Friday, March 13, 2009

So Many Discrepancies, So Little Time...

There are so many discrepancies in the pregnancy and birth stories of both Trig Palin and Tripp Johnston that it is sometimes hard to keep up with them all. You'd need a whole section in your Day Planner just to keep track of most of them. And lots of note cards and spread sheets and.... oh yes, that IS my desk.

Anyway...

When you least expect it, a new clue (or clues) seems to emerge that helps to clear the fog away from earlier statements. Happily, the recent publication of an unauthorized biography of Sarah Palin, Trailblazer by Lorenzo Benet, along with Greta Van Susteren’s interview of Sarah…er… Bristol Palin, offered us some new information that allows us to put a few more pieces of the birth-hoax puzzle together. (Who would have thought that the pro-Palin biography OR Greta’s interview would HELP us make our case? Is this poetic justice, or perhaps divine intervention, or what?)

Based on an (undocumented) birth date of December 27th, Tripp was conceived no earlier than April 2008, and arguably later as he was not presented to the world until mid-February (exactly as I predicted). So even Bristol could not have been aware of the pregnancy until late-April 2008, at the earliest.

Yet we know that rumors of the pregnancy preceded this time frame, so much so that Sarah herself tried to dispel the rumors prior to March 2008. The Anchorage Daily New wrote a story about the rumors on August 31, 2008 and as we now know, they pursued the story about the rumors again in the fall. We also know that, almost a year ago, a poster on reddit.com reported on the Bristol pregnancy rumor and said she was going to high school in Anchorage. Wasilla caterer Sue Williams stated on the record that Willow Palin's boyfriend was telling people in Wasilla before Trig was born that Bristol was pregnant.

In fact, there is so much to discuss regarding rumors of the pregnancy that I have decided to go into more detail on this subject in an upcoming post – today I am just going to focus on the question of when Bristol moved to Anchorage.

Why? Because this is important. Because it shows that in spite of months of time to get it right, this whole dumb bunch STILL just can't get their stories straight. First Dude has had his slip ups, including telling Greta Van Susteren that three of their children had traveled to the VP nomination announcement. Ooops. What about little number 4, Triggy Bear? Sarah - Lord knows - has changed her stories on Trig's pregnancy so many times we can't even list all of the blunders and even direct contradictions. And now... both Sarah Palin's sister, Heather Bruce, and Bristol Palin seems to have joined the ooops club.

First, let’s reintroduce Heather Bruce, Sarah’s sister, who lives in Anchorage near the West High School, where her daughter Lauden is a student. There seems to be no dispute that Bristol Palin lived with Heather Bruce during her pregnancy AND there seems to be no dispute that Bristol Palin lived with Heather Bruce in January and February of 2008, but somehow those two facts don't seem to collide into a simple conclusion in most people's minds: that a high likelihood exists that Bristol Palin WAS pregnant in January and February of 2008.

There is a plausible reason for this: That she had lived with Heather Bruce while pregnant was reported at the same time that Bristol’s pregnancy with Tripp was publicized, and many people assumed that the Tripp pregnancy was the pregnancy in question.

But now, adding to the earlier statements (which, it appears, some in the Palin camp may have forgotten were still floating around out there ), we have some new statements from both Heather Bruce and Bristol Palin that help clarify that this extended stay with Aunt Heather could not have been during Bristol’s pregnancy with Tripp. It was much earlier. Really big oops.

Let’s start by looking at some of the published reports on Bristol’s time living with Heather Bruce.

There is a report by Inside Edition, which says: “Halfway through the school year, about the time Bristol discovered she was pregnant, she transferred to another high school.” This report was aired on 9/2/2008, meaning it had to refer to a prior school year. This states explicitly and openly that Bristol found out she was pregnant "halfway through the school year." Unless Bristol Palin had the longest pregnancy on record, halfway through that school year, Tripp had not yet been conceived, but of course "someone" had to be pregnant with Trig. Half way through the school year would have been around December when "someone" would have been around twenty weeks. A very plausible and logical time for a first time mother to find out (or at least reveal to her family) that she is expecting. Why this statement has not received more scruitiny has always mystified me.

Another report, this one by the Washington Post, states that Bristol went mid-school-year to live with her aunt in Anchorage, finishing at the city's West High School.

The assistant principal of the Wasilla High School also confirmed that Bristol transferred from there halfway through the 2007-2008 school year: “Mark Okeson, the assistant principal at Wasilla High School told the Chicago Tribune that Bristol started her junior year last fall, in the town where Sarah Palin grew up. He said Bristol inexplicably transferred to an Anchorage high school midyear, leaving Levi behind. ‘I never heard the story why,’ he said.”

Not to be outdone, the National Enquirer reported this as well, with some additional details: “When Sarah found out the teen was pregnant by high schooler Levi Johnston, she was actually banished from the house. As part of the cover-up, Palin quickly transferred Bristol to another high school and made her move in with Sarah’s sister Heather 25 miles away!”

(Note here as well the interesting use of the phrase "cover-up." Nowhere has it ever been suggested that any attempt was made to cover up Tripp's pregnancy.)

This has been confirmed to me by several people in Wasilla - that there were definitely rumors in the area by December 2007 that Bristol Palin was pregnant. (Whether the rumors were TRUE is an open question, but that the rumors EXISTED is, in my opinion, NOT open to question or debate.)

These statements have been left to languish by the MSM for months, despite the obvious implication that Bristol Palin was pregnant by late 2007. I think that everyone can agree on one thing: this could NOT have been any pregnancy that ended on December 27, 2008 with the birth of Tripp Johnston. There are only two possibilities. The rumors were all false, or Bristol was pregnant in late 2007 with another child.

Now, in the recently published biography as reported in People Magazine, we have new info from Heather Bruce confirming that Bristol lived with her while pregnant and while going to Anchorage West HS. "While Bristol was pregnant last year, she was living in Anchorage with her aunt and uncle, Heather and Kurt Bruce, and working at two espresso shops – while also attending West High School. Levi was 40 miles away in Wasilla, but, ‘there was certainly no ban on them dating,’ reports Trailblazer. ‘Levi used to drive to Anchorage to take Bristol out.’”

We also have a confirmation from "Misty" in Anchorage that Bristol attended West High School in January and February, leaving sometime around mid to late February.

But let's do a little granny finger counting here. IF the birth date of Tripp Johnston is as reported (December 27th) and he was full term (reasonable considering his birth date) he would have been conceived around April 1st. A quick perusal of the Anchorage West High School's calendar from the 2007-2008 school year shows us that the last day of school was May 23rd. The earliest Bristol could even have suspected she was pregnant was mid to late April. So when would she have lived with Auntie Heather (while pregnant) and gone to school and worked? A week or so in May 2008? Who transfers someone to a new high school with, oh, three weeks left in the school year and then gets two jobs? Come on...

Adding support to our skepticism, we now also know from the Greta Van Susteren interview that Bristol claims to not have told Sarah and Todd Palin of her pregnancy with Tripp until the summer of 2008, after school was out. It's never been suggested anywhere that last fall during the campaign when she would have been pregnant with Tripp was she living in Anchorage, working and/ or attending school.

All of this makes it crystal clear that Bristol’s banishment to Anchorage could not have been for the Tripp pregnancy. As our perceptive bloggers have already pointed out, this also could explain why there are two vastly different accounts of how Bristol told Sarah she was pregnant, one of her sitting her parents down on a couch, the other of her chasing her mother around with a positive pregnancy stick.

So.. what's the truth here? As I have been forced to admit so often on this blog, I don't know. I do know that it is not biologically possible for a woman to have a baby on April 18th and have another (full term) on December 27th. That I can state with confidence.

This, then, leaves us only two possibilities.
A. If the same woman gave birth to both babies, the birth dates we have been given for the two children cannot be correct.
B. If the birth dates are correct, Trig and Tripp cannot have the same mother.

I vote A.

412 comments:

1 – 200 of 412   Newer›   Newest»
B said...

Welcome back, Audrey. What a post!

Virginia Voter said...

Exactly...Sarah and her family can't keep all the lies straight they have told so many.

I am still of the theory that Trig was born earlier than 4/18, and Tripp was born later than 12/27.

Alex said...

The voice of reason returns. Feels like the Sheriff's back in town. Thank you, Audrey, for cutting through the haze of information and (mis)information with clarity.

Duncan said...

Great post Audrey.

As my WV says, I'm stlin.

duncan

Truthseeker2 said...

Nice to have you back, Audrey! I go with A also, too.

hoodie said...

I haven't seen this comment before but it has crossed my mind many times...the names are just too similiar! Trig and Tripp...I think it was the wee glimmer of power Bristol holds to that her 2 sons will be raised together. Thanks Audrey and keep telling the truth...how refreshing that would be for SP to do...just once!

House of Brat said...

The recently released expense reports for Palin's children documents Bristol's lack of travel around the time she was pregnant with Trig. Willow & Piper continued to travel lots and lots in late '07 & early '08 while Bristol didn't.

ProChoiceGrandma said...

Hi Hoodie,
Do you think the similarity of the names may be to "trip" people up when discussing which pregnancy was which? I have seen a lot of people mix up the names in their comments. I think Bristol picked the name for Trig Paxon Van Palin. I recall when I heard the video in which Sarah explains the naming of Trig, she kinda skimmed over the Van part saying we always liked the name Van Palin. But in the pregnancy hoax episode from Desparate Housewives, that baby was named Benjamin VAN de Kamp-Hodge. So is that where the Trig Paxson VAN Palin came from??? As a little inside joke from Bristol or Sarah? It made me laugh! So, is the name “Tripp” another inside joke?

NY tabloid chick said...

Welcome back Audrey!
Isn't it delicious that the self-proclaimed honesty and transparency candidate will bring herself down through her own duplicity?

ravenstrick said...

The conflicting how I told mom stories?

Well, the most logical answer is that I had to tell mom twice.

B said...

I vote A. But my scenarios are still confused.

Why would Bristol attend school even in Anchorage when visibly pregnant in early 2008? Wouldn't someone there talk? Perhaps she took online courses through West High rather than through Wasilla?

If Bristol became pregnant w/Trig in June 2007, as Patrick believes, why did she wait till mid-year (semester break?) to leave Wasilla? Wouldn't she have been visibly pregnant at least by Halloween? Or did she disappear earlier, so that mid-year just means during, not middle? Not sure when hockey season started, but Inside Edition has her in Wasilla watching Levi play.

Perhaps as soon as Trig was born, Bristol continued living with Aunt Heather and began attending West High and working at the coffee shops and dating Levi through summer 2008, so that Heather intended to refer to Tripp rather than Trig. Maybe she did not know Bristol was pregnant at the time but only in retrospect.

But then someone (Patrick?) said Bristol worked in coffee shops in Anchorage during summer 2007, when she could have been living with Heather for all we know, and been pregnant with Trig, and started dating Levi.

And to agree with hoodie . . . First Trig. Then Tripp. If Bristol marries the swim coach, next name is Trident. Or Triathlon. Or just Trio.

I am not making this up: My w.v. is spott, as in Lady Macbeth's "Out, damn'd . . ."

AKPetMom said...

Urban Dictionary entries for the word Tripp:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=tripp

someone had posted a while back on this blog or some other that Tripp's name was based on definition #5.

Who really knows, but he is not a "Tripp Easton Mitchell Johnston III (the third) as far as we know.

It does sound as if Bristol was "trippin'" when she told her Mom about being preggers (another def. of Tripp, "trippin' out, as in I was totally trippin' out when I had to tell my Mom I was pregnant, she could have been totally trippin' out as well when she found out she was pregnant for the second time in one year!!)

Doubting Thomas said...

B said - "If Bristol became pregnant w/Trig in June 2007, as Patrick believes, why did she wait till mid-year (semester break?) to leave Wasilla? Wouldn't she have been visibly pregnant at least by Halloween? Or did she disappear earlier, so that mid-year just means during, not middle? Not sure when hockey season started, but Inside Edition has her in Wasilla watching Levi play."

I say - you getting confused (don't worry many have) between the two pregnancy's. Inside Edition has video of Bristol at a hockey game watching Levi play in 2008 (second pregnancy) while pregnant with Tripp not Triggy bear.

This seems to be a very common problem. People are getting the two baby's, the two pregnancy's, the Palin girls and cousins confused all the time...any wonder why it is so hard to find the ends of strings in this tangled mess? Especially when the ends of the strings are purposely being hidden by the master string puller herself, Sarah....

JJ said...

Audrey~ I love this post! These numerous facts are consistent with each other and in support of Bristol's being pregnant with Trig.
Not to be nitpicky, but from a logic point of view, your two statements A & B, are actually equivalent and are both true "if, then" statements:

if x, then y is the same thing as if ~y, then ~x

To give 2 different possibilities that covers everything, you would have to say something like, either the dates are correct or they are not. If they are correct, then the same woman couldn't have given birth to both babies (ie two women birthed the babies). If the dates are incorrect, then it is possible that either one or two different women birthed the babies.( Of course, in this case, if the dates are incorrect, it was to mislead us into thinking that Trig is not Bristol's, in which case he must be!)

sorry but I am a math nerd, and I want to correct your (rare) mistake in logic

Virginia Voter said...

Pro-choice Grandma...the last name of Bree on Desperate Housewives was Van de Kamp, before she married Orson Hodge...Van de Kamp is a last name.

Sarah and Dud said in an interview the Van reference was in honor of Van Halen, the 80's rock band, and they always wanted a kid named Van Palin. Sounds corny, but whatevs.

Again, I hate to sound like a downer here, but this is still circumstantial, and really not a new revelation. Remember, Bristol was supposedly out of school in Anchorage due to a prolonged case of "mono", which seems to have been a prolonged case of pregnant. At this point, someone has to sing, or authentic physical, unrefutable evidence must be uncovered. Mercede knows who Trig's mother is, so why didn't she drop that bombshell with Star Mag? Something to think about more seriously....

Dangerous said...

It's B.

What Audrey is missing in her otherwise solid posting is the mixing time periods of the reports. There WERE contemporaneous reports of rumors of Bristol's pregnancy prior to Trig's birth. Audrey has shown that. The source of those rumors is an open question, but SP acknowledged and tried to downplay them, about the time she started her 'famous-assisted camouflage' of her own purported pregnancy.

Reports that Bristol and Levi would hang out together, and that she was living with the Bruce family in the early months of 2008, came out later, after Trig was born. It wasn't rumored Bristol was pregnant with Tripp. Reports indicate that in Wasilla it was widely known. That was the summer and that's when Bristol was pregnant.

It was also confirmed that she switched school "mid-year", so it is reasonable to conclude that she did live with the Bruces for a while after doing so. Her school change may have been the source of the rumors. It would be a reasonable basis for such a rumor to start.

All this screams that there's a missing piece. Why would the Palin's not mind the rumor of Bristol pregnant until SP planned to announced her mystery pregnancy? And then after the fact, not mind that Bristol being pregnant with Tripp was widely known?

Hypothetical

Three Smith women, two teen daughers (one a few years older than the other) and a mother. Two Smith babies. Which two might be inclined to claim credit the child of the third?

For the facts that Audrey has laid out so clearly (despite their complexity) where does the suggestion below conflict, if at all?:

1) The younger teen of the three Smith women becomes pregnant.
2) The older teen, who has an decent opportunity to claim credit for the baby without questions and with less damage to the family reputation, agrees to live with family away and hide from her friends so they won't see that she isn't pregnant. Rumors start (perhaps from the Smiths themselves of the boyfriend of one of the girls) that the one who is going to claim the baby is pregnant.
3) Something goes wrong with the plan. The older teen who is going to claim the baby backs out or is discovered not pregnant, perhaps as a result of a traffic accident where the police are called. Now the Smiths can't be sure that their ruse will work.
4) The Smith mother now uses her profile to walk-back the rumor of the older teen's pregnancy, and begins a plan to claim the child. The plan works, mostly, and the Smith mother is nearly universally given credit for baby, even though the younger teen (who's been quietly hid) has actually had the baby.
5) A few months pass and older teen discovers that she's pregnant. There's not much damage in that, since the family was willing to accept that scenario with the initial ruse. So there are "rumors", but broad knowledge -- as there would have been with the first baby if the Smiths wanted it that way.
6) The older teen's transfer from school and time at the out-of-town relatives is no longer relevant, so they don't have to disguise it any longer. The only thing that matters now is containing the original ruse of mother or older sister covering for younger daughter. After all, this was all for the younger daughter.

This is all plausible and consistent with what we know. Some of the reporting is likely confused and bits and pieces that different people haven't figured out completely. If the out-of-town family accidentally slip and say that the older teen lived with them at the start of the pregnancy, there's no harm because the first part is true but the second is demonstrably false. If anyone still thinks older teen is the mother of the first baby, despite the evidence that she couldn't be the mother, no harm done.

If anyone out there was reading this in a book, you'd accept it without question, I think. It may not be right for the Palins. Maybe Bristol x 2 is correct, despite the circumstantial evidence to the contrary. The Palins might have been able to successfully pull off multiple ruses involving multiple families. But I doubt it.

Birth dates for the babies are correct, or close enough. Wild ride is a lie. It was urgent, but not because SP was in labor.

I'm not going to mention her name again. This puzzle only works with a third woman that the other two would defend at all costs. If they did so, sorry for the intrusion, but you shouldn't have run for VP with this out there, Sarah.

Dangerous

Alex said...

An author gives characters similar names to create meaningful confusion, to stress comparison, to form patterns. I seriously doubt that Sarah or Bristol are smart enough to deliberately pick names that will trip (sorry!) us up. However, the subconscious often gives clues to the truth while our consciousness is trying to suppress it.

Alex said...

RE: pregnant teenagers in school. When I was a high school teacher, our school had a special program for teen moms. For half the day (or more) they were segregated from the other students. At the same school, there was also a program for at-risk, special cases, and dropout students where they only had to check in once a day and worked with tutors in a separate bungalow. My point is, staying that Bristol "attended school" can have many different meanings depending on the programs available.

Becky said...

Requirements for registering at West High:
http://www.asdk12.org/schools/west/pages/NewWest/Curriculum/Registration.html

I don't know what exactly were the requirements prior to this year, but you can do correspondence courses at West:
http://www.asdk12.org/forms/uploads/CBC_App_6.pdf

You can also do at least some online courses.

Patrick said...

B,

the confirmation that Bristol worked as a Barista at Nordstrom in Anchorage in June/July 2007 can be found in SP's financial disclosure form for 2007 - download:

http://www.box.net/shared/7u1bxqm3ba

We have also a confirmation of this fact by another source which we cannot disclose.

We also know for sure that Bristol worked at PacSun in Anchorage in June 2007, and it is interesting to note that this job is not mentioned in the financial disclosure form. It is actually possible that the engagement at PacSun was cut short...

Patrick (PD research)

The Editor said...

The truth will come out, thanks to your diligence. My mamma always said that to be a good liar, one must have a very good memory, that's why it's better to tell the truth in the first place. Obviously, these people keep going off script because they've forgotten their lines. It will all come together like a jigsaw puzzle that has been worked upside down.

the problem child said...

Not to be a wet blanket, but the rumours circulating about BP in the winter of 2007/2008 could have been just that -- rumours. And rumours are by definition not always true.

Teenage girls can be quite nasty if they want to bring one of their own down, and I can only imagine how much a governor's daughter might be subject to cattiness from her peers. That might have been the reason for the school change, also, too.

Just pointing out the unexamined possibility, not saying that this is necessarily the case.

I really do enjoy this blog, and want to see it cover all the possibilities.

anne s said...

I find it "odd" for SP to use the I hid my pregnancy from everyone because I didnt know how to deal with it. If she did have Trig.. this is still bizarre.. if she didn't have Trig this is also bizarre.

A Christian Pro-Life (values "life" .. all life), God knows what he is doing type woman would cherish the pregnancy no matter.. She wouldnt be all shamed by Trig's DS and hide him ... that is just callous to do to your unborn child. How is he going to feel one day finding out his mama hid his pregnancy because she was embarrassed. Yes she says it was "emotional" but I call it embarrassed. This would of been her last pregnancy (she's getting up there in years) and one last time for the entire family to be a part of it - decorating the nursery, rubbing the belly, seeing sonograms..
but nope.. She hid it under crappy looking scarves and big old men jackets.

Why I think either she didnt have him and is grasping for excuses (and using terribly untactful judgement saying she was shamed by him) or she did have him .. and is a pretty callous person.

I am a mother so am biased, of course...

So keep on digging!!! Nothing jives with this woman.

sjk from the belly of the plane said...

Bristol's bustline at the RNC tells me all I need to know.

Betsy S said...

Splendid post, Audrey.
I'm still trying to figure out the real reason why Bristol had that interview with Greta, and that perhaps it had to be more than just showing off a month old infant as a two month old infant because nobody had yet seen him, his 300K photo, or his birth certificate, if he was truly born at the announced gestation that threw his mom under the bus, so to speak. SP was involved without question, as I cannot imagine that Bristol arranged this by herself. The abstinence doesn't work remark might have been a slip, or a teenager's moment
of chagrin. When SP showed up, and took over the interview, I thought something else was going to be
announced, but the whole episode was awkward and phony, without a convincing wrap up about why either of them was there in the first place.
I will be relieved when SP disappears like John Edwards, even though he had far more to give for the public good.
I did read Star in the supermarket--would this line of new denouement and family strife be a smokescreen to offset the earlier hoax pregnancy?

B said...

Thanks for the sources, Patrick. I thought it was you who told us, but couldn't remember for sure. So PacSun sells swimwear . . .

AZBelle said...

Audrey and all -- thanks for ALL you are doing! It's been months since I added my two cents, but I read this blog several times a day -- often it keeps me up well into the night!

Thanks to all who are willing to discuss all the Palin Deceptions -- and, as we are learning, there are more than you can shake a stick at!

As "we" (even without posting I feel part of this group) discuss the possible mother/s or Trig and Tripp, it occurs to me that the one person we haven't discussed is Todd. He would have to have given his consent to Sarah's faking anything -- and he would have been in on it from the beginning.

I can't imagine his being willing for Sarah to fake a pregnancy for one of her sisters or for some unknown (to us) person at their church. But I could see how he would definitely go along with faking it for one of his daughters.

And I'm one of the legion who thinks that Bristol is a mother twice. So I wonder what Todd's reaction was to the second, "You're never going to believe this" revelation by Bristol.

Having been raised in a fundamentalist household where my mother was ruler of the roost, I do know what it's like to have a domineering mother and an enabling father. Even though "common wisdom" of fundamentalists says that the man's word is "law." (And, yes, I was in therapy as an adult not just for years but for decades! Maybe that's how the Palin kids will spend the $$ in their college funds ... )

So, any of y'all have thoughts on Todd's involvement? (Beyond his going along with the "wild ride"?)

One more point. The photo just under the blog entry "Once and for all" where Bristol is in the green sweater -- notice how she is "outside" the family circle? She could be airbrushed out of the cozy family and the picture would still look complete. This may be subliminal, but I think it speaks volumes about the family dynamics -- and if Bristol feels she's on the "outside" why not have unprotected sex? She's not part of this family anyhow.

Just my two cents for now. Please keep up all this good work!

WhiteDog said...

Virginia Voter...

I don't think Mercede knows who Triggs mother is, thats why she didn't spill. I think the only thing she knows is who Triggs mother is not.

B said...

Doubting Thomas,

I thought Levi stopped playing hockey for Wasilla High in March 2008, before Tripp began, when he dropped out of school and took the job on the slope. Did Bristol watch him play for another team?

Diana said...

We are getting so close to the truth! It is starting to unravel!

Duncan thanks for pulling the still photos off the Greta interview. Here is a link to view them.

http://tinyurl.com/9zsze9

B said...

Dangerous asks,

"Why would the Palin's not mind the rumor of Bristol pregnant until SP planned to announced her mystery pregnancy? And then after the fact, not mind that Bristol being pregnant with Tripp was widely known?"

That Palin wanted people to think it was an un-pregnant Bristol who was pregnant is one possibility. But not the only one.

Many have been offered here since September, such as Bristol putting her foot down the second time, Bristol being a senior rather than junior, Sarah being unwilling to cover a second time, Sarah believing that herself being pregnant later than April would hurt her VP chances, etc. We don't know the reason but we do know there are possible reasons, so we can't rule out that Sarah kept Bristol's first but not second pregnancy secret.

I still believe in Audrey's option A, or Bx2 as you put it, but not so sure on Levi x 2. This is in part from Patrick's research and in part from Sadie's singing about Tripp only (so far). At least Levi was a teenager. Sarah could have been faking having Trig to keep Bristol out of a criminal case against a father 20 or older, or other scandal. Time will tell.

trish in SW FL said...

Welcome back, Audrey! Glad to see you back among us!

I vote "A" too.

Hoodie: The names 'Trig' and 'Tripp', well, it makes me think of twin names. Irish twins, in this case ;)

Mary G. said...

Great post! I think Palin's greed will be part of what exposes her--all those reimbursements, all that nickling-and-diming the state of Alaska--it has helped us to see where she and her children were and weren't, and it will probably tell us more....
I want to note that NYTabloid chick, Naked Truth, Patrick, and others had some great posts at the end of the last blog.... if you jumped over here without seeing the last 10, or so, you may want to check back! This story is getting legs!

onething said...

B said,

"Why would Bristol attend school even in Anchorage when visibly pregnant in early 2008? "

I noticed that too, but the bit about her attending in January and February comes from one "Misty" and I do not know how credible that is. It would depend, I guess, on whether Misty has spoken privately to Audrey by email. Other sources, if I recall correctly, said she did not attend after December.
_____________________
And also too, for Dangerous,

I have found it troubling that Willow and Piper traveled so extensively together. I think a child of that age (6-7) is just totally wrong to reliably keep a secret, and also for failing to note a sister being pregnant.

So it seems to me that one reason for sending the pregnant teen away was to keep Piper from finding out. Therefore, I am equally puzzled by finding out that Heather Bruce has a young child as well, although that child is far less in the spotlight. Too old to fool, too young to keep mum. Wondering if maybe Bristol did hide out elsewhere for a time.

Saying that people would find her (Willow) "chubby" I don't buy. A pregnancy does not look like chubbiness. It might work for a month or so, perhaps in the 4-5 month range, with big sweaters, but not longer.

TruthPatrol said...

First and foremost – welcome back Audrey and excellent post. I know that I am in the minority on this blog but I vote B – not Bristolx2. Partly, because I believe that people around Wasilla believed that SP was pregnant with Trig Palin and I believe that Bristol was seen not pregnant. I am also of the opinion that the Johnston family does know who Trig Palin’s birthmother is, but, the women of that family are being “convinced” to stay quite thru arrests and the men are just being protective of their “FAMILY”.

onething said...

So Dangerous,

Are you supposing that the Palins hid Tripp for seven weeks and backed out of a lucrative photo deal that would have all but supported Bristol just so that those few people who will think that Bristol could be the mother X2 will continue to think so? To deliberately encourage people to think that he was not actually born on December 27 but later? Even though his birth in December was the whole point of their revealing Bristol's pregnancy?

"If they did so, sorry for the intrusion, but you shouldn't have run for VP with this out there, Sarah."

But the whole point of the pregnancy faking was so that she COULD run for VP!

onething said...

Diana said,

"Duncan thanks for pulling the still photos off the Greta interview. Here is a link to view them.

I have problems with these photos. First of all, they weren't in the actual interview were they? Tripp was wearing a blue bunny suit in the interview. He has different clothes on here. These are photos presented at the interview?

The pictures called tripp 1 and tripp 4 are of an older baby, certainly two months. Holding his head up and smiling while lying on his stomach...whereas tripp 3 looks like a newborn. As do the other photos.

onething said...

It could have taken a while for the rumors to get back to Sarah.

I don't think if Bristol were pregnant by an older guy it would mean a legal scandal. That would only happen if the family of the girl presses charges. Also, there is such a thing as an age of consent which may only apply if the boy is also under 18, but it does carry weight.

I note that someone quoted Bill O as saying the Sarah would have trouble running for VP if there were any more family chaos. Well, now there is.

Dangerous said...

According to Audrey source named 'Misty', Bristol was in school in Anchorage until mid-February. That information would blow away the early Fed birth scenario (there wasn't any supporting evidence, anyway). Then again that doesn't jibe with the Reddit post in March 2008 that Bristol had been out of school with mono for "months".

Whether the "mono" basis was true or not (it may simply have been repeated based on what someone may have heard), what matters is whether the "months" part is accurate. That leaves the Trig-arrives-early-Feb option open.

Of course, Sue Williams report of the Palin 8th grader's boyfriend saying in April that Bristol was pregnant. But they couldn't have known about Tripp because Bristol would have only been a month pregnant with him any day in April.

The most reliable information comes from the anonymous post on Reddit, indicating the Bristol rumors were already in place when SP announced she was pregnant. That's a contemporaneous report. Sue Williams only talked later, and all she has to add is hearsay. The same goes for 'Misty'. I'm not sure that Audrey believes Misty any longer, since she has disappeared from PD boards.

What we can confirm is that during early 2008, Bristol lived in Anchorage. SP and the other girls lived in Juneau. Todd was racing his snow machines, but I suppose he wasn't in Wasilla unless the rest of the family was there. So the Wasilla grapevine was more dormant that not during the period. Their may have been lots of rumors, but the only confirmed, contemporaneous sighting are of SP and that she didn't look pregnant.

I'm glad Audrey is returning the discussion to the evidence, weak as it is. I sense she's more of a late Tripp than an early Trig theorist in the Bx2 camp. I'm still waiting on evidence that the Palin 8th grader (or was it 7th?) actually attended school. I'm beginning to take everyone's lack of curiosity about this fact personal. It's like you're all calling me an idiot for even concerning it relevant. If everyone is saying its Audrey's option A, but can't prove it and aren't getting any closer, maybe you should take a little more seriously the people who say it's option B while we are. Remember Henry Fonda in 12 Angry Men.

Dangerous

Doubting Thomas said...

****B said... I thought Levi stopped playing hockey for Wasilla High in March 2008, before Tripp began, when he dropped out of school and took the job on the slope. Did Bristol watch him play for another team?****

I was wrong earlier (I know how to admit a mistake) when I said Bristol was seen watching Levi when she was pregnant with Tripp. He was not playing in March of 2008, I found this http://tinyurl.com/5nxtra "Levi Johnston, a high school hockey player for Wasilla High School, is not listed on the team roster for 2008-2009"

This does not change my comment about this being a tangled ball of loose strings - any wonder why it is so hard to find the ends of strings in this tangled mess? Especially when the ends of the strings are purposely being hidden by the master string puller herself, Sarah....

Doubting Thomas said...

Why is Tripp in pink? scroll down to the newborn picture of Levi holding Tripp (Levi has on a hospital bracelet) http://tinyurl.com/9zsze9
You can put little girls in blue, but you never ever put little boys in pink.....

agraegoose said...

Glad to see you back Audrey, hope you are feeling better. If we follow Palin logic, could we possibly be expecting a 3rd Tr name to add to Trig and Tripp? I'm wondering if there is a Trout Palin in the works, sorry, just had to throw that one out there. What a trio that would be.

Doubting Thomas said...

The Johnston family have questions about Trigg being Bristols, but they don't know anything for sure!

I found a cousin that was posting on huffpo about it! http://tinyurl.com/bko23e

WV was canci (can see)

mdlw56 said...

Missed you, Audrey...great post!! I am with you...A. And the timing of Palin's announcement directly after McCain's announcement very significant.

----

AZBelle @ 5:03

Todd's involvement apparent by his defensive remarks made during the wild ride interview.

Further, I think the picture of Todd holding Trig at work significant. The one where his large right hand with all his fingers spread way apart across Trig all wrapped tightly in the blanket with a cap (and supposedly a couple of days old). An effort to make Trig look much smaller...I don't know, but it looked that way to me.

My head is exploding...maybe all a hoax except Palin adopting a DS child and faking a pregnancy for political gain. Yeah, I waffling again...it's my nature. And I think it is Palin's nature to control everything.

Thanks, everybody, for sharing thoughts and opinions.

Morgan said...

Dangerous,

You've long been a proponent of the Willow-as-possible-mom theory, and I've been intrigued by your arguments in some respects.

In the last post, Patrick laid out in a very succinct manner why he thinks you are wrong. He supplied what he considered his best evidence and invited you to make your counter-case.

I have been eagerly awaiting your response, given that he put the ball squarely in your court.

Do you plan to respond? No offense, but it does not help your argument to completely avoid his.

I'm not trying to be antagonistic. I'm just sayin.....

Molly said...

Doubting Thomas---

Presumably that is a hospital-issued blanket and hat. At our hospital, the babies get blue and pink striped hats and blue and pinkish blankets.

On the other hand, I think the picture's color is a little off, so I don't think the baby is "dressed in pink".

Molly said...

Diana,

I just went to your flickr site; thanks for the SAT scores!!

Boy she really IS intellectually challenged!

Gotta check out those percentiles!!

How did she ever get into college???

2.2 GPA too?
She isn't college material.

Alex said...

AZBelle--

I'm intrigued by your point about Todd as the "Enabler." I've long wondered about him as a character in this drama. He's always seemed to me to be a wuss, a total milk-toasty zero in the Sarah equation. And yet, weren't there the stories about his desk being in her office-- with rumors of him actually running the Gov's office?

He may seem like the AK Macho Man, and yet. . .what kind of man would let his wife fake a pregnancy? I would even guess that he might not have known it was a fake preg-- except for the "Wild Ride." And that, with Sarah skipping past metal detectors and flight attendents non-pregnant and then the arrangement at the end, with someone supplying the babe-- well, he would have to be either Non-Present for most of it, either mentally, emotionally, or physically. I must admit, I've known men like that. Clueless.

So was he complicit? And what kind of man does that? Just askin' cuz I'm curious. As we all know, it takes two to tango.

(Maybe Audrey would grace us with an entire post on Toddsy.)

Caroline said...

Off topic, but is this for real? Sarah's test scores: 3 C's and a D?

http://tinyurl.com/9zsze9

No wonder she is so scattered.

NakedTruth said...

Patrick said:

"We also know for sure that Bristol worked at PacSun in Anchorage in June 2007, and it is interesting to note that this job is not mentioned in the financial disclosure form. It is actually possible that the engagement at PacSun was cut short..."

Patrick,

This is interesting. B already pointed out but I noticed too. PacSun sells swimwear and surfing equipment.

High School teachers and and (swimming) coaches often get jobs during their Summer breaks. Is there away we can find out who else worked at PacSun during the Summer of 2007?

B said:

"I still believe in Audrey's option A, or Bx2 as you put it, but not so sure on Levi x 2. This is in part from Patrick's research and in part from Sadie's singing about Tripp only (so far). At least Levi was a teenager. Sarah could have been faking having Trig to keep Bristol out of a criminal case against a father 20 or older, or other scandal. Time will tell."

This is where I am leaning. Bristol was pregnant but Levi is not the father or it could be that she was not sure who the father was. Levi and his family have no idea that Bristol was pregnant when she left Wasilla in late '07. They thought she left because SP wanted her away from Levi.

Bristol resumed the relationship with Levi and Sadi after she gave birth to Trig and then conceived Tripp by Levi early afterwards.

This is just my theory for now. It could change with more evidence.

Dangerous said...

Sue Williams wrote in one of her postings in September, which Audrey has spotlighted

When one hears this “rumor” (and okay, I admit, I never heard it straight from Sarah’s mouth) but have heard it from close to 20 people who are all long time friends of the family. Maybe they are all lying - and have been lying since April of this year when Willow’s boyfriend (Willow is the 8th grader) wouldn’t shut up about how Bristol was pregnant.


This comment has often been cited as proof of the rumors about Bristol being pregnant in early 2008. But consider this: SP and the younger girls were living in Juneau, where Willow was -- purportedly -- going to middle school. Bristol was living in Anchorage. If Willow had a middle school boyfriend, he should be in Juneau, not Wasilla, unless they were carrying on a long-distance middle school romance where he would be privy to Palin family secrets. How often does that happen?

The point is that Sue Williams would be in no position to hear rumors spread in early 2008 from any supposed boyfriend of Willow, if she was in Juneau. In fact, the Wasilla grapevine had to be rather weak during this time. That means either:

a) Sue Williams got the timing wrong, the rumors were over the summer from a Willow boyfriend, not April or earlier,
b) Willow was actually living in Wasilla, not Juneau as everyone thinks, or
c) Sue Williams is an unreliable source.

To support my theory, I'd like b) to apply and I could interpret her comments that way if it suited me. Many holding alternate theories have selected their favored evidence and interpretations similarly. But the most likely is c), since it was all hearsay anyway.

I think Sue Williams is referring to summer rumors of Bristol and Tripp, not winter rumors of Bristol and Trig. And they weren't rumors with Tripp either. They were news. Gossip, but still news. The amazing thing is that for how widespread the news was in Wasilla, I don't recall any of us knowing about it or finding anything on line about it until SP announced it on Labor Day.

Dangerous

Shianne said...

I feel the Mercede article in Star is an hoax. The things she divulged was that Levi and Bristol split, and Bristol is not in school. It's another ploy for Sarah to quash the truth about Trig and Tripp being Bristol's babies. As you can see they cannot even get the dates right on Tripp's birth. Sarah is pulling out the heavy artillery. You are making her very nervous Audrey. As you can tell by the Greta interview(what a farce). Everyone knows that when a teenager girl gets mad she tells everything. Mercedes is not mad. Her family is not stupid, they know how ugly Sarah can get. They are not going to jeapordize her mother's case by stepping on the Palin's. They know how revengeful they can be. When Sarah was picked for the VP slot, she and her family chose to lie for the Palin's. We all know they know the truth. One day Mercedes or Levi will get pissed, and we will get an earfull. Until then, you keep nailin that coffin. Good job!

Dangerous said...

Morgan wrote:

Dangerous,

You've long been a proponent of the Willow-as-possible-mom theory, and I've been intrigued by your arguments in some respects.

In the last post, Patrick laid out in a very succinct manner why he thinks you are wrong. He supplied what he considered his best evidence and invited you to make your counter-case.

I have been eagerly awaiting your response, given that he put the ball squarely in your court.

Do you plan to respond? No offense, but it does not help your argument to completely avoid his.

I'm not trying to be antagonistic. I'm just sayin.....


I don't recall reading Patrick's counter-arguments specifically, but I know he's in the Bx2 camp with an early Feb birth date for Trig.

I've laid out the case for daughter #2 a number of times, the principal factors being:
1) That she is apparently capable of having a child based on her physical development at the time period in question,
2) Her lack of a solid alibi,
3) Her one-way trip to Wasilla at the end of March (added to support the theory with the release of travel records)
4) Circumstances aligning more with the damage control associated with a younger daughter getting pregnant than Bristol
5) Simpliest explanation for SP's (and Todd's, let's not forget him) wild ride
6) Bristol needs a 10 month window between babies, which nobody can find any evidence to support, only theories and conjecture
7) SP, or any mother, would only fake a pregnancy to cover for a daughter.

I've laid out in detail the basis for this analysis in a 14-page document that I will send to whomever wants it. The analysis hasn't changed much in months, except for updates related to new evidence.

I've also posted the rational model for any group of people considering a faked pregnancy, which nobody has argued with. Applying that model to the various scenarios, on fools would attempt to fake a pregnancy after the child had already been born, or intentionally attempt to conclude the scheme after an arm-waving spectacle. That closes the Bx2 window.

Much has been said about no pictures of Bristol for when it matters. The same applies to daughter #2, except for maybe a two-second video outside with eavy winter clothes. Get me something solid and I'll immediately wave the theory.

Dangerous

Morgan said...

Dangerous,

Patrick's detailed argument can be found in the last post entitled "Coming Soon," if you're you're interested in doing a point-by-point rebuttal or offering an abbreviated refutation based on your 14-page analysis which is obviously too big to reproduce here.

Patrick seemed to have put quite a bit of work into distilling his arguments down into several points and I'd love to see you do the same here if you could.

In the meantime, yes, I'd like to see what you have. Could you email it to me at thetokenhippie@gmail.com

I'm leaning towards the mother being Bristol and not Wilow, but don't think we have enough conclusive evidence on either side to say it definitely is one or the other to a degree of certainty.

I just like to see both sides of a case laid out in the comments if possible. Patrick did that in admirable form; please do consider offering an abridged argument based on your document here for those who might want to see it but don't have time to read 14 pages of evidence.

Silver said...

The Palin scores are faked.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/palin/reportcard.asp

She was in an honors' society in high school.

Believe what you want about the quality of her high school education, but that would definitely mean her GPA was much higher than that.

Catherine said...

What happened to Bristol is that she left Wasilla Hig mid year and showed up at West in Anchorage when she moved in with her aunt's family. She then got mono and did not go to class. That much is traceable. How much time she took off from physically attending West High has not been verified. She was missing from the scene in March and April of '08 which is why there are suspicions that she is Trig's mom.

Willow was physically present at school the entire year. She shows up on Honor Rolls and rosters, has friends and others who saw her throughout that spring right before and during the time of Trig's birth.

Morgan said...

***MODERATOR ALERT***

Thank you, Silver.

I was not aware of the Snopes.com findings on that and appreciate your bringing it to our attention.

I hope EVERYONE saw that: The Palin report card is apparently a fabrication.

We need to be fair in our pursuits, even to Sarah. It's a credit to have readers like Silver pointing such things out to us.

Patrick said...

Dangerous,

I would be really interested to receive a copy of your analysis.

Could you please send a copy to:

patrick12344 (at) yahoo.com

Thanks!

Patrick (PD research)

Molly said...

RE: the SAT scores

Alrighty then; has the fact of her being in the NHS in high school been "snoped"?

You only need a 3.0 for NHS, btw. Service and character and "leadership" counts too. Maybe the ruthless basketball player thing helped her out there.

Even if it's made up I would still believe the actual scores are a lot lower than mine were!! And I still wonder about the real story on why she took so long and attended so many different colleges to get a degree.

So, sorry Morgan, but it was so easy to believe.........

Catherine said...

Where are Willow and Piper attending school right now? Willow is now in high school.

LisanTX said...

PacSun is a chain store that is currently popular with teenagers. They sell clothes that are considered "kewl" by teens. My teenage son has shopped there for shoes and clothes for several years, so I've been to the local store many times. So Bristol may have just thought it was a good place to work and get a discount on clothes. (just offering another perspective; the earlier posts about PacSun also selling swimwear could factor in too, also)

Doubting Thomas--GREAT researching with the HuffPo comments by Levi's cousin!!!!!

Morgan said...

**FROM THE MODERATOR**

Molly, no need to apologize. You did nothing wrong.

I fell for it, too. I probably should have checked it out so the fault is not with you, but with me.

It didn't occur to me that it was a fake, because it certainly looked official.

But now we know.

B said...

Catherine said...
"What happened to Bristol is that she left Wasilla Hig mid year and showed up at West in Anchorage when she moved in with her aunt's family. She then got mono and did not go to class. That much is traceable."

The mono is not traceable, and not verified. Audrey wrote about this last fall.

B said...

Dangerous said,
"I've also posted the rational model for any group of people considering a faked pregnancy, which nobody has argued with. Applying that model to the various scenarios, on fools would attempt to fake a pregnancy after the child had already been born, or intentionally attempt to conclude the scheme after an arm-waving spectacle. That closes the Bx2 window."

Just because you post something and no one challenges it doesn't make you right. And just because Bx2 doesn't fit what you posted doesn't close that window.

You are not alone in option B. We all need more evidence, and it is coming, however slowly.

While I read and contemplate here, I do not research facts outside the internet as Patrick and others do. I appreciate them very much!

KaJo said...

RE: Those who are saying Bristol Palin and/or Sarah Palin aren't smart enough or intelligent enough to come up with some of the names, dates, stories, rumors, etc. that have us sometimes confused....

I don't think anyone in the Palin family is actually intellectually challenged, except perhaps poor Trig. Uneducated, maybe, such as the case with Bristol.

I do think they are all cunning and devious, which is a whole different ballgame than "smart" or "intelligent", and can make up a lot for an IQ of -- allegedly -- 83.

Don't forget, life experiences that occur between age 18 and age 45 can improve one's IQ score significantly, not to mention one's cunning and deviousness.

(my wd verif is "sophick" -- as in sophistication?)

Morgan said...

***MODERATOR WARNING***

I shouldn't have to issue this to people who should know better, but here goes:

Just because someone disagrees with you does not make them a "Palin troll." Comments asserting that will be dumped immediately, and if such insinuations are made again I may find myself simply hitting "reject" when I see certain names.

I do NOT want to have to do that, especially to people whose comments I personally enjoy reading.

Dangerous said...

My counter to Patrick's evidence against daughter #2:

First, let me say that I didn't see his response until Morgan just direct me to it. I think I had switched to the new thread before then, or simply missed it:

1) Evidence prior to Feb 15/16 Fairbanks trip -- The Jan 15 pictures (I didn't watch the entire video, assuming Patrick had captured the best shots) are head shots only. No midsection shots. She actually looks a little chunky to me, but that's conjecture. Nevertheless, with a mid-May due date, she would only be about five months and may not have showed much to a casual observer.

2) Seafood Gala attendance -- Still less than six months, may not have shown much to casual observers. We also know that she attended the AHA luncheon a couple weeks later, which I think is more crucial. Still, no pictures.

3) AHA luncheon -- Critical date for both Willow and Bristol. I agree.

4) Travel in Feb/Mar -- I agree that on the face of it, Willow travelled more than Bristol, hence the argument that Bristol was hidden more than Willow carries some weight. But Willow had to go with Mom/Dad because there was nobody else in Juneau to be with her. Bristol drove where she needed to go.

5) Willow is not pictured during the critical time period from mid-Feb through mid-April. Bristol got in a car accident where the police were involved. You figure they would have mentioned in their report that one of the people involved was pregnant.

My point is that its still inconclusive and you're holding this theory to a far stricter level of evidence to pursue and a far less rigorous standard to refute than your own.

It's easier for me to dismiss Bx2 on the circumstantial and direct evidence than you can dismiss Wx1/Bx1 based on what's out there. Wx1/Bx1 doesn't have calendar problems. On what we have Wx1/Bx1 is currently more likely than Bx2. I also think that Sx1/Bx1 is more likely than Bx2.

Remember Wx1/Bx1 also explains the rumors surrounding Bristol and her being out of touch, if the original plan was to have Bristol take credit for the baby. If, in fact, SP faked it, they would expose the real mother for as long as possible, then hide her completely after that. After AHA, nobody sees Willow or Bristol, and mom says she's pregnant a couple weeks later.

Dangerous

Morgan said...

Thank you, Dangerous, for responding. Patrick's comment was indeed at the end of the "Coming Soon" thread, and submitted just before Audrey came back with this latest one. I figured you had missed it.

Now that both of you guys have weighed in, I suppose the discussion will continue - nicely, of course.

My word verification is "monow?"

Kathleen said...

B

I can reveal to you that the author of the Mono rumors IS traceable and that he is related to a significant person in the Anchorage community who has connections to political circles there. He has been identified by us here at PD Research with absolute accuracy. That is all I can reveal for now.

Kathleen

Dangerous said...

To B:

The model is right. You can assign your own values to the variables based on conjecture, but the model is correct. (See prior post for defnitions.)

P < A < F

Choose the lessor of

1) P
2) A x O
3) F x C

O usually < C, so circumstances must cause C > O sufficent to override A versus F difference.

In all cases, P must be sufficiently high versus A and F to risk O or C.

I argue that P is much higher for W versus B. F and C are better value for B to succeed than S, so they may have done that, first, but adandoned it at some point, probably mid-Feb.

The model applies in ALL cases, not just for the Palins. But if you want to ignore logic and math, make your own models but be prepared to defend them.

Dangerous

thewiredlife said...

People has an article posted today on Palin. The article says that Palin was in a grocery store yesterday, and that she had Willow, Piper, Trig, and Tripp with her. According to the article, Palin told the crowd (Girl Scouts from whom she was buying cookies) that Tripp is "only 2-months-old. It's kind of surreal!" 2 months old would mean that he was born in January- if he had been born Dec. 27 as Bristol told GVS in the interview, he would be 11 weeks old- almost 3 months, not "only two months old". Keep talking, Sarah...

By the way, guess who was holding (and bottle-feeding) Tripp- Sarah's favorite babysitter- Piper!

B said...

Catherine said...
"Where are Willow and Piper attending school right now? Willow is now in high school."

I posted a quote from People.com on the Coming Soon thread. They have only Piper and Trig in Juneau with Sarah now.

That suggests Piper is in school in Juneau and Willow is in Wasilla, living with Todd and Bristol at home or living with the Heaths.

She could be farmed out to her aunt or uncle in Anchorage. But I bet she likes helping with Tripp -- or did till Bristol left town.

Interesting that Sarah does not have Bristol or Willow live with Trig. But Trig has not been exclusively on breast milk at least since November, when Sarah was photographed mixing formula.

ravenstrick said...

Random thoughts:

Sarah's Foreshortened Pregnancy

a) Didn't start faking until Bristol was convinced to go along.

b) Didn't start faking until she discovered the pregnancy or Bristol may have put off revealing it until it was becoming obvious.

c) Didn't start faking it until after Trig was born.

The trouble with the waiting until after the birth theory is figuring out her motivation. Perhaps there were just things on her agenda that she really wanted to do - but that would be more acceptable for a pregnant woman rather than a nursing mother, i.e. taking a newborn on business trips, etc.

Trig's Diagnoses

When did Sarah go on record that she was expecting a 'special needs' child? I think Trig was already born and diagnosed by this point.

Trig's Place of Birth

Considering the timeframe and conflicting expense reports, I think Trig may possibly have been born in Fairbanks sometime during the Iron Dog/Heart Assoc. trip, and gone back to Wasilla in that car.

Motivation for The Wild Ride

a) Bristol (or Levi) was on the verge of going public. In Alaska that just means going to the grocery store, babe in arms.

b) Bristol reveals her 2nd pregnancy and her parents rush home to deal with the situation. Revealing Trig's birth gives them a distraction for the curious and a possibly realistic timeframe in case Sarah decides to do a pregnancy encore.

Who's Trig's Father?

Since Matt Hanley has entered the picture, this question has come up more and more.

a) Todd is rarely seen holding or interacting with Trig.

b) It is far less likely that a 30-something man (Matt) would go along with any of this than a scared teenaged boy (Levi).

c) The interaction between Levi, Bristol and Trig during the RNC seals it for me. What teenaged boy is that affectionate toward his girlfriend's parent's DS baby?

Dangerous said...

Since Morgan bumped my comment to Catherine, I'll post something again. You wrote:

Willow was physically present at school the entire year. She shows up on Honor Rolls and rosters, has friends and others who saw her throughout that spring right before and during the time of Trig's birth.

What your evidence to back this up? Who are your sources and how reliable are they? Who are the 'friends and others' you mention? The only honor roll reference was for winter term in Juneau Empire.

I can firmly state that W was not in school for many weeks during the period, relying on the travel records. And she didn't return from Wasilla after March 28, so you statement is refuted by the evidence on its face.

If you have something independently verifiable and verified, I'll immediately concede that Wx1 is not possible. Most attempted refutation are like Catherine's however: hearsay, conjecture or inconclusive.

Dangerous

NakedTruth said...

Kajo said:

"I do think they are all cunning and devious, which is a whole different ballgame than "smart" or "intelligent", and can make up a lot for an IQ of -- allegedly -- 83.

Don't forget, life experiences that occur between age 18 and age 45 can improve one's IQ score significantly, not to mention one's cunning and deviousness."

Kajo - I totally agree with you. So often many of us forget or we are just not aware of how devious and manipulative some people can be.

You, like many of us here, have experienced or have seen manipulation around you. Some people just don't get it. Some people can see what's going on and actually convince themselves that it's not happening.

We do not need to under-estimate the Heaths/Palins. They were definitely capable of creating this deception and capable of using their power in AK to pull it off.

A few people have asked about First Dude's (Todd's) role in this deception. I think he and SP were the master minds of this deception. First Dude is the enforcer/enabler, IMO. He makes sure people keep quiet and evidence is hidden. Has he gone back to work yet, or is he still on leave masterminding the next devious act?

thewiredlife said...

Sorry, Sarah was helping the Girl Scout sell cookies, as well as buying them-

'Palin was taking a break from governing the nation's largest state to help Juneau's Girl Scout Troop 32 sell cookies after the group lost all for their previous proceeds in a robbery the week before. "I read about it in the newspaper and I said, 'Well, me and the kids have an hour on Saturday, let's go down and help,'" she explained. "This age is so precious."'
(Wanted to keep the info correct)

ProChoiceGrandma said...

Dangerous:
Sarah Palin’s 2008 State of the State Address from 1-15-08 shows 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.
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.
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

B said...

Morgan,

That w.v. could be "mo now" as in "let's hear some more discussion now," or "mono" (silent w) as in, "Exactly why did Bristol disappear?" Sure does seem like the algorithm to generate those words starts with words from the blog discussion and then mangles them. Thus my "trieg" and "spott."

OK, a comment about a comment about a word verification. Guess I'm still having too much fun (and avoiding work I need to finish).

B said...

Dangerous said to me, "But if you want to ignore logic and math, make your own models but be prepared to defend them."

OK, this one is pretty personal. I "ignore logic and math" just because I won't play your game???

I try very hard not to diss you, and to give you credit where due, but you continue to make comments about my thinking that sound very condescending. Maybe you don't mean them the way they sound.

Morgan said...

***FROM THE MODERATOR***

B, point made.

Dangerous, let's not make this personal. From here on please stick to facts absent of snark. There's no need to turn this into a pissing contest.

Further comments speculating on other one another's weaknesses in areas of intelligence and logic will be rejected.

PLEASE, for the love of Pete, people, play nice. I know you can. You are making my head hurt.

Morgan said...

To RAVENSTRICK

That comment you just say you found from the cousin -- could you resubmit the comment with a link to the one you discovered?

Thanks.

Windy City Woman said...

It has been said that Bristol worked at 2 different coffee shops one summer, but only one appears on the Palins' financial statement.

Could it be that she worked at one of them briefly, say, filling in for someone for just one week, and they paid her in cash, rather than putting her on the payroll?

Also, regarding the comment that Bristol was "in school" until February 2008, what is meant precisely by "in school"? My first thought is the obvious--physically going into the school building every day like most kids. Perhaps she was doing distance learning or online schooling of some sort. These days with the Internet that is a viable possibly. Also, what about being schooled at home with a tutor--either hired privately or supplied by the school district--just so no one would see her pregnant? Maybe she changed districts because the second district had more or better alternatives (tutor, on-line) to regular school than did her original school district. This may be splitting hairs, but if your pregnant teen-aged daughter or sister were getting educated this way, and a friend asked if she was still in school, you'd say yes, right? So she wouldn't seem like a dropout?

Windy City Woman said...

Diana,
In your photo collection, you have what is supposed to be Sarah's academic records. I have heard somewhere (sorry, can't remember where or when) that this document is not accurate. Has anyone else heard this?

Morgan said...

Windy City Woman,

That academic record is indeed a fake. It's debunked on snopes.com, a fact brought to us by sharp-eyed reader Silver today.

To Diana, if you're reading this you'll likely need to remove that item from your photostream in the interest of accuracy.

ravenstrick said...

Comments by keb144 - "Levi's cousin"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/users/profile/keb144?action=comments&display=all&sort=newest

Link to "Fans of keb144"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/users/profile/keb144?action=profile#fans_base

Link to comments by wes_ben - "Fan of keb144"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/users/profile/wes_ben?action=comments&display=all&sort=newest

Ohio mom said...

Dangerous - I think one would have to be a mathematician or logician to refute your models. I also believe that a person can be a very logical thinker without being a mathematician/logician. (Maybe you could make a formula for that?)

Anyhow, we don't know that Willow didn't return to Juneau after March 28. What we do know is that no state record of her flight has been published. However, since she was at the hospital in Wasilla on April 18, I would agree that she probably remained in Wasilla.

I continue to be amazed at how much school was missed by all three daughters. This leads me to believe that the attendance policies and opportunities to do distance learning in Alaskan schools are much different than most of us are familiar with in our home states. I invite any Alaskan teacher/administrator who reads this blog to please comment on what these policies are in Alaska.

wes_ben said...

Before anyone jumps to conclusions, I saw Ravenstrick's comments on keb144 and since I'm a member of HP, I linked to him "as a fan" to see when he posts again. Curiosity on my part and nothing more than that. I'm a loyal follower of this blog and a few others...

Littl' Me said...

Re. the ticket that Bristol got, and cop not mentioning it:
If you are pulled over for a ticket, you ARE NOT to exit the car - so, even if she was, say, NINE MONTHS along at that point in time (don't remember the exact time, but it is irrelevant), if it was a COLD day, she would potentially have worn several layers of clothing, and the cop would not have been able to tell, IMHO!

veebee said...

Welcome back, Audrey! One other possibility re statement B. If the birth dates are correct, Trig and Tripp cannot have the same mother. They could possibly have the same mother if Tripp was born prematurely on Dec. 27 and a preemie Tripp could explain why he wasn't seen until Feb.

NakedTruth said...

Ravenstrick,

I am definitely considering the idea that Levi is not Trig's father. I am not sure if Matt Hanley is his father either but I think that we need to keep our eyes on his and Bristol's relationship.

You said: (My responses are in ().)

Who's Trig's Father?

Since Matt Hanley has entered the picture, this question has come up more and more.

a) Todd is rarely seen holding or interacting with Trig. (NT - Yes, Todd does not show much affection for Trig. I think this could be because of multiple reasons. One could be that Todd does not feel a connection with Trig. Not because Trig does not have his blood but because Trig also has the blood of someone Todd resents. Two could be that he just may not be comfortable handling a special needs child.)

b) It is far less likely that a 30-something man (Matt) would go along with any of this than a scared teenaged boy (Levi). (NT - I am going to have to disagree with you here. I think a 30 something year old man would go along more so than a teenage boy, especially if he thought that charges would be pressed against him for inappropriate behavior with a minor. Also I read somewhere that Matt just got the head swim coaching job at WHS in August 2008. A scandal with a minor would have ruined his career. Check out Matt's profile here: http://www.teamunify.com/Contact.jsp?team=aznlsc

c) The interaction between Levi, Bristol and Trig during the RNC seals it for me. What teenaged boy is that affectionate toward his girlfriend's parent's DS baby? (NT - A teenage boy who has been provided the opportunity of a life time to escape the less-than ideal lifestyle he lives to be on National T.V. with the possible V.P. of the USA and linked to her daughter. IMO Levi was told to show affection to Bristol and Trigg and that's exactly what he did. And guess what, the camera just so happen caught it on tape.)

ravenstrick said...

wes_ben,

Ah-ha! So it was an opinion, not insight from someone in the know. Thanks for letting us know.

See how these things have a life of their own?

Comment on the Palin ladies' People magazine scooped trip to Fred Meyer's yesterday:

There is something seriously skewed about the relationship between Sarah and Bristol. I was the mother of a 3 month old baby twice in my life. (Or is he a 2 month old like his gramma says?) You couldn't separate me from my newborn babies with a crowbar when they were that age! I certainly didn't send them off with my mother for over an hour to the store for no good reason.

What kind of control does this woman have over her daughter that she would let her child(ren) once again be used as props for PR purposes?

And, too, also: Does Sarah now call People magazine every time she ventures out of the house now??

ravenstrick said...

Naked Truth,

Yeah, but, too, also: Why in the name of heaven would he be told to show affection to a child that they were so hell bent on proving he wasn't the father of?

ravenstrick said...

Levi's Talking

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Politics/story?id=7087811&page=1

LisanTX said...

ravenstrick--wes_ben is not keb144. keb114 apparently is a relative of Levi. wes_ben is a keen-eyed person who linked to keb144's comments on HuffPo. She is keeping an eye open for any future comments he makes, using a search function available to the public on HuffPo.

Doubting Thomas earlier today posted a link to all of three of keb144's comments collected together:

http://tinyurl.com/bko23e

ravenstrick said...

Levi's timing on the breakup has changed from "A while ago" on 3/11 to "a week, two weeks" ago on 3/13.

Trying to fix the timing to save face for Bristol on GVS?

million$peach said...

well fellow questioners, when my sis, the oldest child got prego in high school, my parents wisk her out of town to a Episcopalian church facility meant just for this. That was 45 yrs ago.

I cannot believe, in a state the size of AK, with Palin in politics, in this easy info/contact age, they would risk sending Bristol to Anchorage where "things or something" could be seen and brought out, nope, not careful enough.

This is politics and religion and reputation. I'd have to think they would hide her away, WHICH could have some ties to Dobson and right wing evangelicals hiding "these problems?" she was/is their hopeful face.

Also, if Palin is in her 40's, she's still capable of "producing", so what, does Todd have a vasectomy? and is that accepted birth control? if so would they not have done this way earlier than Trigg?? Piper was their last, with a political career on the horizon and they didn't practice some form of birth control?

If no vas., what the hay, what's happening now? nothing? no BC?

btw.......I was given the guilt talks early on, about don't do what your older sister did, I didn't let anything like that happen until 3 days after graduation @ 18 (in 1974, the love revolution) and was leaving home the next day. Guilt, fear, dependency, control and conditional love are powerful things.

I kinda don't think Willow had the first baby, or if she did, Bristol may have let go of caution as the oldest because hey whatever.

million$peach said...

ravenstrick wrote: You couldn't separate me from my newborn babies with a crowbar when they were that age! I certainly didn't send them off with my mother for over an hour to the store for no good reason.
..........................

me either, now way and why would anyone expose an infant so? unless of course they think the hand of god covers them.

NakedTruth said...

Ravenstrick asked:

Naked Truth,

Yeah, but, too, also: Why in the name of heaven would he be told to show affection to a child that they were so hell bent on proving he wasn't the father of?

I agree. IMO I just think poor ole Levi got carried away with his showing of affection. It looked staged to me.

Windy City Woman said...

LEVI INTERVIEW ON TV MONDAY!!!!!

On Monday, March 16, Levi Johnston is to be interviewed on GOOD MORNING AMERICA on ABC.

Fire up those recorders!

sunfish said...

Be sure to watch Levi's interview on Good Morning America (ABC) on Monday morning. He is now saying that he and Bristol broke up only a week or so ago - which I believe is SP-encouraged damage control because of the contradictions between Sadie's Star interview and BP's Greta interview.

Interestingly, SP blasted ABC news via McCallister (of course) for suggesting that she is disingenuous about her campaign stance on abolishing earmarks since she still has them in her budget. (John McCain does not)

Perhaps giving Levi airtime on GMA is ABC's way of getting back on SP's good side after daring to point out her hypocrisy. Just sayin'

sjcb said...

It's been mentioned many times how Levi's loving actions with Trig at the RNC means he's almost assuredly his father. While I admit that a normal teenager wouldn't usually be like that with a baby...I think it's quite possible that SP & Co. told him to appear more "fatherly" for the cameras. Keep in mind at that point all we knew of the kid was his Myspace page riddled with obscenities and the "does not want children". SP knew she had to sell him as an upstanding young man who is excited to be a dad and husband.

Just a thought!

ProChoiceGrandma said...

Littl’ Me,
Bristol was not “pulled over” for a traffic citation, she was in a collision with another vehicle on 2-8-08 and she was at fault. I believe she had already had Trig by this time. Post-Partum Depression? The temperature was approximately 15 degrees and wind speed 4-6 mph. and no data for snow.

Patrick said...

Dangerous,

thanks a lot for your posts today. Let me just pick up some things you mentioned. Of course we could discuss the "Was it Bristol or Willow" question endlessly, so I will try to keep it brief.

It is unfortunate that my post to you regarding my arguments against the Willow-theory was posted in the previous thread. I have also uploaded it here, to make it easier to understand this discussion for new readers:

http://www.box.net/shared/lqb3yi5oo7

By the way, I haven't received your 14-page document yet. My email again: patrick12344 (at) yahoo.com

You said:
"I can firmly state that W was not in school for many weeks during the period, relying on the travel records."

I am sorry, but I don't see the logic here. Just because Willow travelled quite a lot means automatically that was not in school for many weeks? Could you explain this in more detail?

You said:
"Travel in Feb/Mar -- I agree that on the face of it, Willow travelled more than Bristol, hence the argument that Bristol was hidden more than Willow carries some weight."

I agree with you in general but would like to add that Bristol travelled only ONCE between October 2007 and June 2008 according to the travel records.

You said (in respect to Willow, as a fact which supports your Willow-theory):
"Her lack of a solid alibi."

Sorry, I really don't understand exactly what you mean here. Alibi for what? Willow was not hidden like Bristol, as far as we know. She was out there, attending quite a lot of events and not hidden from public view.

You said:
"I've also posted the rational model for any group of people considering a faked pregnancy, which nobody has argued with."

Dangerous - I know that you have obviously put a lot of thought into this, but I have to say: The last thing I would apply to Sarah Palin and her actions is a "rational model". And you seem to have a lot of trust into those models...I am sure that there is a lot of controversy surrounding the validitiy of those models, and certainly many different opinions on that can be found. I haven't looked into that, and don't intend to do so. However, I would focus more on facts and not on models...

Dangerous, one of the main flaws in your considerations is that you accept as fact that the real duedate was in May 2008. I don't believe this for a second - this duedate was made up by Sarah Palin in order to adjust her timeplan. It had nothing to do with the real situation. Unfortunately, far too many people have fallen into this trap.

And you seem to think that the pregnancy of Bristol wouldn't have been a reason enough for SP to fake a pregancy. I don't believe so. Let me tell what I think had happened.

SP became the Governor of Alaska at the end of 2006. In June 2007, her approval ratings were on a record high, between 80-90%. In addition, SP also knew that there was a realistic chance for her to play a role in national politics. Then in June 2007, Bristol tells her mom that she is pregnant. SP knows that it would have been a major embarassment if it had been made public that her sixteen-year old daughter was pregnant. Also, the father was NOT somebody who could seriously be considered to become a future husband, which adds to the embarassment. Therefore, it was decided to hide the pregnancy, with the intention to finally decide later "what to do" with the baby.

It didn't need to be Willow, because Bristols pregancy was reason enough to hide the pregnancy at this point (and later to fake the pregnancy on SP's part).

I am in the "Bristol x2" camp. I also finally came to the conclusion that Tripp was born later than 27th December 2008 (at the beginning, I had doubts about a later birthdate).

We have to realise that this is a carefully executed operation by SP. A good example for this is also the fact that the Mat-Su Regional Medical Center (Palmer/Wasilla) at the beginning of January 2009 surprisingly announced that birth announcements will not be published any more. These news were received with utter disbelief:

http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/matsu/story/649766.html

This was just DAYS before Tripp's birth announcement was due to be published.

As it is already well know, the board of the Mat-Su Regional Medical Center is under the control of Evangelicals - here is one link with more information:

http://site.xavier.edu/tan/handouts/xtianity/Christianity-H011dh-USA.pdf

Sarah Palin herself was a board member of the organisation which runs Mat-Su Medical Center, at least in the year 2005 (I cannot find the link right now, will provide it later).

Therefore Mat-Su Regional Medical Center would do everything to keep SP happy...almost everything...they apparently were not keen to lie for SP a second time.

Patrick (PD research)

Craig said...

thewiredlife;

I feel that sometimes the analysis of everything that Sarah says goes a little overboard. What is really wrong with Sarah saying making a casual comment that Tripp is 2 months old? He isn't three! How many people casually say their child is "two months, two weeks, three days and 8 hours old"?

I would expect anyone in a similar situation to say anything from "two months" to "two and a half months" to "almost three months old".

Some of this gotcha stuff is a little over the top.

Truthseeker2 said...

I think that Patrick has done a good job evaluating the information we have. I doubt, though, that Bristol let Sarah know about the Trig pregnancy in June 2007. More likely that wasn't revealed until the fall of 2007. I do think she let SP and Dude know about the Tripp pregnancy in early summer 2008.

NakedTruth said...

Craig said:

"I would expect anyone in a similar situation to say anything from "two months" to "two and a half months" to "almost three months old".

Some of this gotcha stuff is a little over the top."

Craig,

I am not sure if you have kids but as a mother of two until my babies were probably about 12 weeks old I would give their ages in weeks and not months.

In my experience, I think it's strange that SP and Bristol give Tripp's age in months with him being less than 12 weeks old.

This maybe different for some people but it would be interesting to hear what other mothers say about this.

Naked Truth

Morgan said...

Naked Truth,

According to my mother, I'm 525 months old.

NakedTruth said...

Thanks Morgan!

You always make me laugh! I needed that.

ProChoiceGrandma said...

Patrick, the link about the birth announcements is no longer available. Guess Sarah scrubbed another one.

ravenstrick said...

Naked Truth,

Most definately, new mothers AND grandmothers - I've been both; give a baby's age in weeks for the first several few months.

I think it has to do with the Dr. visits that are based around milestones they acheive weekly for the first 6 months or so.

Patrick said...

Hi ProChoiceGrandma,

do you mean the ADN-link? Here is the tinyurl, that should work:

http://tinyurl.com/c8p8h4

Kind Regards
P

Patrick said...

Truthseeker2

Yes, I agree, it may well be possible that Bristol told her parents only in fall 2007 about the pregnancy. By the way, I always like your comments a lot.

Patrick (PD research)

Kathleen said...

I agree with you Craig.

Sarah is Tripp's grandmother not his mother. It is unlikely that she will be counting his age in weeks. My mother always proudly referred to her grandchildren as being ex number of months old when they were babies.

Gryphen said...

Dangerous is wrong.

I don't usually intrude on the discussion over here but that line of reasoning has played itself out and nobody seems to want to drive a stake through its heart.

I don't know everything, but I do know that NOBODY in Wasilla or Anchorage has ever considered Willow a candidate for mother of Trig.

We KNOW that Bristol has been pregnant at least once. The only question remaining is was there really two pregnancies and when were they.

THAT follows the evidence and the path logic dictates we go.

EVERYTHING else is an unnecessary distraction.

longtimefollowing said...

That did it! The word verification is "sonfact"!! I can't let that slip away so I HAVE TO make my first posting here.

Well, I have been lurking for months. When the new biography came out, I was excited/gratified to hear of the statements placing Bristol in Anchorage and pregnant LAST school year. The ruse is unraveling. I am and have been in the 'Bristol birthed both sons" camp.

Palin's Deceptions is the first blog I've ever followed. So well done, and it has led me to other great blogs. Thank you - everyone - for this wonderful, logical path to the truth.

Yellowgirl said...

Couple of points....

1. I don't think we can read too much into the "he's 2 months old" comment. While I am pretty accurate with my child's weeks/months, I know not everyone is. A friend had her baby only 5 days after mine, and at a recent gathering talked about her X month old child, and I almost corrected her since I knew both our children had passed into X+1 months old....

Also, my child is X months old UNTIL the day the child is officially X+1 months old, b/c I hate to see them growing up so fast.....

Then, as a grandma, my mom is much loser than me with how old my child is.... So, I kinda agree with Craig on this one. (Though I do agree, you usually talk in weeks, and not months, when they are that little).

2. The comment about not being torn away from one's baby at 2 months old.... I could be. I had a touch of "baby blues" or just general newborn baby fatigue, which is quite common. When family came to visit, I'd go to the movies or something.... and this was about the 2 month old mark. I also remember taking a trip to the store without baby (leaving baby with DH) just to "get out of the house" and be by myself for awhile. And I'm an "older" mom, and my baby was very much wanted after some fertility issues. A cousin of mine who had a child out of wedlock, very young, thinks nothing of leaving her baby with her mother for hours on end..... so for a teen to do that, esp for an hour or so, doesn't strike me as overly odd.

3. I'm leaning toward the Trig birth in early Feb, early but not too early (May date being a fib), and Tripp birth in January. I think Bristol attended Go Red event AFTER giving birth. Makes sense as to how come no one noticed anyone pg there and why the late travel arrangements. I think they had to hide baby for a time to allow the ruse to work and Sarah to *begin* to est. herself as "pg".

4. With Trip photo op cancellation.... makes total sense to me that they would encourage unrealistic negotiation among the mags in Dec, to keep their cover while awaiting the real birth of the baby in January.
That way, the story to the world was "we're negotiating a deal", and the eventual back-out was always something they planned.... note how according to NYTabloid Chick, they never committed to People enough that there was a breach of any contract. They thought this one through...........!

Yellowgirl

Aussie said...

To Nakedtruth:

As a mother of six, when asked, I would always give weekly age references up until three months old. I even used fractions of a week! Maybe because I didn't want any of them to grow up.

teal said...

welcome back Audrey!

ravenstrick...I followed the link to Huff Post, another friend is SPICEHANDLER...hhhuuummmm

ANYONE KNOW if levi caughr mono from BP? Or if anyone else had it around the same time?

Littl' Me said...

Naked Truth: I agree with you. I don't remember how long I did that with my child, but for sure the first 12 weeks... At first, it was 'x days', then 'x weeks', and then 'x months' (adding '1/2' as needed)...

Craig said...

Naked Truth;

Sure, many people probably go by the number of weeks for a while. There certainly isn't a right or wrong way. I just don't see why it's a big slipup if a 2 and a half month old baby is referred to as two months old in an off-the cuff manner. She isn't giving a deposition!!

It's actually another no-win situation for her. If she referred to the number of weeks, someone here would say, "see how careful Sarah wants to be to make sure people know Tripp was born December 27th"!

thewiredlife said...

As someone who has no children, but a pretty close extended family, I know that when my cousins had kids, during the baby stage, many of the women in the family (especially Grandma- or Granny, as my aunt goes by) knew how old the child was- as Naked Truth said, down to the week- i.e, 'Tripp is 11 weeks old'. When you are talking the first year of life, especially the first couple months, those weeks do make a difference in a child's development.

(Here is an infant developmental milestones chart for 1-6 mos. The website also has links to articles on baby's week-by-week development.
http://tinyurl.com/334fj2)

onething said...

Dangerous,

Willow and Piper flew home nearly every single weekend from Juneau. The boyfriend could have been in either town.
Why would the Wasilla rumor mill be weak just because for two or three months Sarah went to Juneau and came home every weekend? Sarah and her family werein Wasilla their whole lives!

But I think you are right, that Sue Wms is a weak source.

And I DO care to find out about Willow's whereabouts and school attendance.

Sunshine1970 said...

Been a wile since I posted...This morn I went over to theimmoralminority...Check out the pic in the first post on the page. It seems to show a pregnant Bristol from February 8th: http://theimmoralminority.blogspot.com/

That's it. That proves Bristol was pregnant with Trig for me.... :)

Sunshine1970 said...

Think I misread a bit of that post from Immoral Minority. I thought it was from last year in Feb. It's from this year in Feb.

Still a nail in the coffin pic to me, though. She looks quite pregnant there to me... :)

NakedTruth said...

Craig defensive comment to me:

"It's actually another no-win situation for her. If she referred to the number of weeks, someone here would say, "see how careful Sarah wants to be to make sure people know Tripp was born December 27th"!"

Yes, Craig, it is a no win situation for us who feel that Palin is manipulative. To try to explain why to people like you that refuse to acknowledge the deception in her behavior is definitely a no win situation.

So let's just come to an agreement that we are just going to continue to disagree on much about the Palins.

IMO I find it strange that she uses months instead of weeks for a baby 1-12 weeks old. A baby can be 2 months old from 8-11.9 weeks and 3 weeks can make a huge difference in a baby's development. If Tripp was born Dec. 27 or if he was born Jan. 23 he would be 2 months old today. I think they tell his age in months to hide the truth that he was actually born a few weeks later than reported.

If this is fine with you that's great. You have a right to your opinion.

Patrick said...

Gryphen,

thank you for your post and your support in regard to the "Willow-question". Please post here more often! :-)

Interesting picture you published there in your latest blogpost on Immoral Minority. Shows a "post partum" Bristol, I would say.

Patrick (PD research)

wayofpeace said...

thanks for you comments,
YELLOW-GIRL:

they are ALWAYS well-grounded and measured by a mom's reasonable position.

i think it is going to be just such an approach that will eventually take the PALIN's house cards down.

WV: cant sax i

sjcb said...

i've hit the verification word JACKPOT!

"hatedsl"

obviously i had to post.

;)

Kathleen said...

Please take a peek over at Gryphen's new post - you will not be disappointed!

http://theimmoralminority.blogspot.com/2009/03/post.html

Kathleen

Betsy S said...

I'm thinking about what sort of First Birthday celebration photo SP will award the MSM next month.
Given that Trigg's real birthday is right about now,
Happy Birthday, Trigg!

tennesseeteacher said...

Anybody else find it interesting that on this morning's GMA interview, Levi only had "old ultrasound pix" of Tripp in his truck? Wonder why no real pix of the real Tripp?

NakedTruth said...

Tennesseeteacher said:

"Anybody else find it interesting that on this morning's GMA interview, Levi only had "old ultrasound pix" of Tripp in his truck? Wonder why no real pix of the real Tripp?"

Or was this the ultrasound pix that SP talks about in "The Trailblazer"? The one she said that Willow found of Trig and she had to explain it away?

I just find it strange that these ultrasound pictures are just lying around everywhere. :-)

Ivyfree said...

"Anybody else find it interesting that on this morning's GMA interview, Levi only had "old ultrasound pix" of Tripp in his truck? Wonder why no real pix of the real Tripp?"

I didn't watch it, but given that camera cell phones are so common, that's very interesting. I hadn't thought Alaska has such backward technology, that he couldn't have a camera phone. And he's supposed to be such a caring, hands-on, daily-visiting dad, right? Without a camera? Right.

Alex said...

Thanks, Kathleen, for the word on Gryphen's blog. I did go see-- but normally have to avoid his blog because it loads slower even than Huffpo on my computer. So please keep me posted! (and Gryphen, I would have emailed you directly but didn't have the patience to wait for the email link to finally materialize. Why so slow???!)
______

The video of Levi on GMA is heartrending. It must be seen-- rather than read in transcript. Every statement is halting, sad, and vague-- and confused. Particularly the one about "we- no, -er, I wudden mature enuf."

It's a lot to expect of an 18-19yr old, very UNsophisticated, UNeducated young man: to cover for his mom, his (ex) girlfriend, his (maybe) child under the watchful eye of the entire U.S. and Sarah Palin. This kid is in way over his head, and it's very sad to watch.

In fact, it also tells me something about Todd Palin. This is what it's like to live with Palin women. . .

Craig said...

Naked Truth;

I'm not sure if you think that my reference to "someone here" was directed specifically at you, but it was not. It was a generalized reference.

I also am not "refusing to believe" anything, in terms of rejecting some kind of obvious truth. As I've said MANY TIMES, if a credible source comes along with solid information to question the official story, I'll be happy to admit there is something wrong. I am not emotionally invested in one line of thinking. My self-worth is not that fragile!

I just don't see anything beyond pure speculation, conjecture, and circumstancial information. I frankly will need something more concrete before I believe that a Governor and VP candidate purposely tried to pull off one, if not two, bizarre and certifiably insane baby conspiracies. I don't think that is too much to ask.

This Johnston rift is the kind of human relational event that usually unleashes some true emotions and venting by the individuals involved. Mercedes has already shown that she is open to spewing some vitriol about the situation. The information in the coming weeks that gets either confirmed, denied or unmentioned will be very enlightening, I suspect.

herkimer said...

I have not posted for a while. As an avid reader/follower, I am so happy Audry is feeling better and grateful for her latest post. Thank you for Morgan, the PD researchers -- all we pj-clad and standard-attired ones!


"Kathleen said...

Sarah's address to the Special Olympics -

I would love to know what you think about this.

http://tiny.cc/akD66

Kathleen

March 8, 2009 9:28 PM"


Thank you, Kathleen, for a YouTube link showing "Governor Palin's Address To The 2009 Special Olympics In Boise, Idaho"! ...from sarahpac.com, of which I am not a member. Does anyone know how to access the date the video was made or posted?

...anyway, I watched the whole thing. My speakers were not turned on (to save me from Sarah's screeching voice), but I noticed (at 1:52 - 2:01, and especially at 2:33 - 2:36 and 2:52 - 2:54) -- both still- and action-shots of little Trig being showed by Sarah how to do, and happily doing patty-cake on his own!

Today I peeked at the developmental chart posted ('Thank you' to:) thewiredlife:

"...(Here is an infant developmental milestones chart for 1-6 mos. The website also has links to articles on baby's
week-by-week development.

http://tinyurl.com/334fj2)

March 15, 2009 9:46 PM"


I followed this link, and under the chart for 1-6 months is a link to 7-12 months. This section of the charting lists 'Plays patty-cake and peek-a-boo' at 11 months under 'Mastered Skills (most kids can do)', and at 9 months under 'Advanced Skills (a few kids can do)'.

Today Trig is (claimed by SP) to be an app'x. 11 months old preemie DS child. Suppose it has been at least a couple of weeks since the video was made. So, at '10-1/2 months', Trig is performing above the level of 'most kids can do' (children not preemie/ having developmental problems)? I am not very knowledgeable about this -- experts please comment.

I have thought for some time that Trig was born some time (weeks?) earlier than the April 18, 2008 date claimed by SP & her et.al, (because of the child's appearance in the Sarah- Todd- Trig presentation video being 'not-new' as is a newly-born infant), and Tripp's birthdate is or will be later (weeks?) than December 27, 2008 (because of the appearance of the infant in the Greta V. video being 'so-very-nearly-new', as is a nearly-new-born infant.

IMHO, Bristol is biological mother to both children.

nisgzkys (a mystery)
herkimer

Mary G. said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
NakedTruth said...

Thanks Craig,

Point well taken. I have responded to your points.

"I also am not "refusing to believe" anything, in terms of rejecting some kind of obvious truth." (NT - The same here. If I can see a certified birth certificate for Trig with SP listed as the mother with a birth date of 4/18/2008, I would challenge my own eyes that have seen SP with no baby bump on several pictures at 7 months pregnant and say that she did give birth to Trig. The fact that I have not seen a BC, SP definitely not showing in various pre-birth pictures, the 'wild ride story', announcing her daughter's pregnancy specifically to prove that she was Trig's birth mother and not her daughter, announcing the birth of her grandbaby but not showing pictures until 2-months later, etc. I could go on and on. But what I am trying to say to you is that there is no 'obvious' truth that SP did give birth to Trig. It's easier to prove your case than it is mine. As a Palin supporter why don't you go over to SarahPac and solicit help from other supporters to ask SP to end this by releasing Trig's BC. That will really help us out here at Palindeception. And don't give me that we wouldn't believe the BC anyway crap, just do it! The ball is in your court.)

And also...

"I just don't see anything beyond pure speculation, conjecture, and circumstancial information. I frankly will need something more concrete before I believe that a Governor and VP candidate purposely tried to pull off one, if not two, bizarre and certifiably insane baby conspiracies." (NT - Same here, most of us need something more concrete to believe that she actually gave birth to Trig. Please go to SarahPac and encourage SP to release a BC. Tell her that you support 110% and that you are sick and tired of the rumours and want them to stop. She will do the right things for her fans I'm sure.)

Truthseeker2 said...

Thanks Patrick; I always find your comments very informative too! And Gryphen, thanks for posting here and for the new photos on your blog. How very interesting! I will go on the record here and now to say I do not buy the post-partum option if Dec 27th is the birthdate -- not if it is indeed after a first pregnancy for a slender, body-conscious daughter of SP, who herself never looked one iota post-partum, not even 3 days after purportedly giving birth. Now, if Bristol had just given birth that week and it was her second pregnancy within a year, I could buy the post-partum option -- but not if the birth of her first child were 6 weeks before. And if she's still pregnant as of Feb 8th, that's even more interesting. Wow.
Stranger than fiction.

Amy1 said...

I agree, Alex, the video of Levi shows a very good-hearted young man IMHO, doing the decent thing by limiting his comments to those few. In pain, yes. But still a gentleman in his comments. Just seems so out of synch with the ever-chirpy always-have-a-comment SP and now Bristol also.

". . . I wasn't mature enough, I guess" is a very generous comment from young man his age. Very generous. Very mature, in fact.

I haven't seen this tiny point addressed here: I look again at Bristol at the RNC, in her famous grey dress that is so tight over her. It did occur to me long ago: why pick that style for a PG body? Why not take a page out of SP's book and have a less bulge-y look? OR, as others have asked repeatedly, with all the wonderful maternity clothes these days, why not pick a style that does not look like it will split open in 10 minutes? And it finally comes to me that this was the place where the "$140k-total" type of attention was given to each family member's clothing and appearance. Esp that night. So of course Bristol was not wearing an old formerly flattering dress that was now too tight. Bristol did not dress herself, she had professional dressers, as all the family did ESP that night! This was a NEW dress, picked for the occasion by professionals. Someone here mentioned "padded," and I didn't think that before, but now it makes more sense that the exact look that Bristol had at the RNC was the exact look that was wanted by the RNC folks: she was undoubtedly scrutinized by the best in the business, and the contours of her body were presented exactly as was wanted. Not necessarily as they were, if they were a little smaller. (Which of course supports the "less than 5 mo PG at that time" and "Tripp born later than announced" points of view.)

So my earlier conviction that she was nursing at that time is now not a conviction. The size of her pregnancy at the RNC is also now, for me, not clearly known, and certainly v little that is photographic evidence seems believeable to me.

HOWEVER, this applies to photos that make someone bigger, more padded. It does not apply to photos of trustworthy origin that show someone smaller, because that is an impossibility. Again, I refer to this set of photos, and we could readily add others.
Photos showing an SP who had a flat profile at the time she claimed she was pregnant.

Craig: I've asked you before, and I felt I got bafflegab instead of your usual straight talk: what part of this set of photos is not proof positive?

Alex! I just noticed!! You figgered out how to imbed a link in these comments. Congratulations! See how simple it seems after you know, and how voodoo it seems before you know? Just like our SP issue here. Ha ha ha.

penny said...

I have tried, but I can not find where the discussion of Sherry Johnston possibly being Trig's mom left off...

Just thinking that if SP ends up worried about Sherry talking, she has her arrested for good measure. SP wants to drag out Sherry's silence, yet a judge agrees to push up the court date, then that same judge who was the obvious conservative choice for AK Supreme Court appointment, is amazingly passed over for a former Planned Parenthood board member?

Yes, I think SP is that petty and short-sighted. Don't cross me, or you'll pay...my pretty!

We have heard virtually nothing from Todd, but even less from Track...

Who ever Trig's mother is, I'm sure she wants the best for him, but if she see this as a never ending conspiracy, maybe the truth can set her free, and ultimately be the best thing for her son. Not to mention, the most cost efficient!

Spitballing...maybe, but that sure would be a HUGE SCANDLE!!!!!!!!!!!
Definately worth covering up for SP.

IMHO, Penny

Amy1 said...

For those who feel SP's 10 min are over: she has been chosen as keynote speaker for a big GOP fundraiser.

Craig said...

Naked Truth;

Sarah is as unlikely to listen to supporters urging her to release a birth certificate, as she is going to listen to critics demanding it.

It's yet another no-win issue.

If she is telling the truth, it would first off feel offensive to have to display proof of her baby to a small but vocal group of people (relatively speaking). Secondly, if she and/or her handlers have been skiming blogs such as this one, they would understand that many people have admitted that they are beyond accepting a legal-looking birth certificate. Some will only accept a DNA test, while others admit that nothing will convince them. So the unbelivers will press on, and there ends up being no real gain for Sarah's actions.


If she is covering up a falsehood, you would now have the bulk of the public who has accepted her story as true, who would start scratching their heads in puzzlement as to why Sarah is so worried about a small group of people that she suddenly has to display documents of proof, rather than to just dismiss them. Now you end up having people (and media) starting to ask questions where there were none before.

TruthPatrol said...

I agree Penny – I believe that it is a much bigger scandal too! I think that SP and others let the rumors about Bristolx2 go on because that is the smoke and mirrors for the “real” scandal and they know that they can at some point come out with “proof” of NO Bristolx2! And then use it to say see those pj wearing bloggers are just mean.

Craig said...

Amy1;

It is perfectly alright to display those pictures and say "why shouldn't I question, based upon these specific photos, whether Sarah gave birth to a baby x weeks later". To go further than that by claiming them to be "proof positive" that she did not have a baby suggests to me that this is indisputable proof of a lie.

Take that to any true medical expert or to a court and see if they agree with your level of certainty.

Alex said...

Amy1--

Hmmmm. Nice logic (even though lacking in equations, logic nonetheless imho) on the RNC dressing of Bristol. I always wondered about that point: and then chalked it up to some super-hip young fashion trend about pregnancy. You know, the way stars let their bellies hang out when they're pregnant. Flaunt it, not hide it.

(I always found Bristol's protruding belly in the 07 green sweater photo a bit in poor taste for an official portrait. But more and more I believe AK people just dress and are different from me.)

But you are very right on fashion as a means to script audience response. Once Bristol was officially pregnant, she was OFFICIALLY pregnant, all thanks to the Bolster Bosom Dress, which spoke volumes. As did the JCrewing of Levi.

AND yes, yes, yes. I've used your a href link tutorial 1003 times and always think of you kindly. Glad you noticed!

kaykay said...

Sad video of Levi.

Levi's living with his mom and mom's in a pickle right now. My guess he is in no position to speak freely or possibly truthfully.

The supposed "he said/she saids" are all over the place on this situation.

But REALLY. His mumbled comments about "somthin about me bein immature or somethin"...I say he's following the party line. Palin party.

Shelby said...

Craig:
If she is telling the truth, it would first off feel offensive to have to display proof of her baby to a small but vocal group of people (relatively speaking). Secondly, if she and/or her handlers have been skiming blogs such as this one, they would understand that many people have admitted that they are beyond accepting a legal-looking birth certificate. Some will only accept a DNA test, while others admit that nothing will convince them. So the unbelivers will press on, and there ends up being no real gain for Sarah's actions.
------

Well here is the thing. We know these rumors bug Palin. In fact we know they bugged her enough to throw Bristol under the straight-talk bus at the RNC. It bugs her to the point that she references bloggers and basement dwelling, pj-wearing conspiracy nuts in her now familiar and really tiresome lament against those who have it in for her.

if she wanted to end the conspiracy theories - SHE COULD! She could pull not just a birth-cerificate, but she could arrange an interview with the doctor who delivered Trig (to her) and have the doctormake a clear and definitive statement and answer questions about the birth and events proceding it. Or how about simply a picture of the happy family surrounding her in bed with a red-faced, new-born Trig in her arms etc. etc. etc.

And hey, why not that birth cerificate? How hard is that?

But there is none of the above - none! There has never been one iota of proof offered by Palin that disproves the claim that she did not give birth to Trig.

Either
a: Palin loves all the attention this 'conspiracy' gets her and is willing to sacrifice her young daughter to keep it coming or

b: she doesn't have the proof to shut people up.

She is such an attention-whore that it really could be A, but I vote B. You say it's a no-win for her but I strongly disagree. It's a huge win for Palin to offer substantial proof that Trig is hers. She could immediately gain sympathy points and 'I told you so' points from her supporters. She would also probably gain some support from those who weren't paying attention. She would dominate the MSM news for a few days in a positve sympathetic manner. God knows she could use some positive news.

Most importantly, she could stick it to the PJ-clad, basement dwelling bloggers once and for all. I can not believe she wouldn't love to do that!

And see proof isn't that hard - really it isn't. I think all of us Moms here could prove our babies are our own if we needed to. I think most of us (no I say ALL OF US) would submit DNA tests before we would allow one of children to be thrown to wolves and sacrificed by public humiliation on one of the most visible public stages in the world.

And seriously, I really don't think Palin is that evil that she enjoys sacrificing Bristol to humiliation after humliation. I really just believe she doesn't have the proof so has to keep up the charade that she never in a million years thought would get this far.

The no-win for her here is that she has covered it up for so long, she has no graceful exit anymore. The only recourse she has is to keep covering up and that is what she plans to do I guarantee.

Amy1 said...

Could we revisit again why Track was sent away? I know we have our rules here, but surely we could think about that some more.

I read that there are two credible quotes saying that he was NOT one of the underage youths who participated in the vandalism of the 40 schoolbusses. One quote was from a kid, one of those who was later identified as one of the underage participants, who was not named at the time, but the info leaked out later, it was rumored. The other quote was from the Mom of another participant, saying Track was not involved. Of course, one's first thought is they might have a reason for saying that, even if it is false.

Still, two quotes. I am looking for the citation.

So why was he sent away to a family SP didn't seem to know well, if at all; why did she never visit there? I recall some talk about "enhancing hockey-playing opportunities," but that didn't happen or seem likely to happen, from comments in retrospect.

So why was he sent away? Did he graduate from HS? A good student? Plans for college or career ever mentioned?

Then the story appeared (as rumors, nothing more [as I recall]) that his going into the military was prompted by the alternative of jail. Which was said to be a typical circumstance in Alaska. But jail for what? At the time, I thought it must be for substance abuse plus unruly partying + the 40-bus vandalism. But none of that grew into anything more.

What attracted him to the military? Or was he pushed?

The only link from any of this huge mass of details that we've all mulled over that connects in any with Track is just the Sherry drug dealing, which seems like it might have connected with Track. But no proof.

Is anyone else interested in this loose thread? One would think one of the NatEnquirer sort of magazines would have sent a cool guy over to visit him, buy him a few tall ones, chat about it all. Perhaps that has happened. Where are you, NY TabloidChick?

NakedTruth said...

Craig,

Spin, Spin, Spin! Do you remember President Obama Birth Certificate issue? I remember it well and I and many other Obama supporters asked that he go ahead and show his birth certificate to put the rumors to rest. Well, he did. He put is birth certificate out on factcheck.com for everyone to see. Now some are still saying that the BC was fake but most have accepted it and moved on.

All I am saying is why Sarah won't do the same. I felt in my heart that President Obama was a Hawaiian born citizen and wanted him to prove it. I and others requested that he just post the dawg gone BC and be done with it. Why hide the BC if it is legit?

So I say that if you, as a SP supporter believing that she gave birth to Trig, would go to SarahPac and solicit support to end this rumor or to at least shut most of us up, SP may just produce a birth certificate. This wouldn't hurt. You strike me as a leader and an organizer. I think you can do it. This would really give you the upper hand in this no-win situation.

Another issue that I would like to raise is your belief that only a few people believe that SP faked her pregnancy. How do you know this? Have you seen a statistic or a survey? You keep minimizing this issue like it's just on the minds of a few people. I really don't think so. Did you hear what GVS said on the interview with O'Reilly. She commented that several MSM people came up to her almost taunting her about Bristol and Levi's breakup. I think more people care about this whole issue than you may want to acknowledge.

At least we know that Sarah cares because she is constantly setting up interviews trying to discredit us pajama bloggers. Oh but wait, why don't she just show a BC and laugh at us? Oh I see, she can't!

kaykay said...

I may have misquoted Levi in my earlier post regarding "immaturity".

I read the transcript on another website and apparently what he said is: "It's just us, not me not being mature enough, or something," I had to listen to the original video again and it was very hard to hear, very mumbled...but it does in fact not sound as though he is calling himself immature. Which is what I got out of my first listening, and sounded like an unlikely confession.

I STILL believe it is probably the "approved" version of things, but wanted to clear up my misquote earlier.

veebee said...

I got a good word verification finally...lol! nosin...As in I bet SP really hates us "nosin" around in her business. But seriously I hope everyone keeps on nosin.

BTW, I seem to recall someone posting that SP made a comment that her tight abs kept her pg from showing. It might be interesting to find some pics of female bodybuilders or other females like Dara Torres with rock hard abs during pregnancy to compare and see if they show less. I have tried going through google images but haven't found any pics yet of a pregnant female who had really firm abs before conceiving but I will keep looking and see if I can locate some.

P.S. first post didn't go for some reason and now my wv is prase. So "prase" the day the truth finally comes out.

Amy1 said...

Yes, Alex, I thought about the tight sweater look for pregnancy these days, and actualy I like that a lot better than the huge gingham gathered tent with a big lace collar+floppy bow look of yore.

But the tight black sweater look seems like it could feel comfortable, whereas the stuffed-sausage look of the grey dress looked extremely uncomfortable. To me. Now.

But being as old as I am, I remember delightedly wearing a Merry Widow, unknown today but a popular waist-length or abdomen-length strapless bra, which was boned. It pushed breasts up, pushed waist in. When one leaned over, the bones bowed waaaaay into one's waist. Very uncomfortable, not to say oxygen-depriving (with all the related dislocation of innards) -- but the point of this once-again long-winded reminiscence is: WE DIDN'T CARE! About comfort. Just about the look, in those late-teenage years.

So I blew off the comfort factor for Bristol's RNC dress at the time.

But even then I noticed that the family looked like an older-money educated family and even the little girl now looked proper for once (is that why she was licking Trig's hair into order in that sweet little clip?) + hair combed, vs her former look of being allowed to wear tiaras, and filmy dress-up princess clothes, and any old mish mash, as she did in many earlier photos.

Glad you are using the coding, Alex. A tip I got from my first teacher of it: always type in the

<*a href=""><*/a>

(bad asterisks added
above just to make
it show as text,
not operate as
invisible coding)

FIRST, and only then copy the link in, between the quotes, because you have better control over bad typing that way. You prob already knew that, and in any case, no one is as bad a typist as I am.

LondonBridges said...

I think the Mercede "Sun" is out. I planned to read it while in line at the Super today, but then a woman with only 2 items blocked the rack so she could read the Enquirer. Obviously she didn't want to use the express checkout; she wanted a slow line so she could catch up on her reading.

Lower right cover of Sun has Bristol/Levi dirt.

Anyone read it yet?

Amy1 said...

KayKay, my take on Levi's quote was

"it's just us, . . . no ME, not being mature enough, I guess. . . ."

Which, to me, suggests the nature of the argument and the accusations thrown about: Who's immature? You're the immature one. No you! [fireworks here}, and a chastened Levi ("chastened" because everyone else is in chirpy, cheerful agreement that it's all his fault) agrees (in the interest of ever seeing his dear child again, who he is clearly besotted with, bless his fatherly heart!) to believe that everyone but himself is mature.

But he doesn't really believe it, as the "I guess" gives away. But that's his story, and he's sticking with it. Sigh.

Morgan said...

You mean this one, LondonBridges?

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article2317387.ece

This is the only think I could find online from the Sun. I got distracted by Jade Goody's tragic story. Really puts things in perspective. Poor Jade having to say goodbye to her children and Sarah playing games with her own.

Sickening, isn't it..

Craig said...

Naked truth;

Not to get too far astray (because Morgan will pull the plug), but there are still plenty of "birthers" out there who continue to believe in a Obama birth certificate conspiracy despite all the evidence against it. See Ben Smith's article on Politico.com from 3/1/09.

Never underestimate the determination of true believers!!!

A birth certificate from Sarah will do nothing (IMO) to move the ball forward at this point.



Secondly, we are arguing vague semantics when I say a "small" number of people and you restate it as "a few". I have no true idea of how many people visit this site, for example. I would purely guess that there are regular commenters in the high hundreds and unique casual traffic in the thousands, at most maybe even tens of thousands. Since I think this site is one of, if not THE most popular blog for this topic (props to Audrey, Morgan, et al), its a good measuring stick, though not the whole collection of Palin conspiracy believers.

So, by small I'm not inferring that there are a few hundred people holding out hope.

Craig said...

Nakedtruth said;

"You keep minimizing this issue like it's just on the minds of a few people. I really don't think so. Did you hear what GVS said on the interview with O'Reilly. She commented that several MSM people came up to her almost taunting her about Bristol and Levi's breakup."


Sorry, I forgot to include a comment to this point in my prior comment.

I also heard that comment that Greta made. I think the reference Greta made about other media people gleefully confronting her about the Levi/Bristol breakup was more related to how many Sarah-bashers there are in the media. The implication was that they were bringing this up to ridicule Sarah's assurred statements earlier that Levi and Bristol would be getting married this summer.

It didn't seem to have anything to do with the Trig question.

LondonBridges said...

I think it was supposed to be the March 23 edition which was not on newstands last week.
http://tinyurl.com/c5oy62

Morgan said...

Not to get too far astray (because Morgan will pull the plug)..

Craig is perceptive. He's been around long enough to know just where my rope ends.
Let's not get too far afield here with this back and forth. And let's not get too personal, either.
No one wants me to grab the leather boots and whip, do they? Because you know I will...
;-)

Morgan said...

LondonBridges, you said "Sun" when you originally meant "Star."

LondonBridges said...

Sorry, I came from a poor family and was forced to drop out of Tabloids 101!

Anyway, has anyone read it?

NakedTruth said...

Craig,Craig,Craig, Oh dear,

You are about to get me on Morgan's bad side so I am cutting you off after this reply. You said:

"I think the reference Greta made about other media people gleefully confronting her about the Levi/Bristol breakup was more related to how many Sarah-bashers there are in the media."

And don't for one minute think that these media people aren't curious about the Trig story too. How can they not be, the Trig story is what prompted the 'Bristol is pregnant and getting married story'. Now that she is not getting married, I believe that more people in the MSM are going to wonder if they were ever planning to marry and if SP announced Bristol's pregnancy and engagement just as a cover.

I think we are underestimating the MSM. They are just waiting for the right time to expose this deception.

It may not happen when we want it to but it will happen in time.

The naked truth is always chasing a well-dressed lie.

Chi Town Mom said...

I have been following this blog for a while...LOVE IT! This is not my idea, someone posted it over at The Immoral Minority. I thought it was worth mentioning: Taxes. How are they going to get around the IRS? Either that baby was born in 2008 or 2009. I think it would be harder to put one over on the IRS, maybe I am wrong.

Amy1 said...

Craig said:

"To go further than that by claiming them to be "proof positive" that she did not have a baby suggests to me that this is indisputable proof of a lie.

Take that to any true medical expert or to a court and see if they agree with your level of certainty."


See, this is what I mean by bafflegab, Craig: Yes, I am saying these photos ARE "indisputable proof of a lie." I have said that repeateduly, and invited anyone to tell me how this could possibly NOT be proof positive. I have gotten no answer. It think it IS proof positive.

Your last paragraph contains no info on why you think it's not proof. You're just saying someone else, an expert, would not consider it proof. Why not? no answer. I think this is called begging the question. YOU are not answering, just saying "that bigger dog over there would agree with me." But for what reason? No one knows. You do not even attempt to say.

And I'm not asking anyone else. I was asking YOU. And you have never really answered me, only with stuff like the above.

Let's take it from another angle.

EXAMPLE: Tell me if this is not proof positive: a man has cut off his finger in 1960. There are multiple photos of his hand minus the finger. Photos no one disputes the authenticity of. Published in newspapers, multiple photographers. Later, the finger has been surgically reattached. It looks real. Scars have healed, all are gone. in 2009, he man says, "No, it was not me who had a cut-off finger." But you have these undisputed photos at a time and place publicly documented, multiple photos of the same thing, everyone agrees photos show the same man, no photoshopping possible on each and every one of MANY extant photos: this shows the man had no finger then.

Is this not proof positive of cut-off finger in 1960? Better than eye-witnesses, with their notorious unreliability.

I am saying "photo shows no visible pregnancy 5 weeks before giving birth to a 6 pound baby." How could there be more conclusive proof? Okay, I AM ruling out that a miracle made this happen as SP says it did. But absent a miracle, yes, this is proof!

A board-flat stomach on a credible photo, and a 6 pound baby 5 weeks later? Are you saying she is a medical anomaly? Not the "vigin birth," but the "tight abs birth?" -- explained by a miracle? I give the right-most photo zero credibility, but if you find it credible, it makes even the "tight abs birth" impossible, since the growth rate of the pregnancy in 5 weeks would have to be an unprecedented medical event.

Mathematicians joke about hard-to-understand, hard-to-prove equations by putting a bubble/cloud in the middle of the eqn that says "...and then a miracle happens." I hope you are not using this kind of explanation for how these photos (plus others) could somehow fail to be proof positive?

Dinky P. said...

Truth Patrol,

I am with you on Sherry Johnston. I think Sarah Had her arrested probably set her up during the election to be busted for drug dealing.

I don't think this is only Sarah's work though. Since Sarah has been given the limelight there are many powerful and rich people backing Sarah's destruction and lies not just Sarah.

Remember when the blog was talking loud about Sherry as a possible Trig mom. Then right after her first court appearance she stated she had a hysterectomy 8 years ago. Why would she need to let us know that? To distract us from the real mom, a subliminal message or the truth?

Just like anything the laws of nature always arrive. Look at OJ, Madoff and all the people that get caught. It happens sooner or later, but it happens.

Amy1 said...

I wrote a post SO EXCITING about birth certificates that I fell asleep while doing it and accidentaly erased it. Unless it was you, Morgan! Could you tell I was snoozing? Anyway, here goes again.

We will see no BC because (IMHO):

--The BC lists SP and Todd as bio-Mom and Bio-Dad. So this would open a new flood of inquiry: Where was this BC registered? On what date? Who witnessed it? which hospital? Which MD? If there's any other verifiable info on the BC, it will be checked and double checked. Plus the document itself will be inspected for fakery clues, like we did on the CBJ letter. No, toooo risky to put that out there -- since we know it IS a fake, it would just be a matter of time before it was a disaster for SP.

--If the parents are listed as SP and Todd, and we know SP did not deliver, then tell us, Todd, who is the Mom? No, we don't want to go there.

--The BC shows the true name of the Dad. Doesn't matter if the bioMom on it is SP or anyone else. If it's the true Dad, it's worth concealing, because concealing that one fact IMHO is the reason for the hoax in the first place.

--Perhaps the BC is completely fake, like purchased in Mexico-type-of-fake. Fake names for Mom and Dad, fake name for Trig -- let's say it's Joe = Trig. So some other woman, who also has a matching fake ID showing her to be the Mom or Grammy or aunt of Joe, can have little Joe set up in the hospital, be in NICU, get his DS testing and diagnosis, get all the treatments that would require an ID. All under the name of little Joe anonymous. That's worked fine so far, but we wouldn't really want to admit to it.

--Prob some other combinations of weirdnesses are possible. A legit BC but of some other baby, who maybe moved far away.

--Plus, with any hanky-panky with the BC, we get into the insurance and tax issues. Sure don't want any more scrutiny THERE.

So: the BC will be the last thing we see, right before the last dog is hung, right before the last one out turns off the lights, a little after we know everything anyway and don't really care any more. IMHO

Morgan said...

Amy1, Craig, I think we're just going to have to call it a day on this one.

What we have here is a case of someone doggedly dismissing evidence of that which has not been admitted.

Any rational person who looks at those photos cannot say with any degree of intellectual honesty that Sarah Palin gave birth to Trig.

But standards of acceptable proof vary from person to person, and I think for Craig and many others it's going to take Sarah being backed so far into a corner that she's forced to admit that she lied.

Once they hear it from her mouth, they will likely say, "Well, OK so you were right."

But they won't be happy about it, because this isn't so much about liking the fox as it about detesting the hounds that pursue it.

What gets me is how those of you arguing with Craig fail to see how much he enjoys winding you up.

And Craig, I only say that because I know you can take it. I actually enjoy your comments, but that's because I take them for what they're worth.

No offense, but the rest of you are just wasting your time. Once we start running in circles, we lose the scent.

Those of you who want to continue to argue with Craig, do so at your own peril. The rest of you, Tally Ho!

Windy City Woman said...

sjcb,
If Sarah told Levi to be more "fatherly" or affectionate with Trig, wouldn't that lead more people to believe that he and Bristol are Trig's parents?

Morgan said...

**FROM THE MODERATOR**

No Amy, I didn't erase your post.

I really wish people would stop saying that. Unless you posted about incest, murder, were unnecessarily rude, used the comments section to bitch about the above rules, provided dead or off-topic links, wrote a thousand word post on how Sarah is part of the Illuminata, or tried to sell the readers a Penis Enhancement Product then your post will get through.

If it doesn't you may have accidentally sent it into the ether by failing to do the word verification thing right.

Just look for the bar at the top of the page to appear after you hit the submit button. If you don't get a message saying "pending approval by blog owner" you did something wrong.

It's a good idea to cut and paste your more brilliant comments into a document just in case something goes wrong. That way you can try again.

Amy1 said...

Dinky P: your statement "there are many powerful and rich people backing Sarah's destruction and lies" is fully supported by today's news about SP's keynote speaker gig.

However, I beg to differ re Madoff: his Ponzi scheme was well known to the investment banking community for years. He could handle a market downturn, just not one this big. If it had been a little less severe, he would still be doing fine, in spite of common knowledge about him. As proof, I cite this 2006 report to the SEC that described it very accurately, and no one cared, least of all the SEC.

Sounds like our SP: common knowledge but many people don't care. Business as usual.

Diana said...

Thanks Silver,

It does looks like the Sat. scores posted is a fake. Thanks for letting me know. I will make sure it shows that it is not real.

Who would have guessed. I thought it just made who she was make more sense!
-----------------------------------

Onething said...Diana

I have problems with these photos.(from GVS interview) First of all, they weren't in the actual interview were they? Tripp was wearing a blue bunny suit in the interview. He has different clothes on here. These are photos presented at the interview?
-----------------------------------
Onething...those were photos used as still shots in the interview.

Truthseeker2 said...

Interesting to see comments comparing this with the Madoff scandal. When I read the report on that in the NYT last fall, I felt the language could apply to Sarah Palin! Something like "there was no smoking gun, but too many things didn't add up..."

Of course, there are some guns starting to smoke here now, just like there eventually were with Madoff.

Amy1 said...

MORGAN! Just ze leetle joke! Djoke, as they spell it in serbo-croatian. The idea of you peering over the top of your mighty Wurlitzer computer keyboard, in some all-seeing mode, and noting which of us is not paying attention, who has perhaps fallen away into a drunken stupor, who is about to start on his penis-enhancement tirade (so you can get your big bad boots on!) -- It was just to amuse youse. And I loved the idea that I was so excited by my post that I fell asleep over it. I bet that really makes you want to read it, right? My cat comes over to cuddle his paws on the warmth of the kepboard, but only when I'm asleep because he knows I hog all the good stuff while awake, but he also knows the exact moment I zone out, and then watch out: when I wake up the little computer message says "Do you REALLY want to delete 387 tabs?" Or the email message I was writing ends in a mile-long string of one character...............oooops! Almost happened again.

Seriously, we attribute all kinds of Mom-like heroic values to you for keeping the 4-letter-word artists at bay and keeping us straight.

midnightcajun said...

Amy1 said, can we revisit the subject of Track? I remember reading an article somewhere (ADN?) that was talking about Track joining up and it had a strange final paragraph to the effect that the Palins wanted people to respect the privacy of the circumstances surrounding his enlistment. So obviously there were "circumstances." I had a friend in high school, busted for dealing drugs, who was given the choice of the Navy or jail, and his father was just police chief, not governor. So it does happen.

And I agree with those who felt sorry for Levi after watching his mumbled comments. I don't think Bristol ever had any intention of marrying that good ole boy. She had to pretend to be engaged because a pregnant engaged teen is so much less embarrassing than a pregnant teen with no guy in sight. So she strung Levi along until the election was over, and the baby was born and old enough to fudge his age when she gave the interview to Greta. Then she dumped him. There are words for young ladies like that, and they aren't nice.

Levi has been heartlessly used. If he is the father of Trig, he could very well not know it. The one thing he does know is when Tripp was really born, and if he was premature. But if he wants to continue seeing his son, he's going to have to keep his mouth shut.

Ironic that Sarah accused Mercede of being "greedy." The one thing that shines through in that Star article is that Mercede is very, very angry. She's angry about her family being called "white trash" when they have the same background as the Palins, and she is angry about the way her brother has been treated, and the lies Bristol has spun. And why shouldn't they "cash in" on the "Palin name"(love that--you'd think they were the Kennedies or something). Her family has been savaged by Sarah Palin--her mother's drug bust was spread across the country, as was her brother's sexual escapades. Complete strangers have been analyzing the contents of her My Space Page and prom photos! As far as I'm concerned, the Palins owe the Johnstons big time!

Morgan said...

ROFL, Amy1!

Pay no attention to that moderator behind the curtain!!!!

(Your cat reminds me of my dearly departed feline who pulled the "B" key off my Mac with her claw. I am still, to this day, b-less.)

sjcb said...

windy city woman says:

sjcb,
If Sarah told Levi to be more "fatherly" or affectionate with Trig, wouldn't that lead more people to believe that he and Bristol are Trig's parents?

this is a good point! who knows...but i suppose you could say the same thing about bristol. if we're supposed to believe trig is NOT her child, sarah maybe should have told bristol to ease up on the outward affection. i think maybe sarah was concentrating on selling bristol and levi as the loving, caring, excited parents-to-be...not the scared teenage daughter and the dude staring down the shotgun barrel.

point is...this is sarah! does anything make sense? :)

Amy1 said...

No, it's not Craig who winds me up, Morgan. Craig represents to me the same views that keep people in the real world from taking this SP issue as seriously as it merits. That's why you are so valuable on this blog, Craig. Otherwise we would just be preaching to the converted and no one woulld pull us up short, reminding us that no one cares about these photos. Right or wrong, Craig is among the majority on this issue, and we are in the minority.

As Truthseeker2 points out, it's just like the earlier lack of caring about Madoff, until it's too late. My wise, wonderful, polite father read something I wrote about SP and was ashamed of me for being so rude. I asked him if I had written that about Hitler before he was powerful, how would he have felt about that? He replied (because he grew up not in Germany but in a state that was later occupied by Hitler): "Hitler was never not powerful." He meant they never heard of him in their country, until he was all over them, threatening every part of their lives, incl mayhem and murder -- all legal at that time but certainly not right. (My dad was too young to read the papers carefully in that earlier time slot I am referring to.)

Exactamundo! sez I to ole Dad. There was a time when Hitler was not powerful, and all these little irregularities like the various Palin-gates could just be laughed at by the people who find use for SP otherwise, like as a charming, charismatic keynote speaker to raise money for the GOP this June.

Does it just make you want to puke? Out of fear for the future.

So my rant at Craig is not at Craig, whose presence I do appreciate and wish to commend (for hanging out with us tinfoil hat people), but at the world, for having the same view, of not understanding the seriousness of this issue we are working.

End of rant. But not end of effort.

sg said...

penny asked about Sherry Johnston as Trig's mother.

Remember, Sherry claimed in a People interview that her hysterectomy eight years ago led to her oxycontin addiction.

http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20250904,00.html

If true, that should rule her out as Trig's mother.

The operative word is "if true."

I've mentally put the question on the shelf, until after her trial.

If SJ introduces the matter in her defense, its truthfulness will be vetted.

If she fails to do so, then her veracity will be suspect. Why mention it to People, then not introduce it at trial?

Of course, if SJ pleads out, and avoids a trial, we're back at square one.

Doubting Thomas said...

Veebee said - "BTW, I seem to recall someone posting that SP made a comment that her tight abs kept her pg from showing. It might be interesting to find some pics of female bodybuilders or other females like Dara Torres with rock hard abs during pregnancy to compare and see if they show less. I have tried going through google images but haven't found any pics yet of a pregnant female who had really firm abs before conceiving but I will keep looking and see if I can locate some."

The two sites I found are;
Simone Sziksai - I'm going to be spending the next nine months plus some sharing my fitness experience through pregnancy and on the track back to competing. http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/simone3.htm or http://tiny.cc/8swd5

and this photo of Crystal Anthony http://tiny.cc/YOIN1

Now mind you, both of these are women who are professional bodybuilders before and after pregnancy. Unlike Sarah who is just a fitness nut, yet they both have double the belly that Sarah had...

Now on another note. I am of the Bx2 group. I tend to think that BP had Trigg in Feb (probably just days before her accident) since I think she was turning into the parking lot to see Dr CJB for a post natal check up. That is just my two cents anyway...

Craig said...

Morgan said;

"Any rational person who looks at those photos cannot say with any degree of intellectual honesty that Sarah Palin gave birth to Trig.

But standards of acceptable proof vary from person to person, and I think for Craig and many others it's going to take Sarah being backed so far into a corner that she's forced to admit that she lied."

********

Or to put it another way, you are saying that only an irrational person could look at those pictures and honestly say that Sarah could have given birth to Trig?

Then why not have those pictures professionally evaluated by some respected OB/Gyn's to get their apparently inevitable confimation? That would seem to be the next step in legitimizing the claims so that they become much more reportable.

If it is truly that obvious, there is no professional harm for their medical consensus to be attached to this. But even so, you can promise them that their names will be kept off of any publically distributed report.

That plus an organized timeline of the best supporting evidence that you have collected, should be much more than enough to interest any number of sympathetic media sources, including an even bigger array of other bloggers.

Sarah is not lacking for fervent political enemies, who would like NOTHING better than to bring down a current conservative star and bring collateral disgrace to the Republican Party as well.

There are very receptive ears in the media out there if you have a compelling and verifiable story to tell. What could be better than a collection of OB/Gyn's who say that there is no way Sarah could have given birth on X date, based upon the dates of these pictures.

I really do want to understand how these pictures can only be dismissed by the irrational, and yet the assembling of them hasn't caused even a ripple among the community of even the most politically sympathetic bloggers, reporters or political operatives (even though I would suspect that some of them eyeball this site to see the status of the story). The again, maybe I am just not privy to some data-sharing that is going on behind the scenes.

I just don't buy the easy answers I've heard, such as the media and any bloggers are all a) uninterested, b) afraid, c) being intimidated by some dark force, d) don't want to hurt the children.

And no, I don't need to hear it from Sarah's mouth to first suspect her truthfulness. I've said, give me a credible person who could be in a position to know something. If they say something isn't quite right about Trig's birth, then I will be open to hearing them out and seeing how it gets responded to by Sarah.

Morgan, if you prefer to answer this privately rather than allowing this to post and risk stirring the pot, so to speak, that is fine. I assume that you have access to my e-mail due to our registration process.

Clovis said...

This is my first post, so forgive me for repeating a few things that have already been covered.

I was most puzzled by the Juneau podcast video of Sarah walking to her office where she talked about how she liked to run because "it thrashes your guts and your lungs and your thighs.” This was probably filmed late February and she looked distinctly un-pregnant. Yet the next week or so (5 March) she announces her pregnancy. What was that all about?

I think she only then had decided to keep the recently-born baby Trig.

I had a friend years ago who was very young and, as an aspiring model, very thin. She did lots of coke to stay that way. Missed periods weren't anything suspicious - thin young girls can be amenorrhic - so she didn't know she was pregnant until she was nearly 7 months along. I believe Bristol would've known she was pregnant, but I think she could hide it longer than you might suspect - especially during winter. My understanding is that Bristol's own parents didn't know she was pregnant until around Christmas 2007. If a pregnant female starves herself and/or drinks or uses drugs during early pregnancy (as some young mothers unwittingly do), this is critically hard on the fetus. Would that situation have applied to Trig? That is (possibly luckily) unable to be determined by a casual observer because Trig's Downs would mask it.

I suspect Bristol got pregnant in the summer when school was out. That would make Trig be born early to be born late February (most likely when Piper "represented" the governor at some function by herself to keep her out of the way). I suspect no one knew about the Downs until Trig was actually born. What to do then? Someone on this blog said there is a waiting list of people wanting to adopt a Downs baby. That does appear to be true, though I find that a bit surprising. Perhaps it isn't true in Alaska, or perhaps Sarah didn't know, or perhaps the couple they had lined up to adopt Bristol's baby turned it down when they found out and something needed to be done fairly quickly. I won't guess. Being premie, Trig was likely quite small and Sarah, over-confident, thought she could pull this off.

Since Sarah had had 4 trouble-free pregnancies, perhaps she thought Bristol could be sequestered, maybe even birth at home so that there would be no records. (This isn't a requirement, merely a possibility.) Perhaps Track was sent to Michigan so he wouldn't know about Bristol because Sarah couldn't trust him not to say something - or perhaps it was to keep him out of almost-certain trouble so he wouldn't ruin Sarah's chances of being selected VP candidate (or both).

I suspect Trig was pronounced able to go home from wherever he was being kept (or else it was thought that to wait any later to announce his birth would run the distinct chance of people saying he clearly wasn't a newborn). As mentioned on this blog, Sarah clearly didn't let her parents in on the deception, and told her father one too many details which is the thing that got her into big trouble. She planned to get in late and to have had the baby by morning so everyone (her parents especially) would have missed the main event. She didn't tell anyone about the Downs beforehand because she didn't know, NOT because she had ambivalent feelings.

Next, comes the nomination. When the McCain camp found out about the birth controversy after the fact, Sarah suddenly had a lot of clout on her side to help her with damage control. (Most helpers didn't have to know why they were told to do what they did - like scrubbing sites. Stuff like that goes on in politics all the time.) Everything that happened afterward was a direct follow-on of Sarah's botched decision to pass Trig off as her own.

The Johnstons are neither smart enough nor trustworthy enough to be let in on the Trig part of the deception. The Republican fixers (I believe) told Sarah early on (April-May) that if Bristol could get pregnant again, that would make things much easier - because they knew that Trig was older than everyone thought and a quick pregnancy could be used to do exactly what it DID do - deflect controversy away from Sarah. So Bristol seduced Levi (and maybe others?). That would explain why she appeared to be gleeful to find out she was pregnant again - it doesn't make sense any other way. If she were really defying Sarah, then she wouldn't be such a dutiful daughter from that point on.

Anyway, for her to be the requisite 5 months pregnant, Tripp would have to be born in December, so that's what they said. In reality, he was likely born later, explaining why no one saw him and why Sarah wasn't bilking the blessed event for political (and financial) purposes before March.

It's possible the Tripp everyone saw on tv was "borrowed" and Bristol is still pregnant. When she re-surfaces months later with the real Tripp, no one will know the babies have been switched. This would explain why the only pictures Levi has in his truck are ultrasounds. Levi knows a little (like that Tripp's birthdate has been messed with) but he doesn't have to know the true reason.

Craig said...

Others may have seen this too, but tonight's Nightline program had an extended interview from this morning's GMA program. Mercedes even popped in the truck briefly, but didn't have much to say (on camera). The reporter stated that the quotes in the Star were said to not have been from any interview that she gave to them. Instead they were overheard from her on an airplane.

So, was it a reporter who heard the comments, or were they relayed to the Star by someone who said they overheard it? Either way, this appears to be a way for Mercedes to claim that her quotes were not accurate (if she wants to do so).

My initial guess is that the essence of some of Mercedes quotes are probably accurate. But which ones?

Levi said that some of the quotes attributed to Mercedes didn't sound like something she would say.

And so it goes.

sg said...

ABC News Nightline 3/16/2009 showed more footage from the interview with Levi.

Clip "Puppy Love" at http://abcnews.go.com/nightline

They show Mercede in the truck with Levi. Re Mercede's comment in Star that the Palins wouldn't let Levi see Tripp: The ABC reporter quotes Mercede as saying she didn't give an interview to Star magazine, but was overheard on an airplane.

Levi said that he can see Tripp whenever he wants, and that he couldn't imagine his sister saying something like that.

Chi Town Mom said...

Regarding tight abs: Elizabeth Hasslebeck on the view is a super fit woman. Look at her huge belly and she is on her third kid.

Morgan said...

Craig, actually a blogger did just that. Please read this very interesting account written by this blogger:

http://www.palinpeytonplace.com/ob-gyn-shocked.html

But even without a "professional" opinion, even a lay person would find those photos incredible. Some things are so obvious that a clinical opinion really isn't necessary.

Take horses for instance. I've been around them all my life. When one colics I know right away what's going on with it, even though I'm not a trained veterinarian. Signs are obvious. Likewise, absence of signs are obvious. If someone pointed at a horse grazing placidly in a field and said, "That horse is colicking," absent of any signs I'd know they were wrong.

If someone shows me photos of a non-pregnant woman with a flat stomach one day, padding the net and a mysteriously large bump a few days later it doesn't take a medical degree to recognize that the pregnancy is clearly being faked.

You say that we can't pronounce Sarah as a faker without a medical background. Unless you are an OBGYN then I don't now how you can pronounce her pregnant.

I don't know if anyone has asked you this before, but are you married? Are you a father? I have to doubt it based on what you say here. A father who sees his wife go through pregnancy is about as familiar with changes as a woman.

If you want to continue this line of conversation offlist that is fine. My email is thetokenhippie@gmail.com

Mom of One, Esq. said...

I am procrastinating and was doing some digging. In case people haven't seen these...

There were a few videos of SP in 2/08 and 3/08 that I'd never seen before on http://palinforvp.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=2008-04-21T13%3A38%3A00-06%3A00&max-results=20

For people's timelines, here is a link to the ADN Politics blog starting around 1/08

http://community.adn.com/adn/blog/24417?page=74

You can track SP's movements pretty good. For instance, they show an invite for a 1/9/08 fundraiser SP hosted (can't remember if it showed the City)

The blog also led me to a 2/24/08 CSPAN interview I'd never seen.

I couldn't sit through any of these videos and I doubt they add much but just fyi.

Tully said...

Clovis, thanks for reading and for your first post. I agree wholeheartedly with parts of what you say. Other parts -- not so much.

First of all, Bristol deliberately getting pregnant per the RNC?? This does not hold water whatsoever. BRistol not giving birth to TRig doesn't prove that Sarah did. THe campaign only used B's pregnancy because it was already fait accompli and about to become public knowledge. They figured "What the heck, maybe it will work."

Second, no way could Bristol still be very pregnant with a borrowed baby for the GVS interview without it blowing up. Even if Greta herself went along with the ruse, there was a camera crew, sound people, etc. No way they could have pulled that off.

I think that Tripp most likely was born around the end of January. Yes, the tax returns would be interesting, but alas, not conclusive. I believe that folks claim pets and dead people as dependents without the IRS catching on. What's a little fudging of dates among friends?

A note re Craig. He is very good at answering questions with other questions. It is quite evident that he personally has no explanation for the pictures other than Sarah faking the pregancy. None. Nada. Rien. Zilch. Zero.

Mom of One, Esq. said...

I watched the Nightline interview. They briefly focused in on the ultrasound pic. If only we could focus in on that pic even more! My 3D ultrasound pics give the gestational age in weeks and days (e.g., "GA=20w4d") and the date the ultrasound was taken. You could figure out BP's due date from that.

wayofpeace said...

found this at HUFF.POST:

PALIN’S TURN:

The latest cover of Condé Nast Portfolio is, depending upon whom you ask, gutsy and counterintuitive or simply irrelevant.

As the financial crisis grinds on, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin is on the April cover, editor in chief Joanne Lipman confirmed. Palin apparently did not cooperate with the story by best-selling author Joe McGinniss, and the photographs are drawn from a Vogue shoot with Jonathan Becker for that title’s February 2008 issue (in which, it was later reported, she concealed her then-secret pregnancy with a parka).

The move to put Palin on the cover met with some staff resistance, according to sources.

In an e-mail, Lipman described the story as being about the former vice presidential candidate and “Big Oil, which is especially relevant now given plunging oil prices and increasing questions about Obama’s handling of the economic crisis.”

She added, “We’ve been breathlessly following the saga of Bristol and Levi, too, but alas, you won’t read about that in the pages of Portfolio :).”

wayofpeace said...

more from SARAH's
overextended 15 minutes of fame:

Bristol and Levi Are Forever
by Michael Wolff

So the Palin era appears to be over. She's had to give back the clothes, the per diem, and the travel expenses; the Alaska miracle turns out to have been built on inflated oil prices; and Bristol and Levi... are just a couple of high school kids who screwed up.

These “small town” people who were briefly so much better than the “urban elites” have, it would certainly seem, lost both their packaging and their moral superiority.

The Bristol Palin and Levi Johnston break-up plays out in a predictable, nearly sub-verbal, set of explanations. "It kind of just happened," said a source connected to Sarah Palin. "I thought they would stick it out.”

And a weary or obligatory: “But I think they can work together to raise Tripp"—the product of this American romance.

Bristol and Levi and their story of teenage sex and family dysfunction defined Sarah Palin, making her as large a star as any failed vice-presidential candidate has ever been, and helped doom the McCain campaign.

Palin obviously slipped her daughter’s pregnancy past the McCain people, who, looking foolish and incompetent for being unaware, then had to embrace the whole mess as grand political strategy. This, however, fooled almost nobody and made McCain look ever-older and more out of it—and, conversely, made Palin all the more heroic to the right-wingers who never liked McCain in the first place.

That’s been the point: We see Palin for what she is. There are no hurdles for her to get over. The ordinariness, and randomness, and, even, perfidiousness, of small-town American life is the Palin story—and, as well, the publicity opportunity.

The point about the story is that it goes wrong; therefore, going wronger enhances it. And, too, you get to continue to tell the story of it going wrong because that’s more interesting, and press-worthy, than it going right.

Bristol and Levi in a little apartment in Wasilla is much less of a story than a break-up and the end of the happily-ever-after dream. Even if, surely, nobody ever had that dream except some desperate Republican political operatives trying to salvage an unsalvageable campaign.

ss in ca said...

It would be very interesting to get pictures of Levi from when he was a baby. Just because pictures were given to GVS and identified as Tripp, do not make them so.

Amy1 said...

WayOfPeace: I hope you are as dismayed as I am re the article you posted (with its lead quote: "So the Palin era appears to be over.").

I think it is fully contradicted by the news that SP is the keynote speaker for the big GOP fund-raiser on June 8?

And McAllister says he didn't know about it. Ha ha ha. So typical. So coy. So aimed at keeping the headline alive.

LATimes version, plus a photo from the Alfalfa dinner with Obama and Lieberman.

Or maybe she's not!?! (Although this link is yesterday's news, it's such a good commentary on her approach and decision process!

(Grrrr: I am still smarting from yesterday's big loss to Craig, who I beat on the logic but lost to on the elephant-sized technicality that most people in the U.S. agree with HIM. Remember, Craig -- that's why we need you: you are our "pulse of the nation"!!)

By the way, since SP disguised her secret pregnancy in the Vogue shoot in Dec 2007, where does the swimsuit photo of her on the cover come from?

NY tabloid chick said...

Alex said:
***(I always found Bristol's protruding belly in the 07 green sweater photo a bit in poor taste for an official portrait. But more and more I believe AK people just dress and are different from me.) ***

I'm not so willing to chalk this up to an AK thing. I thought that sweater was a hostile choice for an official-ish family portrait, as were the ripped jeans. I see BP's outfit as being a bit of a screw-you to her mother, who I'm guessing did NOT like the outfit, since it doesn't fit the image she'd like her family to project.

LisanTX said...

Amy1--you asked about the fake swimsuit Vogue cover. An Alaskan blogger(Kodiak Konfidential) prepared that graphic for fun awhile back. He has it on his website and openly admits that he put her face on the body of a model.

http://tinyurl.com/dzaz2d

Also see Mudflats for a "new and improved" hilarious version of that graphic--it's really funny. Scroll down after MO's Vogue cover to see Sarah's "Vague" cover, complete with new teasers of articles.

http://tinyurl.com/dmdybe

Clovis said...

I agree, Tully, that it is unlikely that Bristol was still pregnant during her GVS interview. But if Bristol had already given birth to Trig and planned to marry Levi, asking her to try to get pregnant again is not (to me) beyond what political groups might be willing to do in a national election when there is so much at stake. But whatever. I'll let that go. But I don't think Sherry Johnston made up her comments about Bristol waving the pregnancy test around and the only way I can see compliant Bristol being exultant to be pregnant is if that would please Sarah. And why would it please Sarah? Because it would cover up her botched attempt to claim Trig as her own. The only other explanation I can think of is that Bristol only *pretended* to be pregnant in front of Sherry. If the whole Tripp pregnancy was faked, that's something Levi would've HAD to be in on, though not necessarily Sherry and Mercede.

The other thing that bothers me is Levi's lack of photos of a son the tone of his voice says genuinely means a lot to him. So here's one possibility: the son he loves so much is actually Trig (though, again, Sherry and Mercede may not know). The ultrasounds in his truck could be of Trig. He can't show Trig's photo to a reporter because that would reveal That-Which-Cannot-Be-Revealed. So where does Tripp come in? I'm not sure that can be determined at this point. I think Bristol could've concealed a late-January-early-February pregnancy until after the November election - and after that, it wouldn't matter so much. So was she really pregnant? Again, this is something Levi would surely know. But frankly, it seems out of character for her to defy her mother to that extent at a time that was so CRUCIAL for Sarah. That piece just doesn't fit easily into the whole.

The last small thing that bothers me is the fact that the baby Tripp that Levi is photographed holding IS dressed in pink. Could it be that Tripp's birth was announced early (before he was actually born) and the the actual Tripp turned out to be a GIRL? Ultrasounds can deceive in that regard - a piece of detritus in just the right place is occasionally mis-read as a penis. That would've sent everyone into fits.

I think Levi is he key to the puzzle. I think he is being controlled by the Powers That Be by his love for his son - whichever one that is...

wayofpeace said...

AMY1,

i think the MSM (with the exception of FOX) has written SP off as a serious contender for the GOP nomination for president in '12.

my sense is that they agree that she can still energize the RIGHT-wing nuts, but that that's as far as she'll get.

i tend to agree as she continues to self-destroy.

i also suspect that the higher ups in the party see her as candy for the primaries, but one that will turn eventually toxic at the national campaign level.

for just such an eventuality,
i'd bet there is a file on SP somewhere, which may include proof of the TRIG hoax.

Alex said...

The HuffPo article WayOfPeace quotes (on the April cover photo of Palin on PORTFOLIO magazine) came from editorial commentary in Women's Wear Daily (WWD) for those of you who care about primary sources.

I liked Gawker's 2cents on the Portfolio cover: What is wrong with [editor]Joanne Lipman? Does the Portfolio editor detest business journalism? Is she trying to finally get fired?

But of course, I'm a smarty pants ivy-league educated know-it-all upper class liberal feminist-leaning snob member of the CHOIR.

muah said...

I'm with the Palin is political moose pie history crowd.

Babygates has a life of it's own.

Amy1 said...

Clovis: re your "a piece of detritus in just the right place is occasionally mis-read as a penis": Yes, I used to have that same problem way too often back when I was dating.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 412   Newer› Newest»