Monday, April 6, 2009

Message. In. A. Bottle.

Well, not exactly in a bottle. More like on the Tyra Banks show.

Since the beginning of the controversy about who had given birth to Trig Palin a set of pictures that were published some time prior to May 5, 2008 on Mercede Johnston's MySpace page has given those of us who have tried to solve the riddle, basically, fits. The pictures have been discussed in several other posts on this blog, here. Here's one of them, the other two (one of Mercede with Bristol and one of Mercede with Sarah) can be seen at the posts linked above.



The captions - identifying Trig as Mercede's "baby brother" and Sarah Palin as "mommy in law" could never be adequately explained through "known" relationships. Certainly, many people - myself among them - thought that the captions indicated that Trig Palin was something "special" to Mercede Johnston, something far MORE special than just the younger brother of a good friend, though just how that was remained "obscure" as the captions, while terribly intriguing, were difficult to explain.

No matter how one "sliced and diced," Trig Palin was NOT Mercede's brother unless somehow her mother (Sherrie Johnston) was also Trig's mother... and that seemed beyond credibility... or if somehow Mercede's father was also Trig's father. But it never was possible to explain why, in such a circumstance, Sarah Palin would be motivated to fake a pregnancy. If Trig were Levi's son, Trig would be Mercede's nephew, and she did not say that. If he were merely her future sister-in-law's younger brother, Mercede's enthusiasm was hard to explain.

Initially, many people thought the pictures were taken in a hospital setting. After Gov. Palin did several interviews after the election in her home, we were able to prove conclusively that the photos were in fact taken in the Palin kitchen. While interesting, this made the photos in a way more obscure, since now they could only be dated to some point "before May 5th." We know this because on May 5th, Mercede received a comment about them on her MySpace page. Other than that, they could not be dated.

Today, Mercede Johnston, Levi Johnston, and Sherrie Johnston (their mother) appeared on the Tyra Banks show. In the background, numerous still photos were shown.

Including this one:



I've got news for everyone. Mercede is wearing exactly the same outfit, down to the earrings, as the photos released last year. Her hair is identical. The baby appears to be wearing the same outfit. Levi is sitting in the same chair in the Palin kitchen.
Compare for yourself:



This is NOT a photo of Levi with Tripp Johnston, allegedly born December 27, 2008.

This is a photo of Levi Johnston cradling tenderly Trig Palin, allegedly born April 18, 2008. It was taken the same day as the photos that Mercede put up on her MySpace page, some time before May 5th 2008.

Why in the world would this photo be selected for release on the Tyra Banks show unless Mercede is trying to send us a message, loud and clear? Surely, if Tripp IS Levi's child (and Trig is the son of his ex future mother-in-law) there would be no earthly reason to release photos of Trig with Levi on a show that was supposed to be about current events, i.e., Tripp's birth and the current relationship with Tripp's mother. But.. someone in the Johnston clan selected this photo. Of Levi cuddling Trig. Now almost a year ago. Intentionally. So I... and other "anonymous bloggers..." would see it. And we have.

Mercede, message received. Thank you.

306 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 306 of 306
Punkinbugg said...

GREAT FIND, DAVE.

Mercede's MySpace picture -- I think that is Mercede -- but I don't think that's Levi. Hair's too long and he has a square jaw.

Her mood? DETERMINED

Oh yeah - you go, girl.

Molly said...

Dave? Ok, I looked at the pic you refer to. I can say that is not Levi, but it does look like Mercede with "Tripp". Nice touch with the dead animals on the wall. :)

pearlygirl said...

I felt like Levi lied when he tried to blow off his myspace page as something that his friends made when he was 14. Wasn't the accompanying picture of him in his hockey shirt with obvious facial hair of a 17 yr old? Even so myspace pages are really just public displays and a quote like "i don't want kids" or being a f*** redneck are really about being macho around the guys. Can you imagine if he had written "I just love kids" and "I'm not a redneck--I'm sensitive" --his friends would have pounced on him as a girlyman. Also it seems like almost all kids have a myspace or facebook page so the idea that he never updated it or didn't have one other than what his friends made up doesn't seem truthful. I never put too much stock in his myspace comments about kids and rednecks but the mercedes comments on the pictures were just weird and can't be explained away as teenage boasting/showing off/trying to look cool--

my vw" egamery as in Electronic games? Email gamery?

Molly said...

Just a procedural question:

When you post the Myspace stuff to the website, will you also be posting here to let us know?

Thanks

B said...

The founder of Palin's new legal defense fund was motivated by his beliefs in "free enterprise," "less government control," and the governor's maternal instinct.

Guess he disagrees with Maddow about Palin's wisdom in putting her family (and grandbaby daddy) into her campaign platform.

TruthSeeker said...

My thoughts, they are a-swirlin'! Until now I've been firmly in the Bristol as Trig's birth mom, 2nd pregnancy a probable hoax camp. I just watched today's GMA interview. Levi seems very sincere, much more relaxed than in the Tyra interview, and he is believable. He is fighting for something, for SOMEONE. Yes, the fight is on.

After seeing these two interviews, I find myself contemplating membership in the BX2 camp.

So just maybe there is a baby Tripp. Maybe Bristol and Levi gave Trig to the Palins and intentionally got pregnant again so they could have a son of their own. (Hence Levi's "that time" statement about telling their parents Bristol was pregnant.)

Maybe Sarah covered for Bristol with Trig to save face for the nomination AND to help with Trig's special needs. And as it happened, because the rumors got out so quickly back in Aug/Sept of the baby coverup, it worked out in Sarah's favor that Bristol was indeed pregnant again. So they make the announcement to try to quell the rumors that Bristol was Trig's real mother. Seemed like a good plan...

Altho I didn't hear any blatant slip ups in the Tyra interview, there was alot said that doesn't make sense.

The Johnston's said they weren't permitted to take pictures of Tripp but there are pictures. ???

Mercede's account of Tripp's "birth" is odd. ( Didn't she say her family was not permitted to be there? Why?)

Mercede's tells a story of Bristol calling her white trash but they are unable to tell Tyra how the media got wind of the dispute.

The whole computer hacking thing is strange. (Most of Sherry's responses are odd to me somehow.)

The Trig issue does seem to have been put to rest for the Johnstons. They have had nearly a year (and a national campaign) to put that straight in their heads. Trig belongs to the Palins. But now there is another reason to fight. I'm not sure why but The Johnston's are mad. Sherry had tears in her eyes in the GMA interview.

The plot just seems to get thicker and thicker.

Sunshine1970 said...

@Dave

That's an interesting (and adorable baby!) pic...I wonder how many pics of Tripp they do have? I also noticed that under her profile pic her mood is 'determined' Interesting.

Lol! the verification is conjoge. conjugal?

TruthSeeker said...

Dave said
"While Mercede's MySpace profile is private, even on a private profile the profile picture can still be seen. Within the last 24 hours, Mercede posted a new picture as her MySpace profile pic. It shows her (I think) holding a baby and standing next to Levi (I think)"

Thanks for that link. I don't think that is Levi with Sadie and baby, tho. The young man's hair is longer.

Also, too, I know no two babies are alike but "Tripp" looks big to me for a baby that just made 3 months.

B said...

Dangerous,

Just saw your comment at the end of an old post. If the media has stayed out of the story because they were told Sarah was protecting TriG from knowing he was adopted, why would they be interested now if Audrey and others, named and not anonymous, revealed that TriG must be adopted because Sarah didn't deliver him. Wouldn't they still protect TriG?

The Palin/Johnston sniping surrounding TriPP is keeping the media busy. Clear evidence of his true birth date might draw them in. If Mercede was correct that Bristol's friends attended TriPP's birth, hard to believe lots of Wasillans are hiding a date other than 12/27/08. (I still think TriPP was born approx. 1/27/09.)

wv = zedge.
I'm on ze edge waiting to see where more evidence leads us.

Caroline said...

I agree with Penny at 7:24. It doesn't ring true that SJ was supposed to look after Tripp 3 days a week as SJ got arrested before Tripp was born. And I noticed the odd look Levi had when she was talking about this on Part 2, 2:27.

seawolf08 said...

I just got to watch the Tyra interview and I don't really think Levi or his family said anything too bad about the Palins. Of course Bristol's parents knew she was sexually active. I was still at UAA last year and everyone from the valley knew the story. Over the holidays (not this past holiday but the year before) Bristol's parents were going to a party and were supposed to be out really late so her sisters went to stay with her grandparents. For some reason her parents came home very early and caught Bristol and Levi, well, being very intimate shall we say. They were crazy mad. Her mom was getting ready to go to Juneau and take her sisters but Bristol didn't like Juneau and was going to stay home with her Dad. Since he was training for Iron Dog and would be gone a lot they said they couldn't trust her and she would have to go to Juneau. She talked her aunt into letting her come stay with her in Anchorage (although Bristol said she wanted to go to a pre-nursing program at West but people knew that wasn't the reason). What her parents didn't know was that Levi was playing on a new travel hockey team that played most of their games in Anchorage so Bristol was able to see him quite a lot. My roommate's sister saw Bristol at at least 3 of his games that winter and she asked her not to say anything (although since she got pregnant everyone knows now she was seeing Levi). Obviously her parents didn't know he was playing hockey in Anchorage.

As far as Tripp I think he was born on Dec. 27th. Esquire magazine was at the Palin house interviewing her Dad when Bristol went into labor and will have the story out next month. Her mom was out of town but the rest of her family and a lot of friends jammed into MatSu hospital. So that date would be pretty hard to fake.

As for My Space, when you post pictures, your friends get a notice that you have put up new pictures so they usually comment on them within a day or two. It's pretty rare to get comments more than a week later. So if the comments about the picture here were around May 5 or so, I think it was probably taken not much before that date. So Bristol would've figured out she was pregnant sometime in April, so I'm guessing she only told Levi and his sister (because they were close then) but not anyone's parents yet. So they could have all been feeling super close to Trig knowing that they were all going to be family now and their baby would grow up with Trig. To me, Levi is holding Trig the same way a lot of guys that age hold a baby when you give them one. They don't really know how to hold a baby so they kinda scrunch it up against them. I could see Bristol and Mercede telling Levi to hold Trig because he better get used to handling babies. Without more pictures I don't think it says too much.

Molly said...

I have a question. IF Levi is the father of Trig or thinks he is the father of Trig, and if he and Bristol agreed to give him up to SP and TP, would Levi have had to sign off on that? Or would he have no bearing on it if he is not the spouse. Unless he had a paternity test, in which case I'd think he'd have to agree to the adoption if he is the father, and could have been made to sign a non-disclosure agreement as well. Because now I'm wondering if part of the reason for the alleged baby adoption could be to make darn sure Levi could NOT ever obtain custody of Trig? Given that SP thinks his family is "white trash"? Well, it's just a thought.

I think that as of right now, he does not have any legal right to see his son Tripp, since he is not proven to be the father (again, seems highly doubtful he's had a paternity test) and is not the spouse of Bristol. In that light, right now he is lucky she lets him see the baby at all, but if BP continues to balk at him having the baby over at the Johnston's, then I think he HAS to file for a paternity test in order to seek custody. Does this sound correct? If he has already signed off on a Trig adoption (again, speculating if he would have even have to have done such a thing but assuming SP would have wanted him to do so)then he may have no recourse for contact with Trig.......but it seems clear he does with Tripp--if he is truly the father.

Levi, please please get a lawyer and start the ball rolling for paternity-- for your sake and for your mom's--I can see this is hurting her very much.

kaykay said...

I think it's very odd that Sherry stated that her first reaction to news of the (most recent) pregnancy was one of giddy happiness...what mother of a 17-year old boy would have that be her FIRST emotion!

Now, if her son already had ANOTHER son by the same girlfriend, and you already considered them engaged....

Alex said...

I can't possibly know what was in the Johnstons' heads regarding the Tyra interview.

I can know that no decent lawyer would have allowed his client (Sherry J) to jeopardize her case by doing something that could backfire.

This was a huge publicity move for Tyra-- and I'm sure she would have agreed to any control over her questions. The interview was carefully scripted, imo. Every question carefully asked. The Johnston family would have had the questions in advance, so all answers could be rehearsed or planned.

It is clear that Palin has the power to control the courts of AK. She has the power to make any AK citizen's life hell. We know that. This appearance may have been the only way for the Johnstons to get Sarah's attention and to show her that they have leverage too.

The only thing I know is that Rex Butler would never have allowed anything that would have hurt his client's case.

When I caught my husband up this morning over coffee on the new developments, he laughed all the way through. "Rex Butler!" he chortled. "You're making that up!" Husband's take was that Levi needs a lawyer to garner his rights as a father, but then I reminded him that Levi may not be the father, that there may not be a baby, that the baby may not have been born when we were told he was, and that Sarah can control the family courts-- and my husband admitted that the story, for him, had spun too far out into the ozone to even fathom.

Yep.

The Editor said...

The baby in this picture is more than three months old and Levi looks quite different, so I would guess that it was taken a while ago.I can't help but feel that if someone were to see the pictures of Levi and Mercede with Trig and not know anythingabout the Palin story, he or she would assume (quite rightly, I think) that it was a picture of a young father with his newborn son and an aunt holding her newborn nephew. Even Sarah's presence in one photo looks like that of a grandmother looking over her grandson as he is held by his father. Bristol has the look of a young mother: her face is full and glowing. Sarah's: not so much. Hard to believe that a mere boyfriend would look so lovingly at his girlfriend's newborn little brother. And didn't Levi say that he and Bristol got engaged in June 2008, yet these pictures, as posted in May of that year, are already referring to Sarah as "future Mother-in-law." Again, the timeline does not match up.

BG said...

chill out tin-foil-hatter. mercede's myspace mood has been "determined" for months. not everything is a "message". not every photo has been "photoshopped". just...chill guys.

Alex said...

B,

How do you know that the photo on Mercede's myspace of her holding a baby is Tripp?

Diana said...

The Tatoos are diffently different. If you haven't looked at them side by side you may not realize that. The one with Trig is obviously longer and two words. This might be really important. Make sure you look carefully before you discount that there is more there. We need someone who has the ability to improve and inlarge take a closer look at what it says. May have been the "main" reason the photo was included!

http://tinyurl.com/6vfvev



vw: ofights. uh oh...fights...are coming.

NakedTruth said...

If you go to the CBSNews.com there are some interesting comments from a poster known as palinisaliar.

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4928238n

She/He talks about Levi and his Special Olympics volunteering. (I think it is interesting that Levi all of a sudden decided to get involved in Special Olympics. It's a good thing but I am just saying...) She/He also goes on to say in another posting that Bristol is dating a 26 year old that Palin is trying to push her to marry. (Is this the swimming coach?)

Seawolf08,

Where have you been with all this juicy information? You should have joined us awhile ago. I guess better late than never.

Thanks for the info. You seem to know much about the Palin family. Based on the information you provided Bristol was not pregnant with Trig in Dec 07 - Mar 08. Is this what you are trying to tell us by giving us these detailed accounts of what happened? So I take from this that Bristol was not exactly sent away to keep her from Levi since she was seeing Levi in Anchorage anyway - correct?

NoMore said...

Windycity, April 7, 2009 10:05 PM:

a)Tyra emphatically said the Johnstons were not paid for the interview.
b)Once I upload my pics to the computer, I clear out the memory card to re-use. The only record I have of my pics are on my computer. Possibly the same with the Johnstons.
c)Wearing election T-Shirts… Maybe that was the only clean one he had at that time, or it was loaned to him from the Palins since his was too smudgy to be near the baby?
d)Palin in shorts in that pic: Remember what someone who IS from Wasilla said earlier – they wear shorts year-in and –out INdoors, even when they just hop in the car. Just when they have to go outside for more than a couple minutes will they dress up warmly…

B said...

Ivyfree said, "There are, occasionally, really interested comments or questions that come up. Occasionally, one of them might be pulled out of the comments section and posted for open discussion."

Good idea. Could focus discussion and help the problem of missing a gem because reading all comments would take too much time. At the moment, a MySpace post is waiting in the wings and should come next.

Ocean said...

With all due respect, seawolf08, I'm not buying what you are selling.

B said...

The Editor said...
The baby in this picture is more than three months old and Levi looks quite different, so I would guess that it was taken a while ago.

I think consensus is it's not Levi. I disagree that the baby is more than 3 mos. Looks similar in size and face to TriPP with Greta.

Diana said...

I think the picture with Mercedes is with Tripp and her boyfriend. Tripp looks big but part of that is how she is holding him and her arm is making him look larger than he is.

Mercedes is one smart and tenacious young woman. This is her letting everyone know that they "WON". This is a current picture letting everyone know they are now allowed to see, hold and photograph Tripp! Bravo Mercedes!

icky said...

My daughter had her husband take a photo right before she left for the hospital to have her 7 pound baby. I had forgotten just how big the tummy gets. Anyways, that photo alone proved to me without a doubt that there is no way Sarah could have given the Texas speech or travelled by airplane without it being absolutely certain and obvious that she was not only pregnant but about to deliver. Why does this completely illogical debate even continue???

Doubting Thomas said...

On the Early Show http://tinyurl.com/djpncd
Levi said -
Tripp, says Levi, is "starting to giggle and do all -- rolling over, that kind of thing. ... He's getting exciting. I can't wait for him to start talking!"
from the same article - His family says they hope the custory dispute over Tripp doesn't land in court -- because it's likely almost any judge in Alaska would side with the Palins -

Sounds like they don't hold much hope for Levi's Mother in court then either.....

Now if Tripp was born at the end of Dec (Like Sarah says he was) then he is a late bloomer, considering all the comments from Sarah, Bristol and Levi at "How perfect" Tripp is...
here is a week by week milestone baby development chart http://tinyurl.com/5abvf2

Punkinbugg said...

Oh. Wow.

While the rest of us sit here in PJ's and come up with our pet theories, Seawolf08 provides what appears to be detailed, first- and second-hand accounts of what really happened that famous winter of '07-'08.

So ummm ... how do I put this?

Hey Seawolf08, do you think Sarah Palin is the mother of Trig Palin? If not, who is?

If you don't want to post it here, please email Audrey at info@palindeception.com, and she will protect your identity.

Kathleen said...

In order to clear-up any possible further confusion can I just say that the research team looked at Mercede's present MySpace photo a few days ago.

We can confirm that it is not Levi standing next to Mercede. We DO know the identity of the young man in the photo but we will not be releasing his name.

Thanks for all your insights - they are extremely valuable and we look forward to all your contributions, whether they prove fruitful or not.

Kathleen

Shelby said...

As with all things Palin it is always what ISN'T said that leaves one scratching one's head versus what is carefully scripted and put out there.

I find it very interesting that neither interview with the Johnstons asked the one question that has been on everyone's mind, including Sarah Palin's.

Seriously, how easy would it have been for Tyra to say, "Hey Levi. Can you just once and for all put to rest those crazy rumors that Sarah Palin is not Trig's real Mom?"

It sound to me like that subject was off-limits.

I mean, seriously. Talk about elephants in the room.

I also agree that Levi and the Johnston's appearance on Tyra was scripted and intentional with the point of sending a pointed message to Sarah Palin (and Bristol).

I also believe that if Trig is Levi's son (and I believe he is) that Levi (and Bristol) were compliant in turning him over to the Palins to raise as the Palin's could provide the finanacial resources for his special needs that would be a struggle for two young teenagers.

Levi also probably agreed to the decision thinking he and Bristol would be married and he would have full access to his son and the adoption was just a formality.

I also find Sherry's comment about watching a baby 3 days a weeks to be very interesting. We all heard that Trig was being raise by Grandmas while Mom was busy running for VP. We know baby Tripp isn't being raised by Grandma Sherry.

Oh what a tangled web...

Palin has built a career on obfusication and intimidation and is quite the expert. I give the Johnston's credit for at least trying to take her on.

And I agree with everyone else who said, "Get a lawyer Levi!!!!"

B said...

The Editor said "And didn't Levi say that he and Bristol got engaged in June 2008, yet these pictures, as posted in May of that year, are already referring to Sarah as "future Mother-in-law."

I recall Levi said he proposed in late June without saying which year, though acting like it was after he found out Bristol was pregnant with TriPP.

We've heard there were rumors in Wasilla in spring 2007 that Levi and Bristol were already married when he left school for the slopes. If that were true, I'd think Sarah would have presented them at the RNC as married, unless she felt that would suggest they married because of TriG.

Ahh, mommy-in-law dearest. I also like the nickname Mooselini.

m said...

I have a very simple hypothesis as to why Palin might want to take her grandson as her own child -- insurance. As the Governor, she has extremely generous health insurance for her and her underage dependents (which would not apply to grandchildren). They will save a fortune on need special medical and tutoring, even after the governor is out of office. I'd love to see insurance fraud added to Palin's rap sheet.

B said...

seawolf08 said, "My roommate's sister saw Bristol at at least 3 of his games that winter and she asked her not to say anything"

Were any of those games in January '08? Did your roommate's sister say whether Bristol looked pregnant? Please ask her and email Audrey!

If true that her parents walked in on Bristol and Levi while intimate, that could be how Levi knew Sarah knew even before TriPP that they were sexually active, rather than knowing because they already had a baby together as some have speculated.

Dangerous said...

Quick summary of issues to resolve (non-exhaustive):

The answers to all these circumstances must be consistent with known facts.

For Bx2:

1) Alternate date of birth for Trig and/or Tripp.
2) Location of Trig if earlier DOB than reported.
3) Paternity of Trig;
a) if Levi, why he hasn't claimed him and let SP claim him,
b) if not Levi, how he didn't know (or care) BP had just had a baby.
4) Why SP would fake for BP in March but out her in September.
5) If Trig early, why would SP draw attention with the wild ride.
6) If Trig born before March 5, why SP would fake after child already born when he could be discovered any time.
7) If Trig born after Feb 15, why Bristol was at AHA luncheon.
8) Bristol's traffic accident, indicating that she was not completely in hiding. (Certainly that was not the only time she left her aunt's house.)

For Wx1 / Bx1:

1) Willow flew (accordingly to travel records) during the time period, indicating she was out in public at least some.
2) Willow was at AHA luncheon (as was Bristol) according to reports.
3) Willow attended SofS in early January.
4) Willow was listed on honor roll in the newspaper for "winter term".

I'll leave it the Bx2 camp to try to explain the circumstances for that set. They have a much tougher task than I do for Wx1 / Bx1.

My responses:

1) Travel records aren't proof she actually traveled in public, but I'll stipulate to it for argument's sake. It was winter so clothes could have disguised a lot. Also, she would not draw attention just for looking a little chunky. (Neither would Bristol, for that matter.) And those same travel records show Willow going one way from Juneau to Wasilla on March 28, which is a tough one to explain. How convenient that she was in Wasilla for SP's wild ride!! Funny, because Mom returned to Juneau. If Willow was in school, show me the records.

2) Willow at AHA luncheon is critical. If we had photos, we might have our answer. Same applies to Bx2.

3) Willow attended SofS, but that would be in January when, per the official due date for Trig, at only five months. And we don't get a shot of her mid-section in the photos, so there's nothing conclusive. It's critical to consider that SP and TP could observe WP and decide if she could disguise the condition or not, if it applied. (Same goes for Bristol.)

4) Willow on the honor roll listing is hearsay. We don't know the source, whether she attended or worked remotely, whether her name was included accidentally, or anything else. It is only weak evidence of school attendance. If anyone can show real school attendance for her after Feb 15, I admit Wx1 / Bx1 is highly doubtful.

The evidence people cite again and again to refute Wx1 pales in comparison to the circumstantial evidence to refute Bx2 -- like needing 10 months between births. The elaborate ruses the Palins would have to carry off to open that window could not possibly fly, such as faking Tripp's birth date. By now, Levi or Mercede would have spilled it.

For Wx1, my answer is simple: once she starts to show, disguise it in public and get her out of school. With Wx1 one doesn't have to worry about the 10 month window, Trig's real father, the out-of-control Johnstons, SP's motive to fake for baby #1 but out Bristol for baby #2, etc. etc.

So it should be a simple task to refute Wx1. Show me a clear picture of her abdomen from about Feb 15 on, or prove she was in school after then. MSM has already concluded Bx2 could not be the truth. I don't think they are all stupid.

Dangerous

MimiC said...

Wow, I just watched part 3 of the Tyra show and for the first time I'm very convinced of the Bx2 theory. Sherry says that "they" took all the pictures of when "they" were little and that those pictures are on the Internet -- these clearly are pictures of little Trig. And Levi clearly states that he was living at the Palins when he found out that Bristol was pregnant. Why would he be living there before she conceived Tripp, unless there already was a baby he was helping to care for?

pearlygirl said...

Seawolf08 seems to have a lot of background information that I have not heard before from anyone or anywhere in this blog. It seems like this person is tuned into local happenings around Wasilla in pretty clear detail so I am curious as to Seawolf08's take on whether Sarah gave birth to Trig and what is being said about it today. Also if there is a doubt about Sarah as Trig's mom,then who does Seawolf hear as the possible birth mother or what could cause Sarah to hide or fake a pregnancy?

Doubting Thomas said...

On the Tyra part 3 video http://tinyurl.com/dld48e
at 6:25 Tyra asks "How do you feel about Sarah Palin running for President? Sherry Johnston answers "It is a trick question.". Tyra then asks why is it a trick question and Sherry replies "It is hard enough to see my grandbabieS struggle now..."

hahahahaha WV is "presse"

Diana said...

So I have been thinking about the timeline of events around Levi coming home and how his relationship with Bristol was altered by Sarah Palin.

If Tripp was born Dec. 27 and Levi quit his job Jan. 5, 2009 and came home, somewhere during this time period he started living with Bristol.

In the most recent interview it was stated that he lived at the Palin house with Bristol for almost 2 months.

Now comes the Greta interview Feb. 15th with a disasterous outcome for the Johnston family. Sarah decides that Levi can not go on the show with Brisol and that his mom cannot present Tripp as planned. Remember this is what happened:

Tripp’s “other Grandma” was waiting in the wings to bring Tripp into the interview however, Sarah Palin surprised everyone by coming to the interview and presenting Tripp for the first time.

Bristol states in this interview that Levi sees Tripp every single day. According to a People magazine interview Levi was living with Bristol at Sarah’s house afer the baby was born. Levi was supposed to do the interview with Bristol but something happened just prior that changed the plans.

Did Sarah cause her own daughters break-up by keeping Levi and his mom from being publically involved with her family!?

Seems to me like this might have been what caused the breakup between the families and lead to Levi and Bristols already strained relationship to end.

If Sarah could have let Bristol and Levi have their moment and claim the only son "allowed to be claimed" maybe their relationship would still be working.

Bristol made a decision, when she went on Greta's show without her mom's prior consent and had decided to bring Levi and his mom and make a public declaration of their relationship and present Tripp.

Sarah decided to stop it and Bristol couldn't do a darn thing about it. Bristol has a lot of support that she needs financally right now and I am sure that she will not go against her mom again. Too bad! That is how you grow up. She needs to learn how to stand up for her child and for her relationship and trust that everything will work out.

What a mess!

Anne said...

Thank you Andrew! Please read Andrew Sullivan's comments today regarding Levi and the Palin baby circus - he's hip to Trig:

http://tinyurl.com/dmfyou

Betsy S said...

Morgan, why do I have a little garbage can next to my comments?
The more I look at that picture of Levi and Keith, I'm sure it's Trig that Keith is holding. Levi looks so much younger than he does now, and that tshirt would never have such a tiny "McCain/Palin" logo over a very flashy resort design. It's been photoshopped on.
I'll have to find a copy of Star to see a better quality picture, the one I have is third or fourth hand and is
pretty blurry.

GinaM said...

Did anyone remember the big article Newsweek did on the election that they couldn't release until the day after the election? It was about all the behind the scene stuff. I'm especially referring to paragraph 5

reporters did not even know how to pronounce Palin's name. But on Saturday night, a couple of reporters began asking questions about Bristol. Some had caught a glimpse of her, and explained to a campaign aide that she looked, well, pregnant. The aide denied any knowledge, but Schmidt tapped one of McCain's friends, Steve Duprey, to go have an awkward conversation with Palin. Told of the reporters' nosing around, she looked out the window briefly and replied, "We have a strong family. We've been dealing with this already. We're gonna tell Bristol. We'll be fine. Let's move on. What else do you have?"

Here's the link to the article:

http://www.newsweek.com/id/167905/page/3

ravenstrick said...

Betsy S,

I've seen those t-shirts in real life, that is what they look like.

For those of you who think we in Alaska are in lock step behind Sarah Palin, please take a look at her real approval numbers in the state:

http://www.themudflats.net/2009/03/30/the-sky-is-falling-no-wait-its-palins-approval-index/

The most interesting development after the message in the bottle:

The picture of Levi with the phantom baby arm...

B said...

Alex, I should have said the baby Mercede is holding looks like TriPP. To me he is a carbon copy of the baby in the Greta interview. The shape of his face is not like TriG's.

Diana, Greta may have been talking about Sherry as the "other Grandma," but I don't think Levi and Bristol would have put her on TV with the drug charges pending. The family gathers each year for the Iron Dog. Todd's dad and stepmom travel back from wherever they spend the winter. "Grandma" could have been Sally Heath or Todd's stepmom or mom or grandmother, all doting on TriPP.

muah said...

LisanTX
That is an interesting observation about the Star photo.

Silver - "child" Of all the coincidental words. An illusion that says child would be a message alright!
The Tyra Banks Show at 7:50
http://tiny.cc/750tyra
I am still not entirely certain it is a weird angle.

Ennealogic - I don't see it as the same length or amount of letters. "JOHNSTON" looks complete in both photos. What I'm seeing is one photo has "JOHNSTON" PLUS what looks like "child", it looks longer.

Diana - Thank you
http://tinyurl.com/6vfvev

Nova Land - We're not seeing the same thing. For sure we need a clear enlargement if possible.

Dave - That doesn't look like Levi to me in Sadie's MySpace profile. She and Corey split up, this might be a close friend or a new beau.

Lynn also sees a longer tattoo
http://tiny.cc/a6DKd

Diana - I have to agree with you. There is a message in that photo.
The Tattoos are differently different. We need someone who has the ability to improve and enlarge take a closer look at what it says. May have been the "main" reason the photo was included!

HELP! I am still betwixt between on this one!

muah said...

Betsy S - Diana found photos of the Palin's house with the heart, same as in the Star photo of 3 Johnston men. It dates the photo to January 2009 as I recall. Garbage can means you can delete.

B said...

m said...
I have a very simple hypothesis as to why Palin might want to take her grandson as her own child -- insurance. . . . I'd love to see insurance fraud added to Palin's rap sheet.

Palin's insurance covers TriG when she adopts him, which she probably did. If so, not insurance fraud, not a reason to fake a pregnancy, though it is a reason to adopt him.

We discussed insurance motives at length last fall.

patstevens said...

Today on the video of CBS The Early Show, Levi says his relationship changed with Sarah Palin when she got back to Alaska after the election. "I can go over and see my baby whenever I want." After the election, he said, it went downhill; he said that he wasn't able to see his baby any more (9 out of 10 times). If Tripp were born at the end of December, this description of when things soured does not make sense.

Also, why did he stay at the Palins for two months, presumably prior to the election, if not to take care of his son, Trigg?

Silver said...

To Diana (and others commenting on Levi's tattoo on his left forearm).

There have not been any modifications.

I played the Tyra video in HD. I got a screen grab of that picture. I then enlarged it just a bit.

It's the same tattoo. The angle is a little weird, but it definitely only says "Johnston"

Out of curiosity are there other pictures of Levi wearing short sleeves? I know of a couple raided from MySpace, but there is the very slight chance that he could have gotten himself some ink during the crucial time period.

KaJo said...

I noticed that little arm intruding in on the picture of Levi and Tripp in the Star photo, too. Palinistas can argue until they're blue in the face that "it doesn't mean anything", but to me, it does -- a guy this young is holding two babies, voluntarily! To me it says there's a "tie that binds" between the young man and the baby(s).

You have to wonder if THIS is what Bristol and Levi were arguing about -- Bristol still marching in lockstep with her mother, not wanting any pictures tying Levi to Trig at this late date. Levi at that point in time probably was beginning not to care if the Palin Deception got out, he was more concerned about his kid(s).

I'm sure Bristol knew there was nothing she or her mother could do about the photo of Levi and Trig that was in Sadie's possession (and ended up on Tyra Banks' show), that they couldn't "scrub" because they couldn't find it.

The Star picture probably happened when Sarah Palin was out of town; she was at the Washington D.C. Alfalfa dinner Jan. 15th. It was probably soon after that that Bristol and Levi broke up.

Diana said...

Silver...look again. Their is more than Johnston written. It looks like two words. Notice the spacing is different.

Click into the photo of him with Trig and it will enlarge. I can't read it but it is does not say just Johnston. There is more to it.

http://tinyurl.com/9zsze9

AKPetMom said...

Levi was playing hockey w/the Alaska Avalanche Jr. team in the winter of 2008. Here is the article detailing his tenure, as well as Track Palin's, with the team.
http://tinyurl.com/NY-Times-Avalanche

Palin Pregnancy Truth said...

After seeing the Tyra interview, it got me thinking about the Sherry Johnston drug charges.

This family is scared and they chose their words carefully.

I think they've been threatened. I'm very suspect of the oxycontin charges against Ms. Johnston. She was discovered by undercover troopers. Doesn't Sarah have some pull with the troopers? Isn't she willing to do anything for personal vengeance?

Do states really put in that much time doing undercover investigations for small time prescription drug dealers, especially when meth is such a problem? Couldn't Sarah have ended this highly embarrassing investigation? Obviously she and the campaign must have known it was going on. If she had such political power, I bet she could have made this disappear.

I think Sarah set up Ms. Johnston. I think Sadie was threatening to talk and Sarah flexed her muscles.

aunttomichael said...

Someone mentioned the awkwardness of Sherry Johnston's response to Tyra Bank's question about how often she can see Tripp. SJ stumbles around, talking about how she was going to be able to watch him three days a week, and how excited she was, and that she did, in fact, get to watch him at least twice...clearly she is talking about Trig, and the most telling part is the look in Levi's face as she is talking. He is glaring at her, willing her to shut up. See 7.24, 7.25 and 7.26 on Part Two of the interview. In the last shot, he looks positively alarmed, eyes bugged out. I don't know how to capture large screenshots so I can't link to it myself; I hope someone else can.

WV: folliest. Yes, this was folly, Sarah, the idea of this whole deception. Probably the folliest of them all.

Craig said...

seawolf08 said;

"As far as Tripp I think he was born on Dec. 27th. Esquire magazine was at the Palin house interviewing her Dad when Bristol went into labor and will have the story out next month."

**********

Interesting, if true.

Also, since Levi says he was in the delivery room, he would obviously know the date of Tripp's birth. If that was being faked, he could easily refute it. Given the state of things, it seems reasonable to suggest that he would have by now, if it was a falsehood. The Johnston's have proven that they aren't afraid of fighting back at the supposedly fearsome Sarah.

The media (in any of its variations) would then have an open door to ask, "Why would the Palin's alter a birthdate?" And the walls would have to come down eventually, under increasing pressure.

And why would a family that is suppose to be trying to pull off a high-risk baby scam purposely aggravate a key witness who could pull down a house of cards simply be stating that 12/27 was not Tripp's birthdate (since he was at the delivery)?

Saying that the Palin's don't act rationally is frankly, to me, too easy of an excuse to use to be able to ignore that question.

But okay, let's say he is holding that info back in cause there is a custody fight. The Palin's would know he could easily pull out a bombshell like that in such a case. So why would they push the Johnston's into a corner purposefully?

Those are some of the kind of things that just don't register with me on the plausibility scale.

onething said...

Baby with Mercede does not look like Tripp. That is a very big baby.

Chi Town Mom said...

I saw the pic of Mercedes holding Tripp. That child is NOT 2 months old!

Palin Pregnancy Truth said...

I just had a thought. The reason the Levi picture has foot prints is probably because it was in a scrap book. The campaign might have deleted all the pictures on the computer but they still had a hard copy, it just had baby footprints on it.

B said...

Craig,
If TriPP was born 12/27 and Levi was present, then within a few days he would have returned to the slopes for a two week shift and within a few days of that quit and returned to Wasilla by 1/5. No one has mentioned his having to return to work so soon after his son was born. Just that he stayed with the Palins before and after TriPP was born.

Caroline said...

Diana, on the short tattoo versus the long tattoo:

The top of the 'T' is not visible in one picture, making the word look split. Sort of like this:
JOHNS I ON

Also, Doubting Thomas wrote
'It is hard enough to see my grandbabieS struggle now..."'

but maybe SJ said 'it is hard enough to see my grandbaby's struggle now...'

onething said...

Oh, I was wrong! The baby looks big but it must be Tripp. More pictures of baby in same outfit on the CBS show, with levi.

onething said...

I listened to Tyra #3 again, and it seems that Sherri says, "It's hard enough to see my grandbaby, struggling now...

which doesn't really make sense. I think she meant "It's hard enough to see my grandbaby, I'm struggling now.

I wish she said grandbabies, but I don't think she did.

Silver said...

Better quality shot of Levi, Trig, & the tattoo:
http://tinyurl.com/dl2am5

Besides, it would be very difficult for Levi to have part of the tattoo removed. Very rarely can black ink be removed without a trace. If he wanted to get rid of it, his best bet would be to modify it into something else.

muah said...

AKPetMom - interesting article.

Diana said... Silver...look again.

Palin Pregnancy Truth - There is something fishy about Sherry Johnston's arrest. I thought she seemed to think the charges wouldn't stick.

Palin Pregnancy Truth - It looks like a photo with stickers. It is possible she wrote something on the arm after the "JOHNSTON" tattoo, like when people scrapbook.

Caroline - I don't see the "JOHNS I ON"
After the "grandbabies" or "grandbaby's" she says "them". She goes on to say "he".

That was how I heard it.

Vaughn said...

AKPetMom said...
Levi was playing hockey w/the Alaska Avalanche Jr. team in the winter of 2008.
Here is the article detailing his tenure, as well as Track Palin's, with the team.
http://tinyurl.com/NY-Times-Avalanche

Track Palin was tendered with the Avalanche in April 2007.That was 1 month before
he graduated.He was no longer with the team by the time they started the pre season
training in early Sept.In that NY-Times article Jamie Smith said Track called him
that summer and told him his shoulder was,nt any better and he was joining the Army.
IMO that was pure bullcrap. If your shoulder is not good enough for hockey it,s sure
not good enough for Army bootcamp.
Levi was a junior in high school in 2008.He played a game for the Wasilla Warriors
in Feb. 2008.I read somewhere that he quit school in March of that year.

uu said...

As sincere as the Johnstons appeared at times, they were at times playing evasive...how could they NOT know how the "white trash" comment surfaced??? Funny how Mercede's friend in FLORIDA, the one she is close enough to go visit a few months ago knew where it came from...it was on HER myspace, she made it private right after the white trash comment made it to Gawker's website--screen shot and all. It was Mercede herself that left that entry. The Florida friend also left Gawkers a nasty message on her myspace heading. So I have a hard time believing the Johnston's when they say that they had NO IDEA how the white trash comment surfaced. They perhaps could not bring themsleves to say that Mercede's message got caught. Specifically, Mercede said "if you are not a Palin, you are white trash". Also in the entry was that Mercede felt that Levi had his head up his butt over all this.

The Editor said...

If you use Mozilla Firefox, you can enlarge the picture quite a bit by holding down the CTRL button and scrolling until the picture is larger. I saw that it said "Johnston & Child" and he was holding Trigg(?)

SmacK said...

Is it just me, or did I hear something strange in the GMA interview? (after 3:06)

Maggie Rodriguez: Let's go back to, you're happy, you're living as part of their family, she finds out she's pregnant... what's your reaction?

Levi: I was extremely happy. I got up, we hugged. I was really scared, too. We went upstairs, I was stoked. We told my mom.

Maggie Rodriguez: And your mom's reaction...

YOU"RE LIVING AS PART OF THEIR FAMILY - why would Levi have been living as part of their family BEFORE he found out that BP was pregnant with Tripp?

I know we can get side-tracked by over analyzing every word they say - and in his answer Levi hints that he must have been at his mom's house when BP told him (they went upstairs to tell his mom) so maybe Rodriguez just mixed up the time line in her question, but I wonder,

Did Levi tell us he was living with Bristol before they knew she was pregnant in April/May 2008? Why would SP allow that?

NY tabloid chick said...

seawolf08 said
***As far as Tripp I think he was born on Dec. 27th. Esquire magazine was at the Palin house interviewing her Dad when Bristol went into labor and will have the story out next month. Her mom was out of town but the rest of her family and a lot of friends jammed into MatSu hospital. So that date would be pretty hard to fake.***

So SP was out of town for the birth of her 'first' grandchild? Not buying it. I believe everything else in your post but this paragraph, because if Esquire has folks interviewing Todd on 12/27 (and why would Todd set up an interview on a day when his daughter was overdue to give birth to his 'first' granddaughter?) that means they spent Christmas setting up. It's just not likely. It's also a lot of lead time prepress for a story like this. A monthly mag might hold a non news story this long, but not something that has current relevance and is constantly changing. You don't want so much lead time because so much can change on something like this. Actually, this points more to a 1/27 birth, not 12/27... did you maybe get the date wrong? I do believe everything else in your post seawolf so I'm thinking the Tripp birthdate was a mistake. I can't wait to hear more!

The Dame said...

Pat Stevens, good call, yes, if things went sour after the election and before that he could see his son, hmm, wasn't born yet.

Windy City Woman said...

NoMore,
I know that Tyra stated emphatically that the Johnstons were not paid for the interview. That doesn't mean it isn't true. I think money would be a good incentive for appearing on the show. So would trashing the Palins. So would publicity if Levi is trying to get into modelling or acting. With his looks, that's not just a pipe dream.

Several posters noted it was odd that Levi was living with (or "staying with") the Palins when Bristol announced she was pregnant with Tripp. Gee, no wonder Levi thought Sarah knew he & Bristol were "active." What, he stayed in the guest bedroom? I can't imagine any responsible, "pro-abstinence" parents allowing their teen daughter's boyfriend live in their house, unless their were some really unusual circumstances, like his parents were both dead or in prison or something...or the young couple had already produced a child and the boyfriend was doing his fatherly duty toward the baby.

veebee said...

After looking closely at the three generations of Johnston's photo, I am really doubtful about that baby being Tripp. The baby seems quite long for the age the baby should have been when the picture would have been taken. I am not saying it is Trig but it's a possibility. As for the McCain-Palin tee that Levi is wearing, I think Sarah or her fans in Alaska likely had those printed since it featured Alaska stuff. I doubt McCain had them made since they wouldn't be much use nationally.

wv: shnester shyster? good description of SP

NakedTruth said...

Vaughn,

Yes, I think we discussed Levi quitting school in March 08 here. The coach states in the article that Levi played his last game in Wasilla in Feb. 08 and shortly afterwards quit school so the March timeframe sounds pretty right to me. We on the blog speculated on why Levi would leave school so close to the end of his Jr. year. Most of us then thought that it had something to do with him taking care of Trig who probably was born in Feb. or Mar.

I agree with you Track's shoulder is not why he did not play hockey. If his shoulder was o.k. to join the Army, I would think that it would have been o.k. enough for hockey. Even in the article the coach stated that he thought Track's shoulder was o.k.

Also, I have been trying to pull up Alaska Avalanche Jr. Hockey schedule for 2007-2008 but have not had any luck. It would be interesting to see how often the team played in Anchorage and if there is some validity to Seawolf08's story.

I think that Seawolf08 was trying to make the case that Bristol was not pregnant. But why she just wouldn't come out and say just that makes me suspicious.

She did say that people now know that Bristol was seeing Levi in Anchorage because she got pregnant. But Bristol would not have needed to see Levi during the Hockey Season (Jan - Mar?) to have gotten pregnant by Levi with Trig. Because Bristol wouldn't have gotten pregnant with Trig until late March or early April with a due date of 12/20. And I think she was back in Wasilla by this time.

Maria said...

I agree with The Editor.

I saved the pic in Word and then enlarged it. Although the enlargement is pretty grainy, the wording on Levi's arm in the group pic of him, Trig and Mercede is undoubtedly "Johnston & Child"!

patstevens said...

Another couple of points about that two-month period that Levi said he stayed at the Palins:

Based on the deterioration of the relationship with the Palins, I don't think it's possible that he was living there in 2009.

Beginning November, he was living at Milne Point for his apprenticeship.

So, if Levi is telling the truth, then he had to be staying at the Palins prior to the October convention.

One thing to consider: Mercede said (to corroborate Levi's story) that Levi was not living at the Johnston home for two months. It could be that she is referring to his apprenticeship stint at the North Slope (Milne Point), and that Levi really is lying on this one.

But then, I think of that comment Palin makes in a People's telephone interview on Dec 31:

“You need to know that both Levi and Bristol are working their butts off to parent and going to school and working at the same time,” Palin told PEOPLE in a phone message Wednesday. “They are certainly not high school dropouts.”

The former vice presidential candidate said she wanted to be clear about their continuing work toward high school degrees because any suggestion otherwise “harms Bristol’s reputation and Levi’s reputation and their chances for good work opportunities.”

http://bumpshack.com/2009/01/03/sarah-palin-says-levi-bristol-arent-high-school-dropouts/

Silver said...

I don't want to be obnoxious, but I really want to put the rest the belief that some of you have that Levi's tattoo has changed.

Here's the url again:
http://tinyurl.com/dl2am5

And again, it would be very difficult to have something with such dark black ink removed. He would most likely have to have it modified to get rid of it.

The Editor said...

The picture above certainly shows a different tattoo from the picture I was referring to, yet it is the same picture. Could it have been photoshopped to show a different tattoo. The one I saw clearly had & Child after Johnston. The picture above clearly shows just the name Johnston. WTF?

Lilybart said...

Did Sherry say it's hard to see her grandbaby "struggle" or that SHE was struggling with not seeing him?

why would the grandbaby be struggling unless she was referring to Trig.

Lilybart said...

Today on the video of CBS The Pat....IS THIS TRUE? "Early Show, Levi says his relationship changed with Sarah Palin when she got back to Alaska after the election. "I can go over and see my baby whenever I want." After the election, he said, it went downhill; he said that he wasn't able to see his baby any more (9 out of 10 times). If Tripp were born at the end of December, this description of when things soured does not make sense."

This is a gaffe of enormous proportion IF that is what he said.
(I can't veiw videos at work)

Lilybart said...

So, does anyone think that Palin is so degranged, that having people know SHE knew about Bristol being sexually active, is the whole reason for all this secrecy and BS? AND of course her reckless endangerment of the Trig with her wild ride, also a pro-life no-no.

Does anyone really think it's wrong for Levi to live with the Palins if the kids have a baby together? Who really thinks that is so bad?

patstevens said...

Lilybart, I noted that too. When I re-looked at the video, Levi's words are not as clear as you and I have stated. What he said was: he can see the baby now whenever he wants (without privacy), but 9 out of 10 times can't take the baby out. (Early Morning interview-2:20). Given the announcement of Bristol and Levi's breakup on March 11 and his Nov/Dec stint working on the oil fields at (long distant) North Slope, I'm trying to figure out when that two month peiod was that he stayed over the Palins.

observer said...

Let me offer an observation on the two pictures that appear to have different tattoos on Levi's arm. Levi's arm in the Trig picture has a longer, messier tattoo compared to Levi's arm in the Tripp picture. The latter has square blocky letters and is, I believe indisputably different from the former. Perhaps the Trig picture tattoo, taken more than a year before the Tripp picture, is not a tattoo. My teen sons use sharpie markers to decorate their arms, sometimes elaborately and sometimes looking like tattoos or henna designs. ??? Is this an explanation, because the two "tattoos" are definitely not the same.

LondonBridges said...

Why couldn't the tattoos merely be letters pasted on the photo like the footprints?

onething said...

Maybe it is not real tattoo, but one of those temporary ones, and was not the same one in each picture.

I don't think its so bad to let them live together when they have a baby, but that is most definitely NOT the feeling of most conservatives, or of the older generation. In religious circles, there is still some stigma to having a baby out of wedlock. In fat, I've seen a couple of people get married even when they are not religious. I see nothing consistent in advocating abstinence before marriage, but when that doesn't work, then oh, well, they can live together under the parents roof with no firm plans.

While I'm at it, I thought it a real crock when Sarah said that Bristol will "continue to advocate abstinence."

She did anything but! She said, "Well, everyone should be abstinent or whatever, but that it totally unrealistic."

The way she said "whatever" was very telling.

Palin Pregnancy Truth said...

After looking at the tattoos I agree that something is a miss.

My theory: The Star picture is from earlier, before he got the tattoo.

Maybe he's holding a relative's child, but they needed a pic with him and a baby (and from the whole sadie tyra fiasco we know there aren't a ton of him and Tripp). They realized they had to write in "Johnston" to make it consistent. But it looks like it was written by a computer.

The writing looks too clear and has no depth (like the one from myspace where the writing gets smaller farther away). It also doesn't appear to be on the same part of the arm, the Star picture appears more on the side as opposed to underarm.

Audrey, any chance your photo sleuths or research team can look into this?

muah said...

Silver - The photo of Levi with Trig and Mercede and a long "tattoo" also has what looks like sticker foot prints. People will put things on photos and write on them when scrap booking. The "& child" part isn't necessarily a tattoo. It could be what was written on the photo by an enthusiastic family member. It could be a sharpie.

Let's say the family believed Trig was Levi's son. They were resigned to what they felt best, that Trig was adopted.
There is a confidentiality and legal considerations. This doesn't stop the Johnstons from bursting with joy and needing to express it. In a private moment Mercede may have decorated the photo, thinking at the time no one would see it.

The photobucket photo has Mercede cropped out. I don't know we are looking at the same shot.

Lilybart - It sounds like she said "grandbabies" and "em" or them. Someone else thought they heard "grandbaby's" and them.
Levi's "After the election" would be a big gaffe.

The Palins have a strict religious belief and political standards to uphold. It is hypocritical for them to have teens "staying" in the same bedroom with clothes, toothbrush, condoms and all. What would trouble me is Piper and Willow would be aware of the double standard. They might hear thumping around. Piper might believe whatever she is told, but she will figure things out one day. What if she decides abstinence doesn't work but if I have a baby my honey can move in to help? Children are hard to control.

You might want to read this series on children in care.
http://tiny.cc/5jeQg
One of the lawsuits against the state and governor is over the drugging of children. It helps adults to keep control.
http://tiny.cc/YrEv3
Palin's position on state children is dreadful. You don't want something like this to get out of control.

Nova Land said...

Regarding the tattoo:

(a) London Bridges asked, "Why couldn't the tattoos merely be letters pasted on the photo like the footprints?"

While that might be possible for the picture in which JOHNSTON is clearly visible, it would not make sense for the one in which we are unable to agree on what is written. In that picture, we are having trouble making out what's written because of the angle; it's written on a part of the arm which is turned a bit away from us, making it hard to read. That indicates it's actually written on the arm -- not written onto the photograph.

(b)The Editor said: "The picture above certainly shows a different tattoo from the picture I was referring to, yet it is the same picture. Could it have been photoshopped to show a different tattoo. The one I saw clearly had & Child after Johnston.

If this is so, someone needs to provide a link to a picture in which they think "& Child" clearly appears. In the one from The Star which is linked to in this thread, I am fairly certain it says JOHNSTON -- and that it is the same tattoo which appears in the other picture, simply seen from a different angle.

Now that others have said they see "Johnston & Child", though, I have found that if I squint at the picture just right I can see that too -- the T is blurry enough that it could be an &, and the ON could be CHILD.

Our eyes and brains can play tricks on us. Pictures are a 2-dimensional representation of a 3-dimensional reality; our brains are trained to translate the 2-dimensional image into something which makes sense. Often the brain mis-translates and we confidently see things which aren't really there.

It is possible the tattoo does say "JOHNSTON & CHILD" and that my brain is tricking me into seeing that as JOHNSTON because that's what appears in the other photo. It's also possible the tattoo really does read "JOHNSTON" and that some of you are seeing "JOHNSTON & CHILD" because your brains are tricking you.

Both these things are possible. But they are not equally possible.

We know from the clear picture that Levi had the word JOHNSTON written on his arm at one time. Ask yourselves which is more likely: that in a slightly blurry picture, the word JOHNSTON is indistinct enough that it might be mistaken for something else; or that in a slightly blurry picture Levi now has a completely new tattoo ("JOHNSTON & CHILD"), and coincidentally the form of the new tattoo is such that it can be misread as looking just like the old tattoo?

When someone who is skilled at working with pictures is able to provide us with larger image to examine, we should be able to resolve the question. But I am fairly confident what that will reveal is that some of you are seeing something which isn't actually there.

(Because Levi's tattoo of Bristol on his ring finger is so newsworthy, it is hard to find stories about the JOHNSTON tattoo on his arm. But I am pretty sure the JOHNSTON tattoo on Levi's arm has been seen and commented upon in the past (such as during the McCain / Palin campaign). If so, that increases the likelihood that this is a real tattoo, that it says JOHNSTON, and that it has not changed.)

Gwynedd said...

After enlarging the Levi/Mercede/Trig picture in Word, I am convinced that it says "Johnston" and that it hasn't changed. I enlarged it 300% and it is still pretty readable.

Sarah in SC said...

Gwynedd said...
After enlarging the Levi/Mercede/Trig picture in Word, I am convinced that it says "Johnston" and that it hasn't changed. I enlarged it 300% and it is still pretty readable.

Same here. I did this yesterday, but then all the discussion made me wonder if I was using the same photo as everyone else. I was using the photo posted with this "Message. In. A. Bottle." post. Are the others who are seeing something else using a different photo?

muah said...

The largest I am able to view is from Sarah Palin's Deceptions' photostream
http://tiny.cc/6SX9p
Why the spaces after what looks like "JOHNSTON" space "&" space "child"?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/32527116@N06/3420800526/sizes/o/
I know it is possibly only a distortion, but I don't see the "JOHNSTION" only.
The enlargement someone else posted was cropped and inadequate.

I'd like to see what you're viewing. Please leave a link.

The Editor said...

There are two versions of the same photo. That was my original question. I have downloaded the two and hope to put them side by side and post. I certainly have no idea why this was done or how it was done, but there are two different tattoos on Levi's arm, but everything else in the photos is the same. You can see Mercede's arm in both, but in one, her face is cropped out. In the one that just has "Johnston" the letters are bigger and more spread out covering the underside of his forearm completely. In the other, the letters are compressed and smaller, thus giving room for the "& child."

Doubting Thomas said...

If you click on the picture http://www.palindeception.com/blog/uploaded_images/tyra1-749437.gif and then hold down your control button (Ctrl) at the same time as rolling your scroll wheel you can make the photo larger and t definitely says "Johnston & Child" on Levi's arm.
My opinion is this is photo-shopped in. by whom, I don't know. I am not going to even begin to ask, but it is there.

Petronella said...

Well, well, there is certainly something strange in this whole situation because I for one had made a comment to my husband in the midst of both of us watching the McCain/Palin roadshows running up to November. At the time I didn't know how significant that comment would come to be. And neither did I know at the time about the talks surrounding Palin's preg or (non-preg)for that matter. Now I think it was just a woman's (my) natural instinct 'subconsciously' that kicked in then and even now I get goose pimples from hearing my own words to my husband replay in my mind as I asked this question amongst the only two of us watching the event at that time.

And on that famous evening I
said to him:

"Honey! this child's breasts are huge for being only five months pregi. she looks like someone already breastfeeding. Look, I said, her tommy is not huge enough to match those already highly milked breasts she looks like someone already beastfeeding!". (Today I think: how strange for that to have fallen out of my mouth at that time. Of course, my husband not knowing what to make of it just said: hmmm yeah. That evening I remained with a question mark hanging in my gut but didn't know why exactly that was sooo important. For as I said at the time we knew nothing about the queries surrounding the subject. Only that the young girl was pregnant and in love.

Waired but I look at those images again and again in my mind of the young 'couple' holding hands and even the way they looked at each other along the roadshows and a lot seemed amiss, seemed very staged, so much so that they almost seemed shy of each other. These were two people who are in the midst of pregnancy, in love, and are getting married and that should show naturally It didn't at all look that way. And Levi's late interviews are not speaking the truths. 'YET'.

After the elections I kept visiting the sight 'How Obama got elected and Palin got smared' just to recap on some Palin interviews and GOP campaign videos. Lo and behold I came across a youtube video discussing the subject of the posible palin pregnancy/baby deceit. That's when I was reawakened to that first instinctive feeling and question mark in my gut.
Listen, I was pleased when i read through the Palin's Deception informations and saw that you will stay on this one for us as long as there are questions. I kept saying 'thank you, thank you as I read toward the end of the page and saw your great determination and will to help us find the truth, otherwise what craft and conspiracy we are handed for substance and facts by these.
But good always prevail over evil haa haa.

Remember this? "when the opposition said to the main stream media that his family was off limits 'I' naively thought oh well, that means maybe that goes for all the candidates families then". The ques: If we knew that was not what it meant would we have kept our kids out of the spotlight even the poor little newborn who needed to be home warm and cuddled kissed and kept warm at only 'four months old'. I bet not.

Now, is there a bigger conspiracy cooking than we care to be hit by? or is there not. For as I read my mind opens up to the possibility of Levi and his family conning the 'mainstream media' 'feed them' go make money off of them for I don't know how it works with gov families but direct gov fams might not be able to take money themselves? or or.
Otherwise, maybe someone do want us to know the truth like you said and is sending us the message in code. But food for thought if everyone is so afraid in Alaska to say anything and all myspace a/cs have gone private or scrubbed what with this Levi Johnston and family are they not afraid or are they taking the fool a little further. Could their outburst be a lame attempt to mislead the'mainstream' Or did the first grandmama craftily tricked them too and is about to get her a.s kicked if she don't back off.

In Greta's interview with (what was suppose-to-be) Bristol and tripp, show off, (which would have been 'helpful' in some way) did anyone notice how Sarah spoke 'for' Bristol all through the intraview and did not allow the woman to speak at no time all and only kept repeating the same things over and over again? So there was no Bristol-tripp answers to nothing, nothing achieved by Greta (a complete sham). Also look at how Bristol looks at her mom as she fidgets while crafting words and repeatitive ones at that to fill up Greta's question time. Almost like she was just having an old chat about nothing with an old friend. I promise you won't miss how uneasy Palin is and yet appears comfortable with Greta. If you haven't already people you should watch that video. Maybe you will also help me with new question I have who is the new baby Bristol is holding in the interview with Greta? Is it or is it not for real

18 year old Bristol is a chip off the old block too. She has a look of deceit and a kind of 'pretentious soft-spokenness' with it. Like a hairess in training.

Nova Land said...

muah said: ... Why the spaces after what looks like "JOHNSTON" space "&" space "child"?

Because what you are seeing as an & is actually the T of Johnston. The top bar of the T is not visible, so all one sees is an I shape. (Arms have muscles and ridges; one lies just above where the T top is, blocking the view.)

If you fill in the top cross-bar of the T, there is no longer a space between JOHNS and ON. What you see once you fill in that missing part nicely matches the tattoo image of JOHNSTON as it appears in the (clear) picture, as far as overall size and shape and the length it occupies on the arm. If that's simply coincidence, it's a pretty good one.

Doubting Thomas said: If you click on the picture http://www.palindeception.com/blog/uploaded_images/tyra1-749437.gif and then hold down your control button (Ctrl) at the same time as rolling your scroll wheel you can make the photo larger and t definitely says "Johnston & Child" on Levi's arm.

Thank you for specifying what picture you are looking at and how you are seeing the "& Child". That makes it easier for others to do the same.

Having done that, I still disagree. But now I think I understand better why you are seeing something different than I am.

The T, minus it's crossbar, looks a lot like an ampersand to begin with. Englarging as you are doing makes the image less distinct rather than more distinct, so it becomes easier to mistake what it is. (That's true in reverse, as well: if you're right that it's an ampersand, the enlargement by your method makes it less distinct and easier for me to continue seeing a T.)

The ON is where the magnification as you are doing really creates a problem. Because there is a hole in a capital O, the left and right sides are more dark and distinct while the center is a little lighter. As the O enlarges, it becomes blurrier and and the darker left-and-right and lighter center make it possible for the eye to think the center-top and center-bottom pieces of the O are not there. Thus the O is mistakenly seen as a C on the left and some other letter (such as the vertical line of an h) on the right.

Likewise the N splits apart. The right-hand vertical stands up (like a d does), so the blurrier the image becomes the easier it is to mistake it for one. The left-hand vertical stands up (like an l does) so the blurrier the image becomes the easier it becomes for the mind to think that is what it is seeing. The mind then fills in the missing pieces -- the i, and the right-side loop of the d -- out of the blurry parts, to create an image of the word "Child".

But it's an optical illusion. Of that I am reasonably confident, from a long-time interest in such things. Looking at it in your magnified image, and being aware of the kind of tricks the mind can play so paying close attention to what I am actually seeing as opposed to what I think I am seeing, I can see the "missing" gap in the O which you are not perceiving.

Look carefully. The O is the easiest way to see this. Your mind is tricking you into seeing the O as being split. But it isn't, not really; if you look at it carefully you should be able to see that there is no real gap at the top and bottom of the O, simply one created by the mind.

(If there are people who, even knowing what to look for, are still unable to see the continuous line at the top of the O, then obviously my saying so that I can see it is not going to be convincing. Is there some tool which tool which artists or photo people use which can confirm whether the top of the O has a gap or not?)

Doubting Thomas said...

Not to be rude to Nova Land who is seeing "Johns space T space on" while the rest of us see "Johnston & Child".
The word "Johnston" is much longer than the word "Johns" and I am just not seeing "Johns space T space on Levi's arm. the first word is too long to be simply "Johns" and the second word is to long to simply be "on".
The picture I am looking at is the one surrounded by the blue frame on the forum post "Message in a bottle"

Nova Land said...

Doubting Thomas said...

Not to be rude to Nova Land who is seeing "Johns space T space on" while the rest of us see "Johnston & Child"...


Nor do I mean to be rude to you. We are all here because we're curious and trying to solve a mystery. Disagreement is fine!

One important correction to what you wrote, though. I believe it would be more accurate for you to say that I am seeing Johns space T space on while "some of the rest of us see "Johnston & Child".

Your wording implies that I am the only one who sees JOHNSTON and that everyone else sees Johnston & Child. That isn't accurate. There are several of us who have stated we see "JOHNSTON", several of you who have stated you see "Johnston & Child", and a number of people who have not weighed in.

The word "Johnston" is much longer than the word "Johns" and I am just not seeing "Johns space T space on Levi's arm. The first word is too long to be simply "Johns"...

Really? Can you see every letter of "Johnston" distinctly? Or are you simply seeing a blurry image which is not incompatible with being the word Johnston?

If you are able to print out the picture (I'm not) then do so and try to draw in the lines of all the letters. I think you will find you are creating lines more than you are tracing them.

For my part, I can see shapes which match up to the letters J-O-H-N-S in the first area. So I am not seeing the problem you are.

... and the second word is to long to simply be "on".

No, it isn't. A blurry large block-printed capital O, split in two, is no bigger than a blurry capital C and lower-case h. A blurry large block-printed capital N, split in two, is no bigger than a blurry lower-case l and d. A blurry lower-case i takes up negligible space and fits easily between them, created by the eye out of the blurry image.

Again -- I am not going to convince you by simply asserting I can see JOHNSTON, and you are not going to convince me by simply asserting you can see Johnston & Child. One of us is seeing an optical illusion. And there is a simple way to determine which of us it is.

If you are seeing correctly and I am being fooled by my eyes, then there is a gap in what I see as an O (and you see as C h). If I am seeing correctly and you are being fooled by your eyes, there is no such gap -- your eyes are simply tricking you into not seeing the middle portion of the O because the right and left sides of the O are thicker and darker than the center.

Our human eyes frequently fool us on things like this -- but mechanic eyes aren't fooled by such illusions. Surely there is a photographic tool which can reveal whether (a) top of the O is solid with no gap (as I see it) or (b) the letters C and h (which you see) do indeed have a gap between them. I think that mechanical eyes will reveal that, because the left and right of the O are solid (and thus more black) and the center is hollow (and thus more gray), your eyes are making it disappear on you.

Nova Land said...

I believe what is happening with the word JOHNSTON which makes it appear to transform into Johnston & Child for some people is that in the blurry image the nearness of solid black areas (the sides of the O) to a hollow black area (center of O) makes parts of the O in the center fade from view -- making it appear to split into two letters.

To illustrate my point about how our eyes can trick us when looking at black and white shapes, here are links to a few classic optical illusions.

Here's a stunning example of the eye changing our perception of gray -- making one gray area appear darker, another appear lighter, when they are both the same shade.

Here's another example of how nearness of black makes gray appear lighter, nearness of white makes it appear darker.

Here's a good example of how the presence of black can make a gray area disappear.

Two more, just for fun:

http://www.123opticalillusions.com/pages/opticalillusions22.php

http://www.123opticalillusions.com/pages/opticalillusions29.php

I don't have time to do a lengthy Google (I'm packing to leave for a 2-week trip) but there are many good sources -- on-line or in libraries -- which can explain how and why the eye tricks us in these ways. My point is that some of us are seeing something in the picture which isn't really there -- and I believe it's those who are seeing the words "Johnston & Child".

Caroline said...

Not to be rude, but I don't see Johnston & Child, I clearly see ON at the end. I agree with Nova Land.

Doubting Thomas said...

I enlarged the photo, then photo-shopped in (@Batang font size 4) Johnston & Child in red (you can see the similarities when put side by side. Then because it was as blurry as the original, enlarged the @Batang Font to size 10 and put that above the size 4.
As you can see when put side by side it is VERY possible it says "Johnston & Child".
http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/2549/tyra1749437.jpg

Doubting Thomas said...

Extreme close up
http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/7370/blownupz.jpg

Sarah in SC said...

I *really, really* want it to say "Johnston & Child," but it just doesn't. It's a strange font used for the tattoo--kind of like those you see in athletic team logos, but all I'm seeing, no matter which photo I use, what wheel I spin holding "control," and no matter the size of the close up.....I'm still just seeing "JOHNSTON."

And believe me, I would give just about ANYthing if it really said "Johnston & Child." That would be like Disney World great.
Also. ;)

Gigi3 said...

I agree with Diana. I enlarged the photo of Levi & Trig and then used a magnifying glass. There are definitely two words on Levi's forearm.

Muah: I concluded the same thing you did. While the tattoo is blurry, I read the second word as "child." I believe the two words are separated by a ampersand (&), but it could be a plus sign (+).

Here's my conclusion: The "& child" is either a temporary tattoo or it was photoshopped to superimpose it onto the photo. I believe this was done deliberatly to send SP a message.

Gigi3 said...

Diana is correct. When I enlarged the photo or Levi & Trig and then used a magnifying glass, I saw there were definitely two words.

Muah: I saw the same thing you did. While the whole tattoo is blurry, I made out the second word as "child." I believe there is an ampersand (&) between Johnston and child. Although it could be a plus sign (+).

My conclusion: The "& child" is either a temporary tattoo or it was photoshopped to superimpose it onto the photo; most likely the latter since teenager seldom think this far ahead. Whichever, I believe it was done deliberately to send SP & others a message.

Silver said...

Question: At what point during the Tyra interview does the full shot including Sadie appear? All I've ever seen in the video is the one that just shows her hand on his shoulder.

If anyone can pinpoint the time, I'll get a screen grab of that one, too, because it'll make a much better comparison. I don't want us making assumptions on such a blurry photo.

I doubt this will convince any of you who still see "& Child". But this is a comparison between the screen grab of the Tyra video that was posted on YouTube in HD quality (2:11 in part 1) and the blurry photo that is posted to go along with Message. In. A. Bottle.

I enlarged the "Message" photo to be the approximate same size as the screen grab.

I hope you can tell that not only is the tattoo the exact same length in both, the same shapes appear. Only the shapes/letters on the left from the screen grab are clearer.

http://tinyurl.com/dmycps

I wish this was a message. But it isn't.

Ohio mom said...

Silver, thanks so much for putting those pictures side by side. I can see why many posters thought they saw JOHNSTON&CHILD, but I think your side by side page solves the mystery.

I agree with you. Levi's tatoo is just JOHNSTON.

muah said...

Thank you !! !! !! Now I see what you're seeing.

It's even more awesome that it's coincidence or what have you sending the "Johnston & child" message! Several different people independently saw it the same.
Twilight Zone! Audrey and team don't stop now. The Universe is telling us something!

Duncan said...

I have to agree with Nova Land.

Nova Land said...

"I believe what is happening with the word JOHNSTON which makes it appear to transform into Johnston & Child for some people is that in the blurry image the nearness of solid black areas (the sides of the O) to a hollow black area (center of O) makes parts of the O in the center fade from view -- making it appear to split into two letters."

The last two letters appear to be ON.

duncan

cooky said...

It would seem that Attorney Rex has them by the you-know-whats - according to radaronline Chuck Heath never said "those things" about good kid Levi! Why, they get along just fine! Clear now?

http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2009/04/exclusive-interview-sarah-palin’s-father-says-he-didn’t-attack-levi

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 306 of 306   Newer› Newest»