Last night, at 10 PM Alaska time, KTVA (CBS Affiliate in Anchorage) ran a two plus minute video segment discussing the photos that have been posted on the blog several times, notably here and here.
Here's the link to the segment. This segment contains a short video clip of the actual interview between Gov. Palin and Andrea Gusty on April 13th, 2008, as well as Andrea Gusty's unequivocal statement that both the photograph of her interviewing Gov. Palin and the photograph of Gov. Palin with Bill McAllister and Dan Carpenter were taken with her camera. According to Gusty, Carpenter took the photograph of the interview; she took the photo of Carpenter and McAllister.
Prior to the newscast, at this same link (at approximately 10 PM Eastern Time), a full eight minute unedited version of the actual newscast that had run that night was posted (with no comment whatsoever), including "weekend weather." (Clarification: The eight minute segment appears to have been around 9:30 PM Eastern (5:30 PM AK time) and remained up until some time after the ten p.m. newscast, when it was replaced by the report that Gusty actually did last night.) This contained a much longer version of the interview with Palin. I was unable to capture this prior to it being removed, and I regret this. If anyone reading this blog has it available, please contact me.
I did not post anything on this blog prior to the segment running, as we were unable to confirm until almost ten p.m Eastern that the segment was scheduled. The majority of the discussion in Gusty's report focused on another website; mine was only shown in a very brief flash, and I was never contacted for any comment, or for the credentials or identity of the individual who had done the Photoshop analysis for me. In an odd twist of events... someone, and we are still trying to determine who, emailed a large number of people who had at some point posted their email address in comments to my blog (for whatever reason) that the segment was going to run, yet I was never emailed.
Further comment on this development will be available later today.
A
No Time for Tuckerman
-
Time. It is precious, they say. It flies, they say. And former Republican
Party Chair, former Dunleavy Chief of Staff, and now former University of
Alaska ...
8 months ago
261 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 261 of 261I have to say, I didn't believe that the photos were faked. I felt that it Palin faked her pregnancy, she would have to at some point begin to look pregnant. Having pictures like the ones taken on April 13 would only serve to help Palin.
But again, if she looked that pregnant on April 13, why would the airline staff not be able to tell she was pregnant flying back to Alaska on April the 17th?
This is the govenor of Alaska. I assume she was flying first class, there are not as many people in that section. I imagine that the staff knew who she was and spoke to her on the plane. She looked pregnant at the RGA conference. If she wore the same thing on the plane, she would have appeared to be pregnant.
She may have also taken off her jacket since this was in April and she is flying from Texas. That would only make sense. If that was the case, and she looked like the pictures taken of her in the April 13th photo and the one taken on the 17 at the RGA, then there should have been no doubt that she would be seen as being pregnant.
It is information like this that just does not make sense that has me questioning her story, along with the wild ride and pregnancy pictures that have her going from a flat stomach to a 8 month pregnancy in 3 weeks.
Alex, every person has a unique combination of DNA. That is why the courts are able to use it to rule suspects of crimes out, or in. Remember the OJ trial when the chances of the blood sample in question being anyone other than OJ's was like 1 in a gazillion? If I remember correctly, there was at least one sample that put the stats as a larger number than the estimated population of the entire planet. So, it was OJ's blood.
The jury took that info and, well....yeah, ya know.
I am not familiar with how DNA is used to determine maternity/paternity; I supppose there are patterns of inheritence akin to blood types.
I think you're thinking of mitochondrial DNA, which is passed on from mother to child. So, Sarah's and her children's mDNA would be the same (barring random duplication errors) but not their cellular DNA.
Of course, then, there is always the problem of chimerism--an extremely rare thing, but I saw a program where a mother was accused of her children not being her biological children after DNA testing ruled her out....but she had the birth records and everything, and further extensive testing showed her chimerism, and that the children were hers. (If you really want to know more about chimerism, use google) I mention that only because nothing...I mean NOTHING is 100%.
"SP's Big Obama Lie" in HuffPost
Anybody catch "Morning Joe," this morning? It was sickening. About 6:30 eastern time, Brzenski, the daughter of a war criminal, Harold Ford, Pat Buchanan, Willie Geist and Mike Barnicle, were talking about the Palin baby rumors and rolling their eyes and their typical childish crap about "pathetic bloggers."
I've been in the newspaper business for 25 years and I've given up on the national MSM to report anything of importance. And further, I'd put the journalistic credentials of most of the bloggers I read up against Joe Scarborough's any day of the week.
To claim, as they did, that bloggers are not journalists is so illustrative of everything that is wrong with the MSM and reflects a total misunderstanding of the Web and citizen journalism. They deserve to be on the sinking ship they are on.
Craig,
Well, there you go, the media has addressed this. However, they have only looked at what has been addressed as evidence of possible photoshopping.
There has been no attention or questions to the pictures taken March 11th and 26 taken by the ADN and compared to the April 13th photo. Those have been the real question. Since the photos were being talked about, why didn't they address those?
And I would disagree with your comment that no amount of proof would convince people here that Sarah is the biological mother of Trigg. That assumtion gives a blanket grouping that anyone who dares to question the many incredulous and inconsistent stories regarding this issue is a rabid, nutcase.
There are many intelligent individuals here that feel this story doesn't add up and if Sarah Palin committed this hoax, we need to know. Why do we need to know it? Because committing an act this devious speaks to character, and this person could run for the presidency or vice presidency in 2012.
Personally, if a birth certificate was presented, I would consider this as evidence. Some have suggested that a birth certificate can be altered legally by the state if parents adopt a child. I don't know if that is true or not. If it is, it would also have to be taken into consideration.
I would prefer to see dated medical records. Since I'm a nurse, seeing lab work and doctor's notes would help me determine if Sarah was Trigg's mother. Also, it is illegal to change medical records.
I just had a funny thought...
With Sarah Palin's level of understanding of science and her grasp of the English language, is it possible she's mistaken DNA as another acronym for ADN, and thinks she's going to have an interview by Pat Dougherty himself?
Or something equally bizarre?
**Moderation Notice***
While we appreciate and respect readers' attempts to be helpful by speculating on any hypothetical DNA testing, we are tightening our moderation on comments advancing such speculation.
Yes, the topic is thought-provoking, but it also very technical. There is a reason why Audrey ultimately relies on outside experts for technical and scientific matters. And I really doubt any of us here are versed enough to address genetic matches and/or what a DNA test could or could not show.
The discussion could take this thread off on a time-consuming tangent about some scientific judgements we're not qualified to make. So unless you're a DNA expert and want to *email* your thoughts to Audrey (her email address is on the site and easy to find unless you're completely clueless), we'd prefer to keep the discussion on DNA out of the technical realm.
It's highly unlikely that Sarah would submit to such a test anyway, since she refuses to even show a birth certificate.
Thanks
What would I accept as proof that Trig is the natural born son of the Gov? An affidavit from the attending doctor specifically stating that they delivered Trig, that Sarah is mother, the exact birthdate and who was in attendance at the birth.
A birth cert without the above means nothing at this point since they can be altered.
Since I don't think any attending physician would put their professional license and integrity on the line for Palin I would accept that as complete proof.
Now Sarah...why is that so hard to produce???
There was mistype in my Jan 14 7:44 AM post. Of course I meant the April 13th Gusty photo that shows more of the carpet.
AMY1,
just check your line-up of the suspect: it has GUILTY all over!
it's going to be something as simple as that that will tell the tale.
What if Sarah is Trig's bio mother, but that the wild ride story is a fabrication? How could this be the case? Sarah clearly noted that she was really determined to give the keynote luncheon speech in Dallas, so what if? What if Trig was born April 10 or 11? Sarah may or may not have had official state duties until the close of the legislative session on Sunday, April 13. On April 13 she wore her best Sunday padding, looking more "pregnant" than ever. She could have left the baby with one of her "confidant" sisters on April 17, and then made a hurried trip to Texas to cement her VP nod, and then rush home.
This could explain a lot of the truthiness in Sarah's and her doctor's statements - even using the 'day" of the week. In fact, it really explains being "induced" in time to go to Texas the following week.
The cover up, then becomes abandoning a newborn for a trip to Texas to further one's political aspirations. 'Splains why we do not see birth records and why we aren't hearing any tearful a-palin bean spilling, as this opportunist tripp would not qualify her as mother of the year. In fact, if Trig was hospitalized or treated as noted, for jaundice, mommy Sarah's attendance would have been "optional." (This would also explain why Trig's treatment for jaundice was never a news story at the time - he wasn't officially born yet. Thus, in a sense Sarah & doctor would have only told a few white lies, but the context, if the truth came out, spells political disaster for Ms. Palin.
Bristol's earlier pregnant sightings could have had other outcomes.
This is somewhat off topic, but a story in The Bristol Bay Times states that "a cry for help" came from one Alaskan village hit hard by the cold weather. They say they are in a state of emergency needing immediate help.
Their governor is busy giving interviews and sending emails to the ADN, while these residents are suffering:
Story from The Bristol Bay Times:
http://tinyurl.com/8jmt3n
Immoral Minority Blog
http://tinyurl.com/7ss7u4
Remember, she added after offering to have DNA testing...."I was only half-joking!"
which half?
Also found this interesting; on Monday John McCain's daughter Meghan was interviewed and gave various thoughts on her election experience. When asked about Palin she said:
"Sarah Palin is the only part of the campaign that I won’t comment on publicly.”
mc-midnight - In the ADN article CBJ states (according to the reporter, no quote from Dr.) that she induced labor. That statement from the reporter is in question since there it is not directly quoted.
She may have delivered Trig Palin and induced the birth mother. She simply doesn't state that is in fact SP.
I don't see that CBJ has said anything at all that would endanger her license. If she in good faith accepted patient information and then reported that in good faith as many physicians do when they take a medical history.
Newspaper accounts without direct quote woluldn't be problematic. The letter is so carefully worded and avoids any direct statement that CBJ attended SP as she gave birth to Trig on 4/18/08 at Mat Su.
CBJ cred is based on her practice, her work with youth, her research and educational history. Not solely on a medical license. I do believe she is credible and perhaps that is the reason no precise and direct statement attributing SP as birth mother under the primary care of CBJ has been made. Not once. Perhaps as SP physician & political appointee, CBJ is doing only what she can do to survive with her license intact.
The silence is deafening. SP's refusal to declare herself as Trig Palin's birth mother is heartbreaking. How very sad.
Maybe the church members should pray for the beautiful baby boy whose mother won't stand up to claim him.
Remember when ----
Bags of fan mail could save a TV show from cancellation?
People wrote letters to the editor to express concern?
When switchboards would light up?
When activists insisted that you write or call your Congressman?
When we used our phones to vote for our favorite singer on American Idol?
So tell me, SP and MSM people who are rolling their eyes at us this week: How is REGISTERED USER blogging any different?
I just looked at the 2nd video again. It looks like they have changed it. They took out the end where Sarah and Todd are showing Trig?
At the very beginning Sarah's eyes are weird!
Who was filming all the shots of the legislators that day? What time where these shots taken?
Both Hollis and Guttenberg did not have a reporter next to them. they were speaking to the camera not a reporter.
What time did they paly this on the news that day?
The last day of legislature is a day of celebration for all the bills passed and the accomplishments that transpired in the last 3 months. It makes no sense the Gov. would be in her own little interview and not shaking hands congratulating members.
There is something not right with these videos! Especially when last night Sarah, Todd and Trig where in the second one and now they are not!
Interesting story of a birth on a plane
http://www.hs.fi/english/article/Swedish+mother+gives+birth+on+Finnair+flight+from+Bangkok+to+Helsinki/1135241290049?ref=rss
Few tidbits of interest
Pregnant passengers beynd their 28th week of pregnancy must provide a doctor’s certificate confirming that the pregnancy has proceeded normally. However, pregnant passengers may travel up to the end of their 36th week
In practice, the rule cannot be monitorede with any real accuracy.
”If someone wants to lie, she does so.
******
However - Sarah Palin's situation was different, for one thing she had already started leaking (according to her own words) so it isn't the same a as woman who has no signs at all unexpectedly going into labor.
Also Palin knew she was having a DS baby - and there was a much greater chance the baby would have need immediate emergency care after being born.
Add to that - she is Govenor, and would she really truly have wanted to give birth in front of all those people in a very small cramped aisle of a plane?
Sarah Palin's story just doesn't add up - but I'm going to keep digging in to details about her birth story and the implications of what it means with the risks she took if she is Trig's birth mother.
Punkinbugg said: "So tell me, SP and MSM people who are rolling their eyes at us this week: How is REGISTERED USER blogging any different?"
That is an excellent point. Just by looking at all the comments on this blog alone, it's pretty easy to see this isn't something that's been advanced by a few bored anonymous bloggers (or however she put it), but by a pretty large segment of the public. Although I'm sure the distinction is still too subtle for SP.
Hmmmm....London Bridges....very interesting theory and one that does make sense in a limited way.
An interesting and critical take on SP's recent sniping at the media:
"Palin is getting in her own way" by James Rainey/LA Times
http://tinyurl.com/6vm4fq
Key passage relevant to this blog:
But in her other claims, Palin overplayed her hand.
She accused the mainstream media, for example, of relying on those "anonymous bloggers" to write their stories, when most actually run in the other direction.
After the video spread to YouTube, the governor's office elaborated, charging that "bloggers, the Atlantic magazine and even the Anchorage Daily News continue to give credence to the sensational allegation that the governor's child, Trig, is not hers."
Yes, some Internet scribes and the Atlantic's Andrew Sullivan continue to raise questions about Trig's birth. But the nation's most influential and biggest news organizations have paid little or no attention to the story since John McCain selected Palin as his running mate.
At the Anchorage paper, Executive Editor Pat Dougherty actually has taken considerable flack for failing to prop up the phantom birth theories, which he called "nutty nonsense." (Dougherty told me that a Daily News reporter noticed Palin's weight gain and thought she might be pregnant, and that Palin's doctor told the newspaper that the baby was the governor's.)
But claims that Trig was actually Bristol's child would not go away, so Dougherty assigned a reporter to do a story on the persistence of the rumors -- a piece that never appeared because the governor's office would not cooperate and the paper found that it "didn't have enough of a story to accomplish what we had hoped," Dougherty said.
A bit of perspective:
http://thebristolbaytimes.com/news/story/4512
Whoever Trig's mother is, this is what's going on in Alaska.
LondonBridges:
That's an interesting and clever theory.
***Moderator Request***
Would the commentor known as Dede please contact Audrey privately at info@palindeception.com
LondonBridges--good theory but does not explain how her belly looked so flat when there was a supposed 6 lb baby in there. I might even believe it to be possible if SP even looked remotely pregnant aside from the Gusty photos.
~BG
Okay my sharp-eyed pals, please see if anything's wrong with this collection of seven photos/links:
Amazing Pregnancy
And, if we were to make our best shot, are there photos that should be added/deleted to this?
Thanks!
rebagg (1/14/09 7:44 AM) and anyone else who's still fixated on the State Capitol carpet that shows up in the larger SP/Andrea Gusty picture revealed by Gusty on the KTVA news site:
Red herring!
Trust me -- I've had carpet with a pattern like that laid -- it's impossible to match the pattern because, to avoid the border pattern transecting the pathway at that corner, it has to be mitered into the far corner. And in doing that, there's no way to avoid the mismatch of the center pattern at the mitered carpet seam.
Don't focus on the carpet.
-----------------
Speaking of focussing, the 5-page NY Times article from September 13, 2008 chronicling Sarah Palin's rise to Governor, a story that does NOT gloss over her cronyism and patronage, is well worth the re-read.
http://tinyurl.com/9k9obv
-------------
In my opinion, Palin's offer for a DNA test is a red herring, too.
It's been many years since the wonky results of the OJ Simpson DNA testing, but -- if SP can get a Commission to absolve her of ethics violations after the bipartisan Branchflower panel found her guilty, I'm sure she can find a way to dismiss any DNA findings that prove her to be a liar -- again.
---------------
RE: LondonBridges' theory (@ 10:51 AM)
If Sarah Palin was indeed Trig's biological mother, the baby couldn't have been born April 10, because she was at that ServeAlaska swearing-in ceremony with Joe Parrish, with that not-so-inflated belly that grew so markedly in 3 more days.
She looked pretty perky that day, so it's not too likely she gave birth several days before, and we KNOW she didn't several days after (speech at legislature, the Gusty interview).
How about moving the "birth" back a few more days? Her face looked pretty scrawny in the March 26th "nail" picture, not so much like you'd expect a new mother to look. However, that pad she's so obviously wearing under her shirt couldn't be a Steripad over a C-section incision (quick in-and-out delivery), could it? That'd be even more outlandish a scenario than the "wild ride" scenario (and the obvious question is, WHY? Why go to such extremes of obfuscation?).
As for Trig being hospitalized/treated, isn't it more likely that Trig was under wraps because he was closely monitored in some unknown NICU for immature lung capacity, and was oxygenated? If he had jaundice, it was a transient and easily light-treated condition.
If I'm remembering correctly, too, Bristol was totally incommunicado in early 2008, that there weren't any "earlier pregnant sightings" of her (so there wouldn't be other outcomes).
It all comes back to asking Sarah Palin to come clean, tell the whole story, no more obfuscation, no more distractions, no more tangents.
McMidnight -
I, too, am annoyed at being called a CCT.
The point of this blog is to examine one particular matter which speaks volumes about Palin's integrity and decision-making capability. The goal being to enable Alaskans (and heaven-forbid it come to this again, but the rest of the country) to make informed choices about this political candidate.
It so refreshing to have technology that enables "Audrey the Blogger" to become a true journalist and create a forum that encourages creative thinking and scientific analysis so we don't have to sit back and swallow every pre-digested bite the media tries to feed us!
In fact, watching the kind of power that SP has wielded so far makes it especially important that we pajama-clad bloggers who have nothing to lose can really get to the bottom of things. Fortunately Pat Dougherty, at least, is not caving to her high-pressure tactics!
All the evidence I've seen so far shows that (most) posters here are more logical, analytical and intelligent in their pajamas than SP ever was in her designer clothes!
And as far as disrespecting her family - it's also quite clear that most of us have nothing but respect, sympathy, and frankly, a deep concern for SP's children/grandchildren.
Gusty admits to taking the 3 Amigos pics in a "candid" fashion.
No speculation there. its what she said. I have proof.
What bothers me is the EXIF data shows a 1/2 second exposure time.
Anyone can try this at home.
Set your camera to ISO 400, turn off the flash, go to any well lit room and TRY to get a WELL focused pic of anything WITHOUT a tripod or some sort of bracing.
IT AINT POSSIBLE.
So after the April 10 sighting, Sarah could have gone to a hospital or clinic on that day which was a Thursday to be induced and Trig was not born until early Friday just like her doctor related.
If Trig was being treated for jaundice or immature lungs, doesn't everyone think that mommy dearest Sarah would have milked that for all the publicity? Unless she couldn't because he wasn't "officially" born, yet. Her doctor in her election eve letter noted that Trig required some post birth treatment. An innocent slippage of the tongue?
As far as the lack of appearance of being pregnant, "if all the other observations clearly fit, you must convict."
Other Bristol outcomes could include miscarriage or adoption, unrelated to Sarah and Trigg.
However, even so Sarah could have decided to use Bristol and her rumored two pregnancies to distract from her wild ride tripp which much to her surprise generated too much public outrage.
Thank you SJK. I agree that the "3 Amigos" pic appears staged and don't buy Gusty's explanation for a second.
From the interview she gave, she admits to having a local photographer take a picture during the interview. I can believe this. That seems like a reasonable request.
However, why ask the Governor to pose with a rival news team's photographer and reporter? This was a personal photo that she didn't share with anyone. Why would Gusty want that? Why would she waste the Governor's time with a bizarre request involving people from a rival news team. Did Carpenter or Mcallister ask for Gusty to send them the photo? If he did, then she is lying about having "no clue" how it got on the internet.
I still believe the photos were intentionally staged and leaked. They appear to be taken at an angle that is not flattering for Gusty but clearly shows Palin Pregnant. I don't believe the Gov. looked this pregnant earlier in the day (she wore the suit after everyone had left) and that's why we don't have any other photos from earlier.
Gusty just doubled down and has spoken about the photos. Fair enough. We INVITE the people who were there to talk about this. Our problem has been the considerable lack of evidence. If we are completely wrong, stop hiding evidence and show it to us.
And Sarah (I know you are reading), you have every right to ignore our requests. You don't have to prove anything. But we have every right to blog about it. You are a public figure and we are trying to reconstruct an event that happened during your time in office with the evidence we have. So stop "whining" about bloggers or show us the evidence.
And where was your public outrage with Hustler's Nailin' Palin? Or with the Canadian fake Sarkozy interview? Funny that she's so concerned about bloggers involving the Trig issue but nothing else regarding her public image.
Amy1 said (12:44 PM)... Okay my sharp-eyed pals, please see if anything's wrong with this collection of seven photos/links: Amazing Pregnancy
And, if we were to make our best shot, are there photos that should be added/deleted to this? Thanks!
OK, Amy1, I see you have a ADN article as verification for the date on the first photograph.
But by my calculations -- assuming the statement by CB-J is "true" that SP was in her 35th week the week she "delivered" Trig, i.e. April 13-19, 2008 -- that would make the first week of the year, Dec. 30-Jan.5, 2008 the 20th week of her "pregnancy".
So, February 19 would be in the 27th week.
Amy1...
Also, under the March 26th photograph (the "nail" picture), you have two typo errors -- Trig misspelled, and the birth date should be April 18, not April 28.
Amy1,
In the first photograph, dated February 19th--the first time the scarf shows up--was still several weeks BEFORE her pregnancy announcement, which took place after she returned from her early March LA trip. I cannot remember the exact date of announcement, but it was somewhere between March 5 and 7th, 2008.
Thanks for pulling these together.
how did the pic Gusty admits to taking, the 3 amigos, get posted if she didnt post them?
Thanks to everyone who is asking for my analysis. I have forward a PDF draft of my brief -- 13 pages -- to Audrey. You can request it from her since when I try to click on your ID, I can't access your profiles, sorry.
I want to make it clear that I do not 'insist' that Willow is Trig's mother. I am only attempting to maintain a valid alternative theory for which no conclusive evidence, and little to no evidence at all, is available to refute it. Like all of the other theories proposed here, it could be rendered impossible with some records, such as proof of Willow's school attendance from February - April. A picture with a confirmable date in the timeframe and a clear view of her midsection would also suffice. But we don't have anything for either Bristol or Willow.
If Bristol can be Trig's mother, she probably is. But that would require her to become pregnant twice in less than a year, which is already unlikely. Possible, but unlikely. And having two children in less than 10 months, the second being full term, is impossible.
Dangerous
LondonBridges said (1:14 PM) So after the April 10 sighting, Sarah could have gone to a hospital or clinic on that day which was a Thursday to be induced and Trig was not born until early Friday just like her doctor related.
That doesn't jibe with the energetic face she put forth in the videos taken during her apparent all-day session with the AK legislature on Sunday April 13 --
Unless she just wasn't pregnant and didn't deliver!
-- which is the theory behind what's been discussed up to now -- namely the April 18 alleged delivery date and her subsequent appearance at the Capitol building the following Monday April 21 walking normally in heels with premature special needs DS baby getting "post-birth treatment" in tow.
Amy1 - They look good. Another thing I thought of - does SP normally wear all black like this? What images do we have of her from various times throughout 2007?
The black on black on black (with a colorful scarf thrown in, of course) do a good job of masking any lack of belly - especially in photos - though some of the lightening techniques can cut right through this.
The pre-Texas induction birth theory, is a hypothesis. The April 13 legislative session ended at noon. Was Sarah present for that entire session or was her first arrival for the day at 5pm? (or noon?) Which could explain the 5 hour gap between the legislative end and the hallway filming and photo shoot. (Sarah slept-in that day and bonded with Trig.)
This theory also explains why Trig looks (to some) a little older than a preemie newborn on April 21 or 22.
By the way the reporter who reported on the wild ride on April 22 was the same reporter that the ADN assigned to prove Sarah was Trig's birth mother.
This thought just occurred to me so I'm going to share it: I think that perhaps Trig could have been born at 28-29 weeks in late February as there is a photo of Palin looking not so healthy on Feb 19 (the one wearing the giant orange scarf where she looks either tired or not well). This was 3 weeks prior to her announcement on 3/6/2008 that she was expecting and was 7.5 months along. Perhaps the pregnancy announcement was ACTUALLY after the birth and she was no longer pregnant. She could have possibly hid a pregnancy through that time period without causing much speculation, with larger clothing, etc. There does seem to be a gap in the photo record of her from late February (the last one I’ve found is February 26 on the photos from the accompanying website)
http://www.palindeception.com/subpages/premarch.html
Then we have another photo pop up at the Iditarod start on March 1:
http://www.palindeception.com/subpages/march.html
That does leave 3 days, Feb 27, Feb 28 and Feb 29 without photo documentation, but that doesn’t mean that she was not at meetings or at work during those days.
The next photo from the March photo archives is March 4 at the Newsweek interview, a lengthy video interview in which she spent the entire time with her legs tightly crossed as most pregnant women could not do at that point in a pregnancy.
This theory would fit in that Trig would have been hospitalized in the NICU in Anchorage and Sarah would have then been free to finish out the remainder of the Legislative session, with her visiting him in hospital on a regular basis. This would also fit in with Palin spending so much time governing from Anchorage, instead of Juneau, so much time that some Legislators wore buttons stating “Where’s Sarah?” Could she have been spending time at her Anchorage office so that she was free to visit Trig at Providence NICU? Remember, Cathy Baldwin-Johnson’s main practice is at Providence in Anchorage, not at Mat-Su Regional.
Perhaps she announced the pregnancy FOLLOWING the birth but kept the birth secret until Trig was ready to leave the hospital in April. She went to Texas as planned and gave her speech and then picked up Trig the weekend of 4/19 and took him to work on Monday 4/21 to show him off to reporters (with the Gusty footage at Sarah's office occurring that day). That could be why she did her speech in Texas and flew home as planned, as no one has been able to find proof that she and Todd changed their plane tickets for the return home to Alaska from Texas. Perhaps the wild ride story was concocted to coincide with not the birth but the time at which Sarah’s political obligations were complete and she was free to announce Trig to the world and take him home.
(I don’t’ believe that a 1.5 to 2 month hospital stay would have been unreasonable for a special needs pre-term infant, especially if there were unknown health issues with him. My friend gave birth to a 28 week baby and he was in the hospital for 5 weeks and that was only due to his small size, no other complications.)
I think perhaps Sarah gave birth unexpectedly in late February and decided not to share that with the public so that she could continue her political agenda throughout the Spring. She then faked appearing pregnant throughout this time while visiting Trig at Providence. She could not afford politically for the child to have been born preterm as she had to continue until the end of the legislative session and complete her other political duties including the energy conference in late April in Texas, as that seems to be the last of the major political events on her agenda. The camouflaging scarves could have been as much to cover her large post partum chest as to cover the “bump”.
She had to complete the legislative session and make other appearances since she knew that she was being considered for the VP nod, thus would not want to spend any time "out of commission" during this period. Plus, she would have known that professionals were caring for Trig at the hospital, and she would not be able to take him home until they gave the “all clear” anyway.
This could explain the "convenient" birth story of Trig being born on 4/18 subsequent to the last pressing public appearance on the gov's schedule for Spring of 2008. Note, I am not privy to her schedule during that time, but it seems that not much was happening except gov. business as usual after 4/18 and the summer is a slow time for state government, so the timing would have been perfect for Trig to come home and for Sarah to begin caring for him and announce his arrival to the world. Could also explain why the baby shower happened after-the-fact, as Sarah was free to finally be a Mom.
As I type this I start to wonder if it all just seems too farfetched or if really this could be the answer. So much about the story seems so unbelievable that perhaps this could be the answer we've been looking for. I'm going to peruse some websites regarding pre-term infants and length of stay in hospital following pre-term births.
If any of you out there want to help with this feel free and let's see if what we come up with could possibly fit this timeline.
This could also explain part of the WHO, WHAT, WHY, WHERE and WHEN surrounding the birth certificate, as it would state a WHEN much earlier than we have been led to believe. I feel that some folks might not see Sarah in such a good light if she was continuing business as usual and pursuing her political pursuits after delivering a pre-term DS infant. On the other hand, if he was in the hospital for any length of time then I guess why not keep up business as usual until he could come home. This could also explain why she was so jaunty at his “debut” on Monday 4/21/08 and why many have stated here that Trig did not look like a newborn. He was 6.2 pounds when we first saw him but that could have been after spending time in the hospital after an early birth. Yes, there are the photos of the Heaths holding Trig at the Mat-Su Regional Hospital on the weekend of 4/19, however, barring any complications after his pre-term arrival he could have been moved to Mat-Su after spending time at Providence in Anchorage. With all of Sarah’s friends at Mat-Su, photo ops could have been arranged at any location in the hospital that they chose. There is also the account of the other mother giving birth that same day seeing Todd wandering the halls of Mat-Su. Perhaps he was just waiting for the hospital to hand over Trig so he could then go home.
Thanks for listening.
London bridges,
I posted this info about April 13th in a previous post:
So I have become obsessed with tracking down pictures and information from the April 13th session.
http://tinyurl.com/78yu2x
Hardly the quiet scene Gusty depicted.
I believe this is a picture of Palin on that day. She is wearing the same suit but her hair looks differnt? Interesting that I could see this picture but thumbnail versions have gone missing in google images:
http://www.newsminer.com/photos/2008/apr/13/1669/
http://tinyurl.com/7kpmoe
More pictures and a link to Palin's speech (audio only). However, you can hear the camera's flashing and several of the media's names:
http://juneauempire.com/stories/041408/sta_268248032.shtml
http://tinyurl.com/9vqrkv
http://www.gov.state.ak.us/audio/2008-SessionWrapPresser.MP3
http://tinyurl.com/9c2qcj
She was definitely there for a speech that was videotaped (we've got the audio). Audrey, can we call KTUU for the video? If Gusty is such good friends with Carpenter and Mcallister than maybe we could call KTVA and have her request it for us. :-) All we want is the truth!
The audio clips on April 13 sound like a press conference. It could well have been at 5pm or so which explains why the 3 Amigos were available for the 5PM photo shoot.
So it doesn't seem like Sarah would have addressed the Legislature on April 13. Separate branches of government.
AMY1,
SINCE YOU ASKED.
one advise on your GREAT lineup:
make the pregnancy-stage line as large (font wise) as the dates.
and PLACE THEM on top of the date.
the persuasiveness is not in the pictures alone BUT when observer matches that with stage of gestation.
also, i would suggest not italicizing the letters. it makes words less legible.
Amy1, on your pictures, the first one with the orange scarf, dated in February, says it was from the day the pregnancy was announced. But the pregnancy was announced in early March (about the 5th, I think).
Hey Amy1!
Great timeline.
Under the April 17, 2008 heading it should say "One day" not "days".
Here are a couple of pictures that also caught my attention, but I don't have the source cited:
FEB 5
and
FEB 26
The post-partum April 21 Video also spoke volumes to me.
Excellent work!
KaJo said: It's been many years since the wonky results of the OJ Simpson DNA testing, but -
actually the results weren't wonky, but the defense knew they could never get past conclusive DNA testing unless they could argue that the samples had been tampered with. In which they were successful doing.
Well, it wouldn't surprise me one bit if Sarah Palin's more science-educated advisors would take a page from OJ Simpson's defense team's book re: casting aspersions on DNA sampling.
I could see them dismissing the results with the kind of arrogance they've displayed in their press releases, then hosting another pity party about how persecuted she has been.
"having two children in less than 10 months, the second being full term, is impossible."
Not Impossible, My brother and I are 10 months apart in age.
I know many families that have children 10 - 11 months apart.
QUOTE BlueTx said...
http://www.adn.com/626/story/382864.html
Here is the interview SP is talking about. Her doctor clearly states that she had to induce labor for SP...
Bearing in mind it is a news article and news articles aren't accurate and change the story to say what they think. In CBJ's letter if she said sarah was induced...fair enough Sarah was induced; she just doesn't state she induded her. Plus it states her doctor induced her...maybe there was another doctor involved in the birth
Thank you, everyone, for all the correx and additions. Not sure what to do with the two add'l photos -- I'll just note them (one and two) and maybe add the next time I redo the art.
So here's the revised "Seven Views 1-15-09."
Happy to make further tweaks.
You're going to "hate" me, Amy1, but I found one more typo... :)
In the sentence at the very bottom where you quote what I said about the 20th week and the 27th week, after Trig's name, the date in parentheses should be (April 13-19), not (April 3-19).
Another suggestion about the array of pictures for you to consider, Amy1:
The "nail" picture March 26th has a brightened, lightened version that may illustrate what the viewer should be looking for -- namely that rectangular pad "look" to SP's belly, and that white dot visible through the fabric of her top.
That picture might be of more benefit to post instead of the one you've currently labelled "two".
(IMHO)
Another suggestion about the array of pictures for you to consider, Amy1:
The "nail" picture March 26th has a brightened, lightened version that may illustrate what the viewer should be looking for -- namely that rectangular pad "look" to SP's belly, and that white dot visible through the fabric of her top.
That picture might be of more benefit to post instead of the one you've currently labelled "two" (the negative of which I thought was too bright to show any features, much as the original picture is too dark).
(IMHO)
You beat me to that date catch, KaJo!
I would brighten the April 13 and the April 17 pictures, too.
All that blackness is what fooled "most" of the people. When you see the brightened or negative version, it's clear as day.
Kajo,
C-sections are now (and have been for at least 20 years) performed way down at the bikini line, so the white patch is not covering an incision there.
just an fyi.
penny
Thx for the photo help. I'll fix tonight. I think I should include the TV interview where she sits leaning forward with legs crossed at knee also. Appreciate you help until we get it right!
Penny, just to let you know, C-sections are still occasionally done with a vertical incision. One reason I am familiar with is to "re-use" an existing scar from a previous surgery. The internal incision into the uterus can be low horizontal (safest in most situations) even if the external incision through the skin is vertical.
Not that think for one minute that is what is happened here.
I just revisited this ADN link with the audio interview with Sarah on 4/22/08 when she debuted Trig at her office. She says that CBJ examined her when she got to Mat-Su regional at 11:30pm on 4/17 and Trig came at 6:30am in the morning on 4/18. She never mentions being induced in the audio portion of the interview. Link below to the full article and click the link on the page for the audio portion.
http://www.adn.com/front/story/382864.html
Interesting because the text of the article mentions this quote from CBJ:
"Baldwin-Johnson said she had to induce labor, and the baby didn't come until 6:30 a.m. Friday."
This doesn't really mean much, I guess, it just seems like Sarah would have mentioned the inducement in her audio interview. If indeed she had to be induced, then the labor must to have been more dicey, or more further advanced than she led anyone to believe. Why would a doctor induce a pre-term labor if she did not need to?
Vera, you are welcome to email me at thetokenhippie@gmail.com
Amy1-
I love the photo timeline! Two ideas tha I think could make it even sronger (though neither is necessary):
(1) Any chance of getting the Square Belly still from the Elan interview in the line up as well? To me, that photo was as powerful as the "smoking gun" photo.
(2) If it's not too complicated, how about having a reference timeline directly under the Palin timeline for comparison. The reference timeline would contain photos of "typical" pregnancies at the same stage of gestation as SP claims to be in each of the included photos of her. That way, those less familiar with pregnancy could instantly see why SP's claims are silly.
In response to a couple of comments about not being able to fly when in the 3rd trimester ... I double-checked the Alaska Air website and it states:
"We do not have any restrictions or specifications for women traveling when pregnant. However, we do suggest consulting a physician prior to any air travel."
This is, indeed, quite unusual for any airline, however, Alaska Air is in the unusual position of flying to remote towns http://www.alaskaair.com/as/alaska/images/asqxroutemap.pdf and, as we've noted before, many places in Alaska are 'fly-in" only; they have no connecting roads.
Thus, Alaska Air allows pregnant women to fly at any stage of their pregnancy *after consulting with their doctor* as some have to go to larger towns/cities for medical care, etc.
CasaCalvo,
My gut feeling - and I have no way of knowing if this is the case - is that the comment comes from SJ but that she was put up to writing it on someone's public profile. She may have done this of her own free will but if I were a betting person I'd wager that she was pressured into doing it.
Post a Comment