I just spoke to her, and she wants you all to know that she's feeling more like herself and is preparing a new post with some very interesting photos that are sure to poke holes in more of Sarah's carefully crafted claims.
Until Audrey gets the post prepared and up, please consider this an open thread. But as moderator let me gently remind you that an open thread should not be considered a free-for-all. The general rules of civility apply, as does the long-standing restriction against topics that have been deemed forbidden by the blog owner.
I noted in an earlier thread that in Audrey's absence, Patrick, Kathleen, Mary G. and other members of the PD research team have done a marvelous job in keeping the discussion moving. There are other members of the team hard at work, too, and if there was ever a group that deserved a round of virtual applause it is these people.
So as Sarah Palin would say, give them a shout out. And look for Audrey to be back soon.
Morgan
PD Moderator
457 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 401 – 457 of 457I know that I shouldn't feel sorry for anyone in the Palin or Johnston families because they all made their beds and now they must lie in them. But with that said, I am starting to feel really sorry for Levi.
Like I said in a previous post, I really think that Levi was used. Bristol had someone else while dating Levi or in between breakups. SP may have not liked Levi much but for some reason I think SP thought him to be a better choice at the time than the other guy that Bristol was involved with.
Levi has served his purpose. Bristol and SP do not need him anymore. I will give Bristol some credit, though. She did not allow SP to force her to marry Levi.
Bristol is definitely her own woman. Now the jury is still out as to what kind of woman that is. I have my doubts about her.
I said it before and I will say it again. There is a sadness about Bristol. She strikes me as a woman that wants to be taken care of by a man. The few women that I have known like this were always giving too much of themselves to men that claimed they loved them.
Poor Levi. He better tell us everything he knows.
B, I was thinking as in the Palins are trying to hose us.
Betsy, the comments section is unreal. Trying to moderate there would make my eyes bleed.
Muah, point taken. They are denying it. And for what it's worth, I put about as much credence in this Star report as I put in the People report announcing Tripp's birth.
I have not posted here in a long time because this blog seems to be stagnating a bit. I have posted numerous time here in the past and still continue to post on Immoral Minority and Mudflats as FW.
I am still a Bristol is Trig's bio mom conspirator, but more than photographic eveidence is needed. I do believe that Bristol and Levi's breakup and inevitable legal custody battle may provide a break in this case. Mercede obviously is very close to her brother, and once was to the Palin family (Triggy bear).
Here's the link to Greta distancing herself from her former BFF Sarah:
http://www.foxnews.com/video-search/m/21981835/on_the_attack.htm#q=greta+on+factor
Sarah has now managed to alienate her last ally in the MSM.
I look forward to a new post from Audrey soon
Good find, Virginia Voter. I have to say that the quote from Daily Kos about 'values swapping' had me in stitches. I guess O'Reilly doesn't share my sense of humor.
Oh, and apparently Bill-O thinks we have no class. I must shower to remove the shame I feel. Anyone got a falafel I can borrow?
Let's all keep in mind that you have a teenage-girl relationship on the outs, and the drama and spitefulness that goes with it. These quotes could be accurate, but I'm willing to bet there is some exaggeration and outright lying going on here.
But again, if you now have a loose cannon (aka the Johnston's) out there looking to exact some revenge, if they know anything that would bring down the Palin's, they would communicate it one way or another. Mercedes is having no problem with slamming (or slandering) Bristol, the all-powerful Governor's daughter. It seems very logical that someone would know something if an audaciously reckless conspiracy was going on.
The clock is ticking.
I agree Craig. Completely. I don't doubt there's a feud, but Mercede's taking her case to the Star is the literary equivalent of taking one's case to Jerry Springer.
Not exactly National Geographic, is it?
"I don't doubt there's a feud, but Mercede's taking her case to the Star is the literary equivalent of taking one's case to Jerry Springer."
I'm sure she'd rather talk to a more refined periodical, but remember how many people out there think this only appeals to us pajama-clad drones in the basement. The Star may literally be the only paper willing to publish Mercede's comments.
muah said...'Bring my damn baby out to the car!' SarahPAC and Levi are saying inaccurate!
Also too, seems inconsistent with saying Levi isn't allowed to take Tripp to the Johnstons.
FW aka Virginia Voter, I wouldn't say this blog has stagnated, but we're definitely in a wait state. PD's scope overlaps but is narrower than that of Mudflats and I.M. I look forward to Gryphen making our heads explode soon and to Patrick revealing here that Bristol was pregnant in June 2007.
Meanwhile, I have learned more about Alaska than I ever expected!
Dangerous said...Perhaps we should do an Alaska Freedom of Information request for SP's insurance payment records related to her 'pregnancy' and 'delivery' in order to determine how much it cost Alaskan taxpayers.
This sounds like something HIPPA would prevent. Hard to believe that by being insured through a group plan with the state, I would risk having an FOIA reveal how often my family and I made claims. But I don't know.
Sarah's silence on the Star mag article speaks louder than words. Don't forget she was drunk dialing People Magazine on New Years Eve to refute that Levi and Bristol weren't drop outs, and were "working their butts off to parent" and go to school. Last time she opened her big mouth, Levi had to "quit" his job.
The Star and National Enquirer pay their sources, and Mecede's statement on her friend's My Spage page last month echoed the exact same situation...Levi and her family not seeing the baby, Palins calling them white trash, etc.
Again, I'm sticking with this prediction, that this article will cause a major bom to drop on the Palins
Virginia Voter said, "Don't forget she was drunk dialing People Magazine on New Years Eve to refute that Levi and Bristol weren't drop outs"
It certainly seemed an unwise call, but do we know she was drunk? (Does she even drink?)
For the Alaskan FIO request, we don't need gory or personal medical details. Date of claim, patient name, treating physician, reimbursement amount and nature of the visit (i.e. pre-natal or delivery expenses) should be enough. SP made it not a secret she was pregnant and there's nothing embarrassing about a pregnancy -- unless you didn't actually have one.
I've just been reading some commentary from a couple of months ago when SP was kicking up a ruckus about MSM pushing the faked-pregnancy story. They defend, accurately, that they didn't push it because they didn't want to and mainstream liberal bloggers weren't either. (So 'why should we?' was the reasoning in MSM.)
That's the answer to Craig for lack of MSM attention and resources: willful blindness. They just repeat uninformed people saying they don't "believe" the "rumor" or heard it was "untrue" or "mean-spirited".
If they were as well informed of the facts as we are -- and, Craig, you have to admit that we've collected a lot more facts than 99.9% of MSM have examined on the subject -- they would reach the same conclusion as the rest of us. What they are really saying is that we don't count and our judgment must be wrong because we aren't one of them!!
I call this "MSM truth" and it's not the same as real Truth. MSM truth is wrong as often as it is right. Examples: WMD in Iraq, disagreement in the scientific community on global climate change, dot-coms changing the business paradigm.
I'm not taking my lead from those hacks. My critical reasoning skills are better than theirs, and I don't have a profit motive clouding my judgment.
If any MSM people are reading this, here's a not-so-subtle reminder of what's really happening. It's over six months since this controversy exploded, and despite all the sound and fury, there's no independent, direct, confirmable evidence that SP is Trig's birth mother. Period. Why not?
Re-read the Emporer's New Clothes. I think it's apropos.
Dangerous
On the Matt Hanson, older man situation, there may be more later, as of now I find most of that a stretch. Bristol must be desperate for any kind of human contact separate from church and family. Even Meghan McCain has problems attracting the right men and she has far less baggage. Meghan McCain's body is used by Republicans for fodder.
Bristol could also be a young unwed mother who just feels insecure about her weight. May be obsessed. If she has found a sport and a work out program, that could be the extent of her attraction to her coach. Her chest is rarely mentioned but those RNC photos are shown numerous times around the world. If Levi is mentioned, what pops up on the internet? In print? The stud Levi and the bolstered chest. They will be the Bristol Palin icon if she doesn't counter that moment. For now she is sticking it out with what Sarah Palin needs and caring for a baby or two. If she has a big appetite, she'd want to focus on work outs to lose the baby fat. She can't stay in hiding with a child. She'll be seen in public more often and what girl doesn't want to look trim?
I watched the Fox clip with O Reilly and I am not sure I see Greta distancing herself, although perhaps she is at least making clear that since she only knows the Palins from the interview, she can't be blamed for passing on the lies Bristol told.
I'd say she's sort of fence sitting.
wf: sustm
As I while away the hours waiting for my noggin' to explode, I was struck by the fact that we had a strong little earthquake a couple of days ago, moments before the breakup news came over the web. Got me to thinking...what happened around the time of our last major earthquake on January 8, 2009?
Turns out that was the day the ADN editor published his revealing rebuttal to Sarah's tirade against the media. Here is a snippet...
"Lisa Demer started reporting. She received very little cooperation in her efforts from the parties who, in my judgment, stood to benefit most from the story, namely you and your family. Even so, we reported the matter as thoroughly as we could. Several weeks ago, when we considered the information Lisa had gathered, we decided we didn't have enough of a story to accomplish what we had hoped. Lisa moved on to other topics and we haven't decided whether the idea is worth any further effort.
Even the birth of your grandson may not dissuade the Trig conspiracy theorists from their beliefs. It strikes me that if there is never a clear, contemporaneous public record of what transpired with Trig's birth, that may actually ensure that the conspiracy theory never dies. Time will tell.
According to the “return receipt” feature of my email, my reply was opened shortly after I sent it on New Year’s Eve. Other than that, I have received no response or acknowledgement of that email."
Maybe she wasn't drinking, but she had worked up quite a froth that night I'd say!
...and here are her closing remarks, you will love this...
"As a public official, I expect criticism and I expect to be held accountable for how I govern . . . often the refusal of the media to correct obvious mistakes, unfortunately discredits too many in journalism today, making it difficult for many Americans to believe what they see in the media."
I'll keep you posted on our next terremoto!
Penny
I am not going to take anything from the Star's interview with MJ as fact. I don't trust the girl or the magazine. I think we allow ourselves to get distracted when we start using resources like that to flesh out any of our theories.
Jennifer
Presumably, Bristol will still be declared a dependent on SP's tax return, so wouldn't Tripp also be her dependent? And if he was indeed born in 2008, won't she be putting that on the return, which should be available any day now??
Forget about getting insurance payment records. HIPAA won't allow it.
Greta Van Susteren isn't "attacking" the Palins. She's attacking other journalists who are glad that Bristol and Levi broke up.
I can't believe I sat through that clip of GVS for nothing.
My verification word is "minsp" which could mean "minus SP"
Dangerous,
Todd has a fishing business. Does he employ others besides himself? Maybe that company offers insurance, and maybe he & Sarah file claims through that insurance to keep certain things from being disclosed via FOIA? Or is info on medical records even obtainable through FOIA? Given that we have HIPPA laws?
I don't want to be snarky here and this probably won't get posted but after seeing Mercede's writing on her myspace and listening to Bristol on Greta (oh, and seeing Levi's myspace "redneck" page), we are not exactly dealing with teens here who have "Ivy League" college prospects!
Really, where else would Mercede turn to spill her guts other than a tabloid?
These kids are all a fine example of low achieving teens.
Yep, you betcha Sarah tried to get Bristol away from this influence but apparently she didn't succeed.
Any of them would be lucky to score a spot with Jerry Springer as there are so many of their ilk to choose from.
Maybe Bristol & Levi never really were engaged, but it was stated thus, to appeal to conservatives (and others) who think it is better to have a kid when you are married, or at least planning to get married soon.
AKPetMom,
To clarify, I'm not so concerned about snark directed at the Palin's. It's really difficult not to. There's a line, of course. We've had posters call her Vampira and the like; I prefer not to see that because it makes us sound like twits.
When I caution against excessive snark I'm referring to how we talk to each other here on the board.
There's nothing out of line with your observation that these kids don't appear to be Harvard-bound, by the way. I'm pretty sure we've all had the same thought
I am not sure about whether insurance claims (even whether or not they were filed) are covered by the FOIA. Yes, it is true that the insurance package is paid for by taxpayer money, but does that mean tax payers get to know if the governor sees a shrink? I believe that the FOIA covers the actions of government officials related to their offices, as well as contacts they make by virtue of their office (so negotiations about the gas pipe line, even if, say, they occurred at a private residence, might well be subject to FOIA strictures).
Any citizen can file a request, pretty much any where in the United States. Some states have particular time requirements for certain documents, but you don't even have to know that because you can go to:
http://www.splc.org/foiletter.asp
and do a "fill-in-the-blank" request, and seconds later you will have a letter that quotes chapter and verse of that particular state's statutes. And if what you want is not available to the public, they are required to tell you why.
That letter generator mechanism redeems all law school students and all lawyers, in my mind! It is fabulous. Even if you never use it, it is nice to know it is there. So save that link! Or you can google FOIA and get it.
Oh, any kinds of discussions about laws, budgets, legislation, etc. can be subject to the FOIA, too.
The last days have been exciting. Most people now think that Bristol is not "off limits" any more, due to SP's stupid decision to allow Bristol to appear on Fox with Greta van Sucksteren. This is a breakthrough which is incredibly helpful, and it’s SP’s own fault. I love it.
B,
trust me, I have not promised too much. However, we still will have to wait a little bit longer. But keep my promise in mind.
Dangerous,
I have thought about your “Willow-could-be-the-mom-of-Trig” theory and have also carried out some more research. I have seen that you have been a “supporter” of this theory for quite a long time now. A glance back at your older posts show that you have been constantly bringing up this theory since October 2008. This is your good right – everybody is free to come up with all kinds of theories here, that’s what this blog is made for.
However, it’s also our task here to question the various theories, and everybody should be open to criticism, me included, of course.
I would like to mention five pieces of factual evidence which I think contradict your theory. Apart from that allow me to say that nobody has ever found one tiny piece of evidence which could actually support your theory, in all those months of research. Indeed, you have never provided any evidence to support the “Willow-theory” yourself.
You have mentioned several times here in the past that despite the lack of evidence which supports your theory, we have to “disprove” the theory in order to be on the safe side. Fine!
Allow me to present: Exhibit No 1
THIS video:
http://community.adn.com/mini_apps/vmix/player.php?ID=2920793&GID
This is SP’s „State of the Union Address” which she held in Juneau on 15th January 2008.
It’s a valuable video – because interestingly, sitting in the audience are: Willow, Todd and Piper. See those screenshots from this video:
http://tinyurl.com/amyc8t
http://tinyurl.com/bklg77
http://tinyurl.com/amyc8t
Bristol is nowhere to be seen. This is also consistent with the travel expense records, where there is no entry for Bristol for this event. She was conspicuously absent.
Both Bristol and Track were not there on this day. We are informed by the TV-moderator that Track is still at boot camp and will finish some time very soon. But no mention of Bristol…
The entry for Willow in the travel expense records regarding this event reads:
„First Family invited to attend the State of the State Address“. Willow is mentioned as having departed via DPS A/C from Anchorage on the 12th January 2008.
This is on page 80 of the travel expense records, which can be downloaded here (PDF-document):
http://www.box.net/shared/9cogbgnkko
Exhibit No 2:
Here is the confirmation on a website that Willow had indeed attended the Alaska Symphony of Seafood Buffet in February 2008 (wrongly mentioned by the Associated Press as being held in January – it actually took part on 2nd February 2008).
“In January, the governor, Willow and Piper showed up at the Alaska Symphony of Seafood Buffet, an Anchorage gala to announce winners of an earlier seafood competition.
‘She was just there,’ said James Browning, executive director of Alaska Fisheries Development Foundation, which runs the event.”
Link:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/topstories/2008-10-21-4163490752_x.htm
Bristol didn’t appear at this event either.
Also entirely consistent with the travel expense reports, see page 76 of the PDF-document mentioned above.
Exhibit No 3:
A blogger who posted a Youtube video of SP at the 2008 Iron Dog Snowmachine Race on 16th February 2008 has mentioned the fact that he saw Willow at the event but he didn’t see Bristol. It was a Saturday.
Link to blogger is -
http://anthropocenealaskan.blogspot.com/2008/09/sarah.html
Also mentioned in the travel expenses documents, see page 73 of the PDF-document mentioned above.
Exhibit No 4:
On google, I found this link:
http://tinyurl.com/bprb3l
This link just leads to the document, not to a webpage.
As you can see, it is the protocol of a regular council meeting of the city of North Pole (located outside of Fairbanks) which took place on 19th February 2008.
On pages 5/6, it says:
• Mrs. Weber attended the Go Red for Women fundraiser, the American Heart Associations fundraiser for educating the public on heart disease Friday, February 15th. Governor Palin was in attendance with her three daughters and was very gracious. More women die of heart disease than breast cancer nationally.
Therefore, this is an independent confirmation that Willow and Bristol were attending this event on 15th February 2008. This is at the same time the ONLY recorded public appearance of Bristol between October 2007 and June 2008.
Exhibit No 5:
The travel expense records themselves.
It is documented in these documents (pages 65-83) that Willow travelled EXTENSIVELY in January, February and March 2008.
Dangerous, you yourself had written in a post on palindeceptions on 21st October 2008:
“One other point for investigation: What do the Palin daughters' travel reimbursement records have to say about their activities during that time. There must be public records on that since it is in the news today. Where can you get these records?“
So, now we have the travel expense records (see the PDF-file for download mentioned above). It’s all in there: LOTS of travel for Willow in the decisive months January, February and March 2008, for example, and ONE trip for Bristol in the entire time between October 2008 and June 2009. This trip was the “Go Red for Women” luncheon event on 15th February 2008 which I had already mentioned above and for which it is apparent from the travel records that
a) Bristol’s ticket was bought late
b) Bristol left one day earlier than the rest of the family.
Pictures of this event are still nowhere to be found, but I guess they might exist somewhere.
Conclusion:
Dangerous, from my point of view, the Willow-theory is disproven. This is just my opinion. You might believe otherwise, and I know that there are some who think that it’s possible that Willow is Trig’s mom. However, for the record, I don’t think so.
Bristol is Trig’s mom (my personal opinion), and it shouldn’t take too long until the truth finally comes out.
However, if you still seriously consider the Willow-theory, I believe that it’s now your turn to present concrete evidence which supports this theory, and concrete evidence in my opinion cannot be philosophically-based mathematical formulas. That’s not going to stand up in any court of law, and I have seen from your earlier posts that this is obviously the quality of evidence you are looking for.
Patrick (PD research)
BRAVO PATRICK--
I do believe you hit the nail on the head. Thank you-
Bravo Patrick for showing us direct evidence on the Willow theory! I am waiting to see that kind of evidence for Bristol! In my opinion, ALL the theories are just that…THEORIES and Bristol (and others) has not been proven to be Trig’s mother! CONCRETE PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE WITH VERIFIED DATES ON BRISTOL PALIN FROM JULY 2007 THRU MAY 2008! Because some people still want to argue about the 2006 versus 2007 “official” photos…so all I’m saying is…STRONG INDISPUTABLE EVIDENCE! On a side note, I will wait as long as it takes and keep up the great work! That was a shout out for all on Team AUDREY!
Does anyone recognize what calendar program is used by Sarah Palin? We have her calendars for February 14-17, 2008, all of March 2008 and April 1-18, 2008.
For your easy reference, here is the link to the calendars that Patrick posted on 2-28-09:
http://www.box.net/shared/clahh4tas1
The page numbers at the bottom center start with page 229 on 2-14-08 and goes to page 293 on 4/18/08. This is odd, since February 14 is only day 45 of the year 2008. I am just wondering what sequence of documents these numbers refer to. 7-1-07 would be day 1 in this sequence, which may be the beginning of the fiscal year if that is what Alaska follows, so it is probably no big deal, come to think of it.
HOWEVER, I am MOST curious why the print-out date at the bottom right corner shows “9-18-2008 1:48 pm” on all of these pages of the calendar. Actually, it’s pretty obvious that the calendars were “cleaned up” and/or revised AFTER Sarah’s nomination as VP on 8/31/08. If we know what calendar program this is, I would like to do an experiment. Don’t want to say what just now, but I have an idea. Can we use a FOIA to find out what calendar program she uses? You almost feel sorry for Sarah, all that scrubbing she had to do … pictures, videos, facebook, calendars, travel authorizations, tax returns, … but no, I am not one bit sorry for her! That’s why she never had time to practice for interviews, she was too busy erasing pesky little details.
Funny, my word verification is "refabs", is that short for Sarah's refabrications?
So Bill O'Reilly says that we are a bunch of crazies...
Speaking of Bill O'Reilly...Remember what he had to say about Jamie Lynn Spears on 12/20/2007. Read below.
"On the pinhead front, 16-year-old Jamie Lynn Spears is pregnant. The sister of Britney says she is shocked. I bet.
Now most teens are pinheads in some ways. But here the blame falls primarily on the parents of the girl, who obviously have little control over her or even over Britney Spears. Look at the way she behaves.
And by the way, the mother, Lynne Spears, has reportedly already sold pictures of the upcoming baby of her 16-year-old for a million bucks. Incredible pinhead."
Isn't it strange how the blame falls on Jamie Lynn's parents but Bristol's pregnancy had nothing to do with SP and First Dude?
This is what O'Reilly had to say about the Palins on 9/03/2008
"Critics of teen pregnancies have a perfect right to put forth that if children give birth to children, many bad things can happen, like society having to support both mother and child, like children being unsupervised because there's no father in the home, like mothers and fathers being emotionally unequipped to raise their children responsibly."
Millions of American families are dealing with teenage pregnancy. And as long as society doesn't have to support the mother, father or baby, it is a personal matter. Once the taxpayers do have to support the young family, it becomes a public policy matter.
It is true that some Americans will judge Governor Palin and her family. There's nothing anyone can do about it. And it's also true that Governor Palin will have a hard time running for vice president if there is much more family chaos."
Bill O’Reilly’s hypocrisy is just amazing. Jamie Lynn’s pregnancy is the fault of her parents but Bristol’s pregnancy is a personal matter because society doesn’t have to support the family. Well, society didn’t have to support Jamie Lynn and her baby, Mr. O’Reilly, and you couldn’t wait to call her and her parents out. Why not the same with Bristol, you moron? And if you really want to call it like it is, society is supporting Bristol and her family (Trig and Tripp) because SP is supporting them and taxpayers support SP. Jamie Lynn has her own money and can support her own child without the help of her parents or taxpayers.
So that little clip of Bill O’Reilly talking to GVS about us crazy bloggers and why Liberals won’t leave Bristol alone is just a bunch of bull to me. He has no credibility and has shown time and time again that nothing is fair and balanced with him. But I guess we should expect that, he is on Faux News.
Hi Rationalist,
Your post on 3/11/09 at 11:35 said:
“But I was telling a friend about this theory, and he said "omigod, what if it is true?" That's what I think: Omigod, if this is true, as it seems to have a good chance of being, that gives Sarah Palin an almost Shakespeare-level thirst for power at all costs.”
From Macbeth: “Out damn spot, out I say!” mutters Sarah as she frantically tries to scrub all the evidence that would prove she is a pathological liar about her fake pregnancy and all her other “gates”.
To me, the whole point of this blog is to show that Sarah is unfit to be seeking high national office, and frankly I feel she is unfit for any position of power. She is incapable of telling the truth about anything.
Diana, on your timeline you have the following:
5-29-2007 Tuesday- Juneau
John McCain's VP advance man Arthur Culvahouse has been spotted in Juneau, Alaska. There's only one reason he would be there - to meet with Alaska Governor Sarah Palin about the Vice President position. Did Piper and or Willow return to school?
Where did you get the date for this information? I found the following link where Culvahouse was in Juneau with almost the same language, but the date of the article is 6-12-08 and refers to “last Friday” which would have been 6-8-08.
“As recently as last Friday, word spread in the blogosphere that Culvahouse was spotted in Juneau, Alaska, to purportedly meet with Governor Sarah Palin, who has been repeatedly mentioned as someone on McCain’s short list.”
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=26959
Thanks for the links, Patrick. It's odd that Bristol wasn't present at Sarah's State of the State address, but Willow and Piper were.
So if Bristol showed for an event on February 15th, 2008, was she pregnant at the time? She would have been big with child, and it would be very noticeable. Oh, that is unless she takes after her mother, who didn't look pregnant at all. *snickers*
Virginia Voter, even though I can't stand Bill O', I listened to what he and Greta had to say. I can't believe Bill riding on his high horse. I have seen plenty of mud slinging from the far right, and a lot of hatred, too. I have to say I hate the divisiveness of politics.
Off-Topic, but there were people on Facebook with a group called "Stop Obama". Why not call it "Go McCain"?
Anyway, wv:luros
Dangerous;
We never will agree on the disposition of the mainstream media and the liberal blogosphere toward the "Who is Trig's mother" story.
The explanation of how Bristol was already five months pregnant last September silenced most of the budding media questions about that rumour, but there was a ton of stuff that continued on regarding Sarah's personal/political life and of that of her family. The bulk of it seemed to come from blogs and some tabloids, followed-up by some cable news outlets, and then the better-sourced material filtered up to the big network news.
The the blogger of the year, Andrew Sullivan, put some focused attention on the Trig issue. Especially regarding the "wild ride" aspect, and in requesting proof of his birth certificate.
So I never will buy the nice and tidy idea that the media (especially the fast and loose nature of the blogosphere) would turn an intentional blind eye to the Trig question. Its nonsensical to me that the broad swath of tabloids and rabid Palin-haters in the blogosphere, who eagerly churned stories about drug issues and affairs, would self-deny themselves from talking about a potential baby scam being perpetrated on the public by a high-profile politician who just happened to be running for VP.
The truth would seem to be that there was simply nothing out there credible enough to give the story any legs and authenticity. Because it was clear that the interest and motivation voiced from that portion of the media was very willing to push the story if it could be done.
And as far as why this Trig story still isn't being looked at, I would submit that the same motivations to pursue it are in place, but the same problematic obstacle is also present.
The blogosphere is a very incestuous place, in which information is lifted from, or linked to, one place from another constantly. News outlets, especially cable news, use the blogosphere for leads and for content regularly. And Sarah remains a lightening rod for passionate public opinion. So don't fool yourself. There are some media eyeballs monitoring sites like Palin's Deceptions, just in case speculation and gossip and circumstancial datapoints ever cross over into harder evidence from credible sources.
But the point is, that threshold hasn't been crossed yet. So I disagree with the idea that if only some of these politically-sympathetic cyber-media outlets were aware of what has been discussed here, that they would have to agree that Palin has obviously pulled an insanely wacked-out scam on everyone.
The ugly rift with the Johnstons is the best opportunity yet for credible sourcing to collaborate apects of a deception. That's why what they say, or even what they don't say, will be so significant for the perceived credibility of this alleged conspiracy.
Here is the current theory I am going on now. I think it is one of many possible "true stories:"
Bristol and Levi had not been dating very long when she discovered she was pregnant. She may have told Levi, or she may not have. When she started to show, she was shipped off to live with Aunt Heather and transferred to another school, in Anchorage. Rumors persisted and she was taken out of school altogether. Sarah waits until it is obvious that Bristol is not going to miscarry (end of second/beginning of third trimester) and decides to fake being pregnant and claim the baby as her own. By this time her name was being kicked around as a possible VP candidate, and a pregnant teenage daughter would not help her image and a deeply religious, do-it-all hands-on hockey mom.
It is possible that Bristol hid out at one of the Palins' cabins (which someone mentioned earlier) sometime after leaving school to await the birth of the baby. They plan a home birth for total secrecy. The baby, quite unexpectedly, is born several weeks early. Either at the time of birth or shortly thereafter, his DS becomes apparent and he also becomes jaundiced. He is taken to the nearest hospital, Mat-Su Regional in Palmer, for observation and treatment. It is discovered at that time that he has a congenital heart defect which they want to monitor carefully. Now, if Todd and Sarah have legally adopted Trig they should have received an amended birth certificate naming themselves as his parents. So, the only reason that they would have for not busting out a copy of the birth certificate and saying "F-U" to all the crazed pajama-clad bloggers in their mothers' basements is if Trig was not born on 4/18, or he was not born at Mat-Su, or both. Trig was
probably born sometime before 4/18 (anywhere from a few days to a few weeks before) and kept at the hospital for observation and treatment. That hospital does not have a NICU, but they could have kept him in the nursery or a private room paid for by the Palins.
Sarah had only recently started wearing padding to try and make herself look sort-of pregnant, and since she was taken by surprise when the baby came early and needed hospitalization, she decided to keep the ruse going until he was to be released. She had been scheduled as a last minute addition to an important energy conference in Texas on 4/17, and she felt it was a good opportunity to get her name out there. She was not going to miss it, period. She got word that Trig was going to be released on 4/20, so she decided that 4/18, the day after the conference, would be a good day to "give birth." She went about her day as planned (there is no evidence to suggest that they changed their plans and left Texas early) and flew back to AK that afternoon. She told her parents, who were not in on the scheme, that her water broke in Texas and she was flying back home to have the baby, perhaps never intending for that part to be made public. Her dad blabs to the press, and she has to quickly concoct a story to explain herself. Hence, the Wild Ride. Bristol relinquishes her baby, and, perhaps thinking that she could not get pregnant again right away (and possibly rebelling a little?) spends some quality time with Levi and becomes pregnant with Tripp. Tripp was born not on Dec 27, 2008, but sometime in January 2009. The family hid him from public view until he had grown enough so that his age would be dubious and they could get away with saying he was a month older.
A couple more things:
1.) I don't subscribe to the theory that Trig was born as early as January or February. We have a picture of him at Mat-Su on 4/18, so we know he was there on that day. If he was in fact born in Anchorage and kept in the NICU for months, why bring him to Mat-Su at all? Wouldn't it have been better for SP, made the WR a little less weird, to say that she immediately went to the Anchorage hospital and then present him there? WHY bring him to another hospital in another town to introduce him?
2.) While I think Bristol is the most likely candidate for Trig's mom, I have to agree with Dangerous somewhat and say that we have no reason to rule out Willow. It may not be likely, but it is POSSIBLE.
Nice job on refuting the Willow-theory, Patrick.
I hope everyone has thoroughly viewed the video of Sarah Palin’s 2008 State of the State Address from 1-15-08. If not, please let me direct your attention specifically to the fact that Willow is wearing a sleeveless dress. In fact, I missed it the first time I saw the video. If anyone still believes that Trig’s actual birthdate was 4-18-08, it would be extremely difficult to disguise an approximate six-month pregnancy in a sleeveless dress like that without staying concealed wearing a large coat. I hope we can now drop the issue of Willow as Trig’s mother. We are all entitled to our opinions and observations, but it is misleading to folks who may be visiting this blog for the first time if we remain stuck on a theory that has since been disproved. We certainly have all been misled by Sarah’s many lies, but the evidence, especially over the past couple of months, has narrowed things down significantly since the beginning of this site. Unfortunately, Willow may still someday follow in the footsteps of her sister, mother and grandmother, but at least for now she has not.
Here again are the screenshots that Patrick posted, look at Willow’s dress:
http://tinyurl.com/amyc8t
http://tinyurl.com/bklg77
http://tinyurl.com/amyc8t
*****
Also in her 2008 State of the State address, Sarah talks about the Youth Wellness Initiatives. “We’re going to educate kids about healthy eating and physical activities.”
(BUT NOT TEACH THEM ABOUT BIRTH CONTROL!!!)
*** Amy1 said...
NY tabloid chick: Thx for your response. Just to clarify your points on proof for my pea-sized brain with zero legal training:
To me, the padding is almost irrelevant as far as proof goes. Anyone can pad up.***
Agreed! (Oh, and 'pea-size brain? hardly! You've contributed so much, and I'm neither a doctor nor a lawyer.)
***On this array of 3 photos, which to me constitutes true, total proof, the proof is in the first two photos (brought to our collective attn exclusively by Audrey and her pals and this blog, I hasten to add).
Left photo: the proof is in the flatness of the stomach. No problem with photographer, since there are many photos of this event -- although this one photo is the best for seeing the flat stomach clearly.
Middle photo: to me, the proof is in the smallness, not the padding, nor the rectangular label/patch showing through, nor the odd shape. Although the photographer here, an amateur, might balk at legalites, the fact that the clothes, setting, date, are confirmed by other ADN photos and text of this event on that date -- all this makes it an unassailable piece of proof. To me.
Right photo: We can assume, as I do, that this is a fake belly, but we have no proof. The irony of this photo is that in its fakeness it makes the case WORSE for SP, because it is a photo SP and Gusty authenticate, and it does show a size of PG that is approx normal -- making us able to SHOW the huge contrast in size rather than just talk about it.
The date/timestamp issue for both photos is addressed by multiple confirming photos in newspapers on the same day; photographer reluctance ditto.
Forgive me for worrying this bone endlessly, and help me understand any actual weak link here. I mean in the most rigorous legal sense, not among "just us girls." (I include the cool men who contribute here in that last phrase, one of my faves from the time that my v cool kewl boss, a man, used to use it in similar situations at his conference table, at which I was the only person of the female persuasion.)
So, help me understand: how is this not airtight?***
I think it is airtight. Maybe we're hung up on direct v. circumstantial, which isn't all that important? I think if SP were called on the carpet (not the one in the Gusty hallway, ha ha) she'd claim camera angles led to the inconsistent appearances and dig up other pix of her previous pregnancies in which she didn't appear large, or say she was wearing some support garment due to back pain or something ridiculous. But just to make it clear, I think this is completely airtight evidence that she was not pregnant at the same time. (Sorry for not responding for a few days!)
** Curious said...
Dangerous said:
That's my answer to NY Tabloid chick. You spin scenarios to explain everything, but that just creates contradiction you can't explain away. Faking a pregnancy successfully is hard. You don't plan a wild ride -- as you and others have suggested -- just to make yourself look better. You go as low profile as possible, and conclude the ruse when nobody is looking. You don't go out of town putting the scheme at risk if there's any chance you have to claim the baby.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I agree with the above if "you" is a reasonable and rational person.
SP is NOT those things. This is a person that is used to getting her way AND used to NOT being questioned about things.
She expects (and seems to get) her inner circle/followers utter devotion and questioning her doesn't seem to even enter into the picture.
She lies in the face of revealed truths (troopergate investigation results for example).
She lies pretty much as easily as she takes breathe.
I think it's pretty safe to say that SP does not think like a rational/reasonable person and therefore trying to assign rational/reasonable motives to her won't necessarily always (or ever) work.***
Absolutely! SP is on the record as having hidden the pregnancy from her family at the beginning. Huh? What sort of RATIONAL woman in a happy marriage, with a successful career, AND an absolute opposition to abortion, would hide a pregnancy from her family? And how could she? Maybe it's a 'woman thing' but I can't think of the last time I've had someone close to me surprise me with the announcement of a pregnancy; the changes are obvious, both physically and emotionally.
verification: beaduck (and let the right-wing insults roll right off our backs!)
*** penny said...
It is laughable to see how GVS spoonfeeds Bristol and SP, and yet SP can't resist ad libbing a scooch, not good!
SARAH PALIN: We were all surprised. Let me put it this way. And this is -- I think Bristol's kind of an example of, truly, it can happen to anybody. Bristol, great athlete, great student, great aspirations that she had for herself, plans that didn't include a baby, of course, but it did happen to her and now again, less than ideal circumstances, but we make the most of it. She, I think, of all of her friends even, can handle it perhaps better than some of for friends would have handled it. But still an absolute shock that it happened.
"..but it happen to her and now again..."
AND NOW AGAIN?????????????***
Penny, I just think that's one of SP's odd verbal tics, like the "also" at the ends of sentences. I think she was emphasizing that the circumstances were not ideal. But I'm still loving the way they describe pregnancy as an "absolute shock"... is someone unaware of the connection between sex and pregnancy??? :)
I think that even Lady Mcbeth had more of a conscience than Sarah. At least she (L.B.) felt guilty and haunted when she tried to wash the imagined blood on her hands (out damn spot) I doubt that we will ever see Sarah feel remorse for anything she has done but continue to wrap herself in the flag and the cross proclaiming herself as a victim of the liberal media and us pajama-clad bloggers.
*** midnightcajun said...
Dangerous said, "PR pros know that creating a falsehood to cover-up another one usually does not work."
Actually, it's a classic, classic espionage trick: cover up one nasty secret with another juicy "secret" that's actually a lie. People get distracted chasing the juicy, made-up (or at least altered) secret, thus drawing attention from the first real secret that's being hidden. This is a classic case, and it worked!***
I come from gossip-land, careerwise, and midnightcajun, you are absolutely correct. One example of a celeb; you all can probably tell who: Someone on a TV show who often appears to be drugged/drunk, she also reports frequent accidents like back injuries, or tripping over her dog in the dark, to explain why she appears to be on painkillers. These stories won't satisfy everyone, but they do manage to deflect some of the heat. I think of it as the dangled-keys technique: "OOH! shiny!"
*** NakedTruth said...
I'm serious fellow bloggers, I am really feeling that Levi and his family have no clue that Bristol was pregnant with Trig. I have read some of the comments on ADN and other sites about the breakup and I think too many of us are convinced that Bristol is the victim here. Bristol and Sarah planned to hide Bristol's pregnancy. Bristol was hiding it from Levi because he wasn't the father and Sarah was hiding it from the world. ***
I am also coming around to the same theory. This line of thought gives BP added incentive to go along with SP's plan for the Trigg story; keep Levi on the hook for his appearance as the devoted, stick-by-the-pregnant girlfriend guy at the RNC.
Just a few quick tabloidy thoughts:
Information 'paid for' isn't necessarily less valid than information not 'paid for.' If I were in Sadie's position, and two people wanted info and one waved a check, well, I'm not sure I'd take the high road!
I put 'paid for' in quotes because although the higher-quality media never wants to admit they're paying, or they're not handing a check over to the source, quite often they're paying indirectly. So a low-level media (like the National Enquirer) makes a direct payment, and higher-level media licenses the related video, photos etc. So the source is getting paid in effect from both media.
Also remember the who's-your-mommy, who's-your-daddy stories are NOT Time magazine stories. They're Star stories... for now. When they start being connected directly to SP's fitness for office, current or future, then they WILL be Time stories. And they will be built on a foundation of paid-for information, which will become less important as the surrounding structure comes from more independent sources, like travel records.
Media money is tight these days! It's worth it to Star and the like to spend it more freely, because getting the story first leads to a bump in newsstand sales, which is how these near-the-cash-register mags make their money. The Time magazines of the world have bigger subscriber bases and aren't so dependent on newsstand impulse buys, so they'd rather put resources into original reporting, once they see that there is a foundation to work from (i.e., folks are starting to talk to the media, even if it's for money). I would bet that when this hits high-quality media, and I am confident it will, the angle will be the SP house of cards falling and its connection to her political aspirations.
In case anyone was still curious about the People $300,000 photo shoot, I can say that the Palin family did eventually back out of the deal. I doubt that's a surprise to anyone here; I just didn't want to say I knew it sooner for job reasons.
OH! And thank you to all of the moderators, especially Morgan, who has let through my often long and winding posts! You are all doing such a great job in keeping this whole discussion civil, on-point and fact-based.
And Audrey, hope you're feeling better soon!
I have a colleague who took a leave of absence to work for the Obama campaign. When he came back, he mentioned to me that while he'd originally been stationed in one state (Minnesota or some other one, can't remember), he'd actually been sent to Wasilla, AK *I think* before SP's nomination. So I said OOOOhh, did you get any dirt? Because YOU KNOW Trig is not SP's baby. He said, "Oh yeah, NOBODY believes that [that Trig is SP's baby]"
I found it interesting that perhaps many Obama campaigners, who would have been in the know about all the ways to attack SP, take it for granted that she faked the pregnancy.
And, as a side note, please let's not be persuaded by some insistent person(s) on this blog that if this does not blow wide open now that Bristol and Levi have broken up then there's no story there. I think we all know it's very plausible that the Johnstons could have no idea that Trig is Bristol and Levi's.
NY Tabloid Chick said,
"I would bet that when this hits high-quality media, and I am confident it will, the angle will be the SP house of cards falling and its connection to her political aspirations."
If you are confident, then I will be hopeful.
"In case anyone was still curious about the People $300,000 photo shoot, I can say that the Palin family did eventually back out of the deal."
To back out meant there was a deal. If I'm right that Tripp wasn't born till Feb. 1 or so, and there was no baby to photograph soon after 12/27, I wonder why the Palins made the deal in the first place?
I really appreciate your comments!
NY tabloid chick--Thanks for your insight. Many of us are far removed from the workings of the tabloids or the publishing world in general. Your insight is helpful.
I just love how each of us brings a unique skill or perspective and working together we can accomplish so much.
Hurrah for freedom of speech and democracy!
Another thought on Willow's presence at the 2008 State of the State speech: Can any of you imagine being a teenaged girl sitting surrounding by mostly old men in leadership positions of some type and being 5-8 months pregnant or trying to hide something?
http://tinyurl.com/amyc8t Patrick's pictures are really interesting.
It defies logic and plausibility for Willow to do that if pregnant, unless under extreme duress. (I know, we're talking about the Palins.) This is just my opinion.
Also, check out poor Piper in this picture at
http://tinyurl.com/cn7ogo
She looks bored out of her mind.
Children normally don't want to attend these type of events and shouldn't, especially on school nights,imo.
*** B said...
NY Tabloid Chick said,
"I would bet that when this hits high-quality media, and I am confident it will, the angle will be the SP house of cards falling and its connection to her political aspirations."
If you are confident, then I will be hopeful.
"In case anyone was still curious about the People $300,000 photo shoot, I can say that the Palin family did eventually back out of the deal."
To back out meant there was a deal. If I'm right that Tripp wasn't born till Feb. 1 or so, and there was no baby to photograph soon after 12/27, I wonder why the Palins made the deal in the first place?
I really appreciate your comments!***
Thanks; I'm glad I can bring a little media perspective here and remind people that there IS a lot of stuff going on behind the scenes, and that MSM is not ignoring this just because they haven't taken it wide!
Here's what I know: SP and company were talking to several media outlets. I know a number was floated, but it was closer to 1 than 3. I know several outlets backed out at that price point. I know SP and company (remember, as a public official she can't be the top name on this) was connected to the release of the 3 number. I am skeptical that without lots of other people bidding, the number wouldn't make that jump. I know that SP and company made negotiating 'difficult' (the word used to me) in setting this up.
Next thing I hear, it's 3, and it's People.
And then nothing, and I was told SP and company backed out. Now, I don't know for sure anything was set in stone for 3 or for any other number, but I am told there is no breach of contract. But part of what goes on in a baby=photo deal is generally rather generous access to the family and baby for the photo. My theory (based on all the above) is that after a rough number was agreed to, SP and company heard the terms (i.e., current photos at the house, certain family members present, on-record comments from family etc) and balked.
Bottom line: this isn't a Jolie or Cruise baby. If the family gets too annoying or secretive, the deal will be off.
And I swear with great glee, I heard the word Wasilla coming from an office yesterday!
Naked Truth,
How do you know that Bristol was dating someone other than Levi?
Dangerous,
Re revealing the doctor's name in a FOIA request...that could reveal more than the patient would want. If you know the doctor's name, you could look up his or her specialty, which could be too revealing. Suppose the doctor were a psychiatrist or a cancer specialist? If I were the patient, that would be TMI (too much information)! Nature of the visit could also be TMI. (Removal of intestinal polyps? Abortion? Hemorrhoids? Treatment of herpes? Please note that I am not implying that Sarah had any of these treatments.) Remember that medical privacy laws protect everyone, including politicians whom you may not like.
JJ,
Regarding checking out who is claiming whom (children) as dependents on their tax returns, we know that presidents release theirs, but is it common for governors? What about in Alaska? Would Sarah balk at releasing hers for that reason? Could one see her tax returns on the basis of a FOIA request? If Bristol is a dependent (of Sarah and Todd), and her child(ren) would likewise be dependent(s), then wouldn't we see Trig as a dependent of Sarah and Todd regardless of whether they adopted him, assuming Bristol (or Willow) is his biological mom?
Another reason that Sarah and Toll may not want to release their tax returns: they pretend to be ordinary working-class folks (you betcha!), but they have a lot more income than they want people to believe.
Someone in the business can correct me if I'm wrong, but I have to believe that celebrity pubs and tabloids are very sauve on how to best leverage key people for information. They know the Johnston's have money and emotional issues going on. Outside of the doctor, they may be the best non-Palin source of any potential family secrets. They will identify the most susceptible person in terms of talking (likely, Mercedes), and work any angle available (money, empathy, build a personal trust/relationship, revenge, doing a public service to expose lying politicians, etc.).
What I wonder is, if Mercedes or Levi ever do told them, "By the way, I know first-hand that neither Bristol or Willow are Trig's mother and Sarah is", if something like that is even enough of a "red meat" quote for the tabloids to bother with, since the general public already assumes that to be true. Especially if Mercedes also lets loose with some more catty comments about Sarah and Bristol. That's what their readers want to see.
I still believe that the coming days and weeks are the moment of truth for this deception story.
Wow, thanks, NYTabloidChick; it's always great to get new information and this is very helpful. So why would the Palins back out of a baby-pic deal with 6 figures? Full access to a real baby may have been a difficult hurdle at the time.
Windy City Woman asked:
"Naked Truth,
How do you know that Bristol was dating someone other than Levi?"
Patrick stated in an earlier post that their research had revealed that Bristol possibly had another boyfriend other than Levi in the May - June 2007 timeframe. My thought is that she got pregnant during this time and was about 3-4 months pregnant in the Sept. 2007 Palin Family Photo.
Also there was a post on facebook from a boy claiming that he loved Bristol. Actually there were a couple of posts, one was proved to be false but the other no real evidence of its validity one way or the other.
And IMHO Bristol does not strike me as a one man woman. She is definitely not IN-LOVE with Levi IMO. At least I don't see that spark in her eyes when seeing them together. All appear to be staged to me.
I am just not convinced that Levi is the father of Trig but I do think that Bristol is his mother.
"If Bristol is a dependent (of Sarah and Todd), and her child(ren) would likewise be dependent(s), then wouldn't we see Trig as a dependent of Sarah and Todd regardless of whether they adopted him, assuming Bristol (or Willow) is his biological mom?"
The point of looking at the dependents in the income tax form is to see if Tripp is listed on anyone's form for 2008. Because if he is, and he wasn't born then, that's tax fraud. And Bristol would have had an IRS form for 2008 (or will have, if she hasn't done it already). She was working in 2008 as a barrista at Nordstrom's, apparently. Nordstrom's would be withholding income tax. Even if Bristol didn't earn enough to pay on it, she would have to submit a 1040 to get her refund back. Todd and Sarah know that much, you betcha.
Ivyfree,
Thanks for explaining it better - that is exactly what I meant about Tripp. If he was born in 2008, surely someone will want to claim him as a dependent! Though I haven't seen SP's actual tax returns, I think Patrick has posted a link to SP's previous "financial statements," which do include the number of her dependents..... and as I recall, these forms are due today, March 15!!!!
I've been waiting for Patrick's post that it seems will show Bristol was PG earlier than we thought.
My thinking was Bristol got PG when Sarah went to Kuwait the end of July. This would have put her at four/five months in Dec., 2007.
Supposedly, she went to live with her aunt in Jan., 2008.
Since the legislature convened around Jan.20th, we know Sarah took Piper and Willow and they lived in Juneau during the session.
If so, Btistol could have moved back home which explains why she was in Wasilla when she had the accident. If the Palins came home on weekends, Bristol could have gone to her Aunts or hid out somewhere.
Since no one seems to have seen her during March and April, she could have been living at home until Trig was born on April 17/18.
Dangerous, I agree that faking a pregnancy for a baby already born is ridiculous.
I've assumed Levi was the father, but like others, don't know. I still don't think there's a Tripp.
Thanks, Audrey, even though I'm not an A or a B.
Post a Comment