Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in the News

[RC Vikings]

https://www.politicalflare.com/2022/...e-in-usa-tags/

The dude was an AP in my mission. I think a few years ago he may have disavowed any ties to formal religion.

Ammon Bundy was an AP in his mission, must we something to seeing everything in black and white and being all in.

[falafel]

I honestly don't know where this goes. Could be here in the foyer, since it is about a guy who (at least as of 23 years ago) was a member of the church. Now he's the Trumpiest of Trumpists, has a social media following and a clothing line that proudly features Made in USA and a copy of the Constitution with every order. But, uh, the clothing is actually made in China and just has the origin tags cut off before reshipping.

https://www.politicalflare.com/2022/...e-in-usa-tags/

The dude was an AP in my mission. I think a few years ago he may have disavowed any ties to formal religion.

The author of that "article" describes herself:

Megan has lived in California, Nevada, Arizona, Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Florida and she currently lives in Central America. Living in these places has informed her writing on politics, science, and history. She is currently owned by 15 cats and 3 dogs and regularly owns Trump supporters when she has the opportunity.

Oh boy.

[LVAllen]

The author of that "article" describes herself:



Oh boy.

Yeah, that particular article is not the best. Always good to find primary sources:

Initial Press Release:

https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2022/05/ftc-takes-action-against-lions-not-sheep-owner-slapping-bogus-made-usa-labels-clothing-imported

Full history and links to documents:

https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/cases-proceedings/222-3023-lions-not-sheep

Consent Agreement and Order:

https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/C4772%20Decision%20and%20Order.pdf

[falafel]

Yeah, that particular article is not the best. Always good to find primary sources:

Initial Press Release:

https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2022/05/ftc-takes-action-against-lions-not-sheep-owner-slapping-bogus-made-usa-labels-clothing-imported

Full history and links to documents:

https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/cases-proceedings/222-3023-lions-not-sheep

Consent Agreement and Order:
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc...nd%20Order.pdf

I don't have any qualms with he reporting, just the her self-description.

[Pelado]

Yeah, that particular article is not the best. Always good to find primary sources:

Initial Press Release:

https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2022/05/ftc-takes-action-against-lions-not-sheep-owner-slapping-bogus-made-usa-labels-clothing-imported

Full history and links to documents:

https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/cases-proceedings/222-3023-lions-not-sheep

Consent Agreement and Order:
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc...nd%20Order.pdf

What a dumbass:

The complaint alleges that on Oct. 8, 2020, Whalen published a video of himself to his social media accounts, with the title MADE IN AMERICA! alongside a Chinese flag. In the video, Whalen said he could conceal the fact that his shirts are made in China by ripping out the origin tags and replacing them with tags stating that the merchandise was made in the United States.

If you don't want to be caught doing something illegal/unethical, maybe don't publish a video on social media accounts disclosing the illegal/unethical behavior.

[Eddie]

What a dumbass:



If you don't want to be caught doing something illegal/unethical, maybe don't publish a video on social media accounts disclosing the illegal/unethical behavior.

But that's what tigers do. Or was it cheetahs? I get so confused.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Church comes out with a scathing response to the AP article. Not sure I have ever seen a press release like this from the church.

https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/church-provides-further-details-about-arizona-abuse-case

Significantly different sequence of events.

[YOhio]

Church comes out with a scathing response to the AP article. Not sure I have ever seen a press release like this from the church.

https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/church-provides-further-details-about-arizona-abuse-case

Significantly different sequence of events.

Wow. Yeah this is a lot different than the article.

[Moliere]

AA was right, as usual.

[All-American]

AA was right, as usual.

Very interesting response from the Church. Never seen anything like it.

[Northwestcoug]

This is the one phrase that I still think everything hinges on:

• Asking Paul Adams to report (he refused and also refused to give permission to the bishop to make the report);

I think it's clear now that Arizona law did not prevent the bishop from reporting the abuse, even if the full extent of the atrocity wasn't known at the time of his 'confession'. It was enough to get him excommunicated 2 years later, so what the bishop knew initially was bad enough. Either the help line gave the 2 bishops catastrophically bad legal advice as the article implies, or the bishops interpreted the advice as making reporting optional. Each of these scenarios is pretty bad.

[Jeff Lebowski]

This is the one phrase that I still think everything hinges on:


I think it's clear now that Arizona law did not prevent the bishop from reporting the abuse, even if the full extent of the atrocity wasn't known at the time of his 'confession'. It was enough to get him excommunicated 2 years later, so what the bishop knew initially was bad enough. Either the help line gave the 2 bishops catastrophically bad legal advice as the article implies, or the bishops interpreted the advice as making reporting optional. Each of these scenarios is pretty bad.

This doesn't make any sense to me.

[Northwestcoug]

This doesn't make any sense to me.

I’m not sure how to explain it better. The first bishop testified under oath that he was told by the helpline he couldn’t report the abuse to the authorities. This is contradicted by the DA and others who claim that Arizona law allows for reporting child abuse.

Assuming the bishop’s testimony is true, then it appears the help line gave him incorrect legal advice. If the help line gave him correct advice, i.e. he had legal cover in Arizona to report the abuse to authorities, then the bishop(s) chose to not report. Either scenario allowed the abuse to continue.

If I’m missing another reasonable interpretation I’m all ears.

[chrisrenrut]

This is the one phrase that I still think everything hinges on:



I think it's clear now that Arizona law did not prevent the bishop from reporting the abuse, even if the full extent of the atrocity wasn't known at the time of his 'confession'. It was enough to get him excommunicated 2 years later, so what the bishop knew initially was bad enough. Either the help line gave the 2 bishops catastrophically bad legal advice as the article implies, or the bishops interpreted the advice as making reporting optional. Each of these scenarios is pretty bad.

What about this line?

The bishop then called the help line, where he was advised about how to fully comply with Arizona’s reporting laws.

I have seen Arizona’s current statute, but am not sure what it was in 2011.

[Northwestcoug]

What about this line?


I have seen Arizona’s current statute, but am not sure what it was in 2011.

I’m basing that on my impression of what people smarter than me on this thread have said. It seems like there was a carve out in the clergy penitent clause to report child abuse, even back then.

again, could be wrong here. But no one here has claimed that reporting was against the law back then, as far as I’m aware.