Tim Ballard as Plaintiff - He's Filed 2 Lawsuits

[Teancum]

On 11/3/2024 at 1:02 AM, The Nehor said:

Or you could read his text messages that have been released and just realize he is a huge creep. That is easier.

@teddyawareis a true believer. Evidence and fact that do not confirm his bias are dismissed.

[smac97]

On 11/3/2024 at 12:38 PM, Tacenda said:

@smac97I'm sorry if this or my other post derails, just curious what you have to say about this, maybe this has already been spoken of and I'm late to the party.

I barely just stalked Tim Ballard's posts on his profile on FB and scrolled down to see this video of Tim and his wife saying that Elder Ballard had nothing to do with the church's denouncement of Tim Ballard. It shows Tim's wife saying she called Elder Ballard the next day and he told her he didn't know anything about it. 

https://fb.watch/vDyqs4dw1t/

I'm presently ambivalent.  I think the notion of the Church having made a rogue public statement is pretty farfetched, but the incident was pretty weird.

Thanks,

-Smac

[The Nehor]

11 hours ago, Calm said:

Where do they consider a safer place to go?  Besides Canada that is….

Did a shallow dive and it does seem Texas is particularly problematic, though some were recommending Austin and Dallas.  Glad to see many in the community have gotten together to make relocating when needed easier.

Other states where state governments will probably provide protections the federal government will not.

[The Nehor]

6 hours ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

Bigots are going to find out there is still rule of law.

One of those bigots yelling racist garbage at people who don’t look white enough happened in front of law enforcement.

6 hours ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

Trump isn't the most endearing guy but he isn't Hitler either.

There is no good pithy response to that but if you want a deeper dive:

https://acoup.blog/2024/10/25/new-acquisitions-1933-and-the-definition-of-fascism/

A short excerpt:

Quote

Is Donald Trump a fascist? By his own words, yes. Donald Trump is telling you that Donald Trump is a fascist and on this point – and almost no other – I think you should believe Donald Trump. I feel I should note, if you had asked in me in 2016, if Donald Trump was a fascist, I’d have said no. I’d have said no in October of 2020 too; authoritarian tendencies, perhaps, but not a fascist. Donald Trump’s rhetoric has changed, however, in a way that puts him firmly in this category, satisfying not just parts of the definition but every part of it. He has become a fascist and when he tells us that about himself – we should believe him.

6 hours ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

Everyone (on both sides) needs to take a chill pill.

I hope you are right that little will come of this. I wouldn’t count on it. It is different this time. The rhetoric has changed. The stated objectives have changed. This could get very ugly.

[The Nehor]

6 hours ago, smac97 said:

I'm presently ambivalent.  I think the notion of the Church having made a rogue public statement is pretty farfetched, but the incident was pretty weird.

Thanks,

-Smac

Why was it weird? It was the Church saying ‘leave us and our apostles out of this hot mess’. That is a pretty normal press release when someone in a scandal attempts to drag an organization into it and claim they have the organization’s support or the support of the organization’s leaders.

[Calm]

17 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

That is a pretty normal press release when someone in a scandal attempts to drag an organization into it and claim they have the organization’s support or the support of the organization’s leaders.

The one difference was it named names and that is a big difference, but given the popularity of the scammer and how it was believed ( and I think likely correctly) he was using Elder Ballard’s name for his sexual endeavors as well as the usual financial scams, I don’t find it weird at all.  Usually they are more low key, but this one merited the stronger tone.

Edited November 8, 2024 by Calm

[Doctor Steuss]

13 minutes ago, Calm said:

The one difference was it named names and that is a big difference, but given the popularity of the scammer and how it was believed ( and I think likely correctly) he was using Elder Ballard’s name for his sexual endeavors as well as the usual financial scams, I don’t find it weird at all.  Usually they are more low key, but this one merited the stronger tone.

This seemed off to me, so I went spelunking back through the various Newsroom statements speaking out against given movements, or rumors, or (inter)national goings ons, or in favor of certain government policies, etc.   It's almost always in very general terms, only sometimes mentioning specific organizations, and rarely naming individuals.

At least from my brief spelunking.

Interesting seeing some of those statements juxtaposed with the one condemning Tim Ballard.

[smac97]

41 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Why was it weird?

IIRC:

1. The statement was sent to Vice, not posted on Church's Newsroom site.

2. Also, it called out Tim Ballard by name and publicly impugned his morality.

3. And this took place without any membership council having been convened.  No "due pricess" for Tim Ballard, at least at the time. 

Can't remember seeing these before.  All of this from memory, so I am open to correction.

41 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

It was the Church saying ‘leave us and our apostles out of this hot mess’. That is a pretty normal press release when someone in a scandal attempts to drag an organization into it and claim they have the organization’s support or the support of the organization’s leaders.

Can you cite other instances where the Church has done this re: a member in, ostensibly, good standing?

[Duncan]

42 minutes ago, smac97 said:

IIRC:

1. The statement was sent to Vice, not posted on Church's Newsroom site.

2. Also, it called out Tim Ballard by name and publicly impugned his morality.

3. And this took place without any membership council having been convened.  No "due pricess" for Tim Ballard, at least at the time. 

Can't remember seeing these before.  All of this from memory, so I am open to correction.

Can you cite other instances where the Church has done this re: a member in, ostensibly, good standing?

 

Ammon Bundy, is as far as I know in good standing still, https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/church-responds-to-inquiries-regarding-oregon-armed-occupation

[smac97]

36 minutes ago, Duncan said:

Ammon Bundy, is as far as I know in good standing still, https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/church-responds-to-inquiries-regarding-oregon-armed-occupation

That's a fair point.  But the statement does not call him out by name.  And Bundy's misconduct was not in dispute.

[Duncan]

1 minute ago, smac97 said:

That's a fair point.  But the statement does not call him out by name.  And Bundy's misconduct was not in dispute.

they link to that WP article with the headline, 

"Armed men, led by Bundy brothers, take over federal building in rural Oregon" "for more context"

 

[Doctor Steuss]

41 minutes ago, Duncan said:

 

Ammon Bundy, is as far as I know in good standing still, https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/church-responds-to-inquiries-regarding-oregon-armed-occupation

I didn't see this one when I was looking through.  Thank you Duncan.

Interestingly (and keeping with part of Calm's assessment, and my brief looksie-loo), even though it links directly to a news article about him, the Statement itself doesn't call him and his LDS co-conspirators out by name.

Edited November 8, 2024 by Doctor Steuss

[Duncan]

3 minutes ago, Doctor Steuss said:

I didn't see this one when I was looking through.  Thank you Duncan.

Interestingly (and keeping with part of Calm's assessment, and my brief looksie-loo), even though it links directly to a news article about him, the Statement itself doesn't call him and his LDS co-conspirators out by name.

maybe since then the Church learned you have to call out people by name in order to have some effect? as Bundy is in good standing still and probably shouldn't be?

[smac97]

36 minutes ago, Duncan said:

they link to that WP article with the headline, 

"Armed men, led by Bundy brothers, take over federal building in rural Oregon" "for more context"

 

 

Okay.  Still, Bundy's misconduct was not in dispute.

[Duncan]

24 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Okay.  Still, Bundy's misconduct was not in dispute.

your country, your church

Edited November 9, 2024 by Duncan

[smac97]

22 minutes ago, Duncan said:

your country, your church

?

[Calm]

3 hours ago, smac97 said:

The statement was sent to Vice, not posted on Church's Newsroom site.

Vice asked for a statement because they were publishing a story, so don’t see that as weird because the Church responds to requests quite often.

Quote

this took place without any membership council having been convened.  No "due pricess" for Tim Ballard, at least at the time. 

As far as I know the same thing happened with the real estate scammers I have read about, at least no mention of a council was given that I recall and they responded to the Ordain Women group without any membership council.

The picture of Elder Ballard’s name as a secret partner in Ballard’s scam was damning enough.  Why would a council need to be held when it was a statement from Elder Ballard being unhappy because his name was used?  As far as the morality part, my guess is women showed Elder Ballard the picture and texts from his phone.  Even assuming the woman took the picture while he was asleep without his knowledge, what was she doing in his room with him sleeping (especially since he is in only his underwear)?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12602137/Has-Tim-Ballard-EXCOMMUNICATED-Anti-child-trafficking-activist-portrayed-Jim-Caviezel-Sound-Freedom-Mormon-church-records-accused-sexual-misconduct.html

Edited November 9, 2024 by Calm

[Calm]

1 hour ago, smac97 said:

And Bundy's misconduct was not in dispute.

My guess is Elder Ballard didn’t think Tim Ballard’s behaviour was in dispute either.

When it comes to the scam, I don’t see how it is.  Why is Elder Ballard’s name on the whiteboard?  Has Tim Ballard ever responded to that question?  I don’t remember him addressing it specifically, just saying he never misused Elder Ballard’s name.

Edited November 9, 2024 by Calm

[Tacenda]

4 hours ago, Calm said:

My guess is Elder Ballard didn’t think Tim Ballard’s behaviour was in dispute either.

When it comes to the scam, I don’t see how it is.  Why is Elder Ballard’s name on the whiteboard?  Has Tim Ballard ever responded to that question?  I don’t remember him addressing it specifically, just saying he never misused Elder Ballard’s name.

I'm pretty sure, not totally but think Elder Ballard's death occurred earlier than maybe if he hadn't had all this scandalous stuff happening with his name in the mix. 

[The Nehor]

On 11/8/2024 at 5:44 PM, smac97 said:

Okay.  Still, Bundy's misconduct was not in dispute.

There were several people defending Bundy on this board while this was going on. Some disputing was going on.

[The Nehor]

On 11/8/2024 at 8:04 AM, ZealouslyStriving said:

Bigots are going to find out there is still rule of law.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/racist-texts-black-residents-states/

This is fine.

[ZealouslyStriving]

8 hours ago, The Nehor said:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/racist-texts-black-residents-states/

This is fine.

Let's find out who actually sent the texts before we get all crazy.

Jewish students at our most prestigious universities have also felt in danger and abandoned. 

Extremists on both sides are being jerks. This is not the thinking or general behavior of normal people on either side.

Edited November 10, 2024 by ZealouslyStriving

[smac97]

21 hours ago, The Nehor said:

There were several people defending Bundy on this board while this was going on. Some disputing was going on.

The factual reality of Bundy's actions was not in dispute.  Ballard's actions are in real dispute.

Edited November 10, 2024 by smac97

[The Nehor]

4 hours ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

Let's find out who actually sent the texts before we get all crazy.

Jewish students at our most prestigious universities have also felt in danger and abandoned. 

Extremists on both sides are being jerks. This is not the thinking or general behavior of normal people on either side.

I’m not going to “both sides” this. The Jewish attack was an attack on opposing protestors during a charged protest/counterprotest.

This is occurring in over half of the states in the United States and is not over some charged political dispute. It is coldly dehumanizing minorities anonymously en masse and spreading fear.

They are not the same.

[Calm]

14 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

is coldly dehumanizing minorities anonymously en masse and spreading fear.

While I find targeting college age kids very wrong (I heard of Jewish students who did not feel safe walking across campuses), this is also targeting middle and high school kids, which is a whole other level of wrong.

I agree they are not the same.

Edited November 10, 2024 by Calm