Unplanned Bonus Episode: Evidence of Conspiracy with Clark Aboud

This was an unplanned, unedited interview about a potentially disturbing topic, but I wanted to share some of the information that Clark Aboud has compiled concerning the martyrdom. I will be diving more deeply into this topic at a later time, but for now, I hope you will find this interview thought-provoking.

Please consider supporting this podcast:

Transcript:

[00:00] Michelle: Tonight, I am releasing an unplanned special edition and I just want to give a little quick introduction. Clark Abboud has been contacting me and he contacted me specifically this week telling me he had information that he wanted to bring and he wanted to record and release this week. And, um, I thought that we were talking about deeds and which is something I’ve been looking into too. So I, I was like, ok, let’s see, let’s see what it’s about. I was not expecting that this was the topic that he was going to be talking about and it’s a topic that I’ve just not felt like delving into. It’s not been my topic. It’s not been something I’ve cared to address. I actually have some really good friends who have gotten really into this topic and I feel, feel a little bad that I haven’t had them on the program. I just, this hasn’t been a topic that I have felt drawn to. So with that being said, Clark is mostly talking about the martyrdom and, um, building on. Well, Justin Griffin is one of my friends and, and, you know, I haven’t had him on the show just because he wants to come on the show when I’m ready to talk about the martyrdom. And that’s not something that I have felt at all compelled to um to get into. So Clark is bringing some information about the martyrdom. So I just wanted to give a quick introduction to ask people, especially people who are new to the subject matter and new to this podcast to please be prayerful before watching this episode. I, um I’ve really been torn about what to do. I want to release this information. Clark feels really strongly about it and, um, and he brought it here. So I, you know, I, I don’t want to just like squash the interview, but I also, this is definitely not my comfort zone. So, um, so please please preferably consider whether this is an episode for you to watch. Um Right now, whether it’s an episode for you to watch at all, I, I would prefer people that are new to this channel to engage with my other content before coming to this one. It builds on a lot of, well, I it brings in other ideas that I haven’t touched on and it builds on a lot of ideas that I have touched on. I also um want to recommend that if you are interested in the topic of the martyrdom and you haven’t yet watched Who Killed Joseph Smith, I think it would be good to probably watch that. Um first because it lays some groundwork. Um When I watched Who Kills Joseph Smith, um I didn’t know enough to um to know whether I agreed with the, the theory that Justin lays out, like, like I thought that was interesting, but the part that really impacted me was learning how problematic the narrative I had inherited about the martyrdom is and it is at least as problematic as narrative I’ve inherited about polygamy. And so anyway, this is a lot to intro introduce this interview. But um I do want to proceed with caution. So please do. I’m not saying any of this to be like, oh, now you’re gonna wanna watch and be like, I’m not saying it that way. I’m just genuinely saying I am about building faith and I always want to present um ways that we can think about things. And I’m not saying that Clark isn’t just I want to make sure that the people who engage with this content are people who are, who it’s time for them to engage with this content and it’s the right thing for them. So with all of that being said, I will start the conversation with Clark Aboud. Welcome to this special edition of 132 problems revisiting Mormon polygamy. I am here with Clark Aboud who this is my first time meeting Clark, but he’s been contacting me for a while because we’ve had a common interest. I’ve been researching the deeds extensively and Clark contacted me to let me know that he has, he started researching the deeds and he’s come up with some conclusions that I am very interested in hearing. So he was pretty eager to come on and share what he has found. And I’ll be curious to see how our, um, how our research aligns. So we’re all going to learn brand new what Clark is bringing to us. And actually I, I Clark, I don’t know very much about you. Would you, so would you mind introducing yourself to us?

[03:48] Clark Aboud: I’m sure. Yeah. So, um I’m from Arizona. Um I’ve never been a member in any Mormon sect, um LDS or uh R LDS or any of the other sex out there. And so I’ve been studying this, uh I’ve been studying the church uh for almost 10 years now from uh June 27th, 2014 till today. And um I found some exciting things I’d like to share with on your show today.

[04:18] Michelle: So I’m curious to know what got you interested in Mormonism. How did you get started down that path when that wasn’t your religion or your, your history?

[04:28] Clark Aboud: So, um I was trying to decide what to do with my life. You know, I met my wife to be at this time. And so we were just praying about what did God want us to do with our lives because uh previously I was considering getting into like this one church and to be an associate pastor. Um and um we had some differences and I, I stepped back from that uh possibility. And so I’m just asking God, what do you want us to do with our lives? And uh he told us to um go to Utah and to learn a little bit more about the church and other people there learn about the Ex Mormons and just everyone that’s in Utah. And so I began studying Mormonism and the Ex Mormons and all that stuff starting on in June uh June of 2014.

[05:29] Michelle: Oh, so it’s been a while. So did you read the book of Mormon? Is that where you started or? Uh so

[05:33] Clark Aboud: I started meeting with the missionary. So I met with uh two lovely sister uh missionaries uh starting off. And so I read through the book of Mormon. It took me about uh three months to go from front to back with it. And so they were really nice. They were able to answer some of the questions I had back then and, and then after that, I started reading the Doctrine Covenants and the Pearl Price uh front to back as well. Yeah.

[06:02] Michelle: And what was your experience with those like? Did it keep it obviously kept your interest going? But

[06:08] Clark Aboud: so um the, the book of Mormon, it reminds me a lot about the, the book of judges and first kings kind of the, the narrative story of it um there are some interesting stories like the guy cut it off all the arms if I remember that correctly. And, and the, the story of the Anti Knee Fight Lamanites or whatever

[06:31] Michelle: that Anne Fight Leigh, I

[06:33] Clark Aboud: remember that was probably one of my favorite stories and one of my favorite jokes was like, um when the prophet was talking to one of the kings and he falls down asleep for three days and his wife is like, uh he’s not dead. He doesn’t stink. And I’m like, what wife doesn’t say their husband stinks that show for three days. But yeah, so, yeah, so um I read, yeah, so I enjoyed reading through the book of Mormon. I’m trying to understand it. Um Before I even started, I, I got more uh Mormons and Jehovah’s witnesses confused. So it was good to start reading that and get a better sense of kind of the ideas and it, you know,

[07:17] Michelle: good. OK. So, and as so I guess your interests shifted to kind of when. So I know that you have been in communication with Justin Griffin and studying the, the martyrdom. And so tell me so, so is that where you started? Like, what brought your interest to that? And, and where have you gone from there?

[07:38] Clark Aboud: Yeah. So I, I started off with the martyrdom um back in May of 2022. It’s in my slide, just kind of just a brief outline. I started there and then I saw Justin’s movie like two months into that or so. So I was already studying it previously looking at like Don Carlos Smith and Samuel Smith and the, the what happens prior to it and what happens after?

[08:05] Michelle: Do you want to let people know just in case people aren’t up in those details? Tell them about Don Carlos and Samuel just quickly. Yeah.

[08:11] Clark Aboud: Yeah. So Don Carlos Smith, he worked at the Times and seasons. Uh He died along with Robert Thompson within a month of each other back in August of 1841. And uh basically John T, John Taylor will of Richards and all them gain the times and seasons due to their death. And that’s how Richards become scribed to Joseph and they work on the history and all that. And then uh Samuel Smith is one of the remaining brothers of Joseph and Hiram right after Carthage jail and he dies a month after uh Joseph and Hiram die um under cir uh circumstances that look suspicious. So that’s what kind of got me starting to look into it. And um after uh Dustin Smith passed away in uh September of this uh last year, I decided to take a, a look back at uh the martyrdom and see maybe if I missed anything. And within a month of doing that, I, I no longer believe Joseph Smith was a, a polygamist and it rocked my world and I asked God to forgive me for saying that he was,

[09:24] Michelle: wow. OK. OK. This is an amazing story. So Clark as a never, never mo is that what we call them? Like

[09:33] Clark Aboud: the No? Yeah.

[09:35] Michelle: A nomo came through, the research, came to the same conclusion that I did through the research. And we both had to overcome mighty hurdles to accept what the research actually said because of our, our previous conclusions, our prior conclusions. And then we both, I’m just relating to you because we both had quite a, um, repentance process, like, felt like there was repentance to say I was wrong. And so that’s ok. And so I guess I’ll get into it. So, to you, these are all connected the, your view of the martyrdom, your view of the, of polygamy and, and the deeds kind of shows us more about that. Am I getting that right?

[10:13] Clark Aboud: Yeah. If it, if it wasn’t about, if I didn’t see the martyrdom stuff, I probably would never have switched sides on the polygamy.

[10:22] Michelle: Ok. Ok. And for, well, I guess you’re gonna talk about this. Are you ready to get started? Should I add it to the screen? Yeah, you can go ahead and for anyone who doesn’t know that’s Dustin Smith who was a beloved, um, member of, I, I guess, do they? I don’t, I don’t wanna say the wrong group is, is doctrine of Christ, the group that Dustin would have associated with.

[10:42] Clark Aboud: Um, yeah, my my understanding there was some conflict but um that Jacob Isabel explained to me that and all that. I don’t fully understand all the details. But yeah, so he du Dustin impacted me like um I consider him a friend and uh we got, we talked a lot on messenger and so when he passed away, I, I did not want anyone else to pass away without getting answers. It’s, it’s been too long.

[11:12] Michelle: Yeah, And I will say, um Dustin Dustin reached out to me as well and just continually kindly contacted me as I was going through really difficult things and he was just really good at inviting and being kind and loving. So I think a lot of people love Dustin Smith. Um and, and miss him, you know, so I’ll turn it over to you to go ahead and get started. Ok,

[11:38] Clark Aboud: let’s see background. I don’t see any of the points.

[11:44] Michelle: Do you need to go to the next slide?

[11:46] Clark Aboud: Ok. Oh, this is coming out. It’s not coming out. Ok.

[11:51] Michelle: Let me pause it. Ok. Figuring out the technicalities. Now. Here we go. All right.

[11:56] Clark Aboud: Uh Let me know when.

[11:58] Michelle: Yep, now we were on. Yeah.

[12:00] Clark Aboud: So where I started was um I began revisiting my work uh previously, so I, I began listening to RFM Radio Free Mormon’s Apostolic Kita uh series. And the reason why

[12:14] Michelle: it is really good, I, I appreciated his work on that.

[12:17] Clark Aboud: Yeah. So, um the reason why is because John Taylor, I found a letter um where it made me question the 1844 DNC. Um So I went to RF MS video because he refers to it in the video. Um So it was at this point, I made the shocking discovery and the, and finding the mistake that RFM made in it. So um RFM brings up this January 16th, 1836 entry that reads the 12 are not subject to any other than the first presidency via myself, Sidney Rigdon and FG Williams. And so uh this is the original document. And then following that, RFM mentions this forgery done in will of Richards handwriting, the changes made it so that when Joseph is dead, Rigdon doesn’t have the right to lead the church as it says, where I am not, there is no first presidency. So this section, this part here is added in uh RFM then says this was created after Brigham had assumed power in the church. The problem is we know that Will Richards created this forgery between October 14th 1843 to October 24th, 1843 according to Richards Journal. So using DNC Jesse’s chart, the compli uh the compiling of Joseph’s history of the church and comparing it with Richard’s journal, we can verify all of this Richards records. He completed up to page 680 on October 14th and then completed up to page 702 by October 24th showing the forgery on page 691 was done between that time. This means that Willie Richards predicted Joseph Smith murder eight months in advance to give the church to the 12 rather than Rigdon.

[14:11] Michelle: Ok. Go who, who go over that? Just one more time? You just like give us I need to let that settle in. That was huge.

[14:20] Clark Aboud: That change predicting Joseph’s death where it says when there is no first presidency rigdon is no longer over the 12 that was made in October of 1843. It predates the murder. It, it predates Brigham taking over the J

[14:37] Michelle: and, and, and you get that because Gene, I mean DNC Jesse. Ok. So I would, I would want to look into that because that’s, that’s amazing. Ok. And, and it means that they were, I mean, I, I guess I’m wondering why they, if, if this um conspiracy to murder is true, then why wouldn’t they also just want to kill Sidney Rigdon? He was old anyway.

[14:59] Clark Aboud: Well, Rigdon, they dealt with him in this way and they, with the Joseph Brunning as the presidential candidate. Rigdon is out of town to um the vice president. So they, they do, they do rigdon in other ways, but mainly it’s about changing documents before the big August 8th um situation. Do you want or do you still have some? Yeah.

[15:25] Michelle: Yeah. Keep going, keep going. Just so everyone knows Joseph was killed, December. I mean, June 27th, 1844. So, yes, that’s why this change being made several months before. Is, that’s crazy. Ok.

[15:37] Clark Aboud: All right. So then, uh, Brigham Young shows his knowledge of this forgery on August 8th, um, 1844. After being back in NAVOO for two days, he says, I now wish to speak of the organization of the church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints, Sidney Rigdon and Amasa Lyman were counselors to Joseph ask where Joseph? He has gone beyond the veil and for them to act in their office as his counselors, they must go beyond the veil where he is. So it reflects back on the pre that change that Richards makes where if there is no first presidency, then you know, they’re not over the 12. So Brigham directly refers to the forgery here. So for Brigham, he would have to know about this change before he goes out basically campaigning. Um So the next thing the question I asked was, did Joseph review this change? And the answer is no. So Brigham Young attests on April 1st 1845 I commenced revising the history of Joseph Smith at Brother Richard’s office. Other Heber C. Kimball and George A Smith were with me. President Joseph Smith had corrected 42 pages before his massacre. So the first change that I showed is on was page 690 or 671 or something on those lines. So Joseph did not have time to review this, this change to the history. So the second question is uh did Joseph dictate this change? And the answer again is no. So Howard uh core who worked with for Joseph on the history stated the profit was to furnish all the material and our business was not only to combine in a range in chronological order, but to spread out or amplify and as good as historical style as may be. So Joseph Smith, prior to 1840 he did dictate the history, but after 1840 he left it to his scribes that were working on history. So the question was asked this change that Richards made, was it dictated or reviewed by Joseph? And the answer is for is no for both of those?

[17:51] Michelle: OK.

[17:52] Clark Aboud: Yeah. So then our fam brings up this February 27th, 1835 entry that reads, they are the 12 apostles who are called to the office of Traveling High Council who are to preside over all the churches of the Saints among the Gentiles where there is no presidency established. So, Arram then brings up this forgery which shows the 12 apostles are to operate in leadership within the navoo rather than only in the mission field. Uh And this reads, the 12 are uh the 12 apostles who are called to the office of Traveling High Council, who are to preside over all the churches of the saints among the Gentiles where there is a presidency established. Um So our famous search this too was made after Joseph’s death. The problem is we know Willard Richards created this forgery on August 26th, 1843. According to Richards Journal Richards records, he completed up to page 556 on August 5th, uh August 25th and then completed up to page 578 on August 26 showing the forgery on page 576 was done on August 26th. So this means that Will Richards was predicting Joseph’s murder 10 months in advance to give the church to make the 12 making them above the navoo high Council. So this is what began me questioning the polygamy revelation because the polygamy revelation happens. July 12th, this change is made August 26. Um Do you have any feedback or anything you want to

[19:34] Michelle: say? Ok. So with the July 12th, how are you tying? So, so just to be to clarify, neither of us believe the polygamy revelation was legitimately given on July 12th. They claimed that it was. So what was it you were saying was how does this relate to the polygamy revelation, which I think was actually a monogamy revelation? So

[19:54] Clark Aboud: I believe that Justice Smith created a monogamy revelation in July of 1843 and that polygamy. So as soon as this pheno revelation comes out, we have them planning the murder

[20:08] Michelle: themselves. Ok. Do you have, I’m sure you have the letter between between them kind of freaking out. Um William Clayton saying, who is he talking about in, in that July 16th speech?

[20:19] Clark Aboud: So talk about that I don’t mention in this, but I’ll get to some other interesting things. So, yeah, so August, August uh 15th, 1844 Brigham brings up this the forgery that we just talked about where the 12 are now allowed to operate within Zion where there’s a ST established. And so he goes on to say, uh where to proceed over all the affairs of the church and all the world and to preside and regulate the affairs of the whole church. So he makes no distinction between the, the 12 operating outside of Zion compared to within. Um So yeah, so the turning point is on August 7th, 1843 Willie Richards would announce this new plan on the history in his journal that led to these forgeries in the history. So uh Richards didn’t work on the history alone. Uh He was assisted by WW Phelps who is important in the martyrdom account. We’ll get to the novel Expositor and um the treason charges for Joseph, how it relates to WW Phelps. But um so I had the question, what happened just before August 7th, 1843 for them to wanna murder Joseph and Hiram again, we just talked about it. It is the supposed polygamy revelation, but what it is is monogamy. And we’ll show that in just a second So it made no sense to me. Why would they formulate a plan to kill him right after this polygamy thing? Could it be 132 is fraudulent?

[21:56] Michelle: OK. So that’s how you came to question. This is why did they start plotting at this point? Ok. Yeah.

[22:02] Clark Aboud: So October 5th, 1843 this is a forgery. You guys bring up a lot and this is what struck me about it. So, um this forgery was made between November of 1845 to August 20th, 1855. In the original text, Joseph forbids plural marriage or plurality of wives by the law of the church, formerly known as Doctrine and Covenants 101. So the forged version has Joseph saying he pro prohibits unauthorized polygamy not performed under his keys and he quotes Doctrine covenants 132 verse seven. So an important detail in the original journal entry pointed out by Mormon apologist Kimberly Smith was that Willard Richards did not put any ending punctuation on the end of but one wife showing he had intent to add on to this entry later on. So as I discover that Willard Richards and WW Phelps had made those forgeries to Joseph’s history while he was still alive between, you know, the August 26th entry and uh the, the October 26 1 that were predicting Joseph’s death and giving the church to the 12 rather than rigdon or the NAVOO High Council. Um It struck me that he was leaving room at this point in time while they’re planning his murder, they’re leaving room to add on to this journal entry and it struck me really hard on that. So Richard was just waiting to buy his time. Yeah.

[23:38] Michelle: Ok. Ok. So I have, I have thought a lot about this journal entry. Let me just ask your opinion because I know. So, so your feeling is, do you think I tend to view the journals often that original, the original journal, you know, the original version that was later edited as kind of a um semi reliable, like the most reliable of them, but that they were using it with, with, with preparation in mind to be able to edit it at some point. So you’re saying the same thing that like like Joseph probably really did go up and down the street with his scribe, preaching against polygamy is very good possibility, but that they knew they were gonna have to adjust that in the coming few days. Is that in the coming months? Is that how you’re reading that? Yeah,

[24:25] Clark Aboud: so this October 5th, the they, the Joseph was basically as good as dead by this point in time. And so they were leaving room to adjust it later. Um So will the Richards didn’t always leave blank pages and do this kind of thing. He only started it the day of Joseph getting out of extradition by Missouri um back in 1818 43 I believe January 5th. So that’s where the blank pages start before that Willie Richards is doing wall to wall text. But after Joseph gets out on the extradition, then they start leaving the blank pages and then this is the second extra uh second moving up of that of, they’re no longer just leaving blank pages. They’re changing the history now.

[25:10] Michelle: Yeah. Ok. So you date the beginning of the plotting to potentially January of 1843 when Joseph gets back in town. Is that like that’s when they’re starting to think they’re gonna do something because you start seeing the blank pages.

[25:25] Clark Aboud: Well, that’s where it seems like they’re willing to take more of a risk. So the first, the first time I find them forging documents is in 1841. Um, and that’s within the times and seasons as soon as Don Don Carlos had died. And Robert Thompson, I’ll be getting into that with Bill Rill when we do our. But yeah, so they, they’re creating Pmy forgeries in 1842 as well that you mentioned with the Relief Society Minutes where they’re at and we’ll get to the, I’ll answer the questions on the happiness letter and Martha Brotherton and just, and later on in this. Yeah.

[26:05] Michelle: Ok. And just to point out, I’m just looking it up to double check and I do believe that Willard Richards took his first plural life. If this is accurate in January of 1843. So that timing would align with Willard Richards pretty well.

[26:21] Clark Aboud: Yeah. So, so then we have the, the eternal monogamy uh revelation mentioned. So uh Berm’s polygamy was threatened by this revelation and not only that the temple was nearing its completion and once the temple was complete, this would for sure be announced and taught publicly universally. So this forgery made between August 1855 to April 1856. Um The original has Hiram saying Joseph taught him eternal monogamy and that he was sealed to his deceased wife by proxy. So the forged version says you can also make a covenant with her Mary Fielding Smith and I marry Mary Fielding Smith will be sealed to you myself for eternity. So those two words also and myself are added in and so this change ended up more

[27:17] Michelle: than that.

[27:18] Clark Aboud: Yeah. So this change ended up being dropped from the official history of the church, but this can be found in Saints volume one page 492. So the church points to this as a legitimate thing when it’s not.

[27:32] Michelle: So to clarify, you’re saying the all church version because so, so everyone who’s been watching my podcast knows that the April 8th, the original notes, Thomas Bullock, which I happen to think we’re already trying to make a little bit of wiggle room because I believe he was part of this. But um because Hiram was not ambiguous anywhere in that speech. But all of a sudden when he’s talking about being sealed to Jerusha, it becomes somewhat ambiguous but not enough. So they went in when they did the draft alterations to prepare for the history of the church, they made all of these alterations to have Hyrum be teaching eternal polygamy saying he sealed both wives, which never happened at all. And so, and then they dropped that anyway. But the point I want to make sure everyone remembers is that the original Thomas Bullock notes that weren’t altered were also taken off of the Joseph Smith papers and they are and, but then the altered version is included still in the Joseph Smith papers. And you’re saying it’s the altered version that’s in Saints as well. They’re really insane. Yeah. Yeah. It, it people get really confused and they see the altered version and think it’s the original because because it’s been so hidden and so confusing. So I want to really hammer that into people’s minds that the original notes do not give any leeway for eternal polygamy at all. That’s the altered version if it does that. Ok. Yeah.

[28:55] Clark Aboud: And I agree with you on Thomas Bullock, I’ll show you some changes he made to the history as well. Um He was not. Yeah. So what about Brigham’s alibi? So finding these changes, predicting the murder 10 months in advance was mind blowing and could explain how Brigham could have planned the murder while being so far away in the on the East coast. But was there proof that Brigham knew beyond quoting the forgeries made by Willie Richards? Then I found it in the archives. Um So an important detail to know about Brigham Young is that he would never miss a meeting. He said he was going to. So he was very punctual Brigham Young for one example, he is quoted about missing a meeting on August 8th, 1844 because he goes and chases after Sidney Rigdon basically and confronts him. So in this talk in winter quarters, he says, does any of, you know of me of making an appointment and not being there? I don’t own to that. And if such an item goes into the history of the church, I’d tear it out if it’s written in a book of gold. So that is just who Brigham Young is. Keep that in mind. So on April 15th, 8, 1844 the Times and Seasons published the dates of the political conventions. So the biggest convention in the grand finale was set for Washington DC, September 7th to the 15th. So in the month of August, there were only four other states holding conventions as Tennessee, Connecticut, New York and Pennsylvania. Uh we’ll revisit this in just a second. So on July 2nd, 1844 Brigham and others agreed publicly to oversee Joseph Smith’s campaign conventions and this would be including the convention in Washington DC. This is it from the millennial star. He says each one of the 12 was appointed to take the oversight of several conferences. So, does that make sense so far? They’re saying we’re going to these conferences? All right. So on July 8th, 1844 Brigham writes a letter to Willa Richards that would be included into the public history of the church.

[31:03] Michelle: So wait, July 8. Ok. Just, just to tell everyone, sorry, I’m making my connections. Is that ok? If I say them? So this is about two weeks after less than two weeks after the martyrdom. And this is the day that all of the deeds were taken to Carthage and um registered in, in Carthage like the deed to Emma all of those deeds that I am claiming that proves that they’re not valid. So anyway, that’s an interesting date. So that’s what it made me think of you. Go ahead, sorry to interrupt. So,

[31:30] Clark Aboud: so in the letter, he says, you might ask what we think about brother Joseph’s getting the election this year, you know all about it. We shall do all we can and leave the event with God. He also says we shall attend the conferences in this country and then leave for the Western States to attend the meetings and get home as quickly as possible. So what does that mean to you, Michelle?

[31:53] Michelle: Ok. They, they still think he’s running for office. They are pretending like that. They don’t know he’s dead. Am I?

[32:00] Clark Aboud: Yeah. And they’re, they’re going to doing the political conventions. Right.

[32:05] Michelle: Right. So, so, so it sounds like they’re going to the political conventions because they don’t know Joseph’s dead, despite this being like a week and a half later. Am I understanding that correctly?

[32:18] Clark Aboud: Yeah, because it takes time for mail to be sent to where they are. It takes about 13 to 14 days. So that’s

[32:24] Michelle: why they, however, Joseph had written to Brigham twice, he had him write to him and then he wrote to him in Nauvoo before his death telling him to come home and I’ve always thought that was suspicious.

[32:35] Clark Aboud: So the Joseph Smith paper says we have a copy but there’s no mention that it was ever sent. That’s what Joseph Smith.

[32:43] Michelle: Yeah. Ok. Ok.

[32:45] Clark Aboud: So, and going on. So on July 8th the same day, Berm Young wrote a letter to his wife that wasn’t intended to be made public. The letter to his wife tells her you need not write to me after you. You, you receive this for, I cannot tell you where to write. I shall in three or four weeks be on my way home. So Brigham is planning to head home between July 29th to August 12th, 1844. Brigham end ends up making his way back home on July 27th. Um That’s when he starts leaving, making him off by two days as he hears the news of the murders on July 9th of 1844. So with Brigham leaving between July 29th and August 12th, he couldn’t have attended the conference in Tennessee. August 3rd to the fourth in the West. No, the last convention in Washington DC. September 7th or the 15th. Brigham knew Joseph’s campaign would be over before September 15th. So there was no need to go to DC. This letter is on the same day as a willow Richards letter for the history of the church, which said Brigham believed Joseph and Hiram were still alive and he was busy campaigning. So we see the Richard’s letter is meant for the history. This letter was never meant to be made public because Brigham is saying I’m coming home and I’m not going to these conferences. I made public announcements that I was attending and going to Brigham had other plans in mind.

[34:13] Michelle: Ok. Can I do you care if I keep adding in? And it drives you crazy. Well, this is just a pattern that we see coming up later where with the Mountain Meadows massacre, Brigham writes letters that are meant to be public, right? Like when he says the Indians will do what they will in the letter that he sent, telling the Mormons to, to commit the murders, framing the Indians. That was meant to be a public letter. Although it makes no sense and who knows what private letters he might have sent. And there are other examples of Brigham doing this. So it’s amazing to see this pattern set this early on. That’s OK. Thank you for sharing that. Wow. Yeah,

[34:47] Clark Aboud: this, this rocked, this rocked my world. This is that this was in the archives. Um Yeah. And then Parley Pratt also knew Joseph was going to be dead shortly. So Parley left New York on June 25th before the murders. So two days before the murders to head home, Parley says he heard the news of the murders on July 3rd near Chicago because he’s taking the canal up from New York to Wisconsin and then to Chicago. And so he played an important role to delay Samuel Smith from taking leadership. So in his letter to his wife David or he mentions that

[35:28] Michelle: I repeat that I lost you for a second in his letter to his wife dated what?

[35:32] Clark Aboud: So in the letter to his wife dated April 26th, 1844. So like three weeks into his mission for the campaign, he talks about he’s doing the political campaign in New York soon and he is assisting uh William Smith at this point in time as the, as an editor to the newspaper, the prophet, which is helping with the campaign and all that. So continuing on in the letter, he says, uh he’ll be making a speedily return his speedily return to the bosom of my friends and family. And he says you need not therefore be surprised if I should be at home very soon. So this is super important. So, do you understand that? Partly Pratt here is saying, um, he’s writing a letter to his wife saying I’m coming home early from the political campaign.

[36:23] Michelle: Does that mean? So this is before Joseph was killed? But it’s, it’s knowledge that they, it looks to me, you can tell me if I’m interpreting, interpreting it the way you are. It looks to me like they’re intentionally out of town to do these campaigns publicly announcing that they’re going to these campaigns. But privately, they know that something’s going to happen to Joseph and they’re planning to come home as soon as that’s taken care of, they have no intention of actually going to the campaigns. Is that ok?

[36:48] Clark Aboud: And so, uh Parley Pratt goes on to lie about this in his autobiography, um, why he returned home early? So Parley Pratt, in his autobiography, he says I had been constrained by the spirit to start prematurely for home without knowing why or wherefore Parley. Yeah, Parley leaves out the detail that he told his wife two months prior. He would be coming home early and Parley’s actions show premeditation. So why would Parley Pratt be lying in his autobiography of the Holy Spirit told me to come home when he could have just said, I told my wife I’d be coming home early and um I just decided to come at the time I did

[37:30] Michelle: it was great. Wow, man. Awesome detective work, Clark. This is really fun to see. I mean, that’s not fun to see. It’s terrible to see, but this is amazing what you’ve put together.

[37:41] Clark Aboud: So it wasn’t just Joseph and harm’s death that was planned for. So, um in the licensing book for the elders. So back in the day for it to be a preacher, you had to have AAA license to go and preach. Um So Will Richards began signing himself in, in the, in this book as the acting president and also signing the 12 apostles as the acting president after Joseph’s death. So this title previously belonged to Joseph Smith and should have belonged to Samuel Smith who was next to lead. And Samuel Smith was still very much alive and in good health for at least a solid 2 to 3 weeks as Willard Richards was doing this. So you would think Samuel Smith is doing well. I would, I should sign it as acting president Samuel Smith, but he’s not, he’s doing it as himself or the 12 apostles. So Will of Richards would also know that Samuel Smith was the next to lead the church as Joseph said that the patriarch of the church is the highest office in the church. And these words by Joseph were removed from the history after Joseph’s death. So they should have known Samuel was next. I know the apologists like to say no one had an idea that Samuel should lead. It was clearly taught by Joseph Smith in 1843. So,

[39:03] Michelle: and of all of the, of all of the Smith murders, Samuels is the one that we have the most clear evidence for, for it, that it actually was a murder. I would say so. Ok, like II, I think it’s hard to argue that they didn’t take him out.

[39:18] Clark Aboud: Yeah. So Thomas Bullock went and altered the date of Samuel Smith’s baptism. Uh most likely while Joseph Smith was still alive. So this is found on page 19 of the, the history volume A that was worked on by Joseph and that had, that he had reviewed, but this change was made after Joseph had reviewed it because it makes no sense for it not to me. So Samuel’s baptism date was changed from May 15th to May 25th. So Samuel was baptized the same day as Oliver Cry and Joseph Smith were, but they pushed it back 10 days and there’s no reason for them to have made this kind of mistake. So the times and seasons, August 1st 1842 it gives the correct date of the 15th day of the month. And Lucy Mac Smith, Joseph’s mother gives the correct date as well. But um Thomas Bullock decides on lessening uh Samuel Smith’s authority or top leadership in the church by minimizing his baptism by cutting it back a couple of days.

[40:23] Michelle: So anything they could do to say, look, he wasn’t even baptized when they were, he waited 10 days. He was, he ha he has less, um, what’s the word? I’m looking for less time in the church and, and he, um, was less faithful or something. That’s what you’re thinking. They just use that to in some way undermine

[40:40] Clark Aboud: him. Yeah. So they’re working to undermine Samuel Smith while he most likely was alive. Um, so, um, WW Phelps and Will of Richards were the ones that delayed Samuel from taking leadership by asking him to wait for the 12 to return Nauvoo despite them not waiting for Orson Hyde to return back on August 13th of 1844. And that’s in Will and Woodruff’s journal. And they also uh Will of Richards told William Smith not to return to Nauvoo. So they’re obviously not waiting for the entire 12. So uh continuing on William Smith. So he says in the Warsaw signal October 29th, 1845 that uh Will Richards told him it was unsafe for him to come back to Nauvoo. And then William Smith in October of 1845 mentions that uh he lists Samuel Smith as a martyr who was poisoned. And Brigham responds to this later on, Brigham Young says when they killed Joseph, they were talking about killing a great many others. Would you believe that the apostates say that I was the instigator of the death of Joseph and Hiram and William Smith has asserted that I was, was the cause of the death of his brother Samuel. When brother Woodruff who is here today knows that we were waiting at the depot depot in Boston to uh to take passage east. At the very time when Joseph and Hyrum were killed. Brother Tay Taylor was nearly killed at the s at the time. Doctor Richards had his whiskers nearly uh singed off by the boys. Yeah. And a few weeks after Samuel Smith died and I am blamed as the cause of his death. We did not hear the news of the hear of the death of Joseph until some three or four weeks after he was basically martyred. So I’ve shown thus far that Brigham knew 10 months in advance and his alibi does not hold up. So if he’s, if he’s saying there, it’s impossible for me to have orchestrated this, uh, that falls apart from what I already showed. Um, so when

[42:54] Michelle: is this, when is this bringing it quote from, is this the one in conference when he’s responding to Emma?

[42:59] Clark Aboud: Yeah, I believe it’s in the same conference. This is found in the, um, yeah, in the

[43:04] Michelle: discord. Ok. I, I just wondered if it was a different one or if it’s the one I’ve referred to previously where he, where he basically acknowledges that Emma accused him of, of the deaths. Ok. Yeah.

[43:15] Clark Aboud: So Emma Smith was right. William Smith was right. Um, so modern, the modern polygamist lie. So the church decided they would rather risk people leaving the church over Joseph being a polygamist than acknowledging what Brigham Young did to Joseph. And that Brigham is the author of Polygamy, which I will show you what they

[43:35] Michelle: knew

[43:37] Clark Aboud: the extent of how much the church leaders know today is unknown. But we do have a hint, they knew they had a serious problem. So Leonard uh Arlington, Arlington um

[43:48] Michelle: Arrington, Leonard Arrington, yeah, who

[43:50] Clark Aboud: he was the first and last historian to be in the position of church historian. And he wrote in his journal, July 6th, 1981. What is most disturbing is the apparent feeling on the part of some that we are letting some historical cats out of the bag. What they ought to realize is that the cats have been out of the bag long before we came in in 1972 and that our efforts have been to try and minimize the historical impact of those unfavorable facts and to put the lid on other facts that can be found by intense study of the archival material that would damage the church and all of its officers. I am of course, finding many things about Brigham Young that would be better left unsaid and I am trying to be responsible about my assignment to do his biography. So I believe he noticed either the murder or the polygamy issues and he decided not to say anything. And he brings up that there are other facts that can be found in the archives that hadn’t been disclosed at this point in time and there’s nothing new that’s been out since 1972. Um If you look at everything. So, um what do you think about that?

[45:02] Michelle: I’m, I’m, I’m stunned, I’m not, I, I’m, I’m, I’m not surprised because I’ve been doing this so long, but it is so validating to see that the people who did have access to the archives also knew these things. That is really because you sit there and it, you’re, you’re being gas lit for so long. Like in my position, a lot of people in our position where it’s like this, you, you know, they’re telling us that we’re ridiculous. So seeing that Leonard Arrington knew it and, and I just want to say, I’m really glad you’re going to talk to Bill Real in RFM because the Post Mormons really um admire and respect Leonard Arrington. So I’m hoping that his word will carry some weight with them. This gives me a lot of hope. Actually, I think this is amazing. I hope that the people in the church like me can, can find a way to navigate this um without just, just getting mad and shutting it down and saying you can’t say that about our leaders, you know, I think that truth matters. OK?

[45:57] Clark Aboud: And what made this connection for me was um Brigham Young makes a similar statement about, there’s many cats in our bag and I’ll take an eternity for them to ever come out. Um, and he says that in reference to, uh, right after he makes polygamy, uh, 132 public and, um, right after the

[46:15] Michelle: 1852. Ok. Wow, that’s, so that, where did you find that again? You said that was in his diary? Ok. His diary is that it

[46:25] Clark Aboud: was made, it was made public maybe like uh 10 years ago or something like that. OK.

[46:31] Michelle: Yeah. Good find. Wow. OK. Yeah.

[46:33] Clark Aboud: So now we get into the polygamy. So Benjamin Johnson, um he’s a brother of Almira Johnson, if I’m pronouncing that correctly. Yeah. Yeah. So he says around April 3rd to the fourth of 1843 Joseph was at his house and asked to marry his sister. We know the timing of this event would fit into the timeline as Joseph was in indeed with Benjamin Johnson on this day. So here we see the uh Joseph Smith papers mentioning how Richards wasn’t there because he wasn’t at Benjamin Johnson’s house. And we have Benjamin Johnson in this letter mentioning that. So then Benjamin Johnson goes on to say that Hiram encouraged this polygamy within a few days after April 3rd to the fourth of 1843. So here brother Hiram said, now Benjamin, you must not be afraid of this new doctrine for it is all right. Now, according to the LDS church Hiram did not know his brother was a polygamist on until at least May 14th, 1843. So this is in um the Saints chapter 40 page uh 491 says on May 14th, while Joseph was away at another conference, Hiram preached in the temple against the polygamy. He goes on to say um after the sermon, Hiram began on to question his own certainty about what he taught, discussions about plural marriage world around navoo and murmurs that Joseph had several wives were also common. Hiram wanted to believe this was not the case, but he wondered if Joseph was not telling him something. So now we have an issue with the dating. We understand that Hiram didn’t accept plug me according to at least William Clayton until May 26th, 1843. And that’s in Clayton’s journal. So this means that Johnson is not misremembering dates. He is absolutely lying

[48:32] Michelle: and we have other. Um So I just did, uh so we’re recording this on March 17th, um Possibly going to release it on March 23rd and last week. Um I did an interview with John Bradley where he referenced the same document that Whitney Horning referenced, which is um Levi Richards, I wanna say in his journal, in his records of teachings. Hiram gave a sermon and adamantly anti polygamy sermon citing Jacob chapter two to tell and, and saying that this is a perpetual law forever. There could never be polygamy and so they had to. So, so Benjamin Johnson is claiming that um Hiram was approving polygamy in April where we have an actual firsthand document of a sermon that Hiram gave a contemporaneous record of it adamantly opposing polygamy and said it is saying it is a uh this, the, the Jacob sermon is a law forever for all of the saints that there would never be polygamy allowed. So I think that’s, that’s another thing to know that we actually have that sermon as well. And so Brigham and the others have to date it in later May to, to make up for that sermon, I

[49:39] Clark Aboud: think. But the, the issue is there’s so the Benjamin Johnson dates are so fixed, you can’t wiggle around with them because we know absolutely when he was there and when he wasn’t there,

[49:50] Michelle: right? So, so Benjamin that this also shows the premeditation because Benjamin Johnson is trying to figure out when I was there when I was with him so that they like some people mock us and say, oh, you’re saying they put this much forethought into their lives and the answer is yes, yes, they did. This was a very, very carefully, um premeditated effort to frame Joseph Smith. Ok.

[50:13] Clark Aboud: So um so Benjamin’s sister um in her affidavit, she also states that upon leaving for Nauvoo in April of 1843 Hiram Smith encouraged her to become a polygamous wife before she returned home, May 14th 1844. Uh Benjamin Johnson supports this story when he says his sister came back home three weeks after the ceiling to Joseph Smith on May 15th, placing the ceiling date around April 23rd. 1844. Benjamin also states that Hiram sealed Joseph to his sister in his earliest account rather than William Clayton in the later account. But the point is both of them are attesting harm. Smith encouraged us to do this polygamy before April 23rd. And it’s not possible, it’s not physically possible even by William Clayton’s standards, it does not fit whatsoever,

[51:07] Michelle: right? And right. This is so good. And then we can just add that you just referenced the April 8th, 1844 sermon that Hyrum Game at the special conference elders conference that he called for the purpose of putting down polygamy. So we have Hiram on record repeatedly during all of this time and even after all of these dates opposing polygamy. So, so this is amazing that you’re showing like what I’m taking away from this, from what I already knew is how carefully they lied, how carefully they thought through when they were together. And so when it would have happened.

[51:40] Clark Aboud: Yeah. So uh Benjamin Johnson goes on to claim on April 2nd and May 16th 1843 the prophet was at my house with William Clayton as scribe at which time was written in answer to questions asked all of section 1 31 31 Doctrine covenants and he then gave us, uh gave to us all the keys of knowledge contained in section 129 and 132 before they were written. So this is important as we see the authenticity of Doctrine covenant sections 1 29 1 3131 and 132 rely on Joseph marrying Benjamin Johnson’s sister, which could not have occurred. Clayton’s credibility is also destroyed in this because Clayton is the one recording these revelations that are based on Joseph marrying Benjamin Johnson’s sister. Because if this doesn’t happen, the subject of polygamy does not get brought up by Joseph because again, Benjamin Johnson says, Joseph approached me in the woods and talked to me about it and then this leads on to these discussions. So DNC 129 is important for polygamy as it’s the way to discern angels teaching polygamy. Uh possibly DNC 130 mentions the Heavenly Father has a body of flesh and bone, which Joseph never mentioned in his last interview on the first vision in August of 1843. Um DNC 131 is changing the new and everlasting covenant into polygamy and DNC 132 is again the polygamy being authorized. So all four of these revelations have to be questioned because this event did not occur. It just didn’t. And in

[53:26] Michelle: these, oh my gosh, you’re blowing my mind in these. We can see Brigham’s doctrines being laid out Brigham’s idea that Adam is God a physical man with a body who is a polygamous man, an exalted polygamous man. All of these doctrines are being laid out in this God has a body of flesh and bone. And I mean, there’s, there’s this is, this is incredible to see that. Oh my gosh. Yeah, you are blowing my mind.

[53:51] Clark Aboud: So, yeah. So the other references to God, the Father having a body would be the the claimed kings king poet discourse, which I have serious questions about. And then the supposed sermon at the grove on June 16th. And the problem with that one is like, for instance, one of the guys that records it, he’s supposed to be up campaigning in either New Hampshire or um one of the other states he’s not supposed to be in Nauvoo at that date. And some of the other people recording have serious credibility issues um like bullocks recording it. He’s changing stuff. And um one of the other guys that changes his journal later on for the transfiguration stuff. But um yeah, so they’re, they’re al they altered the first division to give God the Father a body for polygamy. And uh I think you already know this, I’m not sure if you do, but like WW Phelps and Eliza Snow come up with the idea of Heavenly Mother because Joseph never taught that concept and that helps the idea of polygamy and stuff like that as well.

[54:58] Michelle: OK, this is really interesting and yeah, and just, I talked about that with Don as well. Just, just because people are gonna be saying again, you believe in heavenly mother. So you’re so hypocritical Genesis teaches us that God created Adam and Eve in the image of God created He them, we know that God contains both the masculine and the feminine. However, people want to interpret that the question is, is it in a polygamist model or is it some other model where God is the complete um is a completion of both male and female? So, OK, thank you for letting me just clarify that. Another thing. There was one other thing I wanted to say about that last sermon. Oh, the discerning of spirits was also interesting because 129 yeah, 129 because I believe it is Hyrum and I’m not gonna get the, whether that was the um the Levi Richards sermon or the April 8th of the next year. But we have Hiram on record saying if an angel of God comes down to you and tells you to do this, you will see his cloven hope. I think that is the Levi Richards one. And there are other accounts of them saying I don’t care if it’s an angel. So it’s interesting that they are clarifying anyway, that, that seems to play into what they’re having to counter because of the massive record that Hyrum and Joseph laid down opposing this

[56:13] Clark Aboud: with Levi Richards. I question him because he, he’s supposed to go to Europe during the campaign stuff, but he seems to be dragging his feet and just as soon as he gets the word that he can not go to Europe, he doesn’t go. So, but going on. So Louisa Beaman, according to Joseph B nobles in the temple lot case, he claimed that Luisa was a wife of Joseph and he was the one that sealed them at his house in April of 1841. The issue with this account is the house wasn’t built until the fall of 1841. He doesn’t buy the land until July 15th, 1841. Um So Jo Joseph B Noble’s potential misremembering of this day is challenged by Benjamin Johnson’s claims that Louisa Beaman was a witness to the ceiling of his sister to Joseph Smith through Hiram, which again, it didn’t happen. So now Louisa Beaman. Yeah.

[57:10] Michelle: So Don Bradley is saying because that that since the house wasn’t built, that means that Louisa Beu was just a later wife. I wanna, I’ve said this before. If anyone wants to have a lot of fun, go read Joseph Bates Noble’s Temple Lot testimony. He it’s so blatantly clear that he’s lying everywhere. And so anyway, this is really cool that you are saying that Louisa Beaman had to be there as a witness at the wedding that never happened and she would have already been brought into polygamy. So there’s no other way to explain this other than that they were lying. Yeah.

[57:38] Clark Aboud: So Jo Joseph B Nobles this it points to is lying about her, her relationship because she’s not a witness. And what about her ceiling? You know, uh Ruth Ruth Boss is another example. So she claims that Hiram sealed her to Joseph in February of 1843 in her affidavit. Once again, Hiram, according to Clayton doesn’t know his brother is a polygamist and doesn’t accept it until months later. This is much more than just misremembering as Ruth is not the only one. Um So,

[58:12] Michelle: but can I, can I fill in for that? Can you go back to that uh to the to Ruth Ruth Ruth’s um affidavit because the important thing that I want to add here also, I haven’t yet done my episode on the affidavits and I’m dying to. This is from the 1869 collection of affidavits that Joseph F Smith put together in his book. And the fascinating thing is these were form letters. These were the like, it’s not Ruth that’s making, these claims were filled out in advance that the women were either brought in to sign or that were forged. And I can prove that in, in the episode, I’m going to do so. It’s not even fair to say that Ruth is, is lying about it. This narrative is being put together and these affidavits are being crafted and in this Utah period when the the rule was to obey counsel and we have quotes of them saying even if it seems wrong to you, you obey counsel. The the church leaders was your God. So I just wanted to really make the case that it’s not that all of these women were in on this big conspiracy, right? This was being planned out and plotted out. They were coming up with the narrative and the women were some like a lot of them were forged and a lot of them were brought in to sign them or sometimes they didn’t, they weren’t even brought in to sign them. So anyway, that, that was important to say just so we’re not saying it’s ruth that light is part of this, it’s part of this carefully crafted narrative that’s being created.

[59:31] Clark Aboud: I differ a little bit on that. So I do think uh they were lying but I don’t think they were planning the murder. So I feel like the women had some role as far as being complicit, but I don’t think they were planning the murder or anything

[59:46] Michelle: like that. What do you mean they had a role in being complicit?

[59:50] Clark Aboud: Um So there’s, there’s different story like they, it’s not just them, right? Uh Having an affidavit written for them, but they also repeat the story and it seems

[1:00:01] Michelle: like only a few of them do. There, there are a few women that do. There are a few women who are definitely complicit in keeping the story going, you know, who, who in building the story like Eliza Snow and Emily Partridge and Melissa a lot. There, there are a few but most of the women didn’t ever make on say that

[1:00:22] Clark Aboud: again. A lot of the women were silent on the issue, but I think some of them like Eliza were kind of bold about it. All right. So let me continue on. So Eliza Snows credibility. So Eliza Snow is one of the claimed wives of Joseph. So she lists um Amara Johnson, Ruth Sayers Voss as polygamous wives. Initially, she lists Louisa Beaman on this document as all the women that Joseph had sealed uh had sealed to him. So my, my biggest thing is if Eliza Snow was a real wife of Joseph, I would think she would know that both these women, Ruth uh Ruth Voss and Amara Johnson were not Joseph’s wise just because of the Hiram could not have sealed them to Joseph. And uh you know, uh Louis of not being able to be a witness to uh Johnson’s uh ceiling. So this makes me question the person that sealed Eliza Snow. Um And that’s none other than Brigham Young according to her affidavit. So for me, I see it as a web of uh that connects to each other. So if Brigham knew Eliza R Snow was not a polygamous wife because Eliza Snow doesn’t know these other women are not wives of Joseph. Then what about the other women that Joseph had had sealed the Jose uh that Brigham supposedly had sealed the Joseph. So that um so Brigham supposed supposedly seals Mary Eliza, Mary Elizabeth Roland Leitner and Miranda and Nancy Johnson to Joseph as well. Um So um going through the list of some of these women, Eliza R Snow claims Sarah Cleveland was present at her ceiling. Now, that woman needs to be questioned. I think Miranda Hyde claims the Parker sisters were present at her ceiling. Mary light and air doesn’t mention anyone. And so now we should question Sarah Cleveland and the Parker sisters. Um Sarah Cleveland and uh Eliza Partridge don’t implicate anyone additionally. Um They don’t mention anyone’s but Emily Partridge says Heber C. Kimball sealed her. The Joseph Hebrew is said to have sealed Martha mcbride who doesn’t implicate anyone else. So we should question Hebrew C Kimball. Now, um if the Partridge sisters didn’t marry Joseph, then DNC 132 being made to convince Emma of polygamy after she kicked the Partridge sisters out uh doesn’t make sense. So if the Partridge sisters thing never happened, 132 doesn’t happen in the way that Clayton says, you know. Mhm. Um So this is just kind of an illustration of it. What does that make sense? It was a little confusing to explain. No,

[1:03:09] Michelle: I get what you’re saying to me. To me. I see it’s really interesting to see how different people come out this because I like your kind of like tag, you’re it like you’re now CRE not quite credible. You’re not because you’re catching them in each other’s lives. And yeah, so I, I’ve just kind of seen it as this cabal of lies and the more lies we pile up like everything I look into turns into this big huge pile of the lies about Joseph’s polygamy and the actual evidence shows that it reveals that they are all lies. And so I love, I love your way of coming at it to see like anyway, yeah, I really like your way of coming. I just think there are a million ways to come at it as well. But this is a really valid one. I don’t want people to think this is the only evidence that there is that they’re lying. This is just your presentation of it right now, right?

[1:03:58] Clark Aboud: This is the new stuff that I’m presenting here. So I’m I’m just trying to verify their, what they claim and see if it matches up with dates and everything else.

[1:04:08] Michelle: Yeah, it’s

[1:04:08] Clark Aboud: great. So a fake Landy. So um William Clayton and Nel K Whitney certify a fraudulent Landy to Sylvia Sessions dated June 5th 1843. So this is important as it is used to help support the polygamy narrative that Bill Rill and other people point to as see these land deeds. It, it’s evidence of the polygamy. And so this June 1843 would fit around the time frame that Joseph is said to have married Sylvia. But there’s one major problem with this deed though. So Joseph Smith had sold block one, block 108 to uh I’m not sure how to pronounce his name.

[1:04:50] Michelle: But Peregrine Sessions, a

[1:04:52] Clark Aboud: relative of Sylvia from the records, he did not sell this land back to Joseph for Joseph to be able to sell to Sylvia as the grand tour. So the grand tour is the seller uh and the grantee is the buyer. So is how is Joseph able to sell something he doesn’t own, he doesn’t own it. He already sold it years before. So, uh the interesting thing is the brother or cousin. He sells it to Sylvia in 1841 and then Sylvia sells it right back two days later. And so lot two block 108 was sold in 1840. And that’s mentioned in the previous thing where it’s, it lists it as well. So a lot one and two block 108 on this deed here. And so that that part was sold in 1840 Joseph wasn’t the grand tour of that either in June of 1843. So this is strong evidence in my opinion that William Clayton and Noel K Whitney were willing to create forged land deeds in Joseph’s name to support polygamy and this, this piles on to what he found with Hiram’s draft deed?

[1:06:07] Michelle: Yeah. So you think that Nlk Whitney was in on it as early as 1843 at least. Yeah, because I’ve wondered about NK Whitney. I didn’t know if he didn’t get involved. I, I wanted, I wanted to not have NK Whitney be involved so soon. Ok. He didn’t take another wife until I think 1845 or when did he marry Emmeline? P Wells? I

[1:06:28] Clark Aboud: don’t remember. Yeah. So, yeah, so they’re creating a forged a month, a month before the 132 as well. That’s something that, yeah.

[1:06:40] Michelle: Yeah. And that goes along with the work I’ve done and, and I still have my um third episode to do on deeds. But yes, there was a ton of deed forging going on. So you’re connecting it to the plotting that they were doing, knowing that they and, and maybe you’ll get into it more.

[1:06:57] Clark Aboud: So then there’s uh three other deeds that I was able to figure out were problematic. Um There are so um we have Elizabeth and Smith Whitney. Elizabeth Davis, Durphy and Ellen Mark Kimball. So the normal turnaround time from a ad being recor uh dated to it, being recorded in either book A or book B of the D book was between one day to six months. So I have examples here on the left hand side um of some deeds and then we take a look at the ones on the right hand side. So Eli Elizabeth Davis Durphy is dated on March 10th, 1843 but it’s not recorded until between January of 1845 and February of 1846 making it 2 to 3 years after the fact, Helen Mark Kimball’s dated uh June 7th 1843 and was recorded after deeds for February 7th, 1846 making it two years later.

[1:08:01] Michelle: Oh, wow. Ok.

[1:08:03] Clark Aboud: And then Elizabeth and Smith Smith Whitney is a little less egregious but is dated. April 20. Uh April 22nd, 1843 has recorded February 20th, 1844 making it 10 months later. So there’s a huge gap between the dates and them being put into the books. Yeah.

[1:08:27] Michelle: Yeah. Do you know which of these? We have the originals of I’m trying to see which ones I’ve seen. I don’t see um Sarah and Whitney’s there because I know we have her originals. So I don’t know if we have the originals of any of these.

[1:08:39] Clark Aboud: Um if memory serves me correctly. Uh Whitney has one but the others don’t. And most of what we have are copies into the deed book. We don’t have originals of majority of these deeds.

[1:08:53] Michelle: Yeah. Yeah. Ok. Yeah, that’s what I’m, that’s, we have the originals of a few, but I can’t remember if there, there are these ones. So I would. Ok. I’m just curious because we don’t even know what you know what I mean? We don’t have the originals and it’s up to William Clayton’s credibility to even know what was anything because he was keeping all of the records.

[1:09:12] Clark Aboud: Yeah, Clayton was in charge of overseeing these books too. So, so then William Law, so the expositor was a big thing for me. I was like, ok, I’m not sure what to make of William. W is he telling the truth? Is he telling a half truth? How does he fit into this? And so, um I looked at his interview on July 31st, 1887 and he mentions this. So he says, when the Smiths saw that we were against them, then they applied to us their usual system that is to freeze us out. Secret orders went out that nobody could buy property without the permission of Joseph Smith hire or the authorities as they call them. So our property was practically worthless by starting the expositor. We lost nearly everything. So I went to double check to see if this was accurate. So when I check the records of the land transactions, uh we can find that, for instance, William Law bought land in Nauvoo on June 10th, 1844 for $20. And he sells that 100 and 60 acres and five pieces for 1000 $160. So the crazy thing is on this is that June 10th is the day the expositor is destroyed. So the question I have to ask is why is William Law buying property in Nauvoo the day the newspaper gets destroyed and why is he lying about Joseph preventing any real transactions? So if you look at the other transactions, William Law, has he either breaks even or he makes a little bit of profit. William Law did not lose any money by creating the expositor. He’s blatantly lying in his interview about Joseph Smith here.

[1:11:01] Michelle: Excellent. Ok and yeah, and there’s more to be said, I still have, sorry, I’m I’m I still have my other episode to do on the expositor that has a lot more answers in it as well. But this is, I haven’t gotten into this. So thank you for showing me

[1:11:14] Clark Aboud: this. So yeah, so continuing on Wilson Law. He is also lumped into this. Supposedly he couldn’t buy or sell, but we see from his transactions. Uh He buys the first one here for 900. He sells it June 19th, 1844 for $5000. The second he buys for 400. He sells it in a, a total for of 850 on June 11th, 1844 and two pieces. The third, he buys for $330 and sells half the acres for 500 on June 12th, 1844. So Wilson, like his brother, William has a pattern of making even more money or breaking even on these transactions. The laws are dishonest witnesses. And so this makes

[1:12:04] Michelle: a lot of money.

[1:12:06] Clark Aboud: This makes me wonder whether there was some kind of real estate deal between the laws and Brigham Young for the expositor or something like that or whether it is the counterfeiting issues uh that were going on in Nauvoo at the point at that point in time. So

[1:12:21] Michelle: this is answering questions for me as well because one of the things that was me back from just believing the inside job theory is seeing um the law’s involvement and you know, that was an, it was an intentional design to lead to Joseph’s death. The expositor, it was, it was so well plotted. So what you’re showing is collusion between the laws and the fall within the church, which is the same thing I was hypothesizing but didn’t have any evidence for it. Yeah,

[1:12:46] Clark Aboud: I fought hard against it because it was hard for me to, to justify that. Like how does that make sense? But finding the transactions and then the happiness letter which I’ll get to, it makes perfect sense. So also William Law in his 1887 interview, he mentions that uh what he saw was 23 pages long and he describes what he saw in it. And from his affidavits that William Law and what William Law and Jane Law give, we get a general idea of what they’re they’re quoting from. So in, in this picture here, I took the entire Kingsbury document what they quote is in yellow. What they don’t mention is in pink. Our and so from this, we see what they would have seen have to be at least four pages long, if not, maybe five. And if any of the pink is in there, it has to be longer than that. So there William Law I don’t think is just misremembering. How long the revelation that he saw was? I think he is just creating a story that uh this is Hi Hiram gave this to me and this is what contained in it. But yeah, whatever he’s claiming to have seen, it’s not what he actually saw. It just does not make sense with the length of what he’s describing. Yeah.

[1:14:11] Michelle: Right. So, OK, so I want to press you on this and just kind of get your ideas. So my feeling is, well, I think Joseph, I think Joseph did have a true revelation on eternal marriage and part of that is contained in section 132 and you know, Joseph and Hyrum are on record many times um teaching it and um and, and talking about it and so we can get a good sense of what’s in it. So my question has been, were there, well, I did an episode about all of the claims that there were these revelations from Joseph, at least one false revelation from Joseph that was likely going around town that could have been written down at this point. So do you think that William Law? I mean that William and Jane saw something or do you think they were just making up? Nothing like, because I would go, I personally would go about this differently. How I’m, how I’m approaching 132 versus the testimonies and Austin’s

[1:15:02] Clark Aboud: testimony. I think my best guess is that Brigham Young or Richards gave them a prototype of 132 and we’ll see whatever, what they bring up is not what Kingsbury do, what the Kingsbury document is. It has to be some other document that predates it. Um So um I’ll, I’ll go into the conclusion between uh the Higby and Will of Richards in just a little bit. But um yeah,

[1:15:32] Michelle: so in collusion between Higby and Willard Richards, ok. I’m curious about that because one of the Higby held a gun to Willard Richards. Do you think that that was planned? Ok. I mean, it will be interesting.

[1:15:43] Clark Aboud: Yeah. So, so Jane Law in her novel Expositor affidavit, she claims that what she saw limited then the 10 wives and this idea of the 10 wife limit is supported by Sarah Scott’s letter to her parents dated for June 16th, 1844. She mentions um allowing the saints the privilege of having 10 living wives at one time. Um So this, I know that people wanna say, oh, this is generalized. Let’s talk about the 10 virgins, but this is specific. It’s not just one witness, it’s two witnesses, witnesses saying it was 10 wives specifically that you can

[1:16:26] Michelle: add to the number of James has a very clear limit. It’s up to the right like

[1:16:32] Clark Aboud: the number of 10. Yeah, that’s why she, so the problem is that the Kingsbury document does not have that DNC 132 verse 662 reads. And if we have 10 versions given unto him by this law, he cannot commit adultery for they belong to him and they are given unto him, therefore, he is justified. So in that there’s no restriction to only 10, it just says, hey, if someone gets 10 wives and they’re fine, you know, so this proves the Kingsbury document is a fraud because Kingsbury left navoo on July 25th, 1843 and had to have and ha would have had to have written this DNC 132 after July 28th, 1844 when he returns back to Nauvoo after Joseph’s death, for him to remove the wording of the limiting of 10 wives from the prototype.

[1:17:28] Michelle: OK. And an interesting thing to add to this is that in 1843 where this, when this could have, when the laws talked about this, whatever there would have been, nobody had more than 10 wives. Brigham Young didn’t have 10 wives at this point in 1852. What

[1:17:47] Clark Aboud: most Joseph Joseph was supposed to have 26 wives at this point in time, if I remember correctly, but it was, at least

[1:17:55] Michelle: I’m, I hadn’t put that piece together. Thank you for adding that in. That’s ridiculous. That’s another problem for them. But when it was pulled out in 1852 they had far more than 10 wives, which kind of helps us understand why that part of it had to be changed as well. They, they outdid their limit and had to twist it around.

[1:18:13] Clark Aboud: Yeah. So they all did their limit. They had to go back and um change it to create what they want to have it, say. And it shows also that they hadn’t created a timeline of when women would claim to have married Joseph because they’re kind of figuring, figuring that stuff out still. So that’s why they didn’t think of, oh, what about Joseph having 26 wives or whatever at this point in time? That that wasn’t even.

[1:18:41] Michelle: Yeah. Yeah. The list of wives came much much later. You’re right. Yeah. When they were trying to back date them. Ok.

[1:18:48] Clark Aboud: Now, Ma Martha Brotherton, so Martha Brotherton, this event happens supposedly in December of 1841. She says that Brigham uh and Justice Smith cornered it, cornered her in the upstairs of the red brick room to say Mary Brigham Young and all that stuff. So, um in her testimony, I’ll be covering more of this with Bill Rill, but I wanna cover just a couple sections of this. So the statement by um Joseph Smith. So she says that Joseph Smith said that Brigham is the best man in the world except me. And this sounds like a forgery made after Joseph’s death by Thomas Bullock, where he has Joseph say brother Joseph young is a great man, but Brigham is greater is a greater and the time will come when he will preside over the whole church. So the story of the man, so this story and the man claimed to be Joseph should be questioned on this as well as Martha then claims that Joseph asked, look here, sister, don’t you believe in me? And she didn’t reply with a yes or no. Berm goes on to say, well, we believe Joseph is a prophet who is the we that Brigham is referring to the room only has Brigham Martha and a person who is said to be Joseph Smith. Martha was just asked, did she believe in Joseph? And she didn’t reply with a yes. Brigham is implying the other person in the room is not Joseph? Does that? Does that make sense?

[1:20:21] Michelle: Mhm It does. Yeah. And and the other thing I got lambasted because I just tried to really quickly build this into my response to build real and RFM I should have handled it differently. But the other thing to know is we’re saying that Martha claimed this, this is only from John Bennett. We don’t have anything from Martha. We have John Bennett’s version of what Martha said. So there are many layers of problems with this testimony and I love the additional ones that you’re bringing out that they, they worked Joseph’s name into it at the very least.

[1:20:54] Clark Aboud: Yeah. So it, it just doesn’t say it doesn’t sound like Joseph and with how Brigham is wording things, it does not work with the situation. So let me continue on. So the happiness letter. So the happiness letter is assumed by man to be an effort by Joseph to propose to Nancy Rigdon, the daughter of Sidney Rigdon. The letter first appeared in August 1842 through John C Bennett. Now, according to John C Bennett, this letter was written in the handwriting of Willard Richards and given to him by Francis Higby. This is important because Willie Richards and Francis Higby are involved in the murder of Joseph Smith. Uh Willie Richards predicts Joseph’s death eight months in advance through forgery. And the, and he does some other things. We’ll get to that in a little bit. And the treason charges that led Joseph to Carthage were facilitated by Francis Higby who signed the, the letters that got to Robert Smith, the justice of the peace giving Joseph that treason charge. So a lot of people misunderstand Joseph did not go to Carthage because of the expositor. He went to Carthage and Carthage jail because of treason for declaring martial law on the 18th or whatever.

[1:22:13] Michelle: Yeah, that’s not, that’s not my understanding. Um He was he was arrested originally for um like basically riot, something like that and he was taken, sorry he was, he was taken to Carthage and then they got out of ba got out on bail is my understanding because all of the saints, they, they put them under this huge, huge, ridiculously high bail. But all of the saints, many of them mortgaged their farms to pay the bail because they knew that their lives were in danger. But then it’s when just when they were going to let them go out on bail, they brought in treason charges and they did that because they don’t have the option for bail if they’re charged with treason. So that’s not why they went to Carthage, but it’s why they were kept in prison in Carthage. Yes,

[1:22:57] Clark Aboud: that’s why they were kept in prison in Carthage. They were lured to Carthage through the riot charge of the expositor, but it was intent, but they really were trying to get him on treason. And that’s WW Phelps does his role in that. But um so this is similar to the March 17th, 1842 relief society letter that is a forgery. I don’t, I didn’t bring it into this powerpoint, but basically, it mentions that unless we give by word of our mouth of commandment or um revelation that it’s OK to break the laws and to do certain things that are said to be wrong. So that’s what the this forged relief society letter basically.

[1:23:41] Michelle: So you mean there’s the original that wasn’t forged but they altered it just like they did with everything else like the letter and then they altered it. Yeah, the

[1:23:49] Clark Aboud: original is in the book and then there’s then there’s this letter in Richard’s handwriting from that date um that they include some stuff in there that hints that polygamy. So yes, but the real thing is with the happiness letter, the real intent was to get Sidney Rigdon out of the church. So they were really trying to usurp the church from Joseph from at least from 1841 from what I’ve seen. And the happiness letter is just a effort to plant polygamy evidence, but also get rigged in out because Rigdon was in Brigham’s way for the longest. And I think this happiness letter accomplished some of Brigham’s goals at dividing uh Rigdon from Joseph to some degree. Um As far as their relationship went. Um So the question that we have to ask is there’s no clear explanation of how Francis Higby obtained possession of this private letter, but it is best explained as being given to him by Willie Richards to pass on the John C Bennett. Um So there’s also John C. Bennett lists a couple of the women claiming to be Joseph’s wives later on and I believe this, this is just them giving names of women that are willing to comply with them. Um Saying these women married Joseph. So they’re planning PMY evidence that way. So, John C uh John C Bennett is just a useful idiot. I think in this circumstance, the plan is to convince Rigdon to get out. He doesn’t, he comes out against it with his daughter saying this letter did not come from Joseph and it was not authorized to be given to Bennett and all these statements. Yeah.

[1:25:33] Michelle: So I’m gonna have to. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, I think so. I’m gonna have to get into this a little bit more to understand it more thoroughly, but, ok.

[1:25:42] Clark Aboud: All right. So what about the expositors destruction? Governor Ford had already spoken on the issue of the Nauvoo City charter that he would honor it and would only punish the first person to act between the conflict of the Mormons and the non Mormons. Um, a lot of apologists say Joseph was worried about that the, the city charter, but I don’t think that’s the circum the reason for it. But, um WW Phelps led the charge for the city, uh city council to destroy the expositor comparing it to the Boston tea party. WW Phelps, you know, calls on for the crowd to say, let’s destroy the expositor. And WW Phelps is also the legal mind for Joseph and would be the one to encourage the, the nu legion to declare martial law and to get Joseph for the treason charge. So, uh for instance, yeah, they’re setting Joseph up. So March 9th, 1843. Uh, Joseph is calling WWE Phelps to be his lawyer and the legal mind to help him. And Phelps serves as Joseph’s ghostwriter a lot of times and as his political advisor as well, helping him write the political campaign stuff.

[1:26:55] Michelle: Mhm. Ok. Ok. So, so I’m also wondering because in reading through the city council minutes, one of the reasons that Joseph did, um, was on board with destroying the expositor, although he seemed hesitant to do so and he, like, they were kind of convincing him to do it. One of the reasons was because the people were being um the, the people in Navoo were threatening to do it themselves if the city council didn’t. So it sounds to me like maybe Phelps was stirring that up as well, stirring the people up and saying is that like he, like he could have been stirring it up on both sides to create a furor among the people where they were.

[1:27:36] Clark Aboud: Joseph. Joseph. Joseph makes a statement a couple of years before this saying WW Phelps is pretty wild and he says things that are out of pocket. And um I think George a Smith tells him like he like this could get out of hand and he could get killed or whatever from WW Phelps running his mouth. But, but anyway, WW Phelps keep in mind he’s assisting Richards with the history of those forgeries that we talked about earlier because um, they’re the ones that complain about the school Children in this, on the second floor of the red brick store when they’re trying to work on the history and all of that. But, um, so Joseph Smith would not have gone to Carthage without or Carthage jail without Phelps. So any plan by the mob to get car Joseph to commit treason, they could not have forced his hand to do that. The expositors destruction was just a right charge. They post bail to go home. There is no threat to Joseph’s life. If that was the only plan in place, someone on the inside has to do it. And um Porter Rockwell in December of 1843 tells Joseph there’s a traitor among you. There is a Judas. He’s, they’re close in leadership to you and they’re trying to kill you with working with Missouri. And Phelps is not, this is not the first time Phelps betrayed Joseph, he betrayed Joseph back in 1838 with Missouri too. So,

[1:29:05] Michelle: and for anyone who wants to say, because one thing that they say because you’re right, Phelps has a pattern of doing this and Joseph always forgives him, but Joseph even says himself in one of his trials that his only mistake was being too forgiving giving like Joseph was very quick to forgive and if we’re gonna talk about faults to have, that’s the one that you know what I mean? We’re basically saying Joseph was too forgiving if, I mean, I, I guess I’m just saying that speaks to the character of Joseph Smith. Yeah.

[1:29:33] Clark Aboud: The, the one thing I can say about Joseph Smith’s character is that he was a very forgiving person and he wanted to believe in the best of people. I could definitely. Yeah. Um, so then we have Porter Rockwell’s letter. So Joseph is now at Carthage. He is told about the trees in charge, um, early in the morning, but he’s still expecting the post bail. So a letter was sent to Porter Rockwell from Hamilton Hotel where they’re, they’re posting bail. The history of the church states that the letter said stay in Nauvoo and do not suffer yourself to be uh delivered into the hands of your enemies or be taken prisoner by anyone. So this letter was sent around 3 p.m. on June 25th, 1844. The problem with the letter is that Joseph and everyone was expecting the post bail to return to NAVOO later that day. Um So they were not told that they weren’t allowed to have a trial for the treason. They weren’t told they were going to the jail that day. Uh Joseph wrote to Emma at 3 p.m. The governor has just agreed to march his army to NAVOO and I shall come along with him. Does that make sense so far?

[1:30:47] Michelle: Yeah, I just read those letters two days ago. Yeah, all of the letters from Carthage,

[1:30:52] Clark Aboud: whoever sent the letter of the Rockwell must have known plans of the mob to get Joseph to jail and thus could not have been Joseph. Joseph was not prepared to go to jail. He was planning to come home. Rockwell faced no greater threat than anyone else did and would have been a better equipped to handle the situation, telling anyone who threatened Joseph. They did not want Rockwell to come to Carthage’s jail. They and they anticipated that he would do whatever Joseph told them to do. They sent a letter in Joseph’s name and Rockwell did not show up to Carthage.

[1:31:29] Michelle: Wow, because you’re right, Rockwell was

[1:31:35] Clark Aboud: like Swiss cheese.

[1:31:37] Michelle: Yep. Yep. He, he, yeah. And they knew it. Oh my gosh. That’s incredible. Ok. Yeah.

[1:31:43] Clark Aboud: So John Taylor’s letter dated June 25th 1844. It’s written at the same time as Joseph’s letter at 3 p.m. Um So John Taylor in this letter asked his wife to print and bind 1000 copies of the new DNC 1844 edition. Why is John Taylor asking his wife to do this when he’s about to return home in a few hours? This shows John Taylor knew the plan of the mob and to get Joseph to Cara’s jail before Joseph learns the news at 9 p.m. John Taylor and Richards they knew and they would have been the ones to send the letter to Rockwell. Yeah.

[1:32:24] Michelle: Wow. Ok. Ok. Did his wife print the copies

[1:32:29] Clark Aboud: I don’t know the full details. We don’t get a follow up on this. But again, there’s no explanation of why Taylor asked his wife to do this when they’re coming home posting bail. So.

[1:32:42] Michelle: Well, here’s, here’s why I’m asking is because the 1844 edition contains John Taylor’s letter as, oh, I should look up what section it is. Everyone listening will know but it contains

[1:32:56] Clark Aboud: what they talk about. The Martyrdom section.

[1:33:00] Michelle: Yes. Yes. The Martyrdom section and, and I, oh, I wish I had this all on the top of my head. I wanna remember what month it was printed because I always wondered how John Taylor wrote that and included it in time when he was shot five times or however many it was so

[1:33:16] Clark Aboud: the, the actual, it was released in October of 1844 but it was announced. So the new edition was announced, um I believe it was the day right after the exposures destruction. So it was either announced on June 11th or June 12th in the Times and Seasons by WW Phelps that they were coming out with the new DNC and then it went for sale in October of that year.

[1:33:41] Michelle: So what I’m curious about is if John Taylor’s, let what I’m curious about if is if John Taylor’s letter had already been written at this point? Well, they had for his wife to print it. They

[1:33:51] Clark Aboud: had, I’m not, I don’t think they did I don’t see any. So they’re planning to release the new DNC on July 10th or so of 1844. So I don’t know if they would have been wanting to do that to make Joseph into a martyr and to help get people to circle around them and stuff. I’m not sure exactly their intent with the new DNC. 1844. I do understand that. Um, I think DNC 110 talks about the, the 12 authority to organize or assemble the church. And that’s within context of outside of the A stick of Zion. But when, when they change that for, when they forge that document, it changes how DNC is interpreted. I think, I think it’s DNC 110. It might be 1071 of those two. But OK,

[1:34:50] Michelle: OK, this is, this is interesting. I know I’m throwing things at you that you hadn’t prepared. It’s just making me think while they’re in jail in Carthage jail, why is John Taylor’s priority having the doctrine and covenants printed? And why is he writing his wife to do it? That, that just seems so surprising to me, you know, and seems anyway like that brings up a whole bunch of questions for me. So OK, this is, this is, yeah, this

[1:35:16] Clark Aboud: is the letter that started it for me. I knew I overlooked something because I did not find this the first time around. So I, I did a deep dive into everything Yeah. Ok. So I do want to bring this up. I do need to talk about Carthage because I know this is gonna be an objection. A lot of people make to the first parts that I talked about. So an important question is why, so the important question is why would Governor Ford and Robert Smith, the captain of the Carthage Grays and Justice Justice of the Peace, who put Joseph and Carthage’s jail wrongly for treason and did not allow him to do the legal way of dealing with this? Why would he, why would they allow them to go into the jail without being searched for weapons? So this is something people don’t understand. So, uh Governor Ford said, um, some that I ought to have searched them for concealed arms, but it wasn’t under the direction of the, this was under the direction of the Justice of the Peace. It wasn’t my responsibility. This is why they were allowed to bring guns into the jail. Um, and we know the Carthage Grays guys were definitely in on this. They, they were firing blanks. I think that’s pretty solid to say. And they really put down Joseph’s defense during the time when um, Governor for goes to Nauvoo and the cannon fires and uh Porter Rockwell over here and talk about, uh, the deed is done kind of a thing. So, um, the only explanation I see is why would you allow them to have guns into the jail would be if you had someone along with them and you wanted them to be armed to have their weapons with them. So, yeah, so something that’s important that people overlook is that on the day of the murder um during breakfast time, John Taylor does not join everyone else for breakfast. He is the only one missing during breakfast time and he’s upstairs alone for an hour. Now, comparing that to the previous day, we see that he joined everyone else during breakfast. And according to Willie Richards journal here, so he has an hour of time. And the question that apologists have made is what at one point in time where they would have had time to load these weapons if they did have guns in the jail. And this would have been the time the morning of for an hour at 7 a.m. between 8 a.m. So, um, lastly, Will of Richards claims that he was wearing his coat with his shirt and pants and a wool one piece temple garment in 90 degree Illinois summer weather just prior to the murders. And I think that’s a lot of layers of clothes and willow Richards is 300/300 pounds. Um, I would not wanna be wearing a one piece wool garment, um, in that kind of weather

[1:38:21] Michelle: and I haven’t dug into this fully. But one thing that I have just started down the path of is trying to figure out when garments made their way on the scene because the idea of garments and protection like the story came later. Anyway, I just think that’s an additional piece that will have been wearing his garments because Brigham said Joseph told, I mean, that Emma told Joseph and Hyrum to take their garments off implying that she wanted to have them killed. But I don’t think the physical protection mythos of garments had yet been established.

[1:38:50] Clark Aboud: Physical protection, physical protection comes from the Carthage jail. It doesn’t, I don’t see any reference before Carthage.

[1:38:58] Michelle: Right. Right. Well, then it doesn’t come up until years later when it’s applied backward to Carthage jail is what I’m saying. So, so it’s like even that is suspicious, all of it is there, there, there are so many lies that is lie upon lie. Ok.

[1:39:12] Clark Aboud: Yeah. So what about the novel Legion? So Taylor claims that he suggested that Joseph to escape car’s jail. Taylor says when conversing about Deliverance, I said, brother Joseph, if you will permit it and say the word, I will have you out of this prison in five hours if the jail has to come down to do it. My idea was to go into navoo and collect a force sufficient as I considered the whole affair of legal farce and a fraudulent, a fragrant outrage upon our liberty and rights. Brother Joseph refused. So this claim doesn’t match accounts that Joseph requested the Novo legion to rescue him. So Alan stout related to Hosea stout, he says, um, in his journal and while they were in jail, brother Joseph wrote an official order to Jonathan Dunham to bring the legion to reser uh, reserve him from being killed. But John, uh, but Dunham did not let a single man or mortal know that he had received such orders and we were kept in the city under arms, not knowing, but all was well until the mob came and forced the prison and slew Joseph and Hyrum Smith and wounded John Taylor severely. So this is important to know that WW Phelps and Jonathan Dunham were meeting with Governor Ford beginning in October of 1843. And why is John Taylor lying about Joseph requesting rescue and denying it? So, um does that make sense? Yeah.

[1:40:42] Michelle: Mhm. Yeah, it does.

[1:40:45] Clark Aboud: All right. So we’re towards the very end now. So, uh a lot of apologies point to Brigham Young weeping about Joseph Smith’s murder. So, um Brigham Young um to hide his complicity uh to hide that he knew about the murders. Had. Woodruff’s journal altered to include that he cried too about the death of Joseph and Hiram. So you can see the insertions into the history uh on the bottom, right where they added in those details. Um So in Ward’s journal, it says, Brother Young took the bed and I took the big chair and I and I here veiled my face and for the first time gave vent to my grief and mourning for the prophet and patriarch of the church, Joseph and Hyrum Smith and um the history where they alter it, it says Brigham Young took the bed and gave vent to his feelings in tears and I took the big chair and I uh unveiled my face and for the first time, uh gave vent to my grief. So you can see kind of in the insertions here. They’re kind of inserting words like we and R and stuff like that as well. Um So the question that be asked is why is Brigham inserting this into wardrobe’s journal? And um is it because he needs to kind of hide his complicity and woodruff has to be knowledgeable that Brigham is doing this as well. So I see woodruff as being guilty as well, even though woodruff does a lot less than Brigham when it comes to this stuff.

[1:42:26] Michelle: Well, and this was happening later on when the power structure

[1:42:30] Clark Aboud: afterwards. Yeah, I, I

[1:42:32] Michelle: just, I just mean in Utah, it’s important to understand the stranglehold that Brigham had of power and what you risked by going along. I mean, by, by not going along with him as this authoritarian, the theocratic totalitarian leader. So, so, you know, it, it, it got pretty intense. OK.

[1:42:50] Clark Aboud: Yeah. All right. So um so then we have this other letter by John Taylor um to Woodruff October 15th 1844 and he brags about there never was more business transacted in the time or did I ever see so much harmony nor a greater confidence manifested in the authorities of the church. So this statement shows that the 12 were non harmony with Joseph Smith. This goes against the polygamy narrative that Joseph was in fact a polygamist and we see here that they seem to be occupied with getting wealthier. Um You know, John Taylor and all the other guys, they come up a lot with their houses during this time, right after Joseph’s death.

[1:43:36] Michelle: Yeah, things are much better now that Joseph’s gone is what they’re saying. They are much

[1:43:40] Clark Aboud: better than Joseph’s gone. We have more harmony, harmony, we have more confidence. So they have, yeah,

[1:43:49] Michelle: go ahead.

[1:43:50] Clark Aboud: They have confidence or harmony in Joseph,

[1:43:53] Michelle: right? And also the thing that the thing that, well, Whitney Horning and I have talked a lot about the, the thing that we’re all trying to say and get people to see is that the nau polygamous polygamy did have to be hidden before Joseph’s death. But it wasn’t because of the government, it was because of Joseph, right? So the claim is that Joseph had to hide his polygamy and then he was killed because of his polygamy. But what they don’t explain is that immediately after Joseph’s death, they’re gonna be skyrockets, they start taking more wives, they start having Children. There’s way more documentation of it, they’re not hiding it. So it should be so clear that they’re hiding it from Joseph, not the government because they weren’t worried about the government once Joseph was killed. And this shows right here that now they’re free to do what they wanted to do. So there’s all so, so things are great. Now there’s harmony, no one’s fighting against them and their new doctrines. OK.

[1:44:44] Clark Aboud: So from everything uh presented, I believe a strong case can be found made that made that Brigham Young has psychopathic tendencies. Um not to be mean or anything like that, but from what I see, cold, calculated, subtle and manipulative.

[1:45:02] Michelle: Yeah, I would just say I have come to the same conclusion based on his Utah, what I’ve studied about in Utah. So you’re doing it before and I, I Yeah, so I, I would concur with that.

[1:45:13] Clark Aboud: So, yeah. So people think Brigham Young is a dumb guy and he, he just runs his mouth and all that. But he’s, he’s much smarter than what people give him credit in the, in the wrong. Yeah. But Brigham made statements like it’s OK to cut off someone’s head and what others consider evil he sees as good, never love your wife, as much as you couldn’t abandon her in an instant without shedding a tear. And if you love your neighbor as yourself, that you should murder them to atone for their sins, Brigham. Sure. Um One of the, a lot, one of the apologists likes to bring up um that Brigham says that he cares about Joseph’s measures being as sweet as honey or the honeycomb. But in that same statement, he says, Brigham says he was not supposing he was going to die talking about Joseph Smith, which we I showed clearly. That’s the absolute lie. Brigham hated the mother of Joseph Smith so much. He even called for her book to be destroyed to prevent a different narrative from being shared. And that is in the latter day Saints millennial star volume 27 October 21st 1865. For anyone that wants that reference,

[1:46:29] Michelle: he was furious. I got Orson Pratt for reprinting it after he had destroyed it once. Yes, he repeatedly tried to have it destroyed.

[1:46:37] Clark Aboud: So in, in, in my conclusion, I just want to say, as Jesus said, for there is nothing covered that shall be, that shall not be revealed, neither head that shall not be known. Therefore, whatsoever ye have spoken in darkness shall be heard in the light and that which ye have spoken in the ear in closets. So shall be proclaimed upon the house tops. Uh a murder, a murder approaching 100 and 80 years unsolved I believe is now settled. I’m glad I could play my part in helping others finances and help as many people as I can. Um I feel like it’s important that we trust in God still and not rely on the arm of the flesh of experts or how we feel about a subject. Um But we, that like we’re not gonna be like we already made up our mind. We’re not gonna look at anything else. I feel like we should be open minded and seek God, love God, love others and love truth and you will be directed to what’s right if you don’t lose sight of that.

[1:47:41] Michelle: Yeah. Ok. Ok. So this was a lot. I, um, I feel a little conflicted because the martyrdom is not something I’ve gotten into. I, I consider Justin Griffin a friend, but I’ve not settled on the martyrdom enough to want to step into that generally on um on my podcast. So I, I thought you were coming to talk about deeds but it turned out to be mostly about the martyrdom. Yeah. So um

[1:48:08] Clark Aboud: I did put me was a big piece though for me too. Yeah. Mhm.

[1:48:13] Michelle: But, um, but in any case, if people hear this, I guess it’s just, this is Clark presenting his ideas and his approach to this documentation that um everyone can go do their own research form their own conclusions. I do think that um there are troubling aspects to our history and, and, you know, it’s, it’s for me it’s useful to see the um the extent that maybe Brigham Young went to of um what he was trying to accomplish. So I anyway, I’m, I’m really conflicted about all of this information. I’m just taking it in stride. Right now and I invite everyone else to do the same. But yeah, so, ok, thank you, Clark for coming on and sharing this and I’ll be interested to see where it goes. One thing I love is that all of the different people working on this topic, we all build on each other and, and what, you know, I think that you, you’re probably building a lot on what Justin Griffin laid down and what, you know, we’re all kind of helping each other with the information, bringing it forward. And so it’s good to have more eyes on this.

[1:49:13] Clark Aboud: Well, your, your channel helped me a lot and rob fathering him and um and several other people did too. Yeah.

[1:49:22] Michelle: Yeah, definitely Justin. I think so. Um So I want to give a shout out to him. So, um anyway, it’s, it’s troubling. It’s complicated. I, I guess just everyone has to with an open heart and an open mind to look into this, but I will remind us, I don’t have the verse right on the top of my head, but the book of Mormon warns us of the secret murders in our own camp, right? That the adulteries and the murders and the things that are happening within the people of God. So, so anyway, OK, I don’t even know what to say at this point. So thank you for bringing this to us and yeah, just keep us updated. Let us know what you keep finding and you know what the reaction to it is.

[1:50:05] Clark Aboud: I just wanna make sure I clear Joseph’s name of polygamy because he did not do it. He’s not a polygamist and I want non Mormons to know that as well. Not just, uh, those in the LDS church or any other sect out there. Yeah.

[1:50:21] Michelle: You, you know, I really appreciate that because I think that people hear these kind of things and take it as just accusations. You know, I’m always accused of just accusing Brigham. And it’s so interesting to me because no, my central goal is exonerating God is to make sure that all of my people stop blaming God for polygamy and thinking that, you know, it’s God’s problem. And then the next step is exonerating Joseph, not because we were worship him or need him to be innocent just because the documentation shows that he was innocent. And when you see all of this and show what happened to him, what happened to all of Lucy’s sons. It’s heartbreaking, it needs to be revealed, it needs to be exposed. What happened to Emma needs to be talked about and acknowledged and, and that’s the real goal is finding the truth and exonerating people. And if in that process, the guilty people are held guilty. Yeah, that’s just how it is. That’s not us looking to find fault or looking to accuse. We are just, we are just diving into the documentation and seeing what we find and this is what we’re finding. So, so no acc uh no desire to make any accusations. But if people object to this or are angry, please, I would love nothing more than to find out that this was all wrong. So please do the work and come and show us how all of this is wrong. That would be great. Yeah. And that,

[1:51:39] Clark Aboud: that’s why I wanna make sure I sourced everything. So um I can go look, I’m going on Bill Ri’s show um Soon enough where I’m gonna allow him to critique anything that he wants to critique.

[1:51:54] Michelle: OK. And, and I’m, I’m supposed to have engagement with Bill real as well. So, but we haven’t been able to set a date yet, but this will be interesting to see. So, thank you, Clark. I appreciate it. And yeah, like I said, keep us updated. I would love it. I would love it if the people who have left the church because of the failings of Joseph would be willing to just look at this and consider and see if they are the ones with the cognitive dissonance and the emotional reasoning that keeps them. That’s what I’ve been feeling often. Like you guys, you guys accuse us of that, but maybe, you know, consider the beam in your own eye before you start taking the moat out of ours. Yeah. Is, is

[1:52:29] Clark Aboud: it OK? If I uh share, give you the, the powerpoint, the full powerpoint that I’ll be sharing with Bill Ryll and you can, because that one covers a lot of the stuff that you guys covered as well. I didn’t want to copycat or include stuff that you’ve already discussed. I wanted to just bring what’s new to the table for this discussion.

[1:52:49] Michelle: Yeah, that’ll be great. So just make sure you give me credit. I’m just kidding for anything that you bring up to Bill because I’m supposed to be talking to him too. Clark and I are kind of in a little bit of a competition trying to get the deed stuff out. So it’s been a little bit full credit

[1:53:02] Clark Aboud: for the draft deed. I mean, yeah.

[1:53:06] Michelle: No, and I give you full credit for all of this. That was I just

[1:53:10] Clark Aboud: Sa Sessions Landed and you could take William Law’s deeds to Bill Earle if you want.

[1:53:16] Michelle: No, no, you’re good. You go for it. You can interact with Bill all you want. I will, I will pass the ball to you. So thank you and I really appreciate it and yeah, we’ll just have to see where all of this goes. Yeah, and, and

[1:53:29] Clark Aboud: I’m not attacking RFM on this at all. I, I’ve listened to him for years and I, I appreciate his scholarship, but I just wanted to point out some of those mistakes that he made and kind of help fill in the holes. Yeah.

[1:53:47] Michelle: Yeah, I think that’s great and I wanna say to Bill and especially RFM. Like, like I like RFM. I don’t, I don’t, I did not like what went down with us, but I just did an interview with Maven. Let’s just move on and let’s look at evidence and like, just handle it. Like people that want the truth and, and adults who can just interact with one another without name calling that like, I was really disappointed in the number of in the amount of a hominem instead of just honest engagement. So I’m hoping that you can break in a little bit better and we’ll see where it goes. I, you know, I’m always making a plea like it does feel a little like it’s um, it’s kind of hard to be a woman in this space. There’s a lot of sexism that comes out. So maybe you’ll have a little better luck and open some doors that the rest of us can benefit

[1:54:29] Clark Aboud: from. Maybe Brian Hells will put some respect on that name. Still.

[1:54:34] Michelle: There we go. All right. Thank you, Clark. I’m hoping to talk to you again. All

[1:54:39] Clark Aboud: right. Sounds good.