, well everything else.  I think Davis Bitton's essay is very helpful on this point: I Don’t Have a Testimony of the History of the Church.  We should also examine where we stand individually.  A useful framework for such introspection is set forth in a book published last year by Elder Bruce and Sister Marie Hafen, Faith is Not Blind, summarized here:

Quote

Elder Bruce C. Hafen, an emeritus General Authority Seventy for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and Sister Marie K. Hafen, once a member of the church’s Young Women general board, have just penned a refreshingly frank book— "Faith is Not Blind" (Deseret Book) — providing powerful paradigms for navigating faith in increasingly complex times.
...
In the volume, lived stories — like a Latter-day Saint being challenged by an agnostic coworker — blend with the doctrinal discussions one might expect from university-level lecturers. As the authors put it, “untested idealism,” “naïve simplicity” or a gospel that’s little more than “a firm handshake, a high-five, and a smiley face” is unlikely to foster the requisite conviction in order for faith to survive today's trials.
...

A central cause of faith crisis in any age arises when we apprehend a gap between the real and the ideal. Simply minding this gap without ever bridging it arrests many a faith journey. The Hafens quote American jurist Oliver Wendell Holmes: “I would not give a fig for the simplicity (on) this side of complexity. But I would give my life for the simplicity on the other side of complexity.”

They propose a tripartite model of spiritual progression. It begins with childlike simplicity — “innocent and untested.” Then stage two commences as believers juxtapose the ideal and the real. This is where “we struggle with conflicts and uncertainty.” But those who successfully navigate this stage arrive at, in Holmes’ words, a simplicity that transcends complexity — “a settled and informed perspective that has been tempered and tested by time and experience.”

 

I hope these sisters can take pause to reconsider their current path.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited September 29, 2023 by smac97

[Vanguard]

20 minutes ago, smac97 said:

A few thoughts:

1. History Repeats Itself: The early days of the Church saw a fair amount of infighting and turmoil, up to and including high-ranking members of the Church.  We ought to anticipate that it can, and to some extent will, happen again.  Michael Ash makes some good remarks here:

2. For Some, Everything is Political: For some, Paul Krugman's declaration that "everything is political" is an unspoken (and perhaps even subconscious) premise.  They let their sociopolitical views - often heavily influenced and engineered by social media and news media and such - predominate over everything else, including the Restored Gospel.  "Politics" becomes the lens through which everything - including the Church and its leaders and their actions - is viewed.  This is being done by people from all over the political spectrum (though I think there are concentrations of it happening at the margins).  

I think these sisters have let their sociopolitical views become the proverbial "tail wagging the dog."  That is:

I think these sisters have succumbed to this tendency.  The specifics they point to - the Church working with UN organizations and with the NAACP - are, in my view, likely originating in their political dislike of, and disagreement with, these organizations.  

3. Tacit Notions/Expectations of Infallibility: I think a big error in these sisters' reasoning is that it appears to be premised on tacit notions of infallibility.  I have previously commented on this here:

This is, i think, what these sisters are experiencing: a "cascade failure" originating from a likely unspoken and unrecognized expectation of prophetic infallibility.

4. Facile and Finite and Angry Perspectives: I think these sisters seriously err in condemning the Church because it works with organizations like the NAACP and the UN.  The Church is not adopting these organizations wholesale, but is instead working with them on issues where they and the Church have common ground and common interests.  This does not mean that the Church is adopting and endorsing and ratifying each and every facet of these organizations and their philosophies, and it is facile and unwise for these sisters to claim or infer otherwise.

The Church constantly works with other outside organizations, all of which have some divergence of viewpoints and objectives from the Church, all of which likely have some skeletons in their closets (as do the Latter-day Saints), all of which, nevertheless, have some nexus with the Church, some shared interests and objectives.  The scope and extent of the Church's interactions and collaborations with these other organizations is, of course, a judgment call.  I think the Brethren are working hard to "vet" such partners, and that we rank-and-file Latter-day Saints can repose some trust in their competency in this regard.

These sisters seem to have expectations that the Church can only work with other groups and organizations whose viewpoints align perfectly with the Church's.  That is an unwise and facile and finite perspective.  And these sisters seem . . . pretty angry.  Anger is seldom a good foundation for dealing with complex and difficult issues.  That these sisters have proceeded to blow up their relationship with the Church because of this perspective is quite unfortunate.

5. Stewardship and Authority: As I watched the video I was reminded of several of these quotes: 

I think if some of the Lord's servants are "astray," He has in place mechanisms to address that.  I also think that the Lord's ways of correcting the Brethren do not involve self-appointed folks like these sisters posting bombastic YouTube videos accusing the Brethren from horrible atrocities based off mere assumptions.  I don't think the Lord called these sisters to call the Brethren to repentance via YouTube.  The scriptures speak of councils, not social media, as the proper mechanism for addressing disagreements in the Church.  On this point I encourage everyone to read Elder Oaks' 1987 article, Criticism.  In it he does a very good job of laying out how we as Latter-day Saints ought to behave relative to governance in the Church, disagreements (including with leadership), etc.

6. Secrecy: I think another big component of these sisters' reasoning likely arose when they nursed disagreements, resentments, etc. in "secret."  Or else only shared these things with people they felt likely to already buy into such things.  I doubt these sisters started having concerns/questions about the governance of the Church and then, the next day, posted their YouTube video.  I suspect they let doubts, resentments, fears, suspicions, etc. fester for many weeks and months, long before they made and posted the video.

7. The Nirvana Fallacy: Further to my comments about about unspoken expectations of prophetic infallibility, I think these sisters have also succumbed to the Nirvana Fallacy.  I have previously commented on this phenomenon in 2019 here:

As I noted then: "My sense is that some members of the Church are harboring idealized, unrealistic expectations about the Church, and its leaders and members, and its history.  This is the "perfect" part of Voltaire's maxim."  I think these sisters have had these expectations, and have now encountered "big" things that the Church is doing, including working with organizations that these sisters - based on the sociopolitical views - dislike.  This flawed approach to the Restored Gospel, and the Church that houses it, appears to have culminated in these sisters creating for themselves a necessity to choose between two seemingly irreconcilable options

• Option A: the Church is essentially good and decent and ordained of God (as claimed by the Church), or
• Option B: the Church is essentially flawed and corrupt, and even evil (as dictated by these sisters' sociopolitical views and preferences).

Applying Voltaire's maxim, the "perfect" (the idealized perception of, and expectations about, the Church and its members) becomes the enemy of the "good" (Option A).  Consequently, some folks go with Option B, because it seems the only plausible means of reconciling what they thought about the Church with what they now know about the Church.

The problem, though, is that what they "know" about the Church is being filtered through a dirty lens.  They are letting political ideologies and preferences predominate over the Restored Gospel (and I say this as someone who may well have a lot in common with their sociopolitcal views).  They are likely harboring deeply flawed notions of prophetic infallibility.  They are speaking from a blinkered and facile and angry perspective.  They have allowed grievances to fester for a long time, likely mostly in secret.  They are either unaware of, or are disregarding, the gospel principles laid out in Elder Oaks' Criticism article.  They have likely succumbed, at least to some extent, to the Nirvana Fallacy.

8. Moving Forward - Finding "Simplicity" on the Other Side of "Complexity": So what do we do?  Where do we go from here?  I laid out some thoughts back in 2019 that might bear some repetition:

I hope these sisters can take pause to reconsider their current path.

Thanks,

-Smac

Smac - How do I get a hold of you privately? Your PM function seems to be disengaged. Would you mind reaching out to me instead?

[smac97]

10 minutes ago, Vanguard said:

Smac - How do I get a hold of you privately? Your PM function seems to be disengaged. Would you mind reaching out to me instead?

Hmm.  I just tried to send you a PM, and it says you cannot receive them.  

Here's a burner number: ‪(801) 909-1634‬.  Text me there.

[ttribe]

2 hours ago, smac97 said:

I did.

Note the wording here: "At the conclusion of the investigation, as previously stated by O.U.R., Mr. Ballard resigned."  OUR did not fire him "for cause" (that is, they found sufficient evidence to conclude the allegations had merit).  Rather, Tim Ballard quit.  Are you inferring from that (him quitting) that he was essentially admitting to the misconduct?  If so, why?

Here's the next bit: "Mr. Ballard’s alleged misconduct does not represent O.U.R.’s values or others within the organization."  Note that OUR is not claiming that it/they conclude that Tim did, in fact, engage in misconduct.  OUR is, instead, merely stating the obvious, which is that the behavior "alleged" against him - but which OUR has, AFAIK, never actually attributed to him, even after the "independent, external investigation" - does not mesh with OUR's values.

Construed carefully, OUR's statement is that A) allegations of misconduct arose, B) Tim was put on administrative leave, C) OUR ordered an "external" investigation, and D) Tim resigned.  Is any of this competent, probative, admissible evidence that the allegations against Tim are true?  I don't think so.  Regardless of whether Tim is guilty or innocent, OUR could have characterized A-D in the exact same way.

Thanks,

-Smac

Your motivated reasoning is on full display, here. Perhaps it is simply a matter of inexperience on your part, but having been part of the behind the scenes negotiations in at least two scenarios where my work was instrumental in the removal of a founder of an organization, the fact that he "resigned" is not the exculpatory evidence you seem to want to make it in this instance.

Lest you try to do otherwise, let me state for the record that I don't believe this chain of events is prima facie evidence of his guilt relative to the sexual assault allegations. I am, however, arguing that the evidentiary value exceeds 0%.

[morgan.deane]

 

3 hours ago, ttribe said:

Meanwhile, the Cult of Tim Ballard is taking off:
 

 

This is crazy. So the person that has a significant amount of credible evidence against him is not even remotely questioned. But after reading a random story in the Old Testament, they condemn the current leaders that have no credible accusations against them. They claimed the sons of Phineas were seducing the women in the temple, unironically ignoring the sexual allegations against Tim Ballard. Their evidence was some anecdotal sexual sins among low level leadership. But that doesn't mean the quorum of the 12 has fallen. I don't even have the words for how ridiculous they are. 

Edit: I took one for the team and listened to the whole thing. Their evidence consists of some random scriptures (Sons of Eli, Abinadi, Ezekiel) talking about fallen prophets. They dislike Elder Ballard's teachings that aren't as strident against homosexuals as they would like. They disliked a comment form Neil Anderson because the individual was from the NAACP. This is ironic, because they list many of his abhorrent beliefs or associations of the NAACP (communist, pro abortion etc.) the same way cancel culture does. They think that being kind and loving to the transgender community is "promoting it."(22:36) They dislike a long law in Arizona about it. She made a good point that laws are too long and when they get so long it becomes entrapping. Even a blind squirrel finds an acorn I guess. They dislike that the leadership maintained "resolute silence" about the Sound of Freedom, until they attacked Tim Ballard. If they oppose Tim Ballard there must be something sketchy. "Wonder what kind of involvement they have with human trafficking business."

I am truly dumber for listening to this. Ballard had a such a hold on them that they would condemn the church with conspiracy theories before questioning that maybe these accusations arise because Tim Ballard made all of these mistakes. And they believe that can't happen because he is the one saving kids. I'm literally shaking my head.  

Edited September 29, 2023 by morgan.deane

[MustardSeed]

Just now, morgan.deane said:

Wow. So the guy who has a significant amount of legitimate evidence against him is blameless. The leaders that naturally 

 

This is crazy. So the person that has a significant amount of credible evidence against him is not even remotely questioned. But after reading a random story in the Old Testament, they condemn the current leaders that have no credible accusations against them. They claimed the sons of Phineas were seducing the women in the temple, unironically ignoring the sexual allegations against Tim Ballard. Their evidence was some anecdotal sexual sins among low level leadership. But that doesn't mean the quorum of the 12 has fallen. I don't even have the words for how ridiculous they are. 

And to drag your kid into it ugh

[smac97]

38 minutes ago, ttribe said:

Quote

I did.

Note the wording here: "At the conclusion of the investigation, as previously stated by O.U.R., Mr. Ballard resigned."  OUR did not fire him "for cause" (that is, they found sufficient evidence to conclude the allegations had merit).  Rather, Tim Ballard quit.  Are you inferring from that (him quitting) that he was essentially admitting to the misconduct?  If so, why?

Here's the next bit: "Mr. Ballard’s alleged misconduct does not represent O.U.R.’s values or others within the organization."  Note that OUR is not claiming that it/they conclude that Tim did, in fact, engage in misconduct.  OUR is, instead, merely stating the obvious, which is that the behavior "alleged" against him - but which OUR has, AFAIK, never actually attributed to him, even after the "independent, external investigation" - does not mesh with OUR's values.

Construed carefully, OUR's statement is that A) allegations of misconduct arose, B) Tim was put on administrative leave, C) OUR ordered an "external" investigation, and D) Tim resigned.  Is any of this competent, probative, admissible evidence that the allegations against Tim are true?  I don't think so.  Regardless of whether Tim is guilty or innocent, OUR could have characterized A-D in the exact same way.

Your motivated reasoning is on full display, here.

I don't know what you mean here.

38 minutes ago, ttribe said:

Perhaps it is simply a matter of inexperience on your part,

I have been litigating in state and federal court for nearly twenty years.  I'm not exactly a neophyte when it comes to examining issues in a legal context.

I am curious as to what experience you have in this field?

38 minutes ago, ttribe said:

but having been part of the behind the scenes negotiations in at least two scenarios where my work was instrumental in the removal of a founder of an organization,

I don't know what this means.  Are you a lawyer?  Are you familiar with the Federal Rules of Evidence?  Or Utah's Rule's of Evidence?  Are you familiar with the processes used to vet and authenticate and admit (or exclude) evidence in legal proceedings?  

'Cuz I am, and have been working in these frameworks for twenty years.  I'm fairly well-versed in the particulars of what evidence is competent / probative / admissible, and what is not.

38 minutes ago, ttribe said:

the fact that he "resigned" is not the exculpatory evidence you seem to want to make it in this instance.

First, "two scenarios" doth not an expert make.

Second, I have said nothing about his resignation constituting "exculpatory evidence."  

Third, what I have suggested is that his resignation cannot, in and of itself, reasonably be construed as inculpatory evidence.

Fourth, I am attempting to be dispassionate in my assessment of the evidence in this case.  I don't know Tim Ballard.  At all.  I haven't seen the movie.  I don't really have a dog in the fight of whether he's engaged in sexual misconduct or not (except, perhaps, in the broad "family of man"-style way of me hoping that we all listen to our better angels).

Fifth, I have more concerns about the other allegations about Tim, pertaining to financial issues and listing Pres. M. Russell Ballard as a "silent {partner}" in a money-making venture.  I think the evidence for that is a bit more developed.

38 minutes ago, ttribe said:

Lest you try to do otherwise, let me state for the record that I don't believe this chain of events is prima facie evidence of his guilt relative to the sexual assault allegations. I am, however, arguing that the evidentiary value exceeds 0%.

Okay.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited September 29, 2023 by smac97

[The Nehor]

16 hours ago, teddyaware said:

If Tim Ballard Isn’t telling the truth throughout the following one hour long interview, the only explanation that makes any sense is he’s a bonafide sociopath who’s utterly devoid of human conscience. After intently watching and listening to how Ballard calmly comports himself, and confidently answers each question put to him, it will come as a genuine shock if it turns out he isn’t being honest. But if he is playing fast and loose with the truth, this video provides a textbook example of how the devil is able to transform himself into a an eminently believable angel of light.

 

If he didn’t have some kind of charisma he would never have gotten this whole thing going in the first place. Being able to look good in a friendly interview isn’t that impressive. Being able to convey sincerity isn’t that hard and it works. Plato had a few things to say about that kind of rhetoric.

[smac97]

28 minutes ago, morgan.deane said:

This is crazy. So the person that has a significant amount of credible evidence against him is not even remotely questioned. But after reading a random story in the Old Testament, they condemn the current leaders that have no credible accusations against them. They claimed the sons of Phineas were seducing the women in the temple, unironically ignoring the sexual allegations against Tim Ballard. Their evidence was some anecdotal sexual sins among low level leadership. But that doesn't mean the quorum of the 12 has fallen. I don't even have the words for how ridiculous they are. 

Edit: I took one for the team and listened to the whole thing. Their evidence consists of some random scriptures (Sons of Eli, Abinadi, Ezekiel) talking about fallen prophets. They dislike Elder Ballard's teachings that aren't as strident against homosexuals as they would like. They disliked a comment form Neil Anderson because the individual was from the NAACP. This is ironic, because they list many of his abhorrent beliefs or associations of the NAACP (communist, pro abortion etc.) the same way cancel culture does. They think that being kind and loving to the transgender community is "promoting it." (22:36) They dislike a long law in Arizona about it. She made a good point that laws are too long and when they get so long it becomes entrapping. Even a blind squirrel finds an acorn I guess. They dislike that the leadership maintained "resolute silence" about the Sound of Freedom, until they attacked Tim Ballard. If they oppose Tim Ballard there must be something sketchy. "Wonder what kind of involvement they have with human trafficking business."

I am truly dumber for listening to this. Ballard had a such a hold on them that they would condemn the church with conspiracy theories before questioning that maybe these accusations arise because Tim Ballard made all of these mistakes. And they believe that can't happen because he is the one saving kids. I'm literally shaking my head.  

1. I listened to it also (albeit at 1.75 speed). 

2. I too feel their reasoning from the evidence is poor to nonexistent.

3. I agree that she makes a good point about laws being too long.  This is how politicians have been playing around for a long time.  They A) take a good, nonpartisan issue, B) craft a statute for it that includes things that - on their own - could never be passed into law, and C) insist on an "all or nothing" approach to passing the bill.  But that's politicians.  And politics is, increasingly, "the art of the possible."  The Church, like all other private constituents, has to work with such laws as they exist, not as we would prefer them to be drafted.

4. Their stated assumption - that the Brethren are engaging in profane and profoundly evil conduct like the sons of Eli did - is utterly baseless.  And they seem to pretty much admit that (by admitting they are only assuming such things).

5. I respectfully disagree with your comment about "Ballard had a such a hold on them."  Tim Ballard ought to be held to account for his own actions, but there's no evidence he incited these two sisters into anything, or that they even know each other.

Thanks,

-Smac

[The Nehor]

3 hours ago, smac97 said:

I did.

Note the wording here: "At the conclusion of the investigation, as previously stated by O.U.R., Mr. Ballard resigned."  OUR did not fire him "for cause" (that is, they found sufficient evidence to conclude the allegations had merit).  Rather, Tim Ballard quit.  Are you inferring from that (him quitting) that he was essentially admitting to the misconduct?  If so, why?

Here's the next bit: "Mr. Ballard’s alleged misconduct does not represent O.U.R.’s values or others within the organization."  Note that OUR is not claiming that it/they conclude that Tim did, in fact, engage in misconduct.  OUR is, instead, merely stating the obvious, which is that the behavior "alleged" against him - but which OUR has, AFAIK, never actually attributed to him, even after the "independent, external investigation" - does not mesh with OUR's values.

Construed carefully, OUR's statement is that A) allegations of misconduct arose, B) Tim was put on administrative leave, C) OUR ordered an "external" investigation, and D) Tim resigned.  Is any of this competent, probative, admissible evidence that the allegations against Tim are true?  I don't think so.  Regardless of whether Tim is guilty or innocent, OUR could have characterized A-D in the exact same way.

Thanks,

-Smac

Yes, and I am sure Nixon was going to resign on his own. That it happened right after a group of senators of his own party told him to “resign or else” was just a coincidence.

You are wheedling out a favorable conclusion and missing the obvious. When misconduct pops up and is investigated and the alleged perpetrator resigns it is probably because there was enough to fire the person and they are offering the person a slightly more graceful exit. It is a cliche. It happens all the time in businesses, governments, militaries, clubs, whatever.

Now of course it is possible that he resigned for unrelated reasons and the timing is just a coincidence but that strains credulity. He also doesn’t seem like the kind of guy who would fall on his sword for the organization’s reputation. He is way too involved in the cult of him being a hero.

4 hours ago, ttribe said:

Meanwhile, the Cult of Tim Ballard is taking off:
 

 

Will Tim Ballard tell these people to knock it off? I doubt it.

[The Nehor]

42 minutes ago, morgan.deane said:

 

This is crazy. So the person that has a significant amount of credible evidence against him is not even remotely questioned. But after reading a random story in the Old Testament, they condemn the current leaders that have no credible accusations against them. They claimed the sons of Phineas were seducing the women in the temple, unironically ignoring the sexual allegations against Tim Ballard. Their evidence was some anecdotal sexual sins among low level leadership. But that doesn't mean the quorum of the 12 has fallen. I don't even have the words for how ridiculous they are. 

Edit: I took one for the team and listened to the whole thing. Their evidence consists of some random scriptures (Sons of Eli, Abinadi, Ezekiel) talking about fallen prophets. They dislike Elder Ballard's teachings that aren't as strident against homosexuals as they would like. They disliked a comment form Neil Anderson because the individual was from the NAACP. This is ironic, because they list many of his abhorrent beliefs or associations of the NAACP (communist, pro abortion etc.) the same way cancel culture does. They think that being kind and loving to the transgender community is "promoting it."(22:36) They dislike a long law in Arizona about it. She made a good point that laws are too long and when they get so long it becomes entrapping. Even a blind squirrel finds an acorn I guess. They dislike that the leadership maintained "resolute silence" about the Sound of Freedom, until they attacked Tim Ballard. If they oppose Tim Ballard there must be something sketchy. "Wonder what kind of involvement they have with human trafficking business."

I am truly dumber for listening to this. Ballard had a such a hold on them that they would condemn the church with conspiracy theories before questioning that maybe these accusations arise because Tim Ballard made all of these mistakes. And they believe that can't happen because he is the one saving kids. I'm literally shaking my head.  

It is the latest Satanic panic. This one is just about satanic pedophilia instead of child sacrifice. Progress? No, not really. If you speak out against the insanity you must be part of the conspiracy. How many lives will we ruin this time?

[smac97]

22 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Yes, and I am sure Nixon was going to resign on his own. That it happened right after a group of senators of his own party told him to “resign or else” was just a coincidence.

This sort of "I wouldn't put it past him" speculation is fine for gossip and casual conversation, but it doesn't work in a legal context.

22 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

You are wheedling out a favorable conclusion and missing the obvious.

I am not.  To state "X is not inculpatory evidence" is not equivalent to "X is exculpatory evidence."

I am applying the normative principles of evidence and legal reasoning here.

22 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

When misconduct pops up and is investigated and the alleged perpetrator resigns it is probably because there was enough to fire the person and they are offering the person a slightly more graceful exit. It is a cliche. It happens all the time in businesses, governments, militaries, clubs, whatever.

When when false or embellished allegations of misconduct pop up, the same thing course of events can happen.  Hence the need to examine evidence, rather than just assume - as you appear to do - that anonymous allegations of misconduct are evidence unto themselves.  You can, of course, think that for yourself, but that's not how the legal process works. 

And I doubt you would be so cavalierly confident of guilt if you or someone you know were in the crosshairs of anonymously-sourced-but-published-to-the-world-and-largely-unsubstantiated allegations of misconduct.

22 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Now of course it is possible that he resigned for unrelated reasons

It is also possible that he resigned for related reasons.  Perhaps there is some truth to the allegations of financial impropriety and/or misuse of Pres. Ballard's name.  Or perhaps Tim is substantively innocent of the allegations, but has nevertheless got on the wrong side of enough people at OUR that they (and/or he) felt that him continuing to work there was not practicable.  Perhaps, perhaps, perhaps.  Maybe, maybe, maybe.

We need more evidence.

22 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

and the timing is just a coincidence but that strains credulity.

This is not a legal argument.  

22 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

He also doesn’t seem like the kind of guy who would fall on his sword for the organization’s reputation. He is way too involved in the cult of him being a hero.

This is not a legal argument, either.

22 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Will Tim Ballard tell these people to knock it off? I doubt it.

Is Tim Ballard supposed to go around and police the free speech of anyone who references his name and may support his efforts in some sense?  I doubt it.

Thanks,

-Smac

[ttribe]

1 hour ago, smac97 said:

I don't know what you mean here.

I have been litigating in state and federal court for nearly twenty years.  I'm not exactly a neophyte when it comes to examining issues in a legal context.

I am curious as to what experience you have in this field?

I don't know what this means.  Are you a lawyer?  Are you familiar with the Federal Rules of Evidence?  Or Utah's Rule's of Evidence?  Are you familiar with the processes used to vet and authenticate and admit (or exclude) evidence in legal proceedings?  

'Cuz I am, and have been working in these frameworks for twenty years.  I'm fairly well-versed in the particulars of what evidence is competent / probative / admissible, and what is not.

First, "two scenarios" doth not an expert make.

Second, I have said nothing about his resignation constituting "exculpatory evidence."  

Third, what I have suggested is that his resignation cannot, in and of itself, reasonably be construed as inculpatory evidence.

Fourth, I am attempting to be dispassionate in my assessment of the evidence in this case.  I don't know Tim Ballard.  At all.  I haven't seen the movie.  I don't really have a dog in the fight of whether he's engaged in sexual misconduct or not (except, perhaps, in the broad "family of man"-style way of me hoping that we all listen to our better angels).

Fifth, I have more concerns about the other allegations about Tim, pertaining to financial issues and listing Pres. M. Russell Ballard as a "silent {partner}" in a money-making venture.  I think the evidence for that is a bit more developed.

Okay.

Thanks,

-Smac

No, what you've said is that it has ZERO value. If all you and I are arguing is matters of degrees, then we can stop. I don't care if you and I agree on how much it matters, I'm only arguing that outright dismissal of the chain of events as having any relevance is incorrect.

As to the financial things, I agree with you that they are more firmly supported and, at least in my case since I'm a forensic accountant, interesting to me. I have had grave concerns about this organization for years because of its similarities to various affinity fraud and charity schemes I've seen over time. Very little I've seen come out so far has been a surprise to me...although I must admit T. Ballard posting his own mostly naked picture in his own defense was one of the more unusual things I've seen in a while.

Edited September 29, 2023 by ttribe

[Teancum]

4 hours ago, ttribe said:

Meanwhile, the Cult of Tim Ballard is taking off:
 

 

I see a disciplinary council in these two women's future.

[smac97]

27 minutes ago, ttribe said:

No, what you've said is that it has ZERO value.

That is not what I said.

Here is what I said:

Quote

Note the wording here: "At the conclusion of the investigation, as previously stated by O.U.R., Mr. Ballard resigned."  OUR did not fire him "for cause" (that is, they found sufficient evidence to conclude the allegations had merit).  Rather, Tim Ballard quit.  Are you inferring from that (him quitting) that he was essentially admitting to the misconduct?  If so, why?

Here's the next bit: "Mr. Ballard’s alleged misconduct does not represent O.U.R.’s values or others within the organization."  Note that OUR is not claiming that it/they conclude that Tim did, in fact, engage in misconduct.  OUR is, instead, merely stating the obvious, which is that the behavior "alleged" against him - but which OUR has, AFAIK, never actually attributed to him, even after the "independent, external investigation" - does not mesh with OUR's values.

Construed carefully, OUR's statement is that A) allegations of misconduct arose, B) Tim was put on administrative leave, C) OUR ordered an "external" investigation, and D) Tim resigned.  Is any of this competent, probative, admissible evidence that the allegations against Tim are true?  I don't think so.  Regardless of whether Tim is guilty or innocent, OUR could have characterized A-D in the exact same way.

I don't think a judge would be able to look at the above items and from them construe culpable conduct.

27 minutes ago, ttribe said:

If all you and I are arguing is matters of degrees, then we can stop.

I think I am attempting to assess the evidentiary value of the allegations and OUR's statement in a legal context, and that you are not.

27 minutes ago, ttribe said:

I don't care if you and I agree on how much it matters, I'm only arguing that outright dismissal of the chain of events as having any relevance is incorrect.

I did not speak of "outright dismissal of the chain of events as having any relevance."

Instead, I said "OUR's statement is that A) allegations of misconduct arose, B) Tim was put on administrative leave, C) OUR ordered an 'external' investigation, and D) Tim resigned.  Is any of this competent, probative, admissible evidence that the allegations against Tim are true?  I don't think so."

But allow me to clarify in a way that may help: "Without more, OUR's statement does not constitute competent, probative, admissible evidence that the allegations against Tim are true."  Do you find that reasonable?

27 minutes ago, ttribe said:

As to the financial things, I agree with you that they are more firmly supported and, at least in my case since I'm a forensic accountant, interesting to me. I have had grave concerns about this organization for years because of its similarities to various affinity fraud and charity schemes I've seen over time. Very little I've seen come out so far has been a surprise to me...although I must admit T. Ballard posting his own mostly naked picture in his own defense was one of the more unusual things I've seen in a while.

I actually thought that doing so helped provide context for his explanations rebutting the allegations against him (some news reports have, I think, referenced the photo).

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited September 29, 2023 by smac97

[MiserereNobis]

34 minutes ago, smac97 said:

but it doesn't work in a legal context.

34 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I am applying the normative principles of evidence and legal reasoning here.

35 minutes ago, smac97 said:

but that's not how the legal process works. 

35 minutes ago, smac97 said:

This is not a legal argument.

36 minutes ago, smac97 said:

This is not a legal argument, either

10 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I don't think a judge would be able to look at the above items and from them construe culpable conduct

11 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I think I am attempting to assess the evidentiary value of the allegations and OUR's statement in a legal context, and that you are not.

11 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Is any of this competent, probative, admissible evidence?

We’re not in a court of law here. Legal reasoning is required in a legal context. Legal reasoning can be helpful in other contexts. It can also, however, be downright disastrous in a non-legal context (I’m sure you can come up with such examples). 

I do appreciate the perspective and point-of-view you bring to the board and always have. I also think there are times when you lean too heavily on the law for reasoning and examples. So much in life cannot be encapsulated by the law, and legal reasoning can at times be downright limiting. 
 

Perhaps we could apply poetry to this situation. The hubris of Macbeth comes to mind. Or perhaps Sir John Falstaff’s charisma and intelligence (and wordplay) and how he uses them to cover his dishonesty. Shakespeare can certainly weigh in on what humans do, and what we experience in ways that legal reasoning cannot even approach.

[smac97]

24 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

We’re not in a court of law here.

But we are discussing legal issues here.

24 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

Legal reasoning is required in a legal context.

A lawyer publicly read a letter about her client's allegations against Tim.  I think we are "in a legal context."

The principles of law I am laying out here matter, or ought to matter.  A lot.

24 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

Legal reasoning can be helpful in other contexts. It can also, however, be downright disastrous in a non-legal context (I’m sure you can come up with such examples). 

Then let's take whatever usefulness we can get out of legal reasoning, principles, etc.  

24 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

I do appreciate the perspective and point-of-view you bring to the board and always have. I also think there are times when you lean too heavily on the law for reasoning and examples.

I can appreciate that.  But here, the discussion is about legal issues, so I think "the law" can and ought to be discussed and applied.  Not exclusively, but it should play a fairly substantial role in the discussion.

24 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

So much in life cannot be encapsulated by the law, and legal reasoning can at times be downright limiting.

Legal reasoning can also be illuminating.  Many principles of law are not just made up for no reason.  They have been developed and refined over many centuries by attorneys, judges, appellate courts, and legislatures.  These principles are used to to sort out precisely the kind of disputes as what we are discussing here.  I suspect it will be just a matter of time before someone files a lawsuit against someone else, and when that happens all of the issues I am raising will be brought into even more of a focus.

24 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

Perhaps we could apply poetry to this situation. The hubris of Macbeth comes to mind. Or perhaps Sir John Falstaff’s charisma and intelligence (and wordplay) and how he uses them to cover his dishonesty. Shakespeare can certainly weigh in on what humans do, and what we experience in ways that legal reasoning cannot even approach.

I would prefer to first assess what allegations have been made, and what evidence exists to support those allegations.  I am less interested in musing on the foibles of Tim Ballard or anyone else, not when we don't even know what those foibles are, or if they have been distorted, embellished, or even fabricated.

Thanks,

-Smac

[CA Steve]

SLT article on Ballard's books being pulled from Deseret Bookshelves. Here.

 

Quote

“Historians have been highlighting the problems with Ballard’s books for over a decade,” he said. “Many brought their concerns directly to Deseret Book, to no avail. The books were not only profitable but also fit into a larger, and equally problematic, Christian nationalism that enraptures many Latter-day Saints.

Quote

Taylor Petrey, associate professor of religion at Michigan’s Kalamazoo College and the editor-in-chief of Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, concurred with Park’s concerns.

“Ballard’s books,” he wrote in an email, “have long been a lightning rod. By any standard of historical credibility, the books should have never been published by a mainstream press. Latter-day Saint historians have expressed dismay and embarrassment that these ideas are so popular and are promoted by the church’s publishing company. They are more fiction than fact.”

I wonder if those that are still defending him buy into this nonsense. On second thought, of course they do.

 

[halconero]

3 hours ago, MiserereNobis said:

I do appreciate the perspective and point-of-view you bring to the board and always have. I also think there are times when you lean too heavily on the law for reasoning and examples. So much in life cannot be encapsulated by the law, and legal reasoning can at times be downright limiting. 

Only because I get so few opportunities to bring up regression analysis on this board that smac gets all the fun.