Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Tim Ballard


Calm

Recommended Posts

Posted
42 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

This just came up. Interesting to say the least. May even be the reason attorney Troy Rawlings was investigating, and why Pres Ballard has put out the denouncement. It may explain the very swift condemnation of Tim. But it could be like reporter Packer mentioned at the first, the accusers are nameless, but still watching so more info is to come.

 

Thank you this video was very helpful as I’m trying to follow this story with zero context. 

Posted
29 minutes ago, Calm said:

Glenn Beck has deleted the tweets about Ballard. Anyone hear why?

Because he was very critical of the Church's actions in them, most likely.

Posted
10 minutes ago, ttribe said:

Because he was very critical of the Church's actions in them, most likely.

So you think he thought better of it when he calmed down?  I know very little of Beck’s personality. 

Posted
55 minutes ago, Calm said:

So you think he thought better of it when he calmed down?  I know very little of Beck’s personality. 

Yes or he got more insider info. 

Posted (edited)
15 hours ago, bsjkki said:

He must be a grifting liar. 

No, there is the possibility that the Church or Elder Ballard overreacted to rumors and that Ballard just dresses up his stories a bit harmlessly, but there is also the possibility that the Church statement is an accurate portrayal, if vague, and in that case Ballard being a liar is unfortunately an accurate description.  Since the latter case must be included in the possibilities we consider, we need to approach anything Ballard says with caution until we know more just as we need to include in our analysis the Church may be mistaken or even that the condemnation was a result of someone’s lie.

For some reason, I am flashing back to the Labyrinth movie scene of the two doors, where one knocker always lies and the other tells the truth and you have to come up with a question to show which door leads to where you want to go and which door leads to certain death.  
 

The point [added: of my comment, not the Labyrinth riddle] being when you don’t know what source is telling the truth, you make judgments on how to respond with the position that both aren’t telling the truth, iow, proceed cautiously looking for pitfalls and death traps from anywhere.

added:  Somehow I got stuck back a few pages and there were a few posts I had missed or hadn’t really registered, so I thought they were new and so responded to them.  Feel free to ignore.

Edited by Calm
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, MustardSeed said:

Thank you this video was very helpful as I’m trying to follow this story with zero context. 

Thanks, I hope he's accurate. I believe Lynn Packer tries to be thorough. 

Edited by Tacenda
Posted
1 hour ago, Calm said:

For some reason, I am flashing back to the Labyrinth movie scene of the two doors, where one knocker always lies and the other tells the truth and you have to come up with a question to show which door leads to where you want to go and which door leads to certain death.  The point being when you don’t know what source is telling the truth, you make judgments on how to respond with the position that both aren’t telling the truth, iow, proceed cautiously looking for pitfalls and death traps from anywhere.

Hi Calm,

Actually, in the two doors riddle, one can tell which door is the correct door with certainty. You ask either guard which door the other guard will tell you to use. Regardless of which guard you ask they will tell you the same door, the one not to use. You then go through the other door.

Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, CA Steve said:

Hi Calm,

Actually, in the two doors riddle, one can tell which door is the correct door with certainty. You ask either guard which door the other guard will tell you to use. Regardless of which guard you ask they will tell you the same door, the one not to use. You then go through the other door.

Yes, I know. It isn’t a perfect comparison because we don’t have a situation where we know one always tells the truth and one always lies.  Sometimes in life both sources are lying, sometimes both are telling the truth as they understand it to be.

Wouldn’t it be nice if in the real world we could approach life with such certainty that only logic was needed to learn the correct path. 
 

I added clarification to my post to avoid confusion that I was talking about the solution to the movie riddle vs a temporary, very unsatisfying solution to the riddle of one crappy life situation.

Edited by Calm
Posted
11 hours ago, Calm said:

Glenn Beck has deleted the tweets about Ballard. Anyone hear why?

I don't see Elder Ballard mentioned, but are these the tweets? 

r/exmormon - Oh, Glenn—it hits different when it’s you (doesn’t it now?)

Posted
20 hours ago, bsjkki said:

It’s like the National Enquirer. I’m sure they ignore many requests from media about the thieves, child abusers and apostates in the church. They must have wanted to damage him. Because this was much more than a non affiliation statement. 

I wouldn't compare the two. National enquirer usually scores extremely low on reliability while Vice tends to score a lot higher. It skews left, but is less left than say MSNBC...and it also usually scores higher in reliability than that as well. It scores similar to sources like the WaPo, Atlantic, Vox...or on the right somewhere between reason and fox business' website. So it's generally considered a legitimate news org, quoting documents from a legit enough sources. The statement does read personal or at least more annoyed by Ballard. I don't know much about TB, but what I do get from him has always made me really leery. So it wouldn't surprise me if he crossed a line with Elder Ballard that really burned some bridges. 

 

With luv,

BD

Posted
11 hours ago, Tacenda said:

This just came up. Interesting to say the least. May even be the reason attorney Troy Rawlings was investigating, and why Pres Ballard has put out the denouncement. It may explain the very swift condemnation of Tim. But it could be like reporter Packer mentioned at the first, the accusers are nameless, but still watching so more info is to come.

 

A key part of Packer's video:

Packer01.jpg

Packer02.jpg

Packer03.jpg

 

The allegations alone were apparently sufficient to taint Ballard in the eyes of the board of OUR.

Thanks,

-Smac

Posted
17 minutes ago, smac97 said:

A key part of Packer's video:

Packer01.jpg

Packer02.jpg

Packer03.jpg

 

The allegations alone were apparently sufficient to taint Ballard in the eyes of the board of OUR.

Thanks,

-Smac

Speaking of which, what about the wording from the church, by saying Tim Ballard did "morally unacceptable" things. Do you think that has anything to do with what Lynn Packer mentioned about sexual harassment allegations against Tim Ballard? 

Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

Did KSL or Deseret News cover this? I can’t find any story on this controversy this morning. 
 

Correct me if I’m wrong.

Yes, I thought both did, but will need to get links and edit, unless someone else finds it quicker. ETA: Not seeing either one now, hum. 

Edited by Tacenda
Posted
28 minutes ago, smac97 said:

A key part of Packer's video:

Packer01.jpg

Packer02.jpg

Packer03.jpg

 

The allegations alone were apparently sufficient to taint Ballard in the eyes of the board of OUR.

Thanks,

-Smac

I found it interesting they could not find any record of the sexual harassment complaint and the letter arrived anonymously. There is no evidence of whether any of it is true.

Posted (edited)
On 9/18/2023 at 9:17 AM, Tacenda said:

Speaking of which, what about the wording from the church, by saying Tim Ballard did "morally unacceptable" things.

From the statement: "Once it became clear Tim Ballard had betrayed their friendship, through the unauthorized use of President Ballard’s name for Tim Ballard’s personal advantage and activity regarded as morally unacceptable, President Ballard withdrew his association."

On 9/18/2023 at 9:17 AM, Tacenda said:

Do you think that has anything to do with what Lynn Packer mentioned about sexual harassment allegations against Tim Ballard? 

I don't know.  It is, perhaps, notable that the statement differentiates between "the unauthorized use of President Ballard’s name for Tim Ballard’s personal advantage" and "activity regarded as morally unacceptable."  The latter could be anything.  

Here are the potential options:

Option (A) Pres. Ballard and the Church have pivoted to a politically activist posture, and have initiated that pivot by derailing the political aspirations of one of the members of the Church.

Option (B) Tim Ballard did actually "betray" his friendship with Pres. Ballard "through the unauthorized use of President Ballard’s name for Tim Ballard’s personal advantage and activity regarded as morally unacceptable."

Option (C) Pres. Ballard has been duped, that is, Tim Ballard did not make "unauthorized use of President Ballard’s name for Tim Ballard’s personal advantage and activity," or that he engaged in "activity regarded as morally unacceptable," but that Pres. Ballard has somehow been persuaded through misinformation or unsubstantiated claims.  Alternatively (per Calm), the Church believed the allegations and was so nervous about being associated with TB, they hurriedly issued a statement without consideration for the fallout or the target nor took as careful of an approach as they should have.

I think (A) is too unserious, so I reject it.  (B) and (C) are still on the table.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited by smac97
Posted
3 minutes ago, smac97 said:

From the statement: "Once it became clear Tim Ballard had betrayed their friendship, through the unauthorized use of President Ballard’s name for Tim Ballard’s personal advantage and activity regarded as morally unacceptable, President Ballard withdrew his association."

I don't know.  It is, perhaps, notable that the statement differentiates between "the unauthorized use of President Ballard’s name for Tim Ballard’s personal advantage" and "activity regarded as morally unacceptable."  The latter could be anything.  

Here are the potential options:

Option (A) Pres. Ballard and the Church have pivoted to a politically activist posture, and have initiated that pivot by derailing the political aspirations of one of the members of the Church.

Option (B) Tim Ballard did actually "betray" his friendship with Pres. Ballard "through the unauthorized use of President Ballard’s name for Tim Ballard’s personal advantage and activity regarded as morally unacceptable."

Option (C) Pres. Ballard has been duped, that is, Tim Ballard did not make "unauthorized use of President Ballard’s name for Tim Ballard’s personal advantage and activity," or that he engaged in "activity regarded as morally unacceptable," but that Pres. Ballard has somehow been persuaded through misinformation or unsubstantiated claims.  Alternative (per Calm), the Church believed the allegations and was so nervous about being associated with TB, they hurriedly issued a statement without consideration for the fallout or the target nor took as careful of an approach as they should have.

I think (A) is to unserious, so I reject it.  (B) and (C) are still on the table.

Thanks,

-Smac

Thanks, putting it in context like that does clear a lot up on using the word "morally". Being moral isn't always sexually related. I'm sad all around for everyone involved that has or will be hurt by all of this. 

Posted
11 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

KSL…not on Home Screen or most viewed. 

 

523B568B-CFB2-4E67-9F31-16BB94F01CE6.png

Yes, seems this is causing many members to question the church and possibly leave the church over this. After watching the @wardradio with Kwaku, Brad and Cardon, I read the live chat and comments, there are a whole host of members that are upset with the church condemning Tim Ballard. They are almost worshiping Tim. It's troubling all around, everything. 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...