Wednesday, October 15, 2008

Speculation About Willow

For the last few days, we've seen a fair number of comments which suggest that, given the evidence that Sarah may not be Trig's mother combined with Levi Johnston's statement that Bristol is due on December 18th (which would preclude HER giving birth to Trig), someone else must be the mother. The Palin's second daughter, Willow, has been mentioned.

What are the facts here? As I was trying to do a bit of research this morning, the first thing I tried to track down is just how old Willow Palin is, and surprisingly I had some trouble. Numerous places list her birthdate as: 1/21/94. This would make her currently 14 years old, turning fifteen in January. However, many other places, including Wikipedia, USAToday, and Zimbio claim that she was born in 1995. In addition, the official State of Alaska press release at the time of Trig's birth states that she was 13 at that time. If she'd really been born on 1/21/94 she would have been 14 already last April.

However, let's assume for the sake of this question that she was born on 1/21/94. She would have been 14 last April, and 13 at the time of any conception. Do 13 year old girls get pregnant? Certainly they do. But what evidence, other than speculation, do we have that this thirteen year old got pregnant in summer 2007 and gave birth in April 2008?

I can find none.

First, we KNOW that rumors existed that Bristol was pregnant.

Second, in Alaska, compulsory education laws require that young people attend school through age 17. Bristol turned 17 on 10/18/07, meaning that at any point after that date she could leave school, no questions asked. This is frankly one of the reasons I think we are having trouble tracking down info about Bristol - because she was not required to be in school. The same would not have applied to Willow. At 13, her parents could not have simply kept her out of school, even if her mother were the governor.

Third, we have Wasilla caterer Sue William's statements that it was Willow's eighth grade boyfriend that would not shut his mouth that Bristol was pregnant in April. As we've said earlier, Sue Williams, while having some pretty significant misgivings about Gov. Palin, initially stated in her posts that she believed that Sarah WAS the mother of Trig, and she was arguing that Bristol was pregnant last April already with her current pregnancy. That's not the issue of this post, but I mention it only to make the point that it rings true to me - that Willow's boyfriend really was saying these things. It is a very specific (and uncalled for) piece of info and would be an odd thing to fabricate. Remember, Sue Williams posted this BEFORE the McCain campaign announced that Bristol was pregnant. I can think of no reason for Sue Williams to make this up. Furthermore, she doesn't just say "boyfriend," she says "eighth grade boyfriend," indicated that Willow was in school. Willow's boyfriend is hardly going to be walking around Wasilla blabbing that Bristol is pregnant if it's really his little friend who is 6-7 months along.

Sixteen - seventeen year old girls get pregnant. It happens all the time, and most people are willing to simply accept it and move on with not much more than a shrug and a sigh. I wouldn't give a rat's rump if Bristol had had a baby last spring. The reason I have an issue with it is my perception that her mother may have lied about it and politicized it in numerous different ways. But in a small town, people are not going to accept a thirteen year old getting pregnant with the same level of tolerance. Since this is below the age of consent in Alaska (16) I doubt if even the governor could have totally circumvented some sort of legal intrusion.

So to summarize:

Willow would have been terribly young at the time of conception. While some information indicates she would have been 13, other data indicates she would have been 12.

No rumors exist anywhere that this was true. For a 16 year old young woman to get pregnant, most people shrug and say... these things happen. People are not going to be nearly so tolerant when the same thing happens to a 13 year old. They will talk.

Compulsory education laws would have made her disappearance from school far harder to manage.

We have one first hand, and I believe credible report, that a school "boyfriend" of Willow's was telling people that Bristol was pregnant during the exact time period we are interested in.

Age of consent laws in Alaska would have made legal scrutiny much more difficult to avoid.

I have tried very hard to allow posters pretty much free rein on this site, and I intend to continue to do so. But I also encourage everyone to remember that Willow, Piper and of course, Trig, are minor children who have not asked for any of this. (Bristol turns 18 in three days.) I have tried very hard to be sensitive to the children. I would ask that my readers do the same.

Update: Here is a video of Sarah Palin right after Todd won is first Iron Dog snowmobile (sorry, snow machine) race in 1995. She's holding a toddler who has to be a one year old Willow. This proves, I'd say, that the 1994 birth date is correct, and places that have Willow listed as being born in 1995 are incorrect.

50 comments:

Lady Rose said...

Wish there was some way to track down the kid who was saying Bristol was pregnant and what information he had.

Too bad we can't offer folks witness protection in order to get to the truth

Anonymous said...

Audrey,

As the posted most aggressively asserting that Willow COULD be Trig's mother, I want to point out that her age has little to do with it. From photographic evidence, she is clearly CAPABLE of having a child in April 2008. I note that Andrea Mitchell of NBC mistook her for Bristol when she was holding Trig at the GOP Convention!

Further, that stated fact that Willow a) had a boyfriend, and b) said boyfriend was telling anyone who would listen that Bristol was pregnant, says that he was trying to spread a story.

You argue that the story must be true because you can't figure why he would fabricate it. I would submit that the story could be intentionally false to distract from Willow being pregnant and have Bristol take credit for the baby.

While Willow was required to be in school by law, that doesn't mean she was. I read somewhere that she switched schools also.

One other thing, the Dr.'s specialty was CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE. That wouldn't apply to Bristol, but it would to Willow.

I, too, am sorry to bring Willow into this. But we must not let delicacy prevent discovery of the truth when public officials have lied to us about critical matters. I'd let the faked pregnancy go, but covering it up to run for VP is out-of-bounds.

Dangerous

micky-t said...

I am so impressed with how Audrey is handling this subject and keeping the lid on creating rumors.
Her number one point is to pose questions of the integrity of someone who is running for vice president. We have [had?] a right to pose these questions and should be able to get answers. The fact that nobody will answer these questions is what scares me the most. The act of deception in politics is getting out of hand.

Anonymous said...

Audrey is doing an incredible job. Her clear writing and continued composure in a climate that could easily descend into rabble-rousing is truly impressive. I too would hesitate to bring Willow into this, and yet I've felt for a while that the truth must be so damaging that it's even worse than what we suspect, as Bristol having a baby in April would not have demanded such an expansive a cover-up. On the other hand, a fair amount of the suspicion is centered around waterbreakgate. Since Palin is clearly a storyteller, could this have been a spontaneous tall-tale of hers that backfired? Not to say there isn't still overwhelming circumstantial evidence here, but it's hard to verify pieces that only came straight from the horse's mouth (and no, I'm not calling Sarah a horse...just a figure of speech).
Lower 48

Anonymous said...

The Enquirer has been all over this and even its reporters would not dare to make up the outlandish and libelous rumors that this blog has generated. In fact, despite waving millions of dollars around Alaska, the Enquirer can't even PAY someone to even make up a weak story. WHY?

IT IS EXACTLY WHAT IT IS: Gov. Palin gave birth to Trig. Bristol is currently pregnant with her first baby.


Freedom of Speech is essential to our society here in America, but this does not mean people are free to say and repeat statements which are damaging to the reputation of private individuals.

As a public figure, Sarah Palin's actions - both professional and personal(when germane) - should be subject to a vigorous review. Her children, however, are not public figures. Moreover, they are minors.

Some of the participants in this blog are treading on dangerous legal ground. Truth , of course, is always the ultimate defense; truth, however, is something this blog is woefully short of.

Anonymous said...

people would love to confuse us but the truth will not stay hiden for long as soon as 1 of these people figure out Sarah Palin is NOT going to be VP they will be gald to talk I say It will be Levi's mother after her son get FIRED from his madeup job. He quit school to work on some oil rig with an 11th grade education don't most jobs like this take a high school diploma or a GED and quiting school means NO HOCKEY thought he loved hockey. In the end the loser will be Levi. And when his mother see that the Palins only plan was to protact them self she will NOT stand by and let them ruin her son.

Standing Against Abuse of ALL KINDS

Anonymous said...

The truth could easily be established by the release of Sarah Palin's medical records. She refuses to do it. Her birth story makes no sense. The delivering doctor -- Dr. Cathy Baldwin-Johnson (who doesn't even make sense as the delivering doctor of a high risk baby since Dr. Baldwin-Johnson is a family doctor, not an oby-gyn) suddenly lacks hospital privileges at the Mat-Su Regional Medical Center. It all stinks.

And I beg to differ about Sarah "Tight Abs" Palin's children not being political figures. She uses them as political cover and drags them everywhere like toy poodles - she has made them public figures by her own actions. You can't have it both ways. Give me privacy except for when I choose to use my children as political props.

And again, I an convinced that Bristol will be adopting a child on December 17 as part of the cover-up.

Mary G. said...

I just emailed an article to this website (I don't know how to link
things) posted last night to the Wall Street Journal blog that has Palin declaring she discovered Trig's Down Syndrome "midway" through the pregnancy--so the work in progress continues. I hope you can link this, Audrey--as well as the Johnstown rally. All I get of it on Youtube is some scary racist stuff.--mary

Anonymous said...

First, let me clarify that I have only stated that Willow COULD be Trig's mother, which is a statement of fact based on her physical development, no matter her age. Photos from 2007 provide indisputable visual evidence that Willow was capable of having a child.

Whether she is actually Trig's mother is just a possibility.

Sarah Palin is a public figure and, absent malice, cannot successfully sue for slander or libel. As far as her children go, we are all only speculating as to Trig's actual parentage. None of us knows for sure.

It is correct that truth is an absolute defense for slander or libel. And any suit or either tort is subject to full discovery and puts the suing party's reputation at issue.

Therefore, for the anonymous post directly above this one, we'll all take your legal suggestion under advisement.

I do want to point out that you, too, are only speculating that Sarah is Trig's mother. You don't know for sure nor offer any proof that would hold up in a court of law. Further, unless you have evidence that the National Enquirer is actually waving money in front of people to talk about such things, the fact that they haven't published anything on this topic is no proof that our speculation isn't true. Also, stories paid for without documentation to support them are easily discounted as hearsay or fabrication or both.

The one item that does deserve some follow-up as being probative is WHEN Willow's purported boyfriend was telling everyone that Bristol was pregnant!

The Bristol-is-pregnant rumors were swirling back in early 2008, before she was supposedly pregnant for with her current pregnancy, correct? Under the 'official' Palin calendar, noboy would know she's pregnant until the end of April at the earliest.

So, Audrey, what can you tell us about the TIMING of the Bristol-is-pregnant rumors, since I seem to recall that those rumors were floating around the time that Sarah announced to the stunned (and disbelieving) masses that she was pregnant.

If Willow's boyfriend was spreading the Bristol-is-pregnant rumor in early 2008, it would be interesting to know why.

Dangerous

Anonymous said...

Again, as to Sarah Palin's children being private or political figures, she has thurst them into the political limelight to serve her cause. The "common people" are supposed to relate to her and vote for her because she knows what it is like to be a hockey mom. That's Sarah Palin's whole schtick - I'm a mom; I'm a mom; I'm a mom - I married my high school sweetheart; we're still married and I'm a hockey mom. As a hockey mom, I know what's best. Did I forget to tell you, I'm a mom.

Well, as a voter, I don't like what I see of the shctick at all. According to press reports, the oldest child of Sarah "I'm a Mom" Palin had a severe anger management problem on the hockey ice (alright he's a bully, like his mom) and a severe oxycontin addiction problem. Child number two is pot smoker and allegedly an underage drinker and wasn't smart enough to either not have sex or to use birth control.

Looking at Sarah Palin's children, I think she has a mother management problem - she's not exactly raising model citizens. Sometimes I feel she must want to be VP so badly so she can turn over her children to the Secret Service, so the Secret Service can have the job of keeping them out of trouble.

So, Sarah Palin, with your delinquent nightmare of a family, don't throw up your Hockey Momness in my face because frankly, it makes me sick.

Anonymous said...

If "it is exactly what it is"--then why is no one coming out with what IT is? One--ONE--piece of evidence. One photo. One eyewitness. Anything that could be fact-checked, and all of the speculation, even of the most implausible scenarios, would be over. I think even people that don't support SP would be relieved to find out it was just a "normal" event. I would. And I'm not a lawyer, but to prove libel wouldn't you actually have to bring forth evidence to refute the statements in question? Not looking too promising...

Another thing--it's not like this website is the only place out there to find these questions. Google "palin pregnancy conspiracy" and you get 450,000+ hits. And yet if someone was going to put up a counter-blog with evidence that Trig is Sarah's child, the only things they could currently show to "prove" the pregnancy would be (1) pictures of her after month 7 where she looks kinda sorta pregnant, and (2) "You must believe us because we say it is true."

So why is everybody holding back on the truth? It can only help her, right?

MC

Anonymous said...

Libel:

defamation by written or printed words, pictures, or in any form other than by spoken words or gestures

A violation occurs when the 'publisher' knowingly or with malice disseminates facts that are false and defamatory.

As someone who has knowledge of the inner working practices of the Enquirer, I can tell you with certainty that this publication will not (believe it or not) publish anything that they don't have at least a SHRED of hard documentary evidence for. This is not to say that the Enquirer is the paragon of great journalism, however, there is a reason that this gossip sheet has only ever lost ONE LAWSUIT in 30 years in spite of being sued DOZENS of times by people with deep pockets who have been truly defamed.

The Enquirer MUST have someone or something on record to publish bombshell stories. These reporters do not make up things - although they are very good at distorting the facts.

I am acquainted with several people from Wasilla who have been approached by the Enquirer who were offered money to talk. Obviously, some 'pals' and 'sources' have already talked about the alleged 'drug use' by Palin kids.

The Enquirer has aggressively pursued the Trig birth story and has yet to come out with anything substantive. Remember, this isn't about journalism - it's about moving paper at the checkout stands at the grocery store. If the Enquirer has ANYTHING - you can bank on it being published in the next few weeks. After Obama wins the election, S. Palin won't be all that interesting to anyone.

Why haven't some of you 'folks' tipped off the Enquirer with all the fine sleuthing you've been doing?

The Enquirer is about the right speed for people of your substance and mentality.

Anonymous said...

To the anon blogger who claims the Enquirer has been all over this....where did you read that? I have not seen that anywhere.
If you think you will scare us with your legal lingo....think again.
We live in the United States of America. We have freedom of thought and freedom of speech. This is not some fly by night rumor out there. We as Americans have a RIGHT to know if our politicians are being honest. I would NEVER vote for someone who had this amount of rumor and unanswered questions swirling around her. It's very simple, show the American people your medical records and a sworn statement from Dr. Cathy Baldwin Johnson that Sarah gave birth to Trig. Hell, for get the American people, show them to a panel of journalists, like McCain did. We aren't asking for the moon here, just the truth, quash the rumors. The McCain camp has said they will not release Palins medical records until after the election....why? What are you hiding?

Anonymous said...

Since we are going down this road, we should all remember that if Sarah Palin's labor and delivery story is TRUE, Palin exhibited some of the worst judgment I've ever heard of, and her doctor is guilty of malpractice if she abided that behavior at all.

To those attacking us, are you ready to admit that Sarah Palin's story is TRUE and, hence, indicative of her terrible judgment?

This is one reason we don't believe her. Nobody would admit to such reckless behavior and such poor decision-making judgment unless they had something far worse to cover up. But Palin wants to wear this story as a badge of honor, which makes me doubly suspicious because nobody is that dense, not even her.

I give it odds of no more than one in 1000 that she is Trig's mother.

Dangerous

Anonymous said...

Now that's much better people! As they say....OPINIONS are like A-Holes - everyone has one. It's one thing to express your OPINIONS - it's another to spread FALSE and misleading statements -especially statements about minors. This is actionable.

While touting freedom of thought and speech, please keep in mind another very cherished RIGHT we have in this country which is the RIGHT TO PRIVACY.

You have every right to criticize and condemn SP for what you believe to be poor judgment. You do NOT have the 'right' to state or even suggest that her husband impregnated a daughter. What you DO HAVE is exposure to legal consequences.

Veritas said...

Everyone needs to calm down. This website has been very careful about separating facts which can be proved from mere conjecture. The whole idea is that if Sarah Palin is telling the truth she could prove that with very little effort or loss of privacy. However, the Palin camp seems incapable or unwilling to substantiate any of Sarah Palin's crazy story. Why?

Anonymous said...

I think I may have the reason why Bristol's marriage is scheduled to take place next summer. If Bristol is breast-feeding Trig, that would giver her enough time to wean him off. After her marriage, Trig would be in the "joint" custody of Bristol and Sarah.

Why not marry now and let Levi bond with Trig? Because maybe he is not really Trig's father.

Anonymous said...

The naked truth is always chasing a well-dressed lie. Sarah Palin is lying. Trig is not her child. Not sure whose child he is but he is definitely not Palin's. Something is really wrong with this whole thing. Those of you threatening legal action. Get over it. A lawsuit may just bring out the truth and I don't know if you want to really hear the truth.

Anonymous said...

Hey, what's false and misleading about Palin and her kids?

Is it false and misleading that little Mrs. Moral Values delivered her son Track eight months after her elopement to the First Dude? You really expect the American people to believe the garbage that Mrs. Moral Value and Mr. First Dude eloped to spare their parents the expense of a wedding? We're not stupid. No, the undeniable fact is that Mrs. Moral Values was preggers when she tied the knot. Why doesn't she just admit it -- abstinence education doesn't work. Just say it Sarah -- abstinence didn't work for me and my boyfriend Todd before we were married and it didn't work for my daughter and her high-school dropout boyfriend. But you want to teach it to our children? Why, because they are smarter than you and Todd and Bristol and Levi? Or because you are one Tight Ab'd Hypocrite?

What else is false? That Track Palin had an oxycontin problem? Is that false? The campaign hasn't denied it. No one has sued the National Enquirer. If that is false, issue a denial and sue the National Enquirer. Have at it. Since you and Todd are already millionaires, you can donate the proceeds of any lawsuit to a drug education charity.

What else is false? That Bristol Palin is on videotape smoking pot and is a big boozer? Again, haven't seen any denials from the campaign. Haven't seen any lawsuits against the National Enquirer. Again, have had it. Prove that they are lying.

Finally, the richest part of the above post about supposedly false and misleading statements (obviously written by a Palin surrogate) is the paean to the "right to privacy." Now the only Supreme Court case that Sarah Palin has even heard of is Roe v. Wade, with which she fervently disagrees. Roe v. Wade, of course, is based on the 14th Amendment Right to Privacy, Oh, we don't like that Right to Privacy. The only Right to Privacy that matters is the Right to Privacy of my delinquent children. That's rich. Very rich.

Thank God, we still have freedom of speech in America. And here's Sarah "Tight Abs" Palin's epitaph -- "Alaskan politician widely suspected of faking the birth of her supposed 5th child."

Anonymous said...

Actually, the Enquirer did publish this on 9/12:

"When Sarah found out the teen was pregnant by high schooler Levi Johnston, she was actually banished from the house. As part of the cover-up, Palin quickly transferred Bristol to another high school and made her move in with Sarah’s sister Heather 25 miles away!"

As Audrey has pointed out, there have been corroborating sources (like the ass't principal at the high school in Wasilla) who have said that Bristol left school in the middle of last year and transferred to Anchorage. Also this reporter:

http://community.adn.com/adn/node/130240

at the Anchorage newspaper's politics blog, who writes that he actually talked to Heather Bruce, and was told that Bristol went to West High School in the spring. What month that means exactly is unclear.

Frankly, I kind of assumed that this was the paper's way of confirming the rumor (without saying it outright) that she was pregnant at the very least back in Dec 2007/Jan 2008. You can dismiss the Enquirer as a source, if you want to. Believe me, prior to the John Edwards story, I would have written it off as complete tabloid trash, as well. Now? Not so easy to do.

I think you can make the case that Bristol's whereabouts combined with every other "huh?!" aspect of this story are fair territory for questions. People are allowed to question. IMHO, I would let anything about Todd and/or Willow lie, since there is nothing (that I've seen anyway) that seems to beg an explanation for anything related to them.

MC

Anonymous said...

In my original posts on the subject, I made clear that Willow-as-Trig's-mother was a theory that could not be dismissed based on the available evidence.

If we later determine that Bristol could not have been Trig's mother, then everyone would have to accept that either Sarah Palin is Trig mother or Willow is. If Willow is eliminated out of hand, without any evidence unequivocally ruling her out, then Sarah Palin is in the clear on her lies.

We can't let the ICK-factor of Willow being Trig's mother serve as a de facto exclusion to the possibility, because otherwise we may be left with no other conclusion except one not supported by the facts.

As to the actionability of this in court: NOPE. Sarah Palin made her daughters public figures in this saga. And she forfeited her right to privacy by making statements to the press and public about her relationship with Trig. We have the right to determine if those statements were true. If she is claiming him as a dependent on her taxes, and that is false, she's committed a crime.

Anonymous said...

The post above is mine.

Dangerous

Anonymous said...

Yes, Dangerous, we all know the above posting is yours. It could only be yours. It's becoming a tiresome point. You've made it, so now let it be.

Anonymous said...

So, if we want to be able to ask questions, here's something that I think is laid out in a fair (i.e., non-libelous) way. I will come at it from the position of one who believes that SP gave birth to Trig...SO...here are my concerns:

Why did a woman with multiple risk factors ASIDE from carrying a child with Down's Syndrome AND delivering one month early (advanced maternal age, multiple pregnancies) willingly choose to give birth at a hospital completely unequipped for a high-risk delivery? A hospital that does not, according to some reports, even allow for high-risk deliveries?

Did she not know that she was carrying a child with DS, and only find out after delivery? No, that would go against her statements that she found out during the pregnancy.

So if she knew, logically, her doctor and other staff must have known. So she must have asked for and received special permission to deliver at MatSu Regional anyway. Why did she do that? Is it ethical for a doctor or hospital staff to give permission for this to happen?

These are my questions (well, on this aspect, anyway). I feel the answer "it is exactly what it is" doesn't cut it here, because that "it" seems to be a dangerous if not unethical situation. If any of these insiders on the blog now can clue me in to how this was cool with everyone at the hospital, it would be great to hear it. That would help clear up things a little bit, right?

MC

just someone who wants truth said...

I love this blog!

Anonymous said...

Yup. yup. Ya betcha love a blog where the participant IQ is even lower than the person they blog about. 'tis entertaining, I agree.

It feels like a 6th grade slumber party where everyone jams themselves into a closet to tell scary stories and conjure up ghosts!

I believe in Mary Wentworth. I Believe in Mary Wentworth. I believe in Mary Wentworth!

Anonymous said...

Here's another one. Sarah Palin drop the E from her last name in 1995. She was PALIEN. Coincidence? Hardly.

Keep up the great work oblogamasters.

AREA 52

Anonymous said...

Hmmm! Palien? She does LIE about EVERYTHING and she's the one who coined the phrase, "Obama is PALLING around with terrorists." Where did she get the word "palling" from if not from the first three letters of HER last name. I tell you the woman is evil and it appears that the witch hunter's laying of hands on her didn't work, except maybe in REVERSE!

Ohio Granny

Anonymous said...

An earlier post made an excellent point about the timeline.

As the commenter noted, The Enquirer (which as we know from the John Edwards affair story and many other stories, does take pains to get its facts right; it's rarely been sued successfully for libel) published on 9/12:

"When Sarah found out the teen was pregnant by high schooler Levi Johnston, she was actually banished from the house. As part of the cover-up, Palin quickly transferred Bristol to another high school and made her move in with Sarah’s sister Heather 25 miles away!"

The earlier poster then went on to say:

"As Audrey has pointed out, there have been corroborating sources (like the ass't principal at the high school in Wasilla) who have said that Bristol left school in the middle of last year and transferred to Anchorage. Also this reporter:

http://community.adn.com/adn/node/130240

at the Anchorage newspaper's politics blog, who writes that he actually talked to Heather Bruce, and was told that Bristol went to West High School in the spring."

Now. If Bristol is now six months pregnant, that would have made her date of conception sometime in late March, correct? But the rumors of Bristol's pregnancy were already widespread by April, according to Sue Williams (the Wasilla blogger quoted by Audrey in several posts). That's pretty early for Bristol to have discovered her pregnancy, confirmed it, told people, and had them tell others.

Even more telling, Bill McAllister, now Palin's press aide, but at that time a news reporter in Alaska, was approached by Governor Palin sometime before her announcement of her "pregnancy" on March 5. She asked him if he had heard rumors about Bristol being pregnant.

Bristol was said to have been absent from school for months, and to have transferred in either the "middle of the year" or "spring"(spring being the semester that actually begins in Jan/Feb in the academic calendar.)

So, all this suggests that Bristol was pregnant well before March.

I think that Wasilla-based readers of this site should keep an eye out for a little bundle of joy arriving from somewhere ELSE in late December -- i.e., a baby put up for adoption that the McCain campaign has found and acquired in order to keep Palin's lies in play.

Anonymous said...

I too believe that Bristol will be adopting a baby.

Let's keep our eye on the "birth." I'm guessing a home "birth." I'm guessing Mat-Su hospital is tired of participating in cover-ups.

Anonymous said...

I was thinking home births too. I had imagined that the Palin family would become very alternative this time around and opt for a birth at home. Never know, they all might turn into bio-dynamic vegetarians as well. It's a wonder that Sarah didn't go for the home birth option last time.

Speaking of which she now seems to be an expert on autism according to John McCain. Where did that one come from? Autism is not Down's Syndrome.


Syd.

Anonymous said...

Tonight in the last presidential debate John McCain said how proud he was of his pick of Sarah Palin as his VP running mate because "she is such a great role model." Boy has he been snookered on that one. She was pregnant when she got married, her two oldest children have been living wild lives of teen-age drinking, drugs and sex and her daughter is (or was) pregnant out of wedlock. Not to mention the fact that she is not taking proper care of that family and her newborn baby (or grand-baby). McCain also seems to believe that a baby with Down syndrome is the same thing as an autistic child. Sarah Palin is anything but a role model in my book! She is George W. Bush in a skirt!

Ohio Granny

Anonymous said...

Concerning how it could happen in a hospital in the US ...

Present at the birth of Trig Palin at the Mat-Su Regional Medical Center would have been the mother, her physician, and at least one nurse. The birthing room would have been private in the obstetric area of the MSRMC. Family members would have had access to the birthing area but not other non-medical personnel. In the cold, dark, mid-April night in Alaska it would have been possible for a heavily-clothed, very pregnant Bristol Palin to come to the Medical Center obstetric area without anyone but the medical personnel realizing she was near delivery. Given that the medical personnel are prevented from releasing confidential medical information about the delivery, it is clear that the Bristol Palin could have given birth to Trig Palin and no-one outside the medical personnel and family would have known any better. The birth certificate would establish the maternal identity but it is confidential and the family has refused to release it.

Anonymous said...

Thank goodness this blog is getting visitors from all over this great nation of ours, including the state of Alaska. The American people are not stupid.

Let me tell you John McCain, my friend, that running mate of yours Sarah Palin is a role model for nothing other than being knocked up before marriage (as she was when she married Todd and delivered a baby 8 months later - her daughter Bristol now follows in her footsteps, although apparently Bristol doesn't think it's important to at least get married before the baby arrives) and negligent parenting.

But then what do you expect from John McCain, the role model for extramarital affairs. All good role models pick up 24-year old beer heiresses while still married. Nice of you to give a shout out to the hospitalized Nancy Reagan from the debate. The L.A. Times reported that Nancy Reagan was disgusted with you to you because of how you cheated on your first wife Carol, who happened to be a friend of the Reagans. http://articles.latimes.com/2008/jul/11/nation/na-divorce11

Of course, John McCain would see Sarah Palin as a good role model, given his own personal history.

Anonymous said...

No one ever talks about "Track." Is is possible he got a girl in trouble, they shipped him off to the army, they arranged a private adoption, it fell through b/c of the genetic tests and Palin's essentially "adopted" the child.

Anonymous said...

I have spoken to someone who actually felt the baby kick while Sarah was pregnant. This happened in Texas right before Palin flew back to Alaska.

Will he 'come forward' to lay these rumors to rest? NAH! Why would or should he?

The reason none of this is a concern to the Palins - or for that matter - the McCain Campaign - is that there is no truth to what is being said about the birth of Trig Palin in the blogosphere.

Those of you who are spreading vicious lies and gossip should feel ashamed of yourselves - but no doubt....you don't.

Anonymous said...

Re the last post, why doesn't Sarah "Tight Abs" Palin just release the medical records?

Then we wouldn't need a hearsay statement from someone in Texas who allegedly laid hands on Sarah's tummy. How about a statement from the infamous Dr. Cathy Baldwin-Johnston? After all, she would be more credible than the supposed Texas tummy toucher. But Dr. Cathy has gone MIA.

But I would also welcome the tummy toucher to the stage. We're waiting with bated breath.

Anonymous said...

I also find it interesting that the alleged person who touched Sarah's tummy in Texas was a male, according to the poster. What did she do, wink at him and he saw starbursts and just couldn't keep his hands off of her? Apparently, she has that effect on right-wing pundits.

pale by comparison said...

Hey anonymous yup yup, I find it hilarious that "you" stand out like a sore thumb as someone who can't discuss what's happening on this blog. The best part of this whole blog is that yup yups like you are few and far between.

Anonymous said...

"Re the last post, why doesn't Sarah "Tight Abs" Palin just release the medical records?"

Yes, with all of the bally hoo about Obama's birth certificate and whether he was born in Hawaii or in Kenya, how about producing Trig Paxson Van Palin's birth certificate? What's the big secret and what are they hiding? They think nothing of parading this infant all over the campaign stages all over America--what is so private about his birth certificate?

Ohio Granny

P.S. The very Republicans, Ken Blackwell in particular, who stole the 2004 election in Ohio, are now giving the Democratic Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner, a hard time about voter fraud. She had the courage to change our electronic voting machines back to paper ballots to stop the fraud that occurred with those Diebold machines!

Anonymous said...

Palin has put Trig’s birth story at the center of her platform. She has appealed to many Americans based on the idea that she knew she was carrying a Down Syndrome baby and that, walking the walk of the anti-abortion movement, she decided not abort him. (I agree with other posters that even using the word “decided” is mysterious, since the entire idea of anti-choice is that there is no decision involved.) If the reason Palin risked a miscarriage initially to have the genetic testing done that provided her with the information that the baby had Down Syndrome was to prepare for the high-risk birth, why did all her actions once her labor began fly directly and recklessly in the face of that kind of preparation? We all like to think that we can easily go on having babies into our forties, but the facts remain that these are high-risk pregnancies. It’s just science and it’s indisputable. Palin had a high-risk pregnancy simply by virtue of her age. Secondly, she was carrying a high-risk baby who arrived a month early. Is everyone aware that many Down Syndrome babies need to be resuscitated immediately upon birth? What if Palin had delivered on the airplane? What would have happened if the baby needed resuscitation? The defense is that her contractions had settled down and she knew she was not in labor. I know both sides are worked up about this — but really, honestly, if we’re being truthful, is there anyone out there with any experience giving birth that finds this even remotely reasonable? That you could know absolutely, 100%, beyond any possible doubt that after your water broke you could safely get on a plane because you knew for sure you were not in labor and would not go into labor anytime soon? Most women wouldn’t even fly this late in a pregnancy let alone after their water broke. So first we have the incredible journey back to Alaska. Next we have to deal with the fact that Palin risked the baby’s life by delivering in a place which was not equipped to handle special needs situations. The entire point of the amnio was so she could be prepared, i.e., have on-hand a staff experienced with high-risk births. Why did she then choose the opposite? We can only thank God nothing went wrong.

Lower 48

Anonymous said...

Lower 48:

Maybe if Trig is HER baby, she was taking the high risk on purpose?

Ohio Granny

Morgan said...

I'm thinking that the "Anonymous" who would never believe the credible rumors of Palin's pregnancy probably does believe that Obama is a terrorist.

Consider the source, people, and just laugh when he/she makes comments about the IQ of others. She's a Palin supporter. I think that says it all.

Anonymous said...

After last night's debate, I'm even more certain that Obama will win this election.

So here's some free advice to the McCain campaign.

Remember how the original Trig baby controversy caused a huge surge in viewership of Sarah Palin's acceptance speech and a lead in the polls for McCain. They can replicate that again.

Just ask Sarah to hold an open news conference. Someone is bound to ask about Trig. Pretend to be very outraged, even incensed. Talk about liberal bias of the media. Make it all about culture wars. Make sure it becomes the front page news story for a couple of days, drowning out all other issues. Make sure this is all what the right and left talk shows obsess over 24/7.

Then Whammo, after a few days, have a press conference with Dr. Cathy, produce the birth certificate and other records verifying that Trig is indeed your son.

That will create a tidal wave of sympathy that will propel you to the White House.

Please Sarah can you do it? You don't even have to thank me for suggesting such a wonderful idea!!!!

sunman

Morgan said...

Pffft. The only way they'd let Palin hold a press conference would be if that self-righteous blowfish Sean Hannity were the only "journalist" allowed in the room.

A team of 10,000 sled dogs couldn't drag that woman into a room where she'd have to face open questions.

Ima Sikadis said...

The poster, Lower 48, makes some valid and thoughtful points. She raises the kind of questions that should be answered about the birth of Trig and Sarah Palin's judgement (assuming she was the one who gave birth.)

Many of us in Alaska also questioned this at the time, but hey...when it comes down to it...none of it was really any of our business. We just did the tsk tsk huh?? amongst ourselves.

That's changed now - hasn't it? I would urge you to keep asking the questions and making the noise.

Name-calling and ad-hominem attacks certainly do not advance the credibility of this blog. Furthermore, as an earlier poster brought up - some of you are treading very close to libel.

A healthy and vigorous discussion of facts - not hearsay - will do much more to bring the truth to the surface.

Anonymous said...

the childish talk reminds me of the mean girls and bullies on the playground. call me gone.

Gadfly said...

I had a guy approach me with the Willow idea almost three weeks ago. I shot down all his claims, pointed out the sexual abuse issue, etc. (He claimed "all sorts of insiders" knew about this.)

I pointed out that, if this were true, federal law required them to report that.

It eventually turned out he planned to write a thinly veiled novel about that, and I advised him to hire a good lawyer. (His "all sorts of insiders" claim was of course a lie.)

I have been on this since late September. Here’s my main blog post.

Anonymous said...

Here is a great link to all the missing information:

Consider This

donz said...

That video clip you linked (great find, btw) appears to show Palin holding Bristol, not Willow. The behavior of the child -- chewing gum and wiping her forehead -- seems more likely of a four-year-old rather than that of a one-year-old.

The clip can be confirmed as from 1995, mid-February:

http://www.irondog.org/previous_races/champions.htm