Monday, December 15, 2008

Elan Frank Screenshots

Many questions have been raised about these particular screenshots, and I have decided to share them here.

Because the images are taken from an online video source, the resolution is very poor compared to higher quality jpeg images that can be downloaded. Nevertheless, some detail is clear, and, with brightness and contrast adjusted to emphasize detail, what we can see is very odd.

Israeli filmmaker Elan Frank filmed Gov. Palin for four days in early April this year, 2008. I have contacted Mr. Frank's office to determine the exact dates, and have not received an answer. However, we know for a fact that one of the four days was April 8th. In other words, this footage is from approximately ten days before Trig's birth, and within one week of the "April 13" pictures that we have discussed at length.

I originally discussed one still shot available from this shoot in this post. Here is the shot. Here is a Flickr page with some larger versions of the photo. (Interesting to note that this photo was originally released by the Governor's media office, though now it's no where visible on the state website. It's also interesting to note that many places that are still showing this photo are showing a cropped version that stops just below her neck.)

In my original post on this picture, I stated that while it is clear that there IS something there, the "something" looks wrong. This looked then, and still does, like some sort of flat pad. This "tummy" lacks the taut roundness that pregnant bellies typically have by 33-34 weeks gestation. I also stated, at the time, that I was very bothered by the fact that if you look carefully at the very bottom of the photo, as her belly is silhouetted against her blue jacket (our right, her left, closest to Frank) it almost appears as if her belly is getting slimmer again at the very bottom of the picture. But if one tries to envision anatomy, you realize that this is roughly the level of her navel. Now do a Google image search for pregnant women at 33 weeks. See the problem? Pregnant bellies at this point do not look like a flat pad whose "bulk" is mostly above the level of the navel, and then get thinner below.

This screen shot was taken on the same day as the photo above, based on her outfit and accessories which are identical.

Anyone can get this same screen grab. The embedded Fox videos from YouTube are on this page of my website.

As before, at first glance, it doesn't seem like you can tell much. Just another mass of black. But even in the poor quality screen grab, there is additional data that you can't see at the median settings. But by adjusting the brightness and contrast, all of a sudden, more becomes available.

Here's an intermediate adjustment.

A delineation begins to be visible below the bottom of the belly and the legs.

Now a second adjustment.

Yes, it's hard to make out exactly what you're looking at here; the initial screen grab just doesn't have enough date to make a really clear shot. But the overall impression here is that we are looking at something that is rectangle shape. While indistinct, a clear "corner" can be seen on the left side of the belly. There is a line ... a STRAIGHT line ... at the bottom this belly that is not consistent with a normal pregnant woman's anatomy. I have personally seen thousands of pregnant women in my life. Fuzzy or not, I have never seen anything that looks quite like this.

A reader sent in this (rather odd) photo of a young woman dressed up in a costume, with a pillow under her shirt to make her look fatter. Look familiar?


1 – 200 of 219   Newer›   Newest»
Anonymous said...

She should have sprung for a better fake belly.

hrh said...

Congratulations on yet another coup!

Reminder: As I wrote before, trolls on liberal/progressive/left sites are often paid by their reich wingnut handlers for each response to their comments. You wanna be putting money in their pockets?

BTW, visitors to reich wingnut sites are almost always immediately banned if they write anything antithetical to the site. That is, if they write anything truthful!

sjk from the belly of the plane said...

it a bouncing baby PILLOW!

Anonymous said...

Oh man, this is really getting freaky now. With many of the other pictures I thought, okay, well maybe it was the lighting or the position. But THIS my friends, this is truly creepy. She is just crazy enough that I wouldn't put anything past her at this point. L.A. in S.F.

Emily said...

Wow....that, to me, is the most damning picture I've seen on this website.

Pregnant bellies do NOT look like that. The bottom of the bump should be rounded, forcing her to sit with her legs apart.

It should not end in a flat delineation.

Anonymous said...

Once again, the picture analysis is inconclusive. But she is, once again, wearing a jacket indoors which does conceal her mid-section from close examination from the side. This is a look that she started purportedly to disguise her pregnancy (per SP's own admission), and continued even well after she announced her 'pregnancy'.

While there are any number of rational explanations for continuing this look, from 'she was cold' to 'she decided she liked the look', it is also a reasonable explanation that she wanted to continue to disguise her midsection the entire time for the same reason that she initially stated: she wanted to "camouflage" the truth of her condition with her clothing.

After she announced the condition she was trying to hide, there would be no rational reason to camouflage it with clothing. But if she wasn't actually pregnant, she would have every rational reason continue the camouflage to hide that she wasn't.

One other point here: Since nobody outside SP's sphere of direct influence claimed to have known about her pregnancy until she announced it publicly -- including her PARENTS -- we can reasonably conclude that there are not many peopl who have direct knowledge of the facts that could 'spill the beans'. If there were, SP never could have expected to successfully disguise the truth at all. If, say, a dozen of Bristol's friends knew that she was due in May, the Palins would have to know that a claim that SP was the mother would immediately fail.

This is a plausible explanation to Craig and other who claim that National Enquirer or other would have uncovered the truth by now.


Anonymous said...

Why haven't any of her close friends or family stepped forward to defend her -- sharing that they felt the baby kick, have photos of her without the jackets and scarves, went to the OB with her, or other close observations? If they are reading this site, they wouldn't be treated as trolls if they shared this in a straightforward manner, or emailed photos to Audrey to prove her wrong.

No one seems to be doing this. Why? Wouldn't you fiercely defend you friend/family if you had the proof?

wayofpeace said...

one thing has become clear about SP: she has a low-level of awareness about the world around her, ie: the turkey-kill right under her nose.

which led her to assume that she could camouflage a pregnancy thru very rudimentary means.

this new photo-evidence just proves that: she thought that as long as she was padding her belly, it'd be enough to fool everyone.

she was not counting on people with middle to high critical thinking skills as well as acute visual intelligence.


BTW, can anyone speculate how much it'd cost an airline to make an emergency landing?

beyond the risk factor and the inconvenience to the passengers and crew: it seems to me that hefty landing fees, emergency equipment, extra fuel cost, etc would have resulted if SP would have gone into labor while in flight.

Anonymous said...

Again, pregnancy proof goes "poof"! Great work. Any thoughts on what Elan Frank probably knows or does not know? I vaguely recall reading quotes by him saying very flattering things about SP and seemingly confirming that she was pregnant.

My own hypothesis, based on no evidence, is that he must have been in on the scheme. SP may have told him that the only way she would grant his request to film her was to keep a secret about her special condition. Otherwise, he might have guessed based on the bad pillow prop what was going on and then later outed her.


Drew said...

"Reminder: As I wrote before, trolls on liberal/progressive/left sites are often paid by their reich wingnut handlers for each response to their comments. You wanna be putting money in their pockets?"

I've been lurking for awhile, but needed to comment on this-

PLEASE stop with the comments that have absolutely nothing to do with the post at hand and are only there to promote further conspiracy.
Skeptics visiting this site for the first time will read a comment like this and be turned off immediately. If I hadn't navigated here myself I would have sworn this was No Quarter or Texas Darlins' site.
If you have proof that "reich wingnut" handlers (someone obviously never taught you about Godwin's law) are paying people to post comments on left-wing sites- then start your own blog about it. Otherwise, please leave- you're only harming the discourse.

Perry said...

Yes, another picture that verifies that she didn't look pregnant. Honestly, I don't understand the fixation with these pictures. There were plenty of eyewitness reports, reported in the MSM, that she didn't look pregnant. I don't think pursuing this line is going to get us anywhere. She didn't look pregnant. That's not in dispute. But it's not proof. We need documents.

ABS said...

In the first picture, the thing that looks most strange is her chest. It looks like she's wearing one of those fake bellies that includes a padded bra.

I always thought that the picture of her poking her belly looked as fake as fake could possibly get.

Unless and until people in Alaska start speaking up, the truth of this matter will not come to light.

Anne said...

I agree this doesn't look right. At that point in pregnancy the belly (for want of a better description) extends all the way down to the pelvic bone, if you know what I mean. It can't end or crease or fold there!

Also in the video of this when she is beating on it and kind of making it shake like jello - she beats on it quite forcefully which would hurt or at least feel quite uncomfortable - rubbing it or patting it gently is ok - but beating it to make it bounce? That's not right.

Anonymous said...

To Perry, documents would be great, but the reports that she "didn't look pregnant" were reports that she looked like a non-pregnant woman not that she looked fake pregnant as she clearly does in these photos.

Lower 48

sjk from the belly of the plane said...

its that darn gotcha "Photoshop" again!

Anonymous said...

Godwin's Law: "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one." Cute.

Drew: Your point re tolerance for all others (including presumably trolls/Palenites/etc.). is well made. I have been guilty of being too judgmental along those lines myself. I think being civil is the key. If someone makes what appears to be disingenuous arguments, I think it is fair to (politely) call him or her out on that. And if the site seems to be swarming with trolls, pointing that out for the edification of newbies strikes me as defensible.

Also, I for one appreciate good humor - even though the issues we are dealing with are very serious.


Anonymous said...

It is now time for one of the Palin's to come forward before it is too late. Show us or tell us something concrete to prove Sarah was pregnant, because this is now beyond a shadow of a doubt a pregnancy pillow. There is no baby under that shirt which is why SP took to wearing jackets inside. When you are pregnant, especially at that late stage, you are always hot and sweaty. Grant it, I was very pregnant in the summer in Northern VA, but I sometimes took two or three showers a day.

Any Alaskans visiting this site need to seriously start investigating this bizarre pregnancy and birth.Contact the hospital board, etc. Sarah needs to come forward with real medical records, DNA test or something concrete, because the photographic evidence to refute her claims are mounting.

FW from VA

Anonymous said...

"BTW, can anyone speculate how much it'd cost an airline to make an emergency landing?"

I can't, but it's something I've thought of. SP, who is only aware of her own wants, gave no thought at all to the cost and inconvenience of other people on the flights, or of the airlines.


Perry said...

Lower 48,
Yes, I agree.
But these photos are not going to change the minds of anyone who believe she was pregnant. And to those of us that believe she wasn't pregnant, these pictures are just preaching to the choir.

Pictures are a rabbit hole. Fun to look at, but ultimately, they aren't going to prove anything.

jeanie said...

I've just gone over a few shots of Bristol from the RNC. What strikes me is the marked difference in how much more Bristol, a 'first' pregnancy at age 17, shows at 24 weeks than Sarah at age 44 showed at 32 weeks.

Are they getting better at faking? Or is Bristol really just showing a lot and at maybe 21 or 22 weeks because it's her second?

I don't have photoshop, but it would be interesting to see if any artifice shows up in the photos of Bristol. I don't want to tread on sensitive ground - and I have nothing but sympathy for Bristol and her crazy situation - whatever it may be - but these photoshop adjustments are remarkable in their ability to show stuff that isn't visible to the naked eye...

Anonymous said...

Yesterday morning I listened to the audio at adn which I have linked to here -

If you look on the right hand side of the page click on the audio and listen very closely as Todd prompts Sarah's answers to the journalists questions.

I was also immediately struck by SP's answer to a question regarding whether she had to conceal her pregnancy whilst boarding the plane home from Texas. Sarah's reply is worthy of close attention as she implies that she would not have had to conceal herself because she never looked very pregnant and that others did not believe that she looked pregnant either. I believe that this remark is in direct contrast to the huge bump that is visible in the so called "official" pregnancy photos which are referred to by many as proof that Sarah had indeed been pregnant.

It is important to remember that we believe that these photos were taken about one week before Trig's birth. Looking at these would you have any doubt, on sight, that this woman was in an advanced state of pregnancy? How then could Sarah possibly imply that she did not look very pregnant on the day she travelled from Texas over one week later? Can anyone explain this to me?


Anonymous said...

Thank you, Audrey, for your continued insights and for your obvious commitment to total transparency.

If there are "opposition voices" new to the blog (and as Bristol's due date nears, I'm sure more newbies will be checking in), I would only ask that you state your arguments in a lucid, rational, respectful and scientific manner. Lots of people on here want to hear a strong opposition voice; it DOES strengthen an argument to anticipate and allay opposition.

But I, for one, have been extremely disappointed in the intellectual caliber of "the opposition voices" thus far on this site. They can be categorized into three types:
#1) Use of "ad hominem" attacks ("You idiots! You fools! You idiotic fools!");
#2) distractions tactics, e.g."pay no attention to the man behind the curtain ("Who says Trig was at risk if her water leaked in Texas? And how can you prove this if no one else has?");
or #3) repetitive, tedious denial ("I am covering my ears and yelling 'I can't hear you, I can't hear you, and I won't look at pics either.'")

I await an opposition voice worthy of Audrey's well-stated arguments and questions.

Anonymous said...

Well, there is a clear straight line visible at the bottom of her 'belly'. and a sharp corner, too, as if she was wearing a pillow instead of a so-called empathy belly. (Too cheap to even invest one?)

What I also kind of found weird was that she would drum her belly - when I was pregnant, at that stage, I would not 'drum' my belly, but I would lovingly RUB my belly, in a caressing way, or put my hand on it PROTECTIVELY. Drumming is a violent act to me - at least at that stage in a REAL pregnancy!

Anonymous said...

First of all WOW. No doubt. No Doubt. Second, a few Palin-related stories of interst have popped up. First this on People.come:,,personsTax:BristolPalin,00.html talking about what a great grandmother Palin, will be :). I find the whole Bristol pregnancy perplexing. I can't think of another person who would have had that baby but the current pregnancy is messin' with my head.

Okay, next, we have THIS:
My question is COULD those BlackBerry's, those emails, have ended the mystery entirely??

Anonymous said...

When you look at SP's history of actions as Mayor and Governor, a definite pattern emerges. She appointed people to positions if they were for her but immediately got rid of them if they had any criticism.

Remember Anne Kilkenny? She said she didn't have a job that could be taken away. Bill McAllister has a family to support. Maybe Dan Carpenter doesn't. Dr. Baldwin-Johnson has a practice to maintain.

I've tried to think of what motives would cause so much secrecy. I think it is self defense.

Follow the names of the reporters and commentators in Google, and you will see that even conservative reporters such as Dan Fagan have run into problems when they dared to criticize.

sandra in oregon

Anonymous said...

Wow, it looks like she was pregnant with Sponge Bob Square Pants!

Anonymous said...

This really does look like a pillow. A pregnant belly at that stage of pregnancy would be rounded below. It would be taut, rounded and, although one can sit with their legs together, the belly would be resting on her thighs. I don't care how 'high' you carry the child, that's just what happens.

KaJo said...

jeanie, there IS always the chance that Bristol started wearing her mother's fake pregnancy belly 2 months earlier than her mother did... :)

Sunshine1970 said...

That is the strangest pregnant belly I've ever seen...

I think that's the nail in the coffin pic for me.

Audrey, keep up the good work with this site. Hopefully some day soon the deception will come out.

Hey, isn't Bristol due any day now to have her first--erm--next child?

Anonymous said...

Audrey & Everyone,

Great job....please keep up the hard work. The truth needs to come out and with your perseverance it will!

I was wondering, with regard to highlighting SP's fake belly. In order to sooth the doubters, how about you take a photo of an actual pregnant woman (maybe even SP herself from a prior pregnancy) and highlight the belly and show what the tummy would look like under similar circumstances? I'm sure the contrast would be astounding!



Anonymous said...

SP doesn't even need to release 'medical records'. How about she just tells us the dates, times and doctors when/where she had pre-natal visits and the amnio. We don't need the personal details, just her schedule so we can verify it. State insurance records should suffice.

I'll bet she won't do that, but can hardly cite medical privacy as a valid reason for her refusal. I doubt that Dr. CBJ flew around Alaska just to give her pre-natal exams. That would in itself be a red flag. Besides, who would pay for that? Or did SP continually fly back to Wasilla for pre-natal care, and who paid for that?

Considering that she is on-record having the people of Alaska pay for her to live in her own house, it would be really surprising if she didn't charge them for flights for pre-natal visits.

The facade is crumbling. I can feel it. But we lack the heavy artillary to destroy the barricades. Someone in Alaska with standing has to investigate her.


Craig said...

As per Perry:

"But these photos are not going to change the minds of anyone who believe she was pregnant. And to those of us that believe she wasn't pregnant, these pictures are just preaching to the choir.

Pictures are a rabbit hole. Fun to look at, but ultimately, they aren't going to prove anything."

Perry, I couldn't agree with you more!

Anonymous said...

I can't imagine a man alive (nay, even an OBGYN) who'd know more about how a pregnant belly looks than Audrey does. Audrey knows the Palin pregnancy was fake, and if she keeps agitating about it, nipping at the public's heels by whatever means she has, something or someone will come forward. If nothing more, her presence is an irritation to those who don't agree. And that's better than nothing.

I have NEVER in my life seen a pregnant woman beat her belly or even drum it. Just add that to the ever-expanding list of "things that don't seem right."

The final explanation for all these disparate bits may surprise us all. But I'll welcome anything that makes sense.

Sunshine1970 said...

@Anon December 15, 2008 11:44 AM
Well, there is a clear straight line visible at the bottom of her 'belly'. and a sharp corner, too, as if she was wearing a pillow instead of a so-called empathy belly. (Too cheap to even invest one?)

Not too cheap to invest, but more like she couldn't go out to buy/order online because if she did (or anyone connected to her did), records could be checked. And if they were looked at, well then the jig is up.

Sunshine1970 said...

Huffpost has some info on Bristol & the baby from People. It's gonna be a boy and is due on Dec. 20th:

It's a boy!

Morgan said...

I agree, Craig. People will see what they want to see. To me, if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and swims like a duck it's duck. But some people who don't see a duck will see a chicken, even if you hold up a picture of a chicken next to a duck for comparison, have an ornithologist attest to the fact that the duck is a duck, or hand them a DNA test proving it's a duck.

I think the hardcore Palin supporters will see the chicken no matter what, because to admit that the thing they're looking at may be a duck will be to admit they were taken for a ride.

For someone who wants to be seen as intelligent, realizing that they were so easily fooled can be a tough pill to swallow.

I have never been a Sarah Palin fan. I think she was an atrocious pick with delusions of adequacy. She was a bit player thrust into the major leagues, but she had too much pride to admit she wasn't up to the job she was offered.

Part of me feel sorry for her, but part of me doesn't because she's an adult and should have known better than to accept the VP nomination.

Her kids on the other heart goes out to them. Bristol, Willow, Piper, Trig - none of these kids deserve what's happened to them. They are victims. I hope they're not victims of a terrible lie that will only bring more shame on their family if it's found to be true.

But I'm afraid this story isn't going to have a happy ending. It's not because I want it to, but because I know a duck when I see one, even if part of me would like to think it's a chicken.

If this is exposed as a lie, the public will be the winner, because no politician should be able to get away with that kind of lie. However, those kids will be the losers and the pain it will cause those kids will be just another part of Sarah's legacy as a rather questionable mother.

KaJo said...

What do they call people like Craig and Perry, who cannot believe overwhelming circumstantial evidence like the revealing lightened brightened pictures?

Ah, "Doubting Thomas"... Seems to me I remember reading a story in the Bible about a doubting Thomas.

Jesus -- to convince the doubting Thomas -- invited Thomas to put his fingers in the wounds in Jesus' side, hands and feet. On doing that, Thomas then professed his faith.

I guess nothing else will do but to turn back the clock and let Craig and Perry feel Sarah Palin's "pregnant" belly.

I'll bet she didn't even let Frank Elan do THAT!


I've never been pregnant myself, but for up-close-and-personal experiences including bare pregnant bellies, I've seen my mother pregnant with my sister, and my sister pregnant with her own son.

I've never seen either of them, nor any other pregnant woman I've ever known, EVER thump on her tummy like a drum. Like Anon. @11:44 AM said, they'd rub their tummy, or just put their hands on their tummy (or invite someone else to do that) to feel the baby's movement. Not thump the poor thing!

Anonymous said...

I wonder what kind of trauma the fetus would have with the mother thumping the belly like that. It doesn't seem very respectful of its emotions.

sandra in oregon

Anonymous said...

I commented before about the "drumming" on the belly. I have carried two and I patted and rubbed my belly all the time but that drumming thing she did was odd.

Audrey, other mamas, from whichever side you're on--have you EVER seen anyone drum a belly quite like that? I have not

Anonymous said...

In the news report of the fire at the church in Wasilla, on the Anchorage NBC affiliate's web site I recall (unless some other affiliate) there is what appears to be a still photograph with a caption indicating that the photo depicts the Palin family arriving at the church. There is no further identification of the people and the photo is difficult to examine with the naked eye. However, it appears to be a photo of Piper, Willow, Bristol, Levi and Trig perhaps (being held by Levi). Has anyone else analyzed this photo, or seen any video of their arrival at the church? Is Bristol indeed in the photo? Does she appear pregnant?

Anonymous said...

To Perry and Craig, you are right on one point. We do need "proof." That's the purpose of this blog.

With all due respect, if this (ever-growing) "rabbit hole" (of amazing evidence) is pointless to you, please do us a favor, excuse yourselves and stop wasting your time.

In the meantime the rest of us truthseekers will continue to thank and support Audrey for/in her outstanding efforts to pick away at this MOUNTAIN of a FARCE that is the Sarah Palin 5th pregnancy. Thanks to sleuthing like hers, the final "proof" will eventually be known.


Sunshine1970 said...

@ anon December 15, 2008 1:13 PM

That looks like Sarah, Todd (carrying Trig), Piper & Willow (I think)

Here's a bigger img:

Picture of first family

luna1580 said...

wow, kathleen i just made myself listen to the audio -it's revealing! she was sooooo slow and stumble-ly with the story i was tempted to cut out half-way through, but i persevered.

as many have noted before, especially alex, people don't want to touch the birth story because it's so feminine and personal -and in the audio it's VERY clear palin knows this! she flusters terribly and even says (i'm paraphrasing) "....well, if you must ask such personal details..." when the female reporter from her home state touches it. the reporter practically apologizes, pointing out that she personally heard SP's father say the water broke in texas (that said, i think the reporter did a great job by asking these questions.)

when really pushed palin mentions "some leaking" and moves on. it's obvious by the whole tone of her story that she knew her actions could be criticized and is doing everything in her power to make her counter-points, despite the fact she was never asked to justify the story.

it's also amazing that she HERSELF -not the flight attendants- says that she wasn't big and didn't look very pregnant on the flight. how can anyone square that with the much discussed (here anyway) big belly pics from our friend andrea gusty?

everybody should listen to the ADN's audio that accompanies the article i've linked to so many times. at ADN -even though her stumbling uhms are a bit torturous!

great tip kathleen :)


Melly said...

ABS said, "Unless and until people in Alaska start speaking up, the truth of this matter will not come to light."

Pretty much my view. For the time being SP is not our business (non-Alaskans) and the birth of "her" baby is arguably a private matter. I believe she lied, but unless and until she runs for an office that directly affects (threatens) my life and family and community, the task of revealing the lie is in the hands of Alaskans. Otherwise it just seems like sport. Thanks to you, Alaskans have excellent evidence to start with.

Someone mentioned Anne Kilkenny, whose widely circulated email(easily found on Internet; I include only a few grafs here) was the first to sway me toward believing SP was Trig's mother. Kilkenny didn't make that the point of her email, and she may have been conned, too, of course. But I still think local opinion is best. Kilkenny said:

"She is enormously popular; in every way she's like the most popular girl in
> middle school. Even men who think she is a poor choice and won't vote for her
> can't quit smiling when talking about her because she is a "babe".
> It is astonishing and almost scary how well she can keep a secret. She kept her
> most recent pregnancy a secret from her children and parents for seven months.
> She is "pro-life". She recently gave birth to a Down's syndrome baby. There is
> no cover-up involved, here; Trig is her baby."

All I'm saying is, it's up to Alaskans. I'm feeling like a lousy snoop.

Anonymous said...

I want to clarify and confirm my post at 1:13 pm today. The photograph is from KTUU, Channel 2, the NBC affiliate. The photo of course was taken as the individuals were walking toward the Wasilla Middle School, where services were held after the fire closed the church.

luna1580 said...

morgan, "delusions of adequacy" is my new favorite phrase! thanks :)


Anonymous said...

Re:Huffpost/People Article

Is Chuck still talking? Methinks he probably needs to just keep quiet. His comments have already done enough for his family.

And conspicuously absent from this pregnancy tale, I mean article, is any mention of said baby's daddy.

(And if said baby does make his appearance in the next week or so, I will humbly eat crow.):)

wayofpeace said...

What Is Legal Evidence?

Evidence is anything you use to prove your claim.

Evidence can be a photograph ...

Evidence is more believable and trustworthy than what a person says....

Evidence may make something easier to understand. “A picture is worth a thousand words.”

Some things are hard to explain in words, while a drawing or photograph is descriptive and clear.

Explain that the photo “fairly and accurately” shows what is depicted in the photo as it appeared on the date relevant to your case.

For example: “This photo is a fair and accurate depiction of how my face and side looked two hours after the incident and for the next 2 weeks.”

Anonymous said...

Petition the National Enquirer to pay off some of Bristol's friends or even Levi Johnson to the tune of millions to prove that Palin is lying. Someone knows. Someone had to deliver this baby. Bristol probably told Levi she was pregnant. Someone knows something.
Money can get anyone talking.
And these aren't rich people...Levi's family that is. I would make it an offer they couldn't resist.
Would be a huge story....
And we would never have to see or hear from her again....

Anonymous said...

"I wonder what kind of trauma the fetus would have with the mother thumping the belly like that. It doesn't seem very respectful of its emotions"

I agree that it doesn't seem very respectful or even very gentle. I've been pregnant twice and I wouldn't have done that; I've never seen a pregnant woman drum on her abdomen. However, I doubt it affected the "baby" very much IF she were in fact pregnant. The baby is well padded with a heavy muscular wall and to actually injure it, Sarah would have had to hammer on herself hard enough to injure herself... and she wouldn't do that. She takes very good care of herself.

wayofpeace said...

Oh, Morgan,

your rebuttal is a classic, LMAO!!!

"...some people who don't see a duck will see a chicken, even if you hold up a picture of a chicken next to a duck for comparison, have an ornithologist attest to the fact that the duck is a duck, or hand them a DNA test proving it's a duck."

Anonymous said...

Is that SP in the yellow jacket going to the church? Is it just me or does she look SUPER skinny? Maybe she's stressed. Keeping secrets will do that to you...

Anonymous said...

To Sunshine 1970:

Thanks for clarifying the issue regarding the photo from KTUU.

However, all the reports I read astated that Sarah Palin was not at the services, but rather in Juneau attending to the state budget. Can anyone clarify that discrepancy?

I agree that it looks like her, and I agree that it certainly looks like Todd carrying a young child, pehaps Trig.

Anonymous said...

The picture going to the service when enlarged seems to be Todd carrying Trig, Willow in yellow, Piper, and Bristol in two layers. She could be pregnant there. There were reports that SP would be in Juneau and unable to attend.

About the trauma to the fetus, I was thinking of the noise factor, not the hitting.

sandra in oregon

ravenstrick said...

Some thoughts on a couple of things mentioned above.

"Drumming" on the belly. Oh poof! I think it's actually the most authentic thing in the video. I used to push back on my babies when they'd stick their feet in my ribs or kick really hard. I used to manuever them around to change their position by pushing one way on the top of my belly and the other way at the bottom. "Spin the baby!" My mother tells the story of grabbing my sister's big foot when it pushed out really far late in her pregnancy. Those little munchkins are REALLY well protected and as is said above, you'd have to harm yourself before you harmed the baby. I think her belly slaps are equivalent to patting a baby's bottom.

That said, I don't think this lady was pregnant. The size of her belly fluctuates too much during the time span and this is clearly NOT a preganancy under that shirt.

Secondly, there is a new computer software that can detect changes in the voice that indicate lying or evasion. VSA - Voice Lie Detector, anybody have a copy? Want to run that birth story through it?

I loved the "Giving birth to Sponge Bob Squarepants!" Hahahaha!


Morgan said...

You aren't going to hurt that baby drumming on the belly. I fell twice during my pregnancies and the babies were still fine.

I think all the drama over the drumming is really a non-issue. If Sarah was pregnant, she did some stupid things that endangered her kid but playing the bongos on her belly wasn't one of them.

Anonymous said...

Some women DO 'PAT" their bellies in order to calm down a restless baby in there. Some even have to push back a bit (I had to, repeatedly, when my daughter was stretching out her little legs to underneath my ribs, which was VERY painful...), but they don't drum on their belly in order to prove that they are pregnant, like SP seems to do in the video. They would rub their belly at that point, or place a protective arm over it, as I stated in my earlier post.

Besides, at THAT stage in pregnancy (by then supposedly 8 months - a few days before delivery), NO pregnant belly will 'give' like hers did in that video! Check it out again.
I am not comptuer-savvy enough to post a still picture of that moment, but maybe someone can post a succession of frames.

Anonymous said...

To Sandra in Oregon:

Thank you for responding to my further inquiry as to the identity of the people walking into the Middle School. I noted on the KTUU website (upper right on the screen with the first story about the fire--not the second story about the accelerant/arson) that there is video of the people in question walking into the Middle School.

Please view that video. If you are correct that the female in the several layers is Bristol (to which I tentatively concur) then two things seem to stand out. First, she is walking faster than everyone in the family, passing them as she enters, quite unlikely for a female whose due date was four days away. (It seems as though she may have spotted the camera and was getting away from it asap. Todd definitely saw the camera and gave a quick wave.) Second, she simply does not look pregnant under those layers (like mother, like daughter?).

So, all you video sleuths, can you check out/enhance that video and see what you can detect? Your analyses of the "pillow-enhanced" Sarah Palin are destroying her lie; now perhaps you can do the same by discrediting the alibi that Bristol is pregnant.

Anonymous said...

My point about drumming a pregnant belly is that it's something most (if any) mothers-to-be just don't do. No matter who you are, there is this sense of sacredness in the way you carry yourself and particularly in the way you "protect" your belly. (I remember feeling odd wearing a seatbelt and worrying about it.) Poking at the baby inside (as one commenter talked about)even implies a connection with the baby. But drumming like you're a watermelon is just plain odd.
It's just another small thing that smells funny. Or think of it this way: imagine watching a play with a pregnant character. she drums her belly. What does that action tell you about her? now imagine the woman on stage rubbing her belly. As a chosen action, as a single movement, thumping or drumming speaks volumes to me. Just as voice recognition picks up strange intonations in lies, so do our movements.

Anonymous said...

Further to the appearance of the Palin family members at the Middle School services on 12/14:

The KTUU video is posted under the headline: "Wasilla Bible Church Carries On After Fire".

The appearances of the Palin family members spans approximately seven seconds, from 1:29 to 1:36.

Note the hands-in-the pockets walk of the female who appears to be Bristol. Is that walk and hand position consistent with a female who is 9 months pregnant and 4 days from her due date? Note also the generally icy conditions on the ground. Audrey (or anyone else): Wouldn't a pregnant woman walk with more care and with a slower gait?

I have no ability to save that video, in case it should mysteriously disappear from the KTUU web site. Can someone do that and save it for viewing and analysis on Audrey's site?

Much thanks.

Anonymous said...

It's not Sarah in the yellow jacket. First, she would have waived at the camera. Second, the news reporter stated it after the clip. But that looks like Bristol in the white coat and she looks pregnant. BUT she doesn't look ready to pop. I didn't walk that fast at 9 months. Then again, I wasn't that tall and thin at 9 months. :)


Anonymous said...

Comment at 3-07

Do not fret - the video has been captured.


artful_dodger said...

Playing devil's advocate here:
I have a question about the slapping sound sarah make's in the video. I know that the abdomen elicits a lower sound due to air in the cavity than, say, slapping your leg which will be a higher pitch as it is more solid. Now, fortunately for me, I do not have a pregnant belly to slap but wouldn't it stand to reason that the sound would be closer in pitch to the leg slapping rather than the unpregnant abdomen due to it no longer having hollow gut just underneath? I would say the sound in the video is closer in pitch to leg slapping than normal gut slapping. But, then again, the sound seems off. Faster than the actual motion of the hands. But, then again, video and sound often don't match. Any thoughts? Any pregnant tummies out there that can test this theory?

Anonymous said...

I don't know. I looked at the picture of Bristol going into the middle school for church & she looks pregnant to me. Actually more so than SP ever did. I still am not convinced though that SP was ever pregnant. All the pictures are just so odd.

Anonymous said...

Something else that I noticed, or was wondering about when I saw that video is the size of the child Todd is carrying. It's somewhat hard to tell, because it looks like the child is bundled up pretty well (for once?), but assuming it IS Trig, it seems like he's awfully big for an 8-month? old.

wayofpeace said...

just watched the going-to-church video:

wow, SP has lost some serious weight!

the young woman must be bristol: obviously pregnant, but 5 days from delivering a baby? i don't know.

her rushed & fast walk on ice: very unwise.

Anonymous said...

I believe that the skinny lady in the video is Willow and not Sarah. According to the news anchor Sarah did not attend church. Looks like a pregnant Bristol but she sure doesn't look 9 months along. Especially when you take into consideration how big she was at the RNC Convention in Sept. That is 'First Dude' holding Trig.

jeanie said...

To Anonymous at 11:42 -

Add to that #4) counter-attacks such as "Well, Obama's birth certificate is not authentic."

Anonymous said...

Look like a pregnant Palin! Only $14.99! Buy today and start fooling your friends - and the world - tomorrow! You could be the next VP candidate!

Tina in CA said...

I'm 100% sure that's Bristol in the KTUU video of the Palins walking to church. Her stomach looks VERY high, but large enough to perhaps be pregnant, but NOT 9 months pregnant. The rest of her body (butt, legs) doesn't look nearly as large as she was at the RNC. She definitely was walking quickly to get out of the camera's view.

I'm not 100% sure that the skinny woman in yellow is Sarah, however. When does she ever not take the opportunity to pose for the camera? Perhaps wink, wave, or something. She even turns her head AWAY from the camera which is SO not like Sarah.

sjk from the belly of the plane said...

Lets look to Track as the daddy. It is obvious that SP didnt have Trig. BP is supposed to deliver any day now, so the timeline of Trigs birth is critical, BUT my gut feeling lies toward Track being the DNA father.

SP had a pillow, and Trig got dragged all over America for her sick egotistical self serving poison tour.

Now, lets look at her house!

leu2500 said...

re Anon at 11:46

The link s/he posted to People has an intesting piece of info: Bristol's due date has slipped from 12/18 to 12/20.

Anonymous said...

Elan Frank saw SP in California first and then approx one month later went to Alaska to interview her

Everyday intimacies
He contacted Palin four months ago, and according to him she found his idea riveting. He was in the midst of planning his trip to Alaska when he got a phone call from Palin, who was in LA and wanted to meet him.

"I met her in my Hollywood office and we talked for over an hour… we instantaneously clicked and we had a blast. The funny thing is," he added, "that a few days later I got an email from a friend in Alaska telling me she was seven months pregnant. I didn’t notice a thing until later, when we were filming.

"I guess she's one of those women you can't really when they're pregnant, and she was probably dressing to hide it a little. You wouldn't know to look for it."

About a month after the meeting in Los Angeles, Frank and his video camera showed up on Palin's doorstep. "I went by myself because I wanted to have the chance to create real intimacy," he said. he ended up following Palin around for three days, filming nearly five hours of raw footage.

Link to this story:,7340,L-3591532,00.html

anon in canada

Anonymous said...

Bristol's due date changed to the 2oth of December as per today's people magazine.

Anonymous said...

How many women here who have had more than one baby carried and looked significantly different with each one? Just curios. Audrey, can you attest to any cases like this?

Anonymous said...

I can't remember if these have been posted - SP April 12, 2008

This would be days before birth...

Again just photos - no proof of anything. Again - scarf - haven't seen her wear one since she gave birth...

anon in canada

Anonymous said...


Thanks for saving the video (I am anon. at 3:07.) No more shall I fret.

Anonymous said...

obviously Elan has tons of video from which he made the final cut. Too bad he probably wouldn't let us see it...anyone want to ask him?

It's particularly interestingly odd that if Bristol is out and about noone from these anti-Palin blogs has the wherewithal to get closer. Doesn't anyone got to church? Or are you all just sitting around in your pajamas keeping warm inside your mmothers' basements?

Yeah, SP directly slung mud on you. In fact, she called you out. Is she right? Prove her wrong

Anonymous said...

In the video, they say SP did NOT attend church 'today', which would have been yesterday, I guess.
So... No idea who that super-skinny female is in the yellow jacket.
The other female, I believe, is NOT Bristol - WAYYY too skinny if you compare this video to pics during the Repug convention. She would actually have LOST weight, and definitely does not look like a 9month pregnant female.

Anonymous said...

Here is a quote from Chuck Heath about Sarah:

"My daughter will be a great grandmother," he says. "She's a great mother – great daughter, great mother. I don't know about how much time she can spend, she's so busy. But she'll get her licks in. Don't worry."

"Get her licks in????" What does that mean--he whipped his kids, so he expects Sarah to whip hers?

Isn't that another odd thing to say about care for a newborn?

Then the two contrary statements back to back--just like Sarah speaks!!! "great mother" "I don't know about how much time she can spend, she's so busy"

For any mother with 4-5 young children, being a "great" mother is impossible without spending time with your children. Maybe Chuck was the model for Sarah's convoluted and internally contradictory speaking style.

Anonymous said...

I'm not 100% sure that the skinny woman in yellow is Sarah, however. When does she ever not take the opportunity to pose for the camera? Perhaps wink, wave, or something. She even turns her head AWAY from the camera which is SO not like Sarah.

I thought the same thing. But then I realized that she probably feels at least partially responsible for the fire, right? Todd offers a solemn wave and Sarah does not even look at the camera. Seems appropriate to me given the situation. It's hardly a photo op moment, even for this camera hog. But, given that SP usually does not do the appropriate thing, I'm leaning toward that being someone else altogether. It walks the same but really much more skinny. When did she loose so much weight? Has hollywood gotten to her? Maybe the secret shopper from the mudflats can answer that question.

Anonymous said...

sorry for the weird typo at the start of the Elan Frank quote - happened when I cut and paste.

anon in canada

Anonymous said...

you are in desperate need of a life. This is the dumbest thing i have ever seen. why would anyone bother making a blog about this when she released her medical records and its clear that the baby is hers. why would she lie about that? shes not even a candidate anymore. You clearly have a scary obsession with her and need help.

ravenstrick said...

Here's an interesting exercise:

Watch Sarah on the Frank video where she discusses her pregnancy. 4:50 - 5:57.

Now compare her body language, voice and eye contact to this list of signs someone is lying:

Hand shrugs

Increases in vocal pitch


Speech errors

Decrease in eye contact



I also find it interesting that she often shakes her head "No" when she is making declarative statements.

It would be most enlightening to have a professional review some of the video of the Gov.


Anonymous said...

What's the point after a due date passes that doctors will induce/c-section? More specifically, what is that point at which most doctors would induce/c-section a motion with a due date of December 15th?

Anonymous said...

Perhaps you could post the pictures from 3-14 and these pictures side by side so that people can get an idea of how fast this baby supposedly grew in THREE WEEKS ! While no one picture by itself might be the smoking gun, I think a timeline of verifiably dated pictures would be pretty incriminating . . .

Thank you for your continuing efforts re: babygate

sjk from the belly of the plane said...

"she released her medical records ".

and they are CROOKED! literally!

An amateur scan/copy/PDF with 3 angles of type and logos in the copy; letters and logos and signatures that dont look rite.

go back to RNC school. its too late now.

Anonymous said...

sjk from the belly of the plane--

I believe you have a point. I think the total silence of media coverage is due to incest or some painful secret that everyone is afraid to deal with.

Secrets do not help anyone. Secrets allow disfunction, pain and misery to continue. Regardless of the possibility of sensitive issues in this matter, an elected official who isn't truthful and honest is not a trustworthy "public servant."

If sjk's comment were true, then the manner that Sarah Palin handled her family is a reflection of how she handles everything, including public office.

If an "untouchable" incident occurred, what is the best, healthiest way for the media and the public to handle it?


Anonymous said...

"why would anyone bother making a blog about this when she released her medical records"

...sigh- answered your own question there, buddy. Sure this will be the 30th response to the same post...

Anonymous said...

I think the girl in the yellow jacket in the video is Willow. Look closely. Bristol is the pregnant one that walks ahead. Yea, she is showing but still don't think she is 9 months.

Anonymous said...

"About the trauma to the fetus, I was thinking of the noise factor, not the hitting."

Shouldn't be an issue. Babies can hear after their ears develop, and a sudden very loud noise can startle them- I'm thinking of a tipped-over luggage cart at a hotel when I was pregnant, and the baby jumped- but smacking the belly, through skin and subcutaneous tissue and a uterine wall that's an inch or so thick, and through fluid-filled ear canals- it just won't be that loud to him. You can hear underwater, but it's muffled.

Anonymous said...

I don't believe the woman in yellow is a Palin. Maybe another church member or a live-in sitter. That's definitely Bristol in the photo though. A scarf hanging over the belly is a Palin pregnancy trademark.

I agree with the previous comment that this photo and the nail-in-coffin photo could be more convincing to people who are not pregnancy experts if someone would take some of the photos of women at similar stages of pregnancy and adjust their brightness and contrast, to show that the belly isn't supposed to be a rectangle.

Windy City Woman said...

Everyone knows by now that, if the "wild ride" story is true, Sarah endangered Trig's life, and also possibly her own.

So why hasn't any anti-abortion organization come out and made a statement criticizing her actions? Or have they? I haven't heard of any. Surely some of their members nurses or other people with medical knowledge. And certainly many are women who have given birth.

Jim Shoe said...

Why didn't Sarah buy a better fake tummy? She didn't have the RNC to pay for it!

Anonymous said...

I just have to say that I think it's funny when people post criticizing this blog and people who post on it for not having anything better to do with their time. I guess those people don't have anything much better to do than read through our comments and then waste their time scolding us. Cracks. me. up.


Angelle said...

The woman is a blithering idiot. If this is the best the GOP can put forward they need a collective brain transplant.


She is way past her Peter Principle. Having said that, is someone researching how her home was built? I want her to go the way of Ted Stevens.

And ps: if Bristol is pregnant it must have happened around the time that SP gave birth. Great parenting skills.

Anonymous said...

Regarding the photo of SP signing the firefighter legislation, I believe that the bill was actually signed on 5/21/08, even though it was passed on April 11th. I also thought this photo might be important, so I researched the bill's history on the legislature's website -- I didn't save the url,but the bill CSHB 200(FIN) was signed on 5/21 and became effective on 5/30.

Anonymous said...

I have visited this site for quite some time and I hope that Audrey will stay strong. I would like to also state that I never intended to ever make a comment because posting things are "forever". I have read all of Audrey's posts but not all the comments, so if this has been said before...SORRY!

I will start with this...I am from and currently live in a different small town in a different state (both lower 48)...both towns far less than 1,000 people small, I might add. People in small towns are just as diverse as cities. Believe me when I say...there are secrets to hide in most small towns. Some people go there to hide, others like myself are just there because that is where their families decided to stay. So I believe that I have a pretty good idea of what goes on in small towns.

Almost everyone in my small town just adores Ms. Palin...ME, I WOULD LIKE TO NEVER SEE HER ON TV AGAIN. I can not wait until she is found guilty of something and forgotten from the national scene. I also would like to say to my girlfriends, "I was right about Ms. Palin". So please stay on the case!!!

Side note or two...I think that some of the "faithful" in Wasilla and Alaska in general aren't protecting Ms. Palin they are protecting her parents. They "seem" like an older couple who are just enjoying life and don't always see the "real" picture. "Pretend Land" is what I like to call is in my family. People sometimes see what they want to see not reality. And most people don't want to or have the strength it takes to "spill the beans"! Two...Bristol, in my opinion, has yet to tell her story or live her life. Bristol will have many decisions in front of her...I hope that she chooses the path she believes is the best for her, whether or not anyone agrees with those choices. For my sister, it wasn't what I would've chosen but it was "HER CHOICE" and she will have to live with the choices she made, just as I will have to live with my own. I like to live in truth not lies...even if the truth is ugly, as it often is. my opinion, Ms. Palin doesn't give one rat's ass about Bristol or any of her other children for that matter. Because if she did...she would not let "others" write "lies" about her. But maybe I am too protective...I have two children and I would try, at all costs, not to have any site that told "lies" about either of my children. Ever, never, ever would that go on in my world...small as it is. Ms. Palin allows all this because she is protecting herself and her own "interests" not her children's well being. Sad, sad, sad is what I have to say about that. I believe that Ms. Palin made a decision about what to do and now she and "anyone else who knows" has to continue yet another lie in her "and their" many...SHE LIVES ONLY IN HER OWN MESSED UP REALITY. I have a lot more "comments" but I am tired so I will go...

Please everyone take the time to celebrate with your family and friends this holiday season. Kay

Audrey said...

To Anon at 5:57.

I can say with 100% honesty that in twenty years of working with pregnant women I have never seen someone look significantly smaller with a subsequent pregnancy, unless there was a real reason for it, like twins the first time around (so obviously they are not going to look as big the next timed), or low amniotic fluid (a major complication.) Also, occasionally you'll run into someone who was very (i.e., way too) heavy, and then really changed their lifestyle. They might look smaller on a later pregnancy... but they still look pregnant!

But for a thin, fit woman like Sarah Palin, to be as big as boat on number one (and she was huge with that earlier pregnancy...we've all seen the picture!) and then not show at all on number five... doesn't happen.


Anonymous said...

Thanks Anon -

The firefighter photos are from May at their convention

anon in canada

Anonymous said...

In the same People Magazine issue (online) with Bristol's due date, there is a photo history of Naomi Watts 2nd pregnancy. At 7 months this thin, fit woman is very large.

Anonymous said...

ginf --

There is a great Website about lying - called Eyes for Lies and a very bright woman who has excellent intuition and skills and does great analysis. Mostly about crimes/criminals. But there is a lot of information there, if you or anyone else wants to check it out. She does take requests by email. She needs a good bit of video to study to make a determination.

Ha - no problem there with getting video of our overexposed Sarah!

Anonymous said...

Sarah must have known Elan was coming to town. When I look at that picture her face changed alot.

Looks like she had some botox on her lips and something done to her face.

I wonder if they ask if you are pregnant before procedures? Are there any risks invovled if pregnant?

orange triangle said...

Since there aren't too many pre-birth photos of SP, I'm wondering if there are any photos taken in the first weeks after the birth. She went back to work immediately, but noone's body snaps back immediately...even if you have good abs! It might be telling to analyze some of those photos if they exist.

luna1580 said...

about sarah's dad's quote:

the phrase "get your licks in" means to get your comments/arguments/perspectives into a discussion or debate. in short -to get a chance to have your opinion heard before a final conclusion is drawn. so in this case it means sarah will have her views on parenting and her children's behavior influence their lives even if she is very busy (in her dad's opinion.)

the people going to the temporary church at the middle school are identified by the tv station as the first family: todd w/trig, bristol, willow (in yellow=not sarah), and piper. this is exactly what it looks like, so i see no reason to debate who they are.

in my opinion bristol looks truly pregnant, right as she passes the camera you can see a side view of what looks very much like a real taut, round belly poking out under her coats. she does look very thin in her legs and back -but come on folks, she's the most famous unwed pregnant teen on earth -it's not unreasonable that she's truly pregnant and was very concerned about looking "fat" in front of the whole world and has gained little other body fat through restrictive eating. she's (barely) 18, she's image conscious if she's like 99.9% of girls her age, and they don't have blogs like this and who knows who else analyzing them publicly.

can we please leave bristol's current state out of this for now? if it must be analyzed, there will be much more info in about a week, have some patience, please.

the decisions SP and todd have made -even if one of them turns out be claiming a child birthed/fathered by one of their kids- should not be something we all punish the children for. let's analyze everything about sarah, and about bristol's current pregnancy (after the birth when there is more information) only as it relates to sarah and is necessary.

have some respect for the kids.


luna1580 said...

p.s. the birthed/fathered line in my last comment means birthed OR fathered -not related to each other. there is no evidence at all for the incest theories some have suspected, and i think it makes us sound ludicrous to discuss such allegations on zero evidence.

i was referring to the possibility that one of the older girls or track's girlfriend would all be possible candidates for a biological mother. that said, we have little evidence to suspect more than the fact that SP probably is NOT the biological mother and lack real clues on who is.


Anonymous said...

I'm sorry but the video shot of Bristol is inconclusive to me. According to reports she is due 6 days from the date of this video (Sunday the 14th). She looks as if she could be pregnant but a full nine months,I don't think so. It looks as if she has her hands extended in the jacket which could account for the bulge in her jacket. I don't think anyone could say she's definitely pregnant with absolute certainty, especially considering the pics from the convention and campaign trail where she really seemed to be showing alot early on.

The video, like most things regarding SP, raises questions on at least two levels for me.

1. Does Bristol really look like someone 4-6 days from their due date?

2. Why did she speed up like that?

I don't mean Briston any disrespect. I'm sorry that she has been dragged into this but as many have previously stated, her mother and the RNC made her fair game for speculation when they publicly announced this "pregnancy" in September. I really wish the best for this young woman but she is unavoidably a key player in this charade.

Anonymous said...

I'm sure Audrey and others can comment on this better than I, but when I had my child (less than 2 years ago), I was overdue. I was told that I could choose between induction 1 week past due or 2 weeks past due, or sometime in between, but that they would not "let" me go beyond 2 weeks. Same for a friend of mine who gave birth with a doctor/hospital. (I gave birth with a midwife/hospital, fwtw).

So, since Bristol's new due date is Dec. 20, I would imagine they would induce if she doesn't have the baby by January 3rd, and theoretically the labor could extend over to January 4th. Beyond that date, and something is suspect with the Bristol pregnancy due date.

Audrey or others, can you confirm my experience?


Anonymous said...

no way bristol is 9 mos along...that fast gait on ice...skinny body...hands in her pockets make her look larger around'd think she'd flash her belly to the camera just to shut us up, but no the attention is just too damn good...or the truth would be exposed.

Anyways, people in the church know what's up. Isn't anyone here a member? I can't believe out of all those people noone has snapped a pic of her and posted it.

SP said of her predecessors that she wished records would ''surface'' ...
...well so do i about all of her shenanigans.

Anonymous said...

is interesting to watch willow and bristol avoid the camera.

willow turns toward piper then hand in front of left side of face casually.

bristol face hidden by scarf and hands in pocket speeds up to get inside.

she's probably a good 3 months from being due and will disappear from camera until then, but obviously they're not hiding so the paparazzi should be able to get shots anytime.

hey, where was her rouge cou fiance?

Anonymous said...

Yellow girl, that is true for any hospitals that I have worked in. Also, it is possible and becoming more acceptable to induce up to two weeks early for many reasons. Sometimes for reasons that I, personally, don't think are ethical, such as "convenience". Meaning, Doctor so-and-so is planning his vacation and wants to get his deliveries out of the way before he goes.
So, theoretically, Bristol could safely be induced two weeks early for a host of reasons as well as two weeks late. That extends the actual due date well into January. Still, she would have had to conceive about two to three weeks after giving birth, which is unlikely.

NJESQ said...


I strongly recommend that you add a new blog posting on the KTUU video of Bristol and the rest of the Palin family member who attended services at the Middle School on Sunday, December 15th.

I have watched that video closely, and I was struck by several facts regarding Bristol.

1. She is wearing jeans. I know that jeans may exist in maternity sizes, but, in the final days of pregnancy, it is my understanding that women opt for the loosest most comfortable pants they can wear. Further, those jeans do not look like maternity jeans, but someone with greater knowledge should offer his or her opinion.

2. The white shirt portruding from underneath Bristol's outerwear seems to be form fitting enough to indicate that she is not nine months pregnant in the video.

3. It strikes me as unusual that a woman nine months pregnant, walking on an icy surface, would keep her hands in her pockets. Wouldn't a woman at that late stage of prgnancy be concerned with steadying herself by keeping her hands at her sides? By keeping her hands in her pockets in that manner she also obscures whether she is pregnant.

4. Perhaps most unusual is Bristol's pace of walking. She appeared to be comfortable at the same pace as her family members, but, when she glanced to her left and saw the camera, she immediately picked up her pace and more rapidly approached the door, outpacing her family members. This suggests not only that she is not nine months pregnant, but also that she wanted to avoid the camera.

Can you experts who analyze videos provide greater insight and analysis? You are marvels with still photography. Can you perform the same analyses with these moving images?

Thanks much.

Anonymous said...

@Anon 8:15

It's always interesting to hear a new commenter burst forth with "it just doesn't make sense." I enjoyed your perspective, Anon, from the heartland. One comment in particular struck a chord for me:

What you said about Palin not doing all she can to protect her children. I had a concurrent thought yesterday: that if my daughter were being dragged across blogs and if she were the object of wild speculations- I'd do all I could to protect her. In other words, if the wild speculations were that she'd given birth to "my" child, I'd produce documents to squelch the rumor if for no other reason than to protect my daughter!

Palin's freaky untruths must make life very uncomfortable for all around her, especially for her children. (Just read the autobiographies of adult children of con-artists.) I felt very sad watching Bristol scurry past photographers into church. That movement-- her fleeing-- was very sad and telling to watch.

What kind of mother, like Anon asks, would not do all she could to protect her daughter from public ridicule and speculation?

Anonymous said...

Believe me.....I despise Sarah Palin's ideology and narrow-mindedness. I despise the snarky way in which she makes fun of others, and I fully believe that she faked "her" pregnancy with Trig to cover for one of her children. The evidence is overwhelming. However, perhaps the mainstream media has deliberately chosen to ignore the evidence out of respect to two minors (the biological mother and father of Trig) and out of respect to the baby Trig.
Believe me, I despise everything about Sarah Palin, but without the cooperation of the mainstream media, I can't imagine how the truth will ever come out. You have already presented overwhelming, damning evidence on this site, yet the much more powerful mainstream media continues to ignore this issue. Maybe we should too.

artful_dodger said...

I'm going to attempt to break down the possible dates of the Bristol pregnancy scenario. If I have any dates wrong, let me know.
Let's say she gives birth on the earliest likely date of April 16th. (I think the CBS video of Palin shows her looking very anxious. Maybe she already knew but wanted desperately to give that speech then leave at the earliest possible time after that?)
So the VERY earliest realistic time of ovulation after birth would be about two weeks, so we'll go with that. That would be a conception date of May 6th 2008.
Right. So at the RNC convention, Bristol's pregnancy would be at about 19 weeks. The same for the official announcement by the Palin family. -almost 5 months pregnant at this point.
The due date would be:
January 27th 2009. Remember, this is earliest possible scenario. She could be reasonably induced at 36 weeks, (Believe me, they can always find a reason)- a date of:
December 30th.
With this scenario, she would only have to go 10 days "past due" with no suspicion.
That means, to me, that any birth of a full birth weight baby (any weight over about 7 lbs)before this date would eliminate Bristol as Trig's mother.

regina said...

The person in the yellow jacket is too tall and skinny to be Willow. She's quite a bit shorter than Bristol. (from photos of the family during the campaign). Not that it makes any difference who that person is, actually.

I don't know if this is relevant, but aren't pregnant women advised by their doctors to stop using hair colouring products? I couldn't help noticing how very coloured, with streaks and all, our SP's hair is in the flickr collection of photos.

A lot of un-pregnant behaviour went on in this "pregnancy": brisk walk in high heels in the Juneau documentary, belly slapping with Elan Frank, hair colouring throughout, mad dash from Texas to Alaska with amniotic fluid leaking, having a non-existent belly in the fifth pregnancy compared to an enormous one with the first... the list goes on...

SP didn't look pregnant at all and NOTHING changed in her appearance after the birth. Her facial features are exactly the same before, during and after this pregnancy. Very odd indeed.

Morgan said...

Attention, please:

I'm helping Audrey moderate the comments and just want to remind people on *both* sides of this issue to stick to the discussion topic and leave off the ad hominem attacks.

If you don't like what someone has to say, then debate their reasoning. Don't attack them personally (i.e, you're an idiot, you need medication, etc.) or your comment won't be approved.

There's plenty to talk about here without talking about each other.

Thanks for hearing me out.

hrh said...

Anonymous at 8:21a:

The corporate media ignores those stories that they consider too controversial, unless it involves a Democrat. Then, anything goes. (Have you noticed how there is absolutely no evidence that Obama consulted with Blagojevich about the Senate seat? None. Yet, somehow, he musta been involved, according to their lights, and they attempt to taint him. And how compliant they were on the runup to the invasion of Iraq? Anti-war voices were drowned out in a flood of corporate media-generated pro-war rhetoric.)

The owners of the big networks are not Obama voters! The existence of Olbermann and Maddow on corporate media is due only to the fact they generate lots of advertising dollars.

That said, all is most definitely not lost. With the steadily growing mountain of evidence that Palin was not pregnant (and her daughter was), a tipping point will be reached and they'll have to deal with it. When more and more people talk about this, write about this, as is happening now, it'll happen.

And just because the corproate media is ignoring it, that certainly doesn't mean we should.

Your last comment was so chicken-hearted. Perhaps you were at a low point. Courage, Anonymous at 8:21a, slow and steady wins the race. Don't let those trolls get to 'ya!

ravenstrick said...

Good catch Regina!

Doctors do indeed advise no hair coloring during pregnancy!

Especially processes that involve touching the scalp with chemicals (like root touch-ups on a graying 44 year old head). Hairdressers are well aware of the prohibition as well.

Afther 4 pregancies Gov Sarah would have to know this.

But then again, doctors also advise no flying when in labor or after your membrane has ruptured.

The plot thickens...


Anonymous said...

Can someone please investigate when the pics where SP signs the "presumptive bill" were taken?

If I recall correctly the article says around 4/11 or 4/12 the bill passed the legislature and was awaiting the gov's signature. But, the site says the article was last updated in October 2008 so it could have been updated with pics from the actual signing.

Point is, if those pics were taken a few days before giving birth to 6lb Trig, where is she hiding him- her pocket? This fake belly is much smaller than the Elan and Gusty bellies.

Any info would be appreciated. Mom of One, Esq.

Anonymous said...

You may be interested in Atlantic Monthly columnist and blogger Andrew Sullivan's recent post that he calls a "Note On Trig...and with any luck, a final one." It's at:

Sullivan has been a fair, thoughtful and persistent commentator on this subject.


Anonymous said...

I always surmised that Bristol really got pregnant that quickly based on her pregnant, nursing and post-partum look on the campaign trial. But seeing that video- well, the whole thing stinks. Is it possible she could be that small-bellied, that fast a walker, AND not waddle, a week before her due date? Sure- I suppose it is. But on top of all the other circumstantial evidence, now the whole Bristol pregnancy thing stinks. She looks about 6 months pregnant. Plus, the sliding due date thing stinks. As much as I think Sarah and Todd are pathological and conniving, I never thought they would fake Bristol's due date by that much because how on earth could they ever get away with it?

I will now be anxiously awaiting the birth of a full term weight baby no later than January 3.

Mom of One, Esq.

Anonymous said...

I know we are supposed to leave Bristol alone...
One thing that jumped to my mind when I saw the latest (church) video: During the convention/election cycle, she had HUGE breasts (like a nursing mom would have), but the person in this video has relatively small ones. This person is not as 'well endowed' as Bristol was in September...

Anonymous said...

To HRH and others concerning the chicken-heartedness of mainsteam media (MSM) in relation to Trig's birth:

I think there are various factors at play, including cowardice, a desire to avoid embarrassing SP's children, a queasiness concerning birth and other matters relating to women's bodies (as Audrey has pointed out). And in the case of say, Fox News, a certain political bent (although Cameron What's-his-name has not shied away from embarrassing Palin). But not all MSM are rightward leaning: just look at the New York Times. In the case of the Times, the lack of "official" sources is, I think, what might keep them from doing something with this matter.

Still, I think we have reached a tipping point in terms of the amount of circumstantial and photographic evidence available that demonstrates that Palin pulled a hoax. I think what is needed is for an intrepid individual with some journalistic chops to approach, say, Slate magazine or something similar with a proposal. I briefly thought about doing that myself, but I am not really in that line of work. (I teach journalism at the college level, but I have not been a working journalist since the 1980s. I am an academic now, and I will probably do an academic treatment of this matter for a journal or conference.)

So, are there any journalist-types reading this now? If you are a recent grad of a journalism program, this could be a chance for you to make a name for yourself! And I would be glad to offer advice, etc. Just one thing: you may want to use a pen name - there could be a lot of nastiness directed at whoever does this expose.


Anonymous said...

I think that it's time to let the pregnancy question go. You have done a geat job assembling photo evidence that SP was not pregnant with this child. You have convinced me.
But think of this. The child is either unrelated to her or is her granchild through her son or through one of her daughters.
It seems highly unlikely that he is unrelated. Adopting an unrelated child with Downs Syndrome would be very admirable. There would be no reason whatsoever to pretend a pregnancy to conceal such an adoption.
So the most likely explanation is that SP pretended to be pregnant initially in the hope of concealing the fact that one of her children was parent. And since his birth the baby has apparently been well cared for in a loving home.
If SP tries to re-enter national politics and if the pregnancy question is even mentioned in the MSM, I suspect she will confess to her "loving deception" and her base will be all the more charmed with her. A mother who tried to protect her child and who is raising her little grandson.
So let's drop this issue and see if there aren't more substantial criticisms to be made about her governing. Those and not this navel gazing are what will keep her out of higher office.

Anonymous said...

To the person who asked about pregnancy jeans, I had a GREAT pair that I miss now. The band was stretchy but soft so it didn't pinch or press against my tummy. The band was the same color as the denim and only rose part way up. You would not have known they were maternity jeans at all.


Punkinbugg said...

I agree, Regina. That's not Willow in the jellow jacket. She's too tall & thin, plus she looks older & I don't think Willow has bangs.

Bristol's white undershirt definitely shows the curve of a pg belly under that vest. Just how pg? Due in 3 days? Hmm.

Anonymous said...

If it is true that Sarah Palin has lied about the fact that her daughter Bristol gave birth to Trig, then people must take care not to believe anything she says regarding that subject. In particular, the claim that Trig has DS must be viewed with great suspicion.

The theory is that Sarah Palin "outed" her daughter Bristol's alleged current pregnancy in order to end the rumors that Bristol was the biological mother of Trig. Sarah's refusal to provide dispositive evidence, such as a birth cetificate or a public statement from the OBGYN who delivered the baby, was probative of her lie, since a reasonable person would protect her daughter's privacy and have no reason to conceal public records or to prevent a public statement by the OBGYN.

We also know that rumors existed as to Bristol's pregnancy while Trig was in gestation. Sarah Palin's assertion that she was the one carrying Trig was greeted with skepticism by those who knew her, given the fact that she did not appear pregnant to them. To end those doubts, Sarah Palin declared that the baby would have DS (or, if I recall correctly, declared that testing indicated the baby would be a special needs child, with the declaration of the DS condition coming only after the birth.)

In this context, Sarah Palin's assertion that Trig is a DS baby serves the cover-up. Since older women are more likely to have DS babies (on a per birth basis, not in absolute numbers, since more young women give birth), Trig's alleged DS condition would make it highly unlikely that Bristol was the mother, and much more likely that Sarah Palin was the mother. As Sarah Palin well must know, a small percentage of positive DS diagnoses are "false positives." I would not be surprised to read in the future that his diagnosis was a "false positive," and that, miracle-of-miracles, he is perfectly healthy.

The recent video of Bristol Palin walking on December 15th confirms her less-than-ninth-months pregnant condition, if indeed she is pregnant at all. The recent analyses of Sarah Palin photographs confirm that she was not carrying Trig.

Of all the horrible aspects of this lie, and there are so many, I sometimes think the worst would be the lie concerning Trig's DS condition. By trumpeting this assertion, Sarah Palin's story has been an inspiration for families throughout the world who are lovingly raising beautiful boys and girls with DS or some other challenging condition. If and when Sarah Palin is revealed to have perpetrated this hoax, she should be as reviled by those parents as she is revered by them now.

I have read that people speculate as to whether or not Sarah Palin suffers from a personality disorder with severe narcissistic features. It is my opinion that this is correct, and that she has used and will use any person or any group to further her own interests. I think that the unraveling of her story will demonstrate that she used the loyalty of the community of parents of DS children to shield her lies. She will reap the whirlwind.

artful_dodger said...

Anon 10:50 AM, I respectfully disagree with your advice. For the single reason that I don't think Sarah Palin will ever admit to any deceit or lies, no matter how "loving" the motive. She simply will not. There is, I believe, a major character flaw lurking within. Another self righteous Christian who covers her own or her family's mistakes with lies so people won't find out they're human just like us? Fine. Lots of those out there. But a self righteous Christian politician who wants to run the country does this? Then that's another story. The only solution, then, is to catch her in her lies and expose her for being another dishonest politician who poses as one who is not. It's a matter of character. Do you care about her character, her integrity if there is any chance that this woman could be running this country someday? Or does it not matter to you? Well, It sure matters to me. I want the truth. If we can be fairly certain that she will never tell it, then it is up to the rest of us to find it ourselves. Or, she can assure us that she will never seek higher office again. Then I'll gladly forget about it and her.

Anonymous said...

Answering a question from Mom of One, Esq -- though it passed on 4/11, the "presumptive" bill for firefighters was signed on 5/21 and became effective on 5/30. I also thought this photo might be proof, but it isn't. (I posted on this yesterday.)

Responding to the "let it go" posting (Anon 12/16 10:40), that is not going to happen. Something's rotten in Alaska. We the people have been lied to and ridiculed for our efforts to make sense out of the lie. Many of us want to challenge lies told with bravado by politicians, and this case is almost like a dare at this point. But if Sarah Palin wants to end this, she can end it tomorrow (or today!) by simply revealing the truth and saying, "I know that some people will be very disappointed in this deception, but I did it to protect my daughter, and those who want to criticize me for that are welcome to their opinions..." She can (and will) slant this as a heroic I-did-it-to-protect-my-family gesture, and I invite her to do so as she sets the record straight. Otherwise this will hang over her head even as she tries to build a viable national political persona. Perhaps the ax will fall at the most inopportune time for her politically, rather than allowing her to control the timing and damage.

Anonymous said...

Hi Audrey...I went back to Andrew Sullivan's blog, and read the entry that Patrick Appel had done last week. Here's what he claimed this dish reported when Sarah Palin had Trig. This came from a reporter named Lori Tipton:

Sarah [Palin] was in another room, and they said that she was sleeping when we arrived. And so, we got a little bit of footage of Sally [Heath] holding Trig, and Chuck [Heath] standing next to her. And Bristol [Palin] was in there, and I said to Bristol, "We should get some footage of you and your brother and your grandparents." And she’s like, "No I really don’t like to be photographed." And I said, "Are you sure?" And she’s like, "Yeah, yeah, no." And she didn’t have any make-up on or anything, but she was dressed in typical teenage attire, a tight shirt, low-cut jeans, you know, and we had heard the rumors before the delivery of this baby also, that Bristol was pregnant, and so, when my photographer and I got to the hospital and we saw her, I thought, well, clearly there’s no way that that girl just delivered a baby seven hours ago.

This was totally weird. Someone needs to chase down this Lori Tipton reporter. She may be the only witness to this blessed event. Why would she mention Bristol being at the hospital, and the pregnancy rumours back in April? This just gets curiouser and curiouser...

FW from VA

Anonymous said...

Anon @ 10:50 AM:

This issue isn't about Trig, Bristol, Track, or Willow. This is about Sarah Palin and how she has lied and has continued to lie to Alaskans as their elected official, and to Americans, as a vice-presidential nominee and future political leader.

This blog could have been about Palin's lies in the Trooper Wooten case. Or the building of her house. Or the charges she made to the State of Alaska for living in that home. Or the promises she broke to the people in her state once she had power.

There are many lies of Sarah Palin to choose from, this is just one. If she can lie so easily about so many things, ESPECIALLY about an innocent baby, I shudder to think what else she may be capable of withholding from us. I, for one, would love to see a stop put to her political ambitions now, before she does further damage.

Anonymous said...

Hi...I apparently Lori Tipton is a KTUU reporter who was dispatched to Mat-Su to cover the birth of Trig. Her email addres is Her and her crew were supposedly at the hospital the day after Trig was born, and was told Sarah was sleeping, but Trig was being held by Chuck and Sally Heath, which is probably when that infamous photo was taken.

Bristol was at the hospital too, and Lori reports this to the Dish:

Sarah [Palin] was in another room, and they said that she was sleeping when we arrived. And so, we got a little bit of footage of Sally [Heath] holding Trig, and Chuck [Heath] standing next to her. And Bristol [Palin] was in there, and I said to Bristol, "We should get some footage of you and your brother and your grandparents." And she’s like, "No I really don’t like to be photographed." And I said, "Are you sure?" And she’s like, "Yeah, yeah, no." And she didn’t have any make-up on or anything, but she was dressed in typical teenage attire, a tight shirt, low-cut jeans, you know, and we had heard the rumors before the delivery of this baby also, that Bristol was pregnant, and so, when my photographer and I got to the hospital and we saw her, I thought, well, clearly there’s no way that that girl just delivered a baby seven hours ago.

WHy would she think at that point that Bristol delivered Trig...what romours did dhe know? Anyway, it seems like she could be worth talking to. Lori Tipton's facebook page lists SP as her favorite politician....hmmmm...

FW from VA

Anonymous said...

Anonymous at 10:50 am
With all due respect, I really cannot think of a more
'substantial issue' than this
on so many levels, a very obvious one is insurance fraud, would any 'regular josephine' get away with this if exposed ?

Sarah brought this on herself by running on a 'family values' platform, as so many have stated here. This is NOT navel gazing and would NOT be necessary if the governor had been upfront. (In more ways than one !)

What she has done speaks to the entire issue of motherhood, of parenthood, and of consistency between public and private personas. I think that is why people are so outraged and why 'babygate' will not go away. If she did not want this issue exposed then she should not have accepted the VP nomination. I think at some fundamental level she cannot help herself and does want to be called out on her behavior. Otherwise NONE of this makes any sense. (Not that it makes much sense anyway, but I do seem to hear a cry for help coming from Wasilla).

Perry said...

KaJo and others,

I think you are misunderstanding my point. I don't believe for one second that Sarah Palin gave birth to Trig. I just don't understand the extensive dissection of the photos, because it has already been established, without any doubt, that when she announced her pregnancy, she didn't look pregnant. We already know that. So I don't get why people are so obsessed with the pictures.

I think Audrey is doing an outstanding job, and I am very impressed by her tenacity and analysis. By all means, keep looking for the smoking gun. I just don't think it's possible that the smoking gun can be a photo, under the circumstances.

Anonymous said...

HRH said:

That said, all is most definitely not lost. With the steadily growing mountain of evidence that Palin was not pregnant (and her daughter was), a tipping point will be reached and they'll have to deal with it.

I think it is fair to say the mountain regarding SP not being pregnant continues to grow, and the contrary evidence continues to shrink.

But I can't agree that there is any additional evidence that one of Palin's daughter was pregnant then and, therefore, Trig's birth mother. In fact, some of that so-called evidence has been discounted -- such as the no validation that Bristol was out of school with 'mono', although she was out of school. There is also evidence that all three Palin daughters were at a luncheon in Fairbanks on Feb 15, which seems odd if one of them was pregnant, but we don't have pictures and they may have disguised it as SP supposedly had.

That Willow and Bristol were at the luncheon was a surprise to the hosts, as they had not been invited, but Todd was finishing the Iron Dog in Fairbanks the next day, and we have (inconclusive) outdoor video of at least some of the family there on Feb 16. So SP took the entire family on a state-paid junket to see pop finish his snow-machining race, and validated it by taking the girls to the public charity function. Typical.

I think the key would be any pictures of Bristol and Willow from that AMA luncheon Feb 15 in Fairbanks. If neither Bristol nor Willow looks pregnant, and isn't engaging in 'fashion assisted camouflage', we will have to look for other suspects.

As much as we would like to engage in speculation in support of our pet theories, a search for the truth mustn't be sidelined by such pursuits.


Anonymous said...

I have posted before that I have carried two babies, both full term and smaller than Trig and I say NO WAY that SP had that baby BUT I wore jeans up to the day I delivered, didn't waddle, didn't look 9 months pregnant and also kept my hands in my pockets when outside. (I delivered in March). I think Bristol may be pregnant. Not 6 days from delivering but even so, you really can't tell much by how quickly she walks or what she is doing with her hands.

KaJo said...

Anonymous @ 10:50 am -- you're missing one of the major points we've been trying to make here in this series of blog entries, namely: if Trig is NOT Sarah Palin's child, then any care Trig gets subsidized by Palin's governmental assistance/benefit program constitutes fraud. That applies whether the child is Bristol's, Willow's, Track's by another unrelated female, or the unspeakable.

There are so many more ways this presumed fraud is wrong, and there are oddities about so many other of the Palins' activites, political and otherwise, that it does all of her constituents, and possibly the rest of us in the other 49 states, a great disservice if the questions aren't answered satisfactorily, even if and perhaps ESPECIALLY if a jury determines that.


Also, about NJESQ's speculation on Bristol's blue jeans @ 7:45 AM: From what I've observed around MY small town, teen-age girls wear some pretty low low-rider jeans. I don't know how they keep them up (double-stick tape?) or especially how a heavily-pregnant girl would keep them up, but I imagine that's the kind of jeans Bristol is wearing.

Anonymous said...


I got really disappointed while reading some of your comments.

It seems some people believe since MSM is not doing anything about this deception, or just out of respect and in order to protect the Palin children, the entire world should just crawl under the rocks and forget the whole thing. You really don't mean that unless you're a Palin Aide posting here or a Palin Fan who will do anything, anything at all to stop this research that reveals the truth.

Have you ever thought of the number of people living in the U.S.? Out of the entire U.S. population, it's only some people who make up the GOP Base. Very small number, indeed. They will believe in anything Sarah Palin says. Apparently, their values are pretty different as they don't seem to care whether someone is lying consistently and pretending to be someone else, a fibber and a deluded person. If some of the GOP Base believe Sarah Palin was sent by God, oh my Gawd, I must say. I really would love them to explain me how God endorses a human being to lie in the worst manner as possible.

Bristol Palin is expected to give birth to her child soon. Good for her and I wish her all the best. However, this has nothing to do with Sarah Palin's deception(s). Bristol Palin didn't do anything wrong. I feel very sorry for her that she has been subjected to public attention which she didn't deserve. Sure, we don't know why she was way from her home for ?5 months. We don't know why she lived then together with Sarah Palin's sister in another town. Well, we don't know why Track Palin lived in Michigan either.

Someone was saying " so what, if Sarah Palin lied to protect one of her kids or someone in the family and adopted the poor kid". I can't believe some people's logic and values can be so different from many people who look at this as a lack of character issue, as a credibility issue. How can those few "GOP Base" folks cannot see that? Or are they saying that in the Kingdom of Jesus, lying is all accepted. The more you lie, the easier you get a spot in Heaven. Sorry for the sarcasm.

If Sarah Palin adopted Trig, it's fine as a lot of people adopt kids and I admire people who do adopt. But she didn't come out and say she adopted. She and her husband rather did all the tricks to cover up. Was it necessary? Nope, not in my opinion but they did. WHY? Because the truth is an ugly one. Well, I got some news for the Palin family: Truth always hurts but in the long run, you're better off with telling the truth. See, because Sarah Palin didn't tell the truth, this issue will haunt her for the rest of her life and be destructive for her political career.

This pregnancy issue is just one thing.
I hope Alaskans are really investigating their house. Though Sarah Palin presents herself as a pit bull with lipstick fighting good old boy politics, she has been in the club for many years.

After all, they convicted Ted Stevens. Why shouldn't they investigate Sarah Palin? Nobody is above the law. Alaskans want the truth.

“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.” - George Orwell

Anonymous said...

Hello Again!

Re:Huffpost/People Article

Is Chuck still talking? Methinks he probably needs to just keep quiet. His comments have already done enough for his family."

I am laughing so hard.. I couldn't agree more.

Anonymous said...

Re Anon at Dec 16th 10:50 A, I disagree. Palin's pro-life agenda cred is deeply dependent on this being HER baby, and not a daughter's. It shows she "walked the walk". If it was a cover up, I think the religious right will feel that they were tricked. Yes, she still may be pro-life, but she will not have that personal touch; she will not have the special needs kids cred, etc. Remember, Al Capone went to prison over tax issues.


Anonymous said...

I don't see any point in letting the pregnancy question go. This whole blog is to discuss the issues around Sarah Palin's alleged pregnancy. There's been a lot of strange findings, and the one thing that we do know is that we don't know who Trig's mother really is.

As for Bristol, Sarah and the McCain campaign counted on Bristol's pregnancy to "prove" that Trig was Sarah's. Of course it did nothing of the sort, because it didn't address the issue that Trig might be somebody else's baby, and not Bristol's at all. Bristol is 18 now, and while I sympathize with her for being stuck with such a mother, she is an adult, and is soon to be a mother. I don't agree with the hands-off-Bristol thing now that she's an adult.

Whoever gave birth to Trig, Sarah Palin is acting as his mother. Looking at her career, she doesn't do anything without expecting payback. I doubt very much that she'd adopt a baby out of sheer goodheartedness. So... somebody owes her, big time. Not only for taking the baby but for all the complications involved.

She might do this for one of her kids. Who owes Sarah? Who's acting like Sarah is the be-all and end-all? Because that's what Sarah wants. She has a history of getting nasty when people don't kowtow enough. Somebody out there owes Sarah and I'm wondering if that's where the final proof will come from.


Anonymous said...

Thanks again all you hard working investigators that are willing to spend so much time finding out the truth. I just want to remember that this site is dedicated to whether or not Sarah Palin was involved in deception of HER PREGNANCY. What happens with Bristol's pregnancy really does not matter. We don't know who the mother of Trig is, and that really has nothing to do with the pregnancy deception that the Govenor of Alaska is trying to continue. I am so grateful for Audrey and all the others that have compiled so much evidence contray to what the public has been told. I am sure it is just a matter of time before someone realizes that there is more to be gained, financially, emotionally, spiritually, from telling the truth. I would guess that the first person who opens up on this lie will benefit the most.. others may want to tell their story, but the first to disclose will probably reap the most benefits. In addition to sheer gall what laws have been broken as far as her position as Govenor? I know that she pledges openess and transparacy, but what are the exact laws that have been broken or what are other grounds for prosecution? Any information would be appreciated. Keep up the great job.. Pam

Emma said...

Anonymous at 10:50AM

As many have pointed out on other threads here and on other blogs, this isn't about who the mother of Trig is. It's about the integrity, honesty and trustworthiness of a politician who would thinks she should represent all people in this country.

We've seen what can happen when those in charge have no regard for the truth or intelligence of the general population. And, frankly, we deserve much better.

If SP has spun such a thick web of lies and deceit about something so personal, and as has been pointed out, an issue related to a right she would like to take away from all women and teenage girls in this country, what would she lie about when it comes to, oh, say, a bridge, a pipeline, or God forbid, WMD, terrorists, etc. I'd rather the truth come out now and ensure she has no future in national level politics than have to fight to have this information heard in 2-3 years. Waiting until she is running for another high-level office makes it much more likely that the cries of partisianship, liberal media, etc will be used to bury or disregard the story.

Perhaps some are suggesting to walk away now because what has been discovered is just too close to the truth for comfort.

Anonymous said...

To the writer of comment @10.50.

Please do not be deceived by any thought that SP adopted trig as some sort of charitable act. Her motives were clearly much less concerning about the privacy of her family. Remember it was Palin herself who pushed her own daughter into the unforgiving glare of the media in order to protect her run for Vice President. She even went to the extent to authorise the release of the flimsy medical letter which purported to be her medical records which she had promised to release. This letter included the fact that her last child was born in the year 2000. Didn't she read this important letter before it was released? Her daughter Piper was born in 2001....a fact that both she and her doctor would have been well aware of if indeed CBJ had prepared that letter and SP had authorised its use.

Legally that letter has not a foot to stand on if challenged in court because this one inaccuracy points to the fact that the two people most concerned with its production, CBJ (her doctor) and SP could not have read it otherwise they would have picked up that very glaring error. That they did not speaks volumes in itself.

Anonymous said...

"And since his birth the baby has apparently been well cared for in a loving home. "

This is one statement I have to disagree with. Since his birth Trig has been slung over people's shoulders and carried around (by Sarah) like a sack (Bristol has shown much more consideration with him). He should be receiving intensive care in familiar surroundings and that's not what he's gotten. But that makes him just like her other children, as far as I can see-- she doesn't seem to care about keeping them at home or in school.

Anonymous said...

I am just listening to her interview, and she mentions that she had braxton-Hicks contractions for many months, 'as every pregnant woman does' ?!? WTF? I did not have those 'for months during my pregnacy', but I had them ONCE, about 2 weeks before delivery, and I went in to the docs office to be checked out.

Jen said...

Let's also not forget the selfishness of Sarah, if she had of given birth to Trig, that she kept the news of the DS all to herself and didn't bother to tell anyone or prepare the rest of the family of it, even though, she relies on them to care for Trig.

in the elan video she tells the interviewer how much support she has and a big extended family...

isn't it strange that sarah would rely on all these people to care for her child and then not prepare them for the intense childcare that a DS child will require. She didn't even tell her own kids.

And what about all that support?

Track's gone, Bristol will be gone, Willow will be gone in a few years, her parents are older and wont be around forever, her sisters got like 10 of her own kids... so in like 5-10 years, who will Sarah have to care for Trig?

So just think, she not only hid the pregnancy from her parents, children -- she also never told them that Trig would have DS, even though she claims she's known since December... and this is a woman WE'RE supposed to believe will tell us truth -- i dont think so.

Anonymous said...

1.) Long before I heard any "Trig is really Bristol's child" stories, I was perplexed by the cover of a glossy gossip magazine (probably "People" or "US") that I saw while waiting in a grocery checkout lane last fall: in it, SP was pictured with "newborn Trig," who wore a white outfit. Showing her usual plastic smile, she held Trig out and away from her body as if he were Exhibit A rather than her baby.

2.) Although I intensely dislike SP's "image" and politics, I basically ignored Trig-Bristol stories until I heard that Bristol had been away from her previous high school for several months. In my parents' high school days in the 1950s, this was usually a "dead giveaway" that a girl was pregnant.

3.) Bristol was not pregnant at the RNC convention, and is not pregnant now: she was breastfeeding, and either had trouble losing baby weight or wore a pregnancy pillow.

4.) A few years ago I read the nonfiction book "Choosing Naia: A Family's Journey," about a 30ish couple, Tierney Temple-Fairchild and Greg Fairchild, whose firstborn is given a prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome. In "Choosing Naia," the author noted that "most (Down syndrome babies) are born to younger mothers like Tierney," perhaps because younger mothers are less likely to undergo amniocentesis.

sjk from the belly of the plane said...

"Remember it was Palin herself who pushed her own daughter into the unforgiving glare of the media in order to protect her run for Vice President."

yes indeed. threw her child right under the Straight Talk Express.

BP was the first victim of SP gettin' on that bus. Luckily SP's attempts to use the bus to run over PE Obama didnt work.

Anonymous said...

Re: Bristol...Looks like the baby has not dropped yet. She does look pregs though. I doubt she's due on the 20th.

jeanie said...

Re - the timing of the DS diagnosis. I don't believe there was anything mentioned about this - or any other special needs - before the actual birth.

I know SP claimed to have had 'testing' at 13 weeks (and we all have great faith in her claims - NOT!) but I don't recall any news articles or anything else released before 4/18 that mentioned this.

Does anyone have a confirmed article stating her knowledge that Trig would be special needs that actually was made public before he was born??

Palin Pregnancy Truth said...

1) The reason this is our business is because Sarah Palin made it her business. Trig is part of her narrative. She was qualified because she knew better than most what it was like to have a kid with special needs, according to McCain. Trig is her pro-life qualification. If she had made no mention of him throughout the campaign I would say its none of our business. But she threw all of her kids into the spotlight (and the nice new RNC wardrobe).

If having Trig is a demonstration of her pro-life stance and a reason to vote for her, than we have every right to ascertain whether this story is in fact true.

2) We will get no where with the pictures of Sarah during the pregnancy or Bristol now. I believe that they clearly suggest that Bristol gave birth to Trig and Sarah did not, however even the most obvious pictures will not be conclusive.

We need to spend our time demonstrating that the CBJ letter was forged or that the Gusty pics were photoshopped or faked. Was Gusty somewhere else at the time of the session? Was Palin somewhere else? Did anyone else see them Is there something in the photo that could reveal the time of day or date?

I believe that a technicality like this will reveal that Palin is lying. Remember Al Capone was put away for tax evasion. We need to find some other nuance, not the photos, that suggests Palin is lying.

3) Bristol will produce pictures with a baby. Palin's career depends on it. Sarah's father's comment to People have only whetted the public's appetite. I highly doubt this is Bristol's first child or her biological child (4 months is enough time to set up an adoption). But again, Bristol being pregnant doesn't "prove" Sarah was the mother. It never did. We need to not get wrapped up in this "pregnancy" and find something else to reveal the truth. Palin's people want us to focus on Bristol but that was always the bait and switch.

How is that photo analysis going?

Anonymous said...

According to Sarah Palin, in her People Mag interview, it was her young daughter Willow who first "discovered" (for the family)that Trig had Down syndrome. She thought this because of his physical appearance in the hospital.

As a "special needs" mother myself, I have to say this is highly improbable!

Newborns with Down syndrome are very hard to distinguish from other newborns -- all are so swollen from the birth proces (even with C-sec)that features cannot be easily distinguished.

The signs of Down syndrome that can be seen at birth (such as a single crease in the palm of the hand) are not ones that are widely known by the lay public, much less a very young teen.

The idea that Willow "discovered" Trig's chromosomal abnormality for the rest of her siblings during the post partum period was one of the major signs (to me) that SP's story is almost certainly false.

--A "special needs" mother who has been there

Karen in WI said...

I'm a little intrigued about the announcement concerning the gender of Bristol's (current) pregnancy ... was this (the announcement in the recent People magazine) the first time that it was announced that she is expecting a son?

Generally speaking, a gender scan is done around the 20 week mark (halfway) of pregnancy; while not every baby is "cooperative" with letting a sonographer get a peek at "the goods" the announcement as to this baby's gender seems really late considering the impending due date of this Saturday.

I'm still not completely sold that Bristol is pregnant (or as pregnant as we've been led to believe); and had always felt that the 'leaky' flight from Dallas in April was because SP had been called that Bristol was in labor at that time.

(I also agree that a majority of doctors will not allow a pregnancy to go more than 2 weeks beyond a due date as at some point the placenta will begin breaking down.)

Oh what a tangled web we weave, When first we practice to deceive.

Doodad Pro said...

This blog is breathtaking. So I know when Sarah Palin went into labor, but I have no idea whether Obama took an economics class in college. Great democracy we've got going here.

What's next - a blog on whether Governor Mike Rounds of South Dakota dyes his hair?

It's an amazing double standard. Left-wing arsonists try to kill members of Palin's church, and the press gives a big yawn. Can you imagine the outcry if there was a fire at Obama's Chicago church?

luna1580 said...

at this point it's preaching to the choir, but anyone who doubts how the hardcore pro-life evangelicals in america reacted to SP's "birth of trig" should glance at this blog
living in alaska, the blog of some lady in big lake alaska

-do read the comments too, it's fun & there aren't many.

-don't leave this poor woman 87 million comments, please! it's plain she wouldn't want to hear them. read on (here*) for more about that.

the point is this is a perfect example of the political impact sarah's "birth of trig" had on her base. it's quite notable.

i'd bet money that many of these people would feel betrayed and disgusted if it all turned out to be a lie.

-*BUT they are also the sort of people who, for the most part, wouldn't even consider the possibility she could've/would've ever done something so unholy as to lie to them. they will only believe if this reaches the point where she herself admits and apologizes (ha ha) or if it is somehow proven in all media beyond doubt.

i happened on her blog by googling "baby trig" looking for a picture i remembered, it was #2 in the web (not image) search.

the only point i have in sharing this is for the benefit of those who don't understand how profoundly political this "serendipitous" down syndrome birth really was for SP, if you understand that feel free to skip it.


Prudi said...

I have always thought that in the photos of Sarah and then Bristol with the girl that went to the prom, Bristol's face looks like she has "the mask of pregnancy".

I wonder if using the shadowing photo enhancing option, exactly the same on both Sarah and Bristol, would cause it to show up more?

Scott said...

Palin's great manipulation

Sarah Palin's Dad Says She'll Be a Great Grandmother


Bristol Palin is expecting her first child, a son, on Dec. 20,,personsTax:BristolPalin,00.html

Bristol will be great mother too!

of both children.

Now Sarah won't be criticized for leaving her baby to be babysit by Bristol full time. Perhaps that's her punishment for jeopardizing her best laid plans for her political future.

Anonymous said...

Take a look at this Sarah Palin is up for a raise! Unbelievable. I can not believe Alaska.

Anonymous said...

i love how people are writing that this matter should be dropped now and only brought up again if/when she runs in 2012 or something.

IMO, the matter must continue until she admits her charade to the world which she tried to fool.

If the poster hadn't noticed she IS in political office, currently.

Anonymous said...

When Levi gave his unscripted "driveway interview" during the campaign, I recall him mentioning that the baby is a boy.

Anonymous said...

Not exactly evidence but some musings from a night of television. . .

Last night watching tv I saw a commercial for the soap opera Days of Our Lives. Guess the storyline they were using as their tease. A fake pregnancy! The commercial showed the character wearing her fake bump, her lover touching it and pulling his hand back in recoil, and the repeating voiceover: why would she do it? fake a pregnancy? could she pull it off? wouldn't they guess? but why?. . .

Not exactly art imitating life, I guess, but too funny.

And then I also watched The Biggest Loser, and for two hours, I got to see a thin, small woman very pregnant (four weeks from delivery) on screen, moving and very exposed in all aspects. The pregnant spokeswoman, who all viewers have seen unpregnant, is a classic 8 mo pregnant woman. Enormous wide-across rounded breasts in proportion to her expanded abdomen and classic large rounded belly. But the real kicker was watching her move and hearing her breathiness (I'd forgotten that part of being pregnant!) I tried to imagine her pregnancy being fake, and there was no way. How she maneuvered her body on camera, how she lumbered (gracefully) but the tell-tale breathiness in her voice!

I know Audrey sees lots of pregnant women. But I realized that at middle age, I don't-- and I certainly have never watched a very pregnant woman for two hours on screen.

No wonder Audrey's warning bells went off! I am convinced even more than ever that Palin is a con-artist and liar.

Anonymous said...

Karen, Levi spoke of Bristol's baby as a boy back in October. -B.

Morgan said...

Really, Doodad pro? You know who started the fire at Sarah's church? And their motives? Could you kindly cite your source?

Because until someone is arrested and charged I'm inclined to think that the person who put those churchgoers at risk could have just as easily been a Palin supporter seeking to make her out to be some Persecuted Martyr by setting the fire.

Of course, I'm not going to come out and say that's the case because I don't know. To announce such a thing would be, well, foolish. Which would make a fool. Which I'm not.

BG! said...

Here is an article from ABC news from October where Levi Johnston says they are having a boy:

Anonymous said...

While certainly inconclusive, the fact that tests (which at the minimum determined the child's gender) were performed "early-on" on then 17 year old Bristol's baby, could be an indication of concern that she could be pregnant with ANOTHER Down's Syndrome child. Another "conspiracy" thought.

Anonymous said...

"As Sarah Palin well must know, a small percentage of positive DS diagnoses are "false positives."

You may be crediting her with too much intellectual curiosity. Is she, in fact, intelligent enough and foreseeing enough to create a plan based on the premise that Trig's was a false positive DS diagnosis? That has not been her pattern. Her pattern seems to be to jump without looking.

Anonymous said...

"Left-wing arsonists try to kill members of Palin's church, and the press gives a big yawn. Can you imagine the outcry if there was a fire at Obama's Chicago church?"

President-Elect Obama is of slightly more general interest than a failed VP candidate known for misstatements, though. I'm sure you're free to set up a blog to discuss the church fire. Really, I'm still thinking that one of the people doing "crafts" inside at the time got careless with a glue gun- or maybe the church was built by somebody's pal and they cut corners on fire safety and wiring. Who knows?


Sunshine1970 said...

Levi hinted he's expecting a boy. He didn't confirm it. I took it as he was hoping for a boy, but wasn't sure either way (well, he did have a 50/50 chance of being right lol)

Hey, y'know I've been thinking about something. We seem to hear a bit about Sarah's parents, but what about Todd's parents? How come there are no images of the Palins and their grand child, like there are with the Heaths? Are they excited for their great-grandchild?

And where is Levi? Shouldn't he be around now as a supporting loving husband/father to be?

hrh said...

Anonymous at 7:05a: Crediting Palin with ANY intellectual curiousity is an overstatement. Arianna Huffington has said Palin wears her ignorance like a beauty pageant tiara!

Bristol's "pregnancy" seems, to me, just another desperate improvisation by Palin to further the original lie: that she, herself, was pregnant.

Another poster quoted the Shakespeare "What a tangled web we weave...." Boy, is that right on!

Anonymous said...

Re: Anonymous @ 7:57p.m.

I remember reading the "People" mag article as well, and the comment regarding Willow "discovering" Trig's D.S. did sound a bit strange to me at the time. I had forgotten about that! What newborn doesn't look "different"?

Unless, Willow first saw Trig when he was a week or two old??? Then, possibly, some of his features might have been clearer and more recognizable as those of a baby with Downs Syndrome??

Another point to ponder.

Anonymous said...

The question of whether Trig really has DS has been raised. In some photos I have seen of him, I thought I saw facial characteristics typical of DS babies, but I may have been reading that into what I saw. I have no special ability to discern such things, but a friend of mine did recently birth a DS baby and Trig reminded me of him. Could someone with more expertise perhaps comment on Trig's appearance and whether it seems to show DS symptoms?


Jen said...

jeanie said...

Re - the timing of the DS diagnosis. I don't believe there was anything mentioned about this - or any other special needs - before the actual birth.

I know SP claimed to have had 'testing' at 13 weeks (and we all have great faith in her claims - NOT!) but I don't recall any news articles or anything else released before 4/18 that mentioned this.

Does anyone have a confirmed article stating her knowledge that Trig would be special needs that actually was made public before he was born??

December 16, 2008 6:35 PM


to jeanie:

there were none -- in fact, it wasn't until the People magazine article that Sarah mentions that even her children did not know.

in the article it says: Willow says he looks like he has down syndrome and Sarah's reply was: Well, IF he does, you'll still love him anyway.

Then Willow asked: how come u didn't tell us and Sarah's response was: I didn't know how to.

It was around 4/22 that she confirmed Trig was 'special needs' and that early testing, in December, at 13 weeks -- which is incorrect anyways, SP, would have been 16 weeks even at Dec 1st, told her that Trig would have DS but she didn't bother reading about it for "months" and didn't bother to tell anyone until the baby was already born.

sounds pretty selfish to me to withhold that kind of information from people that you will rely on to help care for your son.

Anonymous said...

As a mother of five who hid her pregnancies each time, I don't think it is implausible that SP had Trig on the day she says she did. I find it totally believable that she took that very negligent trip to Texas, flew back to have her kid in Wasila. I think she liked the birthing center there and did not want to be stuck in a hospital where she would not get as personal attention from people she knew and would give her even more special perks than being governor would get.

Get some pregnant women who are 7-8 months along, not showing much and challenge them to hide it. With a big loose jacket and regular clothes, you can hide a lot.

I don't think she went into labor in Texas. She leaked some pee. When the leaking did not continue and maybe with a sniff test, she realized that she was likely fine and took the chance. She talks off the top of her head so mentioned that, but I doubt she was in labor. She probably decided to get herself induced when she got to Wasila to end the whole thing then and there whether she was in labor or not, something a doctor who is friendly with her would do, but a first rate medical center would not so easily do this as early births have risks and she already was high risk.

She isn't responding to all of this because she does not care about it. It's nonsense to her. She does not have to respond and there is no reason for her to do so. If Trig is her son, and all went as she said, she is opening MSM discussion on her negligence, something she does not want to do. Enough people think this is website is kooky that it isn't going to have an effect. Even NE isn't touching this story.

I do wonder about Bristol and Levi, however. Should they not be together and bonding as she approaches her due date? Are they going to wait until marriage before setting up house together? Kinda crazy I think especially with a baby in the works.

Anonymous said...

As far as I am concerned, Audrey and CO. have established that SP was not pregnant this spring and she did not birth Trig. PERIOD - Next steps-- how to move this forward? Sometimes to accomplish something as tricky and this-- we need to circle backwards a bit. I know that SP "announced" her pregnancy in early March. I think, this was around the time that she was being considered (with others) for the VP slot. I also think that her decision to "be pregnant" had to to with some type of information that she received that she was being considered more seriously. I think we need to look into this aspect of it-- Something like that happened in the early spring, and the more info we have about this series of events, I think we may be able to develop a case that includes "material" evidence (photos) as well as circumstantial evidence ( i.e.--she had something to gain by suddenly becoming pregnant). We'll just keep chipping away at this and eventually it will come undone !!

Anonymous said...

The "Chuck Heath" type at 8:45 am 12/17 posted a modest effort on rewriting the birth story. Hope no one bothers to rebut it.

Please people, keep your focus on exposing lies, not debating with folks who (1) fail to read Audrey's website and (2) fail to accept medical/biological truth.

Anonymous said...

Someone here mentioned the Palin kids taking state paid junkets while dubiously doing state paid business. You know, I agree it's a poor 'cover story' and would be more plausible if reports existed of the 'first family' kids assuming community leadership roles while at home and I'm not talking about photo ops like attending charity dinners or women's conventions. I'm talking about Community Service. It is unfortunate, if not telling, that the only reports we have are exactly the opposite ''conduct unbecoming a first family'' and just plain downright scandal coming from the head of the family down.

I've often bristled at the term 'first family' and how and how often it's used. I think it's inappropriate and shows a sense of entitlement, conferring upon others a lower status. And it shows in how the rest of Alaskans are treated and have bought into this role of being lessers.

My last thought for true christians is:
Would Jesus have been a politician? Political life is against everything he stood for.

Morgan said...

Anon at 8:45 who claimed she hid her pregnancies:

There's a few things that jump out at me regarding your defense of Sarah.

You say that she may have just been leaking pee and didn't realize it right away. I disagree. A woman who has had five kids would know the difference between urine and amniotic fluid right away. Hell, even a woman who hasn't had a kid can tell the difference between urine and discharge. Not to be course or anything but that statement was rather lame.

You don't just "decide to get yourself induced" early. That's a medical decision and a doctor wouldn't induce a preterm baby without a medical reason. If there were some sort of emergency, they'd opt for a c-section.

The reasons you give for her bypassing the major medical center are as curious as her actions. Shall I remind you again that she is (allegedly) pro-life? And yet you maintain that she'd bypass a major medical center with a NICU just to "end the whole thing." Such disregard for a child seems inconsistent with her claims to be a (cough*cough*) caring mother.

Your claim that you hid your pregnancies was a nice touch, but made as much sense as the rest of what you wrote.

Like the previous commenter, I suspect a jittery Palinite. I fully appreciate such attempts to cover for the governor, for they always make for fun reading. But would ask those of you who do to at least try and come up with better arguments than this.


Anonymous said...

Anon at 8:45 bring up some very good points supporting SP's version of events, including the hiding and flight back to Alaska.

Good for those of us who have concluded that SP faked it, that is.

This commenter asserts that SP leaked pee, not amniotic fluid, so she just THOUGHT she had to rush back to Alaska -- because she wanted to give birth in a place she was comfortable.

Just, oh, have a dozen or so problems with that scenario.

1) If SP thought her water had broken, why didn't she at least get it checked out.
2) If she later concluded it was just pee, why would she rush back?
3) If she found out it was pee, not broken water, why contend that he water broke at all?
4) If it was pee, why was labor INDUCED a month early?
5) If she was hiding her pregnancy, why did she announce it when everyone was fooled? Did she want to disguise it or not?
6) Once the cat was out of the bag, why did she continue to disguise it, particularly when the public's reaction was surprised but pleased?

So thank you, Anon, for positing such a weak defense, riddled with inconsistencies. It helps to explain why SP didn't try the "it was only pee" story: too many inconsistencies with the direct evidence.

I think SP's Texas-to-Alaska story is the best she could come up with that explains two indisputable facts: Trig was born and she left Texas early. I suspect if she had left Texas on the first sign of trouble and hadn't waited to give her speech, she might have been given the benefit of the doubt.

On the issue of hiding a pregnancy with 'fashion assisted camouflage', you can hide a fake pregnancy the same way.


Anonymous said...

Thank you Morgan for addressing Anon @ 8:45! I was at a loss for words and you nailed it, once again.



Anonymous said...

Also, Jesus was most definitely a politician, in the activist sense. Don't kid yourself. He sought followers, just like a politician does. He was good enough at it so that the politicians and authorities he challenged saw that he was executed and his followers persecuted and worse for centuries.


Anonymous said...

@ Anon December 17, 2008 8:45 AM

Nice Try!

What a wonderful coincidence.. 5 pregnancies .. hiding pregnancies each time... Wow, you do have a lot in common with SP.. A Loyal Aide and even SP couldn't write better the entire story. When you said so many times that SP doesn't care, she just proved us that SHE DOES CARE, oltherwise you wouldn't be here.

BTW, I thought Church going ladies love showing off their bellies and not hiding them. With all due respect, why would a Christian woman hide the Gift og God? Why would a Christian woman take chances, especially when she knew she was carrying not only the Gift Of God but a Special Gift?

Please come back and explain.. I am all ears. But please do not change the subject as I don't care whether Levi and Bristol are getting married or moving in together.

Morgan said...

Susan and Dangerous, as we get closer to the truth I think we're going to see more excuses floated by Palin supporters who are desperate to see if something, anything will stick.

I was on another blog one day when a Palin supporter claiming to be an OB went on and on about how Palin was Trig's mother. In the process, this "doctor" revealed just how little knowledge he really had in his "field." That guy was as much a doctor as Anon is a serial pregnancy hider.

Like the last Anon who commented, I find it curious that someone would feel the need to hide five pregnancies. If you're ashamed of your kids, why are you having them?

It's always good practice to allow comments like the one Anon at 8:45 posted. It shows the desperation of the people seeking to rationalize something that simply can't be rationalized. If they have to create fake circumstances or personas to lend credibility to their argument they will certainly do it.

But when the meconium hits the fan none of this will matter anyway. It'll mean they'll just have to come up with some other equally unbelievable excuse.

Anonymous said...

Morgan said....

"when the meconium hits the fan none of this will matter anyway."

You, my friend, have a gift!



sjk from the belly of the plane said...

Levi Johnston walks with his girlfriend Bristol Palin after they arrived to attend the Republican National Convention in Minneapolis.

She was huge then. Is she even bigger now?

Anonymous said...

I, with everyone else, including Andrew Sullivan, ask myself, why did Palin throw her young daughter to the wolves when all she had to do was produce a birth certificate or medical records proving Trig was her baby?

I know truth can be stranger than fiction but I like the duck comment and this story quacks all over.

Therefore one tries to understand what really happened here and why was so much trouble taken to obfuscate the facts?

Here is what we do know.
Trig Palin was (reportedly) born in the middle of April.
He does appear to be suffering from some sort of congenital birth defect.
His 'sister' was paraded in front of the world as being 5 months pregnant in order to divert speculation away from Palin.

It has never ceased to amaze me how to how much trouble Sarah Palin went to NOT squelch the rumors and speculation surrounding the birth of Trig Palin. Her method of proving that she had to be the mother because Bristol couldn't be, makes me just scratch my head and ask myself, why would she even mention Bristol at all? What does this have to do with Bristol if Sarah Palin is Trig's mother? The answer is - nothing at all! Sarah Palin dragged Bristol into the mess for the simple reason she wouldn't or more likely couldn't give some simple legitimate, easily provided proof that she gave birth to a 5th child. I think it's also very telling that Sarah Palin knowingly exposed Bristol to this public humiliation. Why?

Here is what I think happened.
Bristol Palin got herself pregnant.
Early diagnosis reveals the baby has special needs.
Sarah Palin decides to claim the child as her own to
a. Protect her right-wing, fundamental, pro-abstinence reputation upon which Palin's whole political career is based.
b. Pick up some brownie points for her pro-life advocacy
c. Hide the shame of a teenage pregnant daughter
d. Provide the child with the much needed medical coverage that she could provide for the child and Bristol couldn’t.

I doubt she did that happily or willingly or even unselfishly. She did it as a coldly calculated political move and it took a good deal of scheming and subterfuge on her part to pull it off - but she did pull it off - sort of. (It appears rumors have swirled even before Palin hit the national scene.)

And then what happened? It would appear that Bristol got herself pregnant - again!

Can you imagine how absolutely livid Palin must have been at Bristol? So what does she do? She sacrifices Bristol to save herself for being exposed for her hypocrisy and fraud. I can imagine she felt absolutely justified in her actions as she was most likely enraged with Bristol and her sinful, irresponsible behavior.

That is the only thing that makes sense. Throwing Bristol to the wolves to 'prove' she (SP) was the legitimate mother of Trig made no sense.

Throwing Bristol to the wolves because she had already covered for her once and Bristol had screwed up again makes complete sense.

Sunshine1970 said...

@sjk from the belly of the plane said...
She was huge then. Is she even bigger now?

No, Bristol seems to actually be smaller, but still seems to be pregnant..

Weird, actually..

sjk from the belly of the plane said...

when do we get to see the results of the CBJ medical records PDF hack job?

sjk said...

Pregnant or nursing:

Anonymous said...

"Also, Jesus was most definitely a politician, in the activist sense."

For the sake of the conversation, I agree with this point, but I'd like to add that we have actually no proof that Jesus ever really existed. There are no books of the bible written concomittently with his alleged existence- they were all written later. There are no primary source materials for his existence.

That doesn't mean he didn't exist, of course, merely that his alleged existence is purely a matter of faith and not proof.

Anonymous said...

As someone who at 6.5 months developed a very slow leak of amniotic fluids, I have been very skeptical of Sarah Palin's story from the beginning. Even though my leak started on Christmas Day and I really thought it might be urine, my OB was adamant that I come to the hospital immediately, which I did. When a quick test determined that the leak was amniotic fluid, my OB was equally adamant that I was getting into a hospital bed and not getting up until my baby was born. I think it was medical malpractice if Sarah's doctor didn't insist that Sarah go to a Dallas hospital post haste.

At first I thought that Sarah's wild ride, then bypassing two NICUs was her attempt to kill the baby. However, all the photographic evidence that Audrey has posted certainly argues that Sarah could not have been pregnant.

But, someone at Sarah's insurance provider has to know what the truth is and if insurance fraud has been committed. Did Sarah have bills for pre-natal care, an amnieocentesis, delivery charges? Is she turning in bills for Trig's pediatric care? Does the hospital just write everything off because she's the governor? Is it against HIPAA regulations for the insurance company to say if there were no charges?

Someone from Alaska posted that adoptions in Alaska can be completed in as little as four months. Did Sarah pay Trig's bills herself for four months? Maybe her insurance pays as soon as you begin an adoption. Who knows?

I think even though Alaska is our largest state, in reality, it is a very small place and people are afraid to speak out and incur the wrath of Sarah. Anne Kilkenny seems certain that Sarah is Trig's mom. Perhaps if Audrey emailed her, she would explain her reasoning.

Ohio mom

sjk from the belly of the plane said...


the Palin women sure have WEIRD pregnancies!

regina said...

The Palin women have weird pregnancies and wear weird dresses! Bristol's black dress is a poor choice for a pregnant woman... her breasts and belly are all squashed!

KaJo said...

Echoing what regina said above: I looked at the Bristol/Levi pic that sjk referred to at 11:24 (walking across the tarmac?), which reminded me of the companion picture of Sarah Palin, Bristol and the baby in what I think is the RNC makeup/photo room later the same day (Aug. 31, 08).

In contrast to her thoroughly married matronly mother who hid her 5th "pregnancy", this unwed pregnant teenager is dressed in a black see-through lace dress with a opaque black slip underneath (and a white bra! Fashion police!!). Doesn't look much like a disguise, does it?

The outdoor Bristol/Levi picture sjk linked to shows what looks like an authentically, truly pregnant lower abdomen. And most notable, Bristol is wearing a light-colored skirt (or pants, I can't see her lower legs)! No disguise!

Gosh, if Bristol was this big at the end of August, she must be bigger than her mother was in that red-shirted "pregnant with Track" picture.

palin pregnancy truth said...

This might have been posted before but I hadn't seen it:

Where is the footage on fox with Elan Frank? Why hasn't he been talking if he's hired as a commentator?

Anonymous said...

I have to admit that I'm not a scholar of that period in history, but it seems virtually certain that someone named Jesus of Nazareth existed and was widely known in Judea at the time he lived. That is not to say that all of the things he was credited with doing in the various gospels happened. It could be a composite of several people, with other literary devices.

So that it relates directly to this blog, I could suggest that the story of Trig's birth as the gospel according to Sarah requires about as much blind faith to believe as the literal truth as the gospels about Jesus.

I'm not an OB/GYN nor a Christian, but I don't belief in the literal truth of a 'virgin' birth, or of a woman giving birth when she was never pregnant. (Hmmm. Interesting parallel there.)

I do have it on good authority that 'virgin' Mary was a mistranslation that stuck, and nothing more.


Morgan said...


I've allowed a few topics on the discussion of Jesus' existence, but after the last comment by Dangerous we're going to call it a day on religious discussion.

It's easy to get sidetracked, and I don't want to come across as the Evil Moderator, but given the volume of comments we're getting and the amount of time we're spending just on moderation, I'd prefer we stay on topic.

So back to our regular discussion which I do recall had something to do with Sarah Palin. ;-)

Anonymous said...

Just a quick question for Audrey and Morgan:

How much if any uptick have you seen in comments that have to be banned? I know you are only banning obvious malicious spam, references to things easily found on the website, and discussion about the myspace kids, right? (well, and now Jesus discussion). just curious to know how much has been blocked, and if it is incresing and if so, how. I'm hoping this blog is getting more and more attraction... seems like it is, anyhow......

Also, is there any way to track where your hits are coming from? I'd love to see a breakdown of where people come here from....


PS: thanks for all your hard work!

Anonymous said...

Re: above comments about SP's decision "to become pregnant" a month before she "gave birth."

Does anyone know the DATE of the famous video clip where SP asks ..."what exactly is the job of the VP.. what does the VP do?"
I would love to get a reply here--
and I wonder how close the date of the video is to the March 7th announcement of her "pregnancy?"
Thanks !

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 219   Newer› Newest»