True. It is evidence. And the fact that Dr. Cathy Baldwin-Johnson said anything at all, after refusing to make any public comment about Sarah Palin's birth story for more than seven months (from April 21, 2008 to November 3rd, 2008), is noteworthy. It is undeniable that this physician states that Sarah Palin has given birth to five children. The exact quote is: "She had four term deliveries in 1989, 1990, 1994, and 2000, and one pre-term delivery at 35 weeks gestation in 2008." However, and this is critical, at least some of this information are not "facts" that Dr. Baldwin-Johnson knows because she was there. It's information she's repeating because she's been given it by others.
A written statement from her doctor is evidence. It may not rise to the level of documentary evidence that you insist upon, but it IS evidence.
We have no way of knowing where much of the information came from. Actual files that were physically transferred to her office? Or a medical history that Sarah Palin filled out? And when might she have filled out this history? 1992? Or November 2, 2008?
This physician was not even practicing in Wasilla at the time of Palin's first two births. Yet the information about Palin's birth history is reported with all births listed equivalently: Births that Baldwin-Johnson may have attended and births that we know she could NOT have attended. So... which is which? No distinction is made.
We're supposed to "assume" that the information about the 2008 delivery is something that Balwin-Johnson knows about first-hand because it's "recent," but this is never explicitly stated. My guess is that this is exactly what the framers of the statement hope readers will assume. We've been told by Sarah Palin that Cathy Baldwin Johnson was at Trig's birth, but it's never been confirmed by anyone, in particular Cathy Baldwin Johnson. This statement also says that Trig was eligible to be born at his community hospital, but does not say he actually was. These ommisions are strking.
(And interestingly enough, there appears also to be a factual error in this supposedly "rock-solid" statement. Piper's birth year is listed as 2000. In every other source I can find, she's listed as being born in 2001, which jibes with her being seven throughout the campaign, and six when when the announcement was made that Sarah was pregnant in March. If she was born in 2000, at no point in 2008 could she have been six years old. Not a big deal, but one would think that this statement would not contain any errors, no matter how trivial!)
Again, everything else is just speculation. I don't care what birthing histories people have had. I don't care what people have read in text books or had described to them by medical members of their family. EVERYTHING being discussed here (of a medical/obstetric nature) is PURE SPECULATION.
It is NOT evidence. Of anything.
There are specific standards of care which are widely available. I am a medical professional who can comment "professionally" on all aspects of lactation and breastfeeding. I have attended over 100 births in a support/coach/midwife's assistant capacity, so while I am not a midwife or obstetrician, I have a solid - factual - grounding in exactly how laboring women behave and how labor is managed. My husband is a board certified physician who has reviewed most everything of a technical medical nature that has been posted by me, and he's written some of it. To say that it is not appropriate for a woman who has stated that she is eight months pregnant and who has stated that her amniotic fluid was leaking to be taking long airplane flights is not speculation. It's a fact. It's dangerous, ill-advised, and I challenge you to find one physician anywhere who will disagree with that. To say that the majority of women with a medical history similar to Palin's will give birth within 24 hours of amniotic sac rupture is not speculation. The majority will. This is a fact.
Numerous physicians who have posted on this site and others, and have given statements to the main stream media, have all agreed that from a medical standpoint, Sarah Palin's actions on April 17th, 2008 cannot be defended. It is evidence of either a blatant disregard for the health of her child and the comfort, well-being, and safety of her fellow passengers, OR it is evidence of untruthfulness.
Statements by SP's father - hearsay. Tick-tock on the day of the birth - speculation and hearsay.
Sarah Palin's father told KTUU news in an interview that Gov. Palin's water broke in Texas. How is this hearsay? He said it, and Palin confirmed it on 4/21. "Tick-tock" on the day of the birth comes from a variety of sources, but most notably Palin's own interview with the Anchorage Daily News (audio file here / transcript here). Palin herself describes her 4 AM contact with her doctor, her determination to give the luncheon speech, Todd's efforts to change the flights, and their decision to skip the evening reception. Alaska Airlines only has so many flights, and I have personally confirmed with the airline that their schedules have not changed significantly since April. Palin confirms their arrival back in Anchorage around 10:30 PM. How is this speculation and hearsay?
This is 3 people's highly personal medical histories that are being commented upon. It is a witch hunt. If we don't have the medical records, we cannot make assertions as to the factual nature of the circumstances.
In many cases, we cannot make absolute statements without medical records. But we don't have those records because they've never been released. Neither has a birth certificate. Nor has a simple, three sentence statement from Dr. Cathy Baldwin-Johnson, to wit: "Trig Palin was born on April 18th, 2008 at Mat-Su Hospital in Palmer, Alaska. Sarah Palin is his biological mother. I was personally present at his birth."
Much on this website is speculation. But much is not, and ironically this commentator has chosen to call into question some of the best documented information available. Most of what we know concerning the timetable of the events from 4/17 and 4/18 is from Palin's own words, or from sources that we should be able to consider absolutely reliable like official press releases from the State of Alaska press office. Most of what we know of her labor is from her own words.
The question is not: fact or speculation?
It is: truth or lie?