Tuesday, April 28, 2009

Pregnant with Piper? You betchya...!

Since the beginning of the controversy regarding Gov. Sarah Palin's pregnancy, one aspect that has been commented on continually is that her appearance last spring did not mesh with expectations of a "normal" pregnancy.

At the time of the announcement, March 5th, 2008, the news that she was expecting was regarded with utter astonishment. Although Palin claimed at the time that she had to announce the pregnancy when she did because "people were beginning to notice," and that her clothes were getting "snugger and snugger," in fact the only person who has ever stated this IS Gov. Palin. (Even the article in which Palin is quoted as saying her clothes were getting tighter has as its main theme the fact that no one - not even her staffers - suspected she was pregnant.)

And a quick digression: I have always wondered, after reading this explanation for the public acknowledgment of a pregnancy that was allegedly already in its seventh month, if no one had EVER "noticed" her clothes getting tight, at what point would Palin have announced it? It's a fair question. Or would she have just showed up with a baby one day? She seems to be implying exactly that.)

Not one person has ever come forward and stated that they even suspected Gov. Palin to be pregnant prior to March 5th, at which point she would have been – based on her own announced due date – approximately 29 weeks pregnant with her fifth child. Not one staffer, not one journalist, no one. One sole journalist, Cherie Shirrey of KTVA, within 48 hours of the controversy erupting in August, jumped to Palin's defense and claimed that she had seen Palin numerous times for interviews and "in the studio" prior to Trig's birth (implying that it was between the time of the announcement – March 5th – and the birth six weeks later) and that Palin was definitely pregnant. Here's the blog post I did about this last December. However, Palin's daily schedule (obtained under a FOIA request) for the two months prior to Trig's birth in fact shows not a single visit to this TV station's studio. I have personally written Ms. Shirrey asking her to corroborate her statement. I have inquired about the dates of these interviews, topics covered, and why no video or stills are available of any of these interviews. I have received no answer.

After the announcement of her nomination on August 29th, one photo had appeared of Gov. Palin pregnant with a previous child (prior to the alleged pregnancy with Trig in 2008.)



This photo was provided by her parents to the news media as part of a large group of family photos that were released very shortly (within a day or two) after her VP pick. Although in a couple of places it has been suggested that this is not actually Palin at all (based on the fact that frankly the woman in the photo does not seem to look much like Sarah Palin does now) neither the Palin family nor the McCain campaign retracted the photo or ever stated it was not she. This photo has been shown widely, specifically to cast doubt on whether she is Trig's mother, and has been effective in doing so. I believe that if they had been able to retract the photo by claiming that it was someone else and had been released by mistake, that they would have done so.

Her hairstyle and general appearance actually are consistent with other photos we have of her from the late eighties into the early nineties. This comparison below shows Palin, I believe, looking very much similar to the photo of her late in pregnancy.



(And, no, I have no clue at all why she is wearing a crown, so don't bother to ask.)

Although rumored to be of her late in her pregnancy with Track (in 1989), as far as I can determine that's never been confirmed. However, based on hairstyle, my guess is that the photo is either from Track's pregnancy or Bristol's pregnancy two years later (1991.) Willow was born in mid-summer, 1995, and based on the surroundings, I do not believe this to be a mid summer scene.

Regardless of the exact year, however, one thing is clear. Gov. Palin is not only pregnant, she is in this photo I would say larger than average, particularly so if this might be her first pregnancy. In precise medical terms, she's huge. This evidence of her being of certainly "normal" size (and then some) in a prior pregnancy has been largely ignored by those who support Palin. They feel comfortable ignoring this photo for one reason: we do not know "how pregnant" Palin is here. She could hypothetically be one day away from giving birth at full term, a point she never reached with Trig, who was allegedly born at 35 weeks. Palin might be, it's suggested, one of those women who just gets really big "right at the end." The picture therefore is worthless for comparison purposes, it's claimed.

And – again – whenever this is discussed, the same group of "she got big right at the end" naysayers also serenade us with plausible tales of how they themselves, (or their wives, sisters, co-workers, what have you) never looked pregnant either. Every one of these people seems to know LOTS of 110 pound women who never looked pregnant and then, miraculously, gave birth to healthy seven, eight, even nine pound children. I am sure there are exceptions to every rule, but in fact, in nearly thirty years of working with pregnant women, I have never met one who looked significantly less pregnant on a subsequent pregnancy (unless there was a very good physiological reason, such as a single pregnancy following twins) than she did on an earlier one. It just doesn't work that way. I know, you know it, Governor Sarah Palin knows it, and deep down, every Palin supporter who tries to feed us this line of bullpuckey knows it too.

Since September, I have been hoping that additional photos of Palin from a prior pregnancy would become available which would shed some additional light on this issue. Was her pregnancy with Piper, for example, as magically free of any of those pesky physical changes as her pregnancy with Trig apparently was?

I can say now that it was not. Additional photos have been found, though regrettably they are not of the best quality. We have located two photographs of her taken in late November/early December, 2000, during her pregnancy with Piper. Both are from the archives of the Frontiersman, the local newspaper for the Mat-Su Valley.

Originals are not available. We have the photos in three separate formats, copies made from microfiche (microfiche provided by the University of Alaska), Xerox copies made from the actual extant physical copies of the paper (in person at the Frontiersman offices), and digital photographs of the physical copies of the paper (also taken in person at the Frontiersman offices.) None of these methods are ideal. Yet, in both, in spite of the fuzziness of the copies, I believe she definitely looks pregnant.

Piper was born on March 22, 2001, according to this article on her projected due date. The first week of December, therefore, Sarah Palin would have been around 25 weeks pregnant. She looks, well, normal. At twenty five weeks into her fourth pregnancy. This is, fortuitously, exactly the same point of pregnancy she would have been at when these famous "Super Tuesday" photos were taken in Juneau.





Unlike many other photos of her taken in late winter / early spring 2008, where Palin seems to be determined to hide behind winter coats, trench coats, huge (and notably unattractive) floppy print scarves, tables, podiums, mannish black blazers, and her own children, these two shots are remarkably clear. She is slim-hipped and flat-chested, and, in my opinion, she shows utterly no signs of pregnancy whatsoever.

Here are the two photos. The first, dated December 1, 2000 would have been taken sometime in the prior week, so let's say between November 24th and November 30th.



The second, dated December 5, 2000, again could have been taken any point in the prior week: between November 30th and December 4th. In this second photo, Palin is holding something – I presume a coat – draped over her left arm. Here's our original:



Here's one we sharpened to try to bring up some contrast between what she is wearing and what she is holding.



Closely examining the photo shows a slightly greenish cast to the fabric in a few places. However, as the fabric falls between her body and that of the other woman it is impossible to differentiate between what she is holding and her dark clothing, due to the fact that newspaper "half tones" scan at 85 dpi, which is a very low resolution photograph to work from.

In spite of the drawbacks of these two photos, the fullness of Palin's shape – in both photos - is impossible to deny.

Palin's supporters – the "Sarah Palin had Trig because Sarah Palin would never lie" posse – have also stated that the reason Palin never looked pregnant with Trig is that in 2007-2008 she was "in the public eye" and "did not let herself go." These photos of her pregnant with Piper demonstrate this is false. Palin was in the public eye (she was mayor of Wasilla) and was also very fit (running competitively around this point in her life). How she looked with Piper in 2000-2001 should be a very good guide to how we might have expected her to look with a fifth pregnancy several years later.

Why she didn't is anyone's guess. Mine is that she was not pregnant.

282 comments:

1 – 200 of 282   Newer›   Newest»
Kyra said...

Audrey,
thanks for stressing that point about pregnancy to pregnancy. I know people who didn't show much, but we tend to carry about the same pregnancy to pregnancy - at least I and every one of my friends/family did.

The other thing I noticed, is that SP's face in the photo of her hugely pregnant is the same face as her with the crown - a little pudgy, but not grossly obese. If she were, it would be reflected in her face, which it is not. Therefore, in my opinion, it is a fairly accurate reflection of her pregnancy size and not an anomaly due to excess weight gain during that first pregnancy.

passinthru said...

Of course she wasn't pregnant. There may be people who would believe this story, but like you, I've spent lots of time among pregnant women (and I've also spent a bit of time pregnant) and nothing about her story makes a lick of sense, in that context. Nice to have the Piper pictures, though. :)

Plus, really. Pregnant women her age and position positively GLORY in it. If she'd known she was pregnant at that magazine shoot, she'd have insisted on a bikini. :D

B said...

Thank you, Audrey and Wasilla newspaper sleuths!

wv = unite (I think we did.)

MrsTarquinBiscuitbarrel said...

Excellent points, as always, Audrey! And I did appreciate passinthru's comments about how women "in [SP's] age and position positively GLORY in" what is now called, by magazines, a "baby bump."

I know I did. By the time my husband and I started our family, I was absolutely dying to "show." So did every other contemporary of mine--to a gal, married, happy, and eager to be mothers.

Who DOESN'T want to show, and to measure one's belly with her hands and gauge its growth, day by day? Teenage girls who don't want to admit that they weren't able to remain chaste. Can you think of anyone else? Hmmmm, how about a pro-abstinence-education-only, anti-choice governor who's covering up for her daughter?

The only other similar, publicly prominent example that springs to mind is that of Jack Nicholson. Born in 1936, he grew up in a poor, not-very-functional family. Not until 1974 did he learn, from a journalist from TIME who was profiling Nicholson, that his "sister" was actually his biological mother, and his "mother" and "father" were, in fact, his maternal grandparents. By that time, both his mother and grandmother had died; to this day, he doesn't know who his father was.

But that was then, in the 1930s and 1940s, and this is now. Why?

B said...

ProChoiceGrandma (previous post, April 20, 2009 10:35 PM) provided this picture of Sarah pregnant with Piper: http://tiny.cc/M1irY

The Alaskastock caption said it was Iron Dog 2000, but PCGrandma had seen a blurb saying Piper was born the next month, as in 2001. We decided the kids are Track and Willow, because of the age gap.

At almost 8 mos., Sarah couldn't zip her jacket. Not sure it adds much, but relevant to this post.

vonrupert said...

I noticed that she is wearing sensible shoes for a pregnant woman in the second picture, also, too.

Amy1 said...

Who is with SP in the two Super Tuesday photos?

muah said...

Good work!

Sarah was wearing sensible shoes for the December 2000 pregnancy.

Nancy said...

Unless Ms Palin decides to run for national office in 2012, we may never know the truth. Hopefully the information and insight contained in this blog will keep Ms Palin away from seeking national office. For this, I am grateful that you keep the heat on, in what is usually a private family matter.

B said...

I don't want LisanTX's great Slush Cup photo to be overlooked at the end of the last post:

http://tinyurl.com/c9apkf

Who is Bristol's man friend? Matt Hanley? Johnny Chandler? Random photo poser? Anyone recognize him?

B said...

wv=vesecto(my)
What Levi may be ready for.

leu2500 said...

I never believed that SP gave birth to Trig, but never having been pregnant myself, I wasn't familiar with all the details that the moms on this website have discussed.

However, a friend of mine is expecting her first. She's petite, slender, and 20 weeks along. I saw here the other day and a lot of what's been discussed I get now. (1) Her whole body has changed, not just her belly (2) I get the comments about the Gov assoc (?) video, where SP bends at the waist, crosses her legs at the knees, etc. No way can my friend do that. And (3) the curve of her spine is different. I think the 2nd Piper picture shows the spinal curve. But none of the alleged pregnant with Trig pictures, not even/especially the Gusty picture, show this.

B said...

Re; Slush Cup photo
Same guy posed with Sarah and with Todd, so probably just a fan, though sort of creepy Bristol let him put his arm around her.

Punkinbugg said...

NIiiiice.

And.... check out the SHOES she chooses to wear when pregnant...

in Alaska...

where one would presume there is ice and/or snow on the ground.

Where are those high-heeled boots you wore when "pregnant" with Trig and hiking from the Governor's House to the State House?

pearlygirl said...

Way to go B. Even if anyone doesn't want to say that the coat is just unzipped at the bottom for any number of reasons, Palin's face fills out each pregnancy. Her face is definitely rounder and "pudgier" (although I hate saying that because the fuller face that pregnant women get can cause a female to get self-conscience but it's part of the normal process.)

Also Audrey, if you have the name of the photographer from those newspapers, chances are that he/she still has a copy or the negative at the very least which would give you better detail. Every photographer I know keeps their stuff especially pictures that actually make it into the paper--good for the portfolio and all that. However, there is no guarantee that the photographer will want to help us for personal or professional reasons.

Great find. It still is circumstantial but the "trig" pregnancy was definitely an anomaly considering her past body changes. Every woman may carry different but each woman has a definite body style when pregnant. The only change might be getting larger or showing sooner than the last---but smaller? I don't think so.

Ginger said...

Just saw the latest issue of the National Enq.

Poor Sarah! She only had "one" page and it was all old news.

Levi did say he was working odd jobs and looking forward to being an electrician and the author of a new book.

I'm waiting for Levi to really hire a family law attorney and go to court for 50% custody of Tripp.

That will make my day!

Journeygal said...

In the ADN article announcing SP's pregnancy in her 7th month...

http://tinyurl.com/cn9g4r

... here are some statements I find interesting:

"That the pregnancy is so advanced astonished all who heard the news. The governor, a runner who's always been trim, simply doesn't look pregnant."

"I thought it was becoming obvious," Palin said. "You know, clothes getting snugger and snugger."

"Palin said she decided to reveal the pregnancy after she felt the signs were giving her away, like doing less running this winter and being "ravenously hungry."

"She's known as a fashion plate, but said she hasn't been dressing differently to cover her barely perceptible bulge."

What I find interesting is that all of these statements could be said of a woman who was simply trying her darndest to put on 10 pounds.

Kathleen said...

Windy City Woman and others

Here is the link request for Britta's blog in Spain.

http://tinyurl.com/d7ckjk

Kathleen

Bretta said...

I remember when she was pregnant with Piper and how proud she was that she could have the baby, conduct her mayoral business and return to work within a couple of days of delivery.

These photos just re-emphasize to me that she was not preggo with TriG.

ProChoiceGrandma said...

I am hoping Morgan will kindly allow me re-post my previous comment from 4/20/09 since it fits with this latest article from Audrey. BTW, I never did hear back from “Questions and Answers”. I am positive what the blurb said at the time when I saw it, because I was so excited that here was a picture of Sarah pregnant with Piper. But the next night, the blurb was no longer there. Again, here is my post from 4/20/09:

Hi Molly:
You asked about the picture that I saw of Sarah Palin when she was pregnant with Piper. Well, here is the picture, but let me explain further below.

From Alaskastock.com
Image Number:
351PL EX0022 001

“Mayor of Wasilla Sarah Palin with her husband Todd Palin at the end of the 2000 Iron Dog Snowmachine race, Fairbanks, Alaska"
http://tiny.cc/M1irY

Even though this is the Alaskastock picture that I saw last night, there was a longer and different blurb that said something to the effect that also in the picture, but not seen, is their daughter, Piper, who was born the following month. I do not recall specifically if it was in the caption or if it was in a statement below the picture. I believe Piper was born 3-19-01, and this photo says at end of the 2000 Iron Dog. Now I am really confused! Do I have the wrong year for Piper’s birth, or is the year incorrect on this photo? I distinctly remember about “born the following month” because I immediately thought of Questions and Answers timeline showing the timeline faces of the girls, and would like to have him/her do the same comparison with Sarah’s pregnant and faked pregnant faces.

How exasperating!

regina said...

Amy1,

The woman with SP in the Super Tuesday photos is Beth Kerttula, who SP rejected for the vacant Senate seat recently.

MrsTarquinBiscuitbarrel said...

leu2500, a very sensitive and astute assessment of the changes that pregnancy has wrought upon your friend! It seems that the hoax that SP has been trying to pull off is making other folks who haven't been pregnant themselves rethink the whole situation, especially when someone close to them is pregnant, and they can see the woman's body and emotions change.

David Gregory, a Beltway scribe who's now at Meet the Press, swallowed whole SP's tale of the "wild ride" back from Texas before TriG's birth, and actually said, on air (I have to find the link), that this proved Palin's "toughness."

Made me wonder what Gregory's wife thought: Would he have wanted his own unborn child endangered in the scenario SP laid out? Likely he didn't know all of the details. If he'd been MY husband, I would have boxed his ears. Mine, even in his delight over our pregnancies and squeamishness about delivery, would have known better...

Headtrip Honey said...

Hm. Also, in that second pic, you can see she is wearing shoes that one might expect of someone pregnant: flat, with thick soles. Sturdy and comfortable.

Not like the heels she was constantly wearing during her "pregnancy" with Trig.

peter said...

in the first picture, i always thought sarah palin was the woman in beige (cut out of your picture, but there's a copy here http://is.gd/vluF), not the woman in red.

Semantic said...

Another strange thing about all the scarves and jackets during the supposed Trig pregnancy was that without exception pregnant women are WARMER than everyone else in a room. (My pregnant winter was the ONLY time in my life when I did not wear turtlenecks and long johns inside)

There is no way that a pregnant woman would wear jackets and scarves in rooms where everyone else is in short sleeves and lower-cut tops.

Elizabeth said...

Has nobody found any SP pictures from the two conferences she attended in the week preceding her March 5, 2008, announcement of her pregnancy?

http://www.adn.com/palinfamily/story/336402.html

WV: shlyth = sleuth

ProChoiceGrandma said...

To Peter at 4/29 at 6:11 am: I totally fail to understand why you would have thought Sarah was the woman in beige, facing AWAY from the camera, instead of the very pregnant Sarah in the red shirt facing the camera. I think once again we may owe our thanks to Grandpa Heath in his over-exuberance for proudly providing this family picture of his famous governor daughter and VP candidate. We all have Chuck to thank for telling the media about the water leaking in Texas which caused Audrey to take notice. Let me just give a shout out for Grandpa Heath from one grandparent to another! Yeah Chuck!

midnightcajun said...

It's unfortunate that the quality of photocopied pictures is always so low. People will see what they want to see. The only thing that really stands out is that characteristic pregnant woman's sway back in the second photo.

Bretta, do I take it you live in Wasilla? Did you see Palin during the time she was allegedly pregnant with Trig?

And I always laugh when I read this line from the ADN on Palin's supposed pregnancy, "She's known as a fashion plate, but said she hasn't been dressing differently to cover her barely perceptible bulge." Pre-GOP Sarah known as a fashion plate? You're kidding me, right? One thing looking at all of these old photos of Sarah has told me is that Sarah Palin has the worst dressing sense of any professional woman I've ever seen--jeans at formal receptions, huge distracting prints, casual windbreakers worn inside--Glamor could do an entire segment using her as the illustrations in a "what not to wear" article. (Of course, she's not really professional, but she's in a professional woman's position.)

KaJo said...

To add to Kyra's comment @ 5:06 PM Apr 28, SP's face in the "holding coat" second picture looks remarkably like the "red big shirt" picture of SP pregnant with (presumably) Track.

Note in that second picture how her upper back and head is slightly cantilevered back at an angle over her buttocks, like you'd expect a pregnant woman to stand.

Note how her bosum is filled out.

Note also the clunky flat (comfortable for a pregnant woman) shoes, that you NEVER saw on Palin's feet in all the pictures from February-March 2008.

Sarah Palin in late 2000 = pregnant.

Sarah Palin in late 2007-early 2008 = not pregnant.

(my WV is "kingli")

Morgan said...

**MODERATOR REMINDER***

Per the poster who just submitted a comment regarding Dar Miller. Yes, that has been addressed here and I'm not going to allow it to be reopened for discussion. If you seek more clarification then by all means help yourself to the archives.

Let's stick to the topic, please.

(You regular posters should know better than to try to slip something past that we've specifically said we aren't going to discuss.)

KaJo said...

B said...April 28, 2009 6:17 PM I don't want LisanTX's great Slush Cup photo to be overlooked at the end of the last post:

http://tinyurl.com/c9apkf

Who is Bristol's man friend? Matt Hanley? Johnny Chandler? Random photo poser? Anyone recognize him?
I don't know this for sure (in fact, I'm just guessing), but it MAY be either "Bob" or "Mark", one of the two DJs for KWHL, that radio station that (I think) was one of the sponsors of the Slush Cup.

From some of the remarks I've read at C4P, the event is a gathering for the young hippie surfer-dude crowd, and those two look the part! :)

ProChoiceGrandma said...

Hi Elizabeth at 4/29/09 at 7:06:
I have looked at that ADN article many times that you posted above. However, reading it once again, something jumped out at me that I never paid any attention:
“Aside from Piper, the Palins have three other children: Track, 18, serving in the U.S. Army at Fort Wainwright in Fairbanks; Bristol, 17, a high school junior; and Willow, 13.”
Track was in Fairbanks! So would that mean Track was in Fairbanks at the same time as all the mystery surrounding the AHA/Iron Dog weekend of 2/14-2/17/08? Maybe they had a private little ceremony for Bristol and Levi, with Sara officiating since she is the Governor, and Tod and big brother Track as witnesses. After this weekend, Sarah started her scarf charade, three weeks later announced her 7 month pregnancy on 3/5/08 which was the day after she knew McCain won the Republican nomination on 3/4/08, Levi quits his junior year in school to go to work sometime in March, the “promise ring” (I have NEVER heard of a boy/man wearing a “promise ring”), and the list goes on.

ProChoiceGrandma said...

KaJo, I looked up Bob and Mark from KWHL, here is the link:
http://www.kwhl.com/jocks
The guy with BP, SP and TP does not look like either one of these jocks. If it is the receding hairline jock on the left, and he wore that dewrag in the pictures with the Palins, then he is considerably older than Bristol. But I do not think it is one of the jocks.

Original Lee said...

Just looking at the second picture, even if you can't see her midsection specifically, you can tell she is pregnant. She's not wearing heels, and she has that slightly backwards-leaning posture women get to compensate for having more weight in front. The photos from early 2008 never show her with a posture that shows she is compensating for the weight of the fetus and fluid (even the famous Gusty photo), and she was wearing very high heels in (I believe) all of the photos except the Gusty one.

KaJo said...

pearlygirl said @ 8:29 PM Apr 28...
...Palin's face fills out each pregnancy. Her face is definitely rounder and "pudgier" (although I hate saying that because the fuller face that pregnant women get can cause a female to get self-conscience but it's part of the normal process.)Palin's face actually DID get fuller in spring 2008, but from the pictures I've seen, only in that last week or so before her alleged delivery April 18th.

The pictures at the ServeAlaska ceremony April 10th, the Gusty picture, and the pictures of Palin standing alongside the other governors at the Dallas conference April 17, 2008 are the only pictures that show her looking full of face.

It's almost as if she porked up on ham, corned beef, potato chips, and anything else that would make her look bloated.

ProChoiceGrandma said...

Penny at Immoral Minority posted this:
Here is a photo/bio of Matt Hanley:

http://tinyurl.com/coekqr

KaJo said...

Slightly off topic:

I was just Googling "Sarah Palin's sister Molly", thinking I could get an ID of that 1990 picture of Palin and "the other woman" whom I believe has been identified previously as her sister Molly...

....and I happened on this picture of Palin in a blog entry dated October 9, 2007. The caption says she's followed by Piper, then by sister Molly and a niece (one of Molly's offspring).

That dress Piper's wearing (and the niece, too, it appears) matches the dress Piper was wearing in the family photo that has been dated as Sept. 14, 2007, and the photo with Bristol in the Mansion's parlor, same date (on Diana's Truthseeker222 Flickr account http://tinyurl.com/dzq8z8 )

I'm posting this only because I don't think I've seen this picture either on Diana's collection or Katherine/Patrick's collection.

KaJo said...

Oops...I got so focussed on making sure I had Diana's Flickr site URL correct that I forgot to post the URL of the new picture I found!

It's at a blog entitled "Campaign2008VictoryA" (hah! how'd that work out?), and the tinyURL is http://tinyurl.com/dezxmo

Sorry about that... :)

-----------------


Another site I found while Googling "Sarah Palin and sister Molly" was very interesting.

Ever heard of "Wikileaks"?

Scary site, almost like having a LexisNexis account, where you can research almost ANYTHING.

Anyway, there's an interesting page there -- http://tinyurl.com/5tgmve -- entitled "Successes and three near misses for Wikileaks" with a subtopic "The case of the Sarah Palin Yahoo hacker" that says David Kernell, the "hacker", wasn't Wikileaks' source. Hm...

B said...

KaJo said...
I was just Googling "Sarah Palin's sister Molly", thinking I could get an ID of that 1990 picture of Palin and "the other woman" whom I believe has been identified previously as her sister Molly ***

Really? That woman always looked older than Sarah to me. Molly is a couple of years younger than Sarah. Could be Heather, I guess. She favors Chuck whereas Sarah and Molly favor Sally. But I thought the woman was older than Heather as well. The best Molly picture I've seen is Xmas 2006.

mdlw56 said...

Audrey,

Great work trying to pin Ms. Shirrey down!

For what it is worth, I would have guessed Palin carrying a baby girl in the picture with the red shirt.

Great work, Audrey and friends!

Audrey said...

A note to pro choice grandma, and others who have asked about the Alaska Stock picture, and stated that Sarah cannot zip her jacket, etc.

Researching this race is confusing because the official name of the race is the Tesoro Iron Dog 2000. It's just like the Indianapolis 500... it's 2000 miles long. So, in 2000 the race would have been technically the 2000 Iron Dog 2000. But quite often, because of the confusion caused by the distance being close to the years we are in now (no one makes that mistake with the Indianapolis 500!) quite often, the distance 2000 is dropped from the name. So the 2000 Iron Dog happened in 2000, 2002 Iron Dog in 2002, etc.

The caption at Alaska Stock is correct, no matter what you may have seen or read elsewhere. This photo was taken in 2000, a full year prior to Piper's birth.

Todd Palin won the race that year, and although I cannot find any photos of that victory on line (Iron Dog archives only go back 3-4 years) from other research I have found out that Todd was sponsored by Arctic Cat in 2000 and 2002, and Yamaha in 2001.

In the photo in question, he is clearly wearing Arctic Cat gear. So it is my conclusion that this photo was taken in February, 2000.

If anyone has any additional photos of this Iron Dog - or the Palins at the next one, in 2001, please send them to info@palindeception.com

Lilybart said...

I often ask myself, why do I care SO MUCH about this lie?

I want her discredited so she can't ever be President and ruin my life!

But the other thing that bothers me is that as a woman, lying about a pregnancy just pisses me off. These ridiculous NOT-pregnant photos with the stupid huge scarf....I guess I just don't like being lied to.

If in the end, there is a compelling humanitarian reason for faking this for someone, I will apologize to her. But for now, claiming a DS baby as your own, which benefits you poltically BIG TIME, is a ruse that needs to be exposed.

Ghostbuster said...

KaJo, that pic you found was in the October 15, 2007 cover story "Now this is Woman's Work". A little googling led me to the name of the photographer, and from there to this very interesting gallery:
https://pa.photoshelter.com/gallery-show/G0000s65T0nGgM7Y

15 pictures of Palin and family, with dates and captions, taken by photographer Andrew Testa. Some were taken in Juneau before or during the official portrait session (the one with Bristol in a spotted dress) and others were taken in Anchorage and in Wasilla. All the pictures are dated Sept 13th, which seems a stretch to me - watching Willow compete in a x-country race (in Wasilla), conference call with Gen. Petraus (in the Anchorage Gov. office), football game, official portrait, and visit to the capitol building (in Juneau) - all on the same day??? With the entire family (plus Molly and her daughter), including a bunch of teenagers and their hair products, in tow?

No wonder she didn't notice that Bristol was showing. ;-)

Ooooh, more here:
http://www.panos.co.uk/

Just type palin into the search box.

Ivyfree said...

"And, no, I have no clue at all why she is wearing a crown, so don't bother to ask"

Ah, the dream, the dream.... Don't we all know that she'd really LIKE to wear a crown?

Actually, in both those pictures, I looked at her belly and she looked about 5-6 months pregnant in them, but then I looked at her posture. You can see it more clearly in the second photo, but it's there in the first one too; she's leaning back away from her her belly, counter-balancing it by increasing the arch of her lower spine. I thought these photos were really good representations of what happens to a woman's posture when she's pregnant. It's like watching that video of her presenting Trig to the office when he's supposedly 3 days old: she's not walking like a woman who has given birth so recently. Audry could describe it better, but the pelvic structure stretches out as the baby drops and passes through it, and it takes a while to get back to normal. These are changes that can't be faked very well.

Annabel said...

Hi there! Long time reader, first time commenter. Allow me to cut to the chase...

Like the majority of the posters on this blog, I don't believe for one second that Sarah Palin gave birth to Trig... but if we all want to be taken seriously, then it's best not to get simple facts wrong. Audrey, there are a few statements in your post regarding the children's birthdays that are in of need correcting:

1.) Bristol was born in 1990, not 1991.
2.) Willow's birthday is January 21, making her a mid-winter baby, not a mid-summer one.
3.) Piper was born on the 19th of March 2001. The article you linked to was published on Thursday, the 22nd, but states that Piper's birth was on Monday, three days earlier.

As you can see, these are not earth shattering errors, but I felt the need to bring them to your attention. Sorry for being nitpicky...

— Annabel

peter said...

ProChoiceGrandma (4/29 at 7:09 am):

the reason i thought sarah was the woman in beige, facing away from the camera, instead of the very pregnant woman in the red shirt facing the camera is that the woman in red bears no resemblance to sarah palin, while the woman in beige has palin's body shape.

i don't know the provenance of the photo.

peter said...

more than that, really -- the woman in beige looks like sarah palin, even though she is not facing the camera. don't you think so?

i gather the picture was provided by the heath family without any identification or date information.

KaJo said...

ProChoiceGrandma said..."KaJo, I looked up Bob and Mark from KWHL, here is the link..."Thanks, ProChoiceGrandma...

I'd gone to the KWHL site myself, but for some reason I was linked to the bio page, not their picture page, and I couldn't figure out how to find those pictures (no matter what I clicked my cursor on!).

That's what I like about PD, we all try to help each other out if one of us is in error... :)

Interesting thoughts said...

The very pregnant woman dressed in a red shirt with black stretch pants is Sarah Palin. The picture you posted has been cropped. In the original, the woman standing behind Sarah is her mother, Sally Heath, and they are standing on the deck of the Heath's home off the Palmer- Wasilla Hwy.

http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/0aFc47u3szeI6/340x.jpg

Punkinbugg said...

Ivyfree,

You just gave me an idea. Rather than putting together a timeline of photographs (which the naysayers will claim are Photoshopped), why not put together VIDEO CLIPS of her from early 2008?

The clips could include her leaning-way-over-at-the-waist interview in Los Angeles, her famous "shredding abs" hike to the Capital Bldg, hugging the First Dud(e) at the Iron Dog Finish Line and then her full-tilt stride into the office after giving birth 3 days prior.

A well-done video like that could go viral overnight. Just ask Susan Boyle.

While researching this post, I came across a Canadian news (CBC) report that I've never seen. Much could be added to that report now!

leu2500 said...

Peter - I think I understand why you think the woman in beige looks like SP. It's the hair; it's smoother, more like SP's hair is today. However, if you look at other photos of SP, such as her beauty queen photos, the infamous "I may be broke..." photo, you'll see that SP went through a v. curly/permed phase, like so many of us did in the 80s (see The Wedding Singer).

The Editor said...

Very good detective work - especially the comments about posture and sensible shoes. If we are to believe that SP was indeed pregnant with a special needs child in her mid-forties, wouldn't she be refraining from jogging and wearing spiked heels while on the icy roads of Alaska in March? Of course, that was all before the wild ride from Texas to a not-ready-for-premie-baby hospital. Sounds like a woman who hoped for a miscarriage, if all that is to be believed. Instead, logical minds would go to a cover-up of a teen pregnancy in the family like was done in the "old days." Except that the co-conspirators in the old school pregnancy cover-up didn't go on to run for VP of the US. They did it to protect the teenaged mother. SP threw her daughter under the campaign bus.

Ghostbuster said...

ProChoice Grandma, you say you "have NEVER heard of a boy/man wearing a “promise ring”" -

Well now you can say you have. My husband and I had matching rings that we wore before we got married. If I had to put a label on it I would call them friendship rings, not promise rings. But whatever, I don't think Levi used the term "promise ring" either. When we got married we switched them over to our ring fingers and they were then our wedding rings.

I know other couples who wore matching rings before they got married too. Not something everyone does, but not unheard of, either.

anne s said...

I always wondered if the lady to the left of the pumpkin belly red shirt lady was really palin but I am convinced pumpkin belly is Palin Because...
The photo was provided by her family. Why would they send a photo of some one other than her prego looking at the camera and Sarah to the side looking off to the distance?
Gotta be S.P .

B said...

Audrey said, "Todd was sponsored by Arctic Cat in 2000 and 2002, and Yamaha in 2001. In the photo in question, he is clearly wearing Arctic Cat gear. So it is my conclusion that this photo was taken in February, 2000."

Thanks for setting the record straight. She didn't look a month away from delivering, did she?

wv=krapsa. We're knee-deep in it.

Doubting Thomas said...

While looking for photo's of the 2001 IronDog Race, I came across this online Diary/Journal of the race from a racers point of view.
It mentions Todd Palin in passing and that is it. There are no photo's of Sarah either.
But If you want to know what the Iron Dog Snow mobile Race...err excuse me SnowMACHINE Race, is like. Then this is a Great read!
http://www.irondog.org/racers/stories/2001_Team27.pdf
or Tinyurled
http://tinyurl.com/dlvs37

Bretta said...

MrsTarquinBiscuitbarrel said...
"""leu2500, a very sensitive and astute assessment of the changes that pregnancy has wrought upon your friend! ...especially when someone close to them is pregnant, and they can see the woman's body and emotions change."""
Very true! My cubicle-neighbor at work started showing before four months - she's 6' tall - short women usually show sooner! Also I notice her voice has changed as well as her shape - and of course (this is normal IMHO) she talks constantly about the pregnancy. It would bug me but I remember all that 'stuff' being so important to me to process during pg.
Bottom Line (for me) SP did not 'show.'

Publius said...

Audrey brings up a good point with this latest post. All you need to do sometimes is step back and look at the basics.

When a normal sized woman is in the later stages of pregnancy it is nearly impossible NOT to notice it. Woman are always getting looked at, especially if they are even remotely attractive - much less a Governor of a US state. It boggles the mind that no one could tell that Palin was pregnant. Not a single person. None.

Really, all anyone needs to do is spend even a small amount of time with late-term pregnant women and you'll realize what a real pregnancy is about.

Woman get noticed, especially pregnant ones.

People talk when a woman is pregnant. Just ask Bristol.

Heck, there were/are even rumors that Michelle Obama was/is pregnant!

Truthseeker2 said...

Thanks, Interesting Thoughts -- it sounds like you know what you are talking about.

Bretta said...

midnightcajun said...
"Bretta, do I take it you live in Wasilla? Did you see Palin during the time she was allegedly pregnant with Trig?"

No, I live in Anchorage and travel all over the state for work. I confess to an early and constant fascination with the SP glimmer-glammer because I believed the hype that she was ethical and capable.

In the last 12+ months her actions have resulted in disillusionment and my embarrassment at her behavior and demeanor. It is by no means a singular source: it is said that she is disengaged from the work of a governor, does not hold meetings, does not push her projects in the legislature, and has an adversarial relationship with legislators and even people who you'd think are on her side. She is said to be disconnected and unresponsive, except where she attacks those who have filed ethics charges against her; calling them bogus, frivolous, distracting, but not addressing validity of the charges in particular.

I also know that a State Commissioner investigated me because I made a comment to an ADN article that that particular Commissioner did not have education credentials for that position.

Her tentacles are far-reaching. I hope to help you understand that Alaska is a very small town, population-wise.

I've been pregnant four times; I've had intuitions when preggos are nearby that they are pregnant, knowing sometimes before they do; this is only experiential, not evidence (I know the difference, I have a Master's degree in Science) my point is to answer your question: I never had a 'sense' that SP carried. The photos and other data put forth have not shown me any different, i.e., that she delivered a baby. It seems so easy to document, even if you're out-raged that someone asked: I have photos of my huge belly and have copies of my children's birth certificates. I would not be sorry to show anyone on demand.

I don't even care who did give birth to TriG and I'm okay with SP adopting him. I'm mostly concerned with the behavior of someone who purports to be capable of leadership of this state and this country.

mlewis said...

I'm interested in Bretta's comments, describing Sarah's last 12 months as Governor of Alaska. Maybe this is a little off topic, but I am reminded of a very early description of Sarah, when she was Mayor of Wasilla, announcing then that she planned to run for President. (As an aside, when people ask how anyone could think she could get away with faking a pregnancy, the answer is simple. If you are as focused as Sarah was at achieving national office, nothing would get in the way). As we all know from the election, she came close, millions of people voted for her. But everything has been falling apart for her since then, accepting an important national speaking engagement, then canceling, lashing out in petty family squabbles, Bretta gave us a much better list. Now, Sarah will respond to criticism with Twitter-- instead of governing. And, isn't it a bit undignified to be appearing on the American Chopper Show-- they are making a special motorcycle in honor of Alaska's 50th anniversary. (I live in Illinois, our recently impeached governor wanted to go on a reality show, too).

As for people in Alaska willing to talk, Bretta reminds us that Sarah has long tentacles, she is still in office and she is still powerful. Once, I was very frightened that her wink wink charm would make her a formidable candidate in some coming national election. Now, as I watch her fall apart, I feel sorry for her. I think she has learned just how difficult it is to organize a national campaign, a well-run, well-funded, focused and informed campaign. Perhaps if this is her last elected office, maybe someone will talk in a year or two-- I hope that we don't have to wait that long. Thanks for the information, Bretta.

nilap said...

Ok, so no one from her office noticed she was pg. No one from the media noticed. No one from the public noticed. But how did her children not notice? This has always bothered me. Piper didn't give her a hug during those months? She could not have worn coats and giant scarves at home. That certainly would have been curious to Willow.

ProChoiceGrandma said...

Hi Ghostbuster. You are right, I should have clarified my previous statement as follows: I have NEVER heard of a boy/man wearing a “promise ring” on his LEFT ring finger.
The photo with Bristol sleeping on Levi’s chest, the plain wedding band was on his left ring finger.

NY tabloid chick said...

*** nilap said...
Ok, so no one from her office noticed she was pg. No one from the media noticed. No one from the public noticed. But how did her children not notice? This has always bothered me. Piper didn't give her a hug during those months? She could not have worn coats and giant scarves at home. That certainly would have been curious to Willow.***

That always struck me as odd as well. SP is always hugging and touching her children; did she back off for several months??? Also, how odd that Willow reportedly tells a boyfriend that BP is pregnant; her mother is being standoffish, but she says her sister is pregnant? Willow is willing to tell a family secret, but she tells it about her underage unmarried sister?

Doubting Thomas said...

http://www.themudflats.net/
Sarah Palin’s communications director Bill McAllister announced today that (drumroll please)………

Sarah Palin has a Twitter account.

No, I’m not kidding. That’s the big breaking news that Eddie Burke promoted on KBYR.

Why does she have this Twitter account? Because there are so many lies and distortions in the media, that she needs a way to counteract those things quickly. So, now you can rush over to Twitter.com and sign up to get messages from akgovsarahpalin.

McAllister said that Palin is “concerned by media coverage” like the AP story yesterday that reported she “changed her mind” about the federal stimulus money. Now, this may seem a little confusing because Palin originally said she didn’t want a third of the stimulus money, and now she’s taking almost all of it. She was against it before she was for it. Sounds like she changed her mind….but wait.

According to McAllister, the reason we have all been led to believe she flip flopped is because….”apparently nuance and subtlety are dead.” (A moment of silence for nuance and subtlety please)

Then McAllister went on to say that she has consistently said from the beginning that she’s concerned about “exploding national debt.” He forgot the part about how rejected stimulus money wasn’t going back to the national coffers, but rather to other states.

He also said that she was worried about “unsustainable state spending.” He forgot the part about the fact that nobody could find all those ’strings’ she was supposedly worried about.

After all the whining about that AP article that stated Palin “changed her mind” instead of, perhaps, the more accurate “She used nuance and subtlety to alter the message from one point in time to another,” the big announcement came:

“Today we’ve launched a Twitter service!”

Oh boy!

“We have to be able to correct the record instantaneously,” he went on to explain.

The only thing that made me laugh harder than this ridiculous use of personnel, time and public airwaves to announce a Twitter account was when a woman from Wasilla called in and asked

“Is the governor still receiving per diem to live in her own home?”

She held her ground for a long time, and had Eddie Burke all a-twitter (pardon the pun). He sputtered and talked in circles and ended up falling back on, “You’re like one of these other crazy women who filed the frivolous ethics complaints. A bunch of crazy delusional women. Delusional women. Crazy women! A bunch of crazy women! That’s what they are - a bunch of crazy women!”

Way to debate the issues.

And the final thing I heard as they came back from a commercial break, and before I had to run across the room and kill my radio was:

“Breaking news right here on the Eddie Burke Show - The governor is tweeting!”

Yes, it has come to this. (head meets desk)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!

ProChoiceGrandma said...

Ghostbuster at 4/29 at 10:48 am has made a TERRIFIC find! Great job Ghostbuster! There are four more pictures of Bristol in her camo dress from 9-14-07. The photographer lumped all the dates as 9-13-07, but it is from 9-14-07. Please be sure to look at all the pictures on the two sites that Ghostbuster posted.

Here are the tinyurls for just the four pictures of Bristol:

http://tiny.cc/H5dpX
http://tiny.cc/qRlMF
http://tiny.cc/dkcFm
http://tiny.cc/GDROF

Morgan said...

ProChoiceGrandma

While I appreciate your earlier clarification, I'm afraid I'll also have to disagree with you on the ring issue.
My daughter and her fiance both had "promise rings" - around here they are called pre-engagement or commitment rings - and *both* of them wore the rings on their left hands.

Morgan said...

***MODERATION REMINDER****

If your comment doesn't show up, please email me at thetokenhippie@gmail.com

If I've rejected your comment I'll be happy to tell you why, but I will *not* approve comments that all or in part complain about posts being rejected, especially when they have not.

I reject few comments, actually, as most of our regulars by now know what the rules are and are good at following them.

If you have a question about a comment or a comment about moderation, send it to me privately. DO NOT put them here or include them as part of your comment.

Thanks for your cooperation.

B said...

ProChoiceGrandma,

I couldn't get your tinyurls to work. I went back to Ghostbuster's url and reached the pictures.

Just shows how hard it is to learn facts from photos. Bristol has a thick middle when sitting and esp. in photo 15, but a stretch to say it proves pregnancy. Just "consistent with." I'd say the official photo emphasizes -- dare I say enlarges? -- her thick middle more than these photos.

In fact, Molly's appearance here compared to Xmas 2006 wouldn't rule out that TriG was hers. Willow's competing in cross country suggests she's not the pregnant one, but if only a couple of months along, maybe she could.

Willow wearing heels when she has just barely started seventh grade seems odd to me. Is that common? As someone else mentioned, seems sometimes that Palin's family is a throwback to pre-60's. Kids grow up fast. Boys join the army. Girls marry or have babies before college. Families cover up by sending daughters away or thinking the mom can get pull off faking a pregnancy (or going to NYC for an abortion). Another world.

Lilybart said...

The other side of the "Palin is too powerful to cross" is that there are people who want to come with her and get big jobs and big money when she becomes (gag) President. Why would they say anything at all until that is no longer a possibility?ab

Original Lee said...

B, it's common for girls to start wearing heels very young nowadays. Unless you are lucky enough to find Mary Janes or similar for a dress shoe, you are stuck with 2-inch or higher heels. Until my daughter grew into adult sizes, it was always a bit of a task to find dress shoes with no heels or modest heels for her. I have thought it very weird that there are more choices for flats in women's sizes than in girls'.

Ghostbuster said...

Quick question - can someone tell me where the picture of Bristol & Levi asleep in the car - the one where he is wearing a wedding band - was first published?

This is the pic, on Diana's site:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/33163903@N05/3296989484/

Thanks...

Lilybart said...

Regarding the post about the kids and the secret: I don't think Piper would have noticed her mother and whether she was pg or not. My daughter is 7 and two years ago, she might say I was getting fat but she wouldn't know anything.

Once she told people, I don't know what Willow might have thought, but maybe she was just not around much or her mother was not around much.

Track may not have been around either, right? In Michigan playing hockey or something.

Sheesh said...

Bretta,

Appreciate your comments on why folks in AK might be reluctant to say anything negative about the gov or anything that questions her actions. That certainly can explain why people who may have something significant to share in terms of corroborating our suspicions aren't coming forward with their knowledge and observations. But that also makes it that much more interesting that no one is coming forward to absolutely confirm her pregnancy.

I will agree that at this point it doesnt matter who did give birth to Trig. I am convinced that it wasn't SP. Craig asks (again) what it would take to change my mind; a statement under oath from the doctor who delivered him that SP was the birth mother. I wouldnt even need independent DNA testing. I doubt we'll ever see that definitive statement.

And as other posters have stated; my goal in all of this has always been to make sure this woman never sees a national office (and hopefully loses her office in AK)

I do think we're closer every day to seeing the truth out. At some point, someone in AK will come forward with evidence and I still believe the NE is on the story and sifting through the evidence presented here and finding additional sources to break the story.

Ivyfree said...

"Once she told people, I don't know what Willow might have thought, but maybe she was just not around much or her mother was not around much.

Track may not have been around either, right? In Michigan playing hockey or something."

I've always thought it was a bit odd, the way the Palins are always shipping their children off places. My kids spent the occasional night with friends, and once spent several days with my parents when my husband and I both had flu- but they lived with us. It strikes me as strange, the way they send the kid off to a different state or to live in a different town with a relative.

Center Stage Corsetry said...

Truth Seeker/Diana, you asked in your photostream what the word was on Mercedes shirt- you've probably already found out, but it says "Hollister" a popular teen brand
http://tiny.cc/s80J7
I looked at your photos of Bristol, Piper, and Willow and do not believe now there was any chance it was Willow who was preggers. Piper looks much younger in the photo shown, I think it was a 2006 family photo not 2007. Lastly you do show that Bristol was not a "chunky" girl, and her breasts were definitely huge for at the Convention someone not that far along. I've always believed she was breastfeeding. The thank-you note too was very intriguing too. :) Nice work!

I also agree about the video stream, it's a great idea! I for one could not wear heels or bend over my tummy when I was late in my pregnancy!!!

Whoever said Palin announced when she was Mayor that she would run for the Presidency, do you have a news article for that? That would prove interesting, huh?

nilap said...

With my first pregnancy in 1990, I found I was expecting twins. At that point I needed to get a new doctor since my current one told me she did not have mal practice insurance for a high risk pregnancy. One baby she could deliver, but not twins. This made me wonder if CBJ had the mal practice insurance to continue care and delivery, and if this is public information we can look up.

Craig said...

lilybart said;

"The other side of the "Palin is too powerful to cross" is that there are people who want to come with her and get big jobs and big money when she becomes (gag) President. Why would they say anything at all until that is no longer a possibility?"

**********************

Umm, its already a zero possiblitity. Unless the swine flu selectively knocks off all but the 10-15% or so of the voting public that would still pull the lever for her as President. She's more and more irrelevant within her own party as a viable candidate. She's mostly just good for some general fundraising anymore.

She is DONE as a serious national political candidate. End of story.

Morgan said...

***FROM THE MODERATOR***
Penny, could you please email me directly at thetokenhippie@gmail.com
I have a question about your links.

Vaughn said...

RE: Center Stage Corsetry said...

The article in the NYTimes titled--- Once elected,Palin hired friends and lashed foes-
was printed in Sept.

Laura Chase, the campaign manager during Ms. Palin’s first run for mayor in 1996, recalled
the night the two women chatted about her ambitions.

“I said, ‘You know, Sarah, within 10 years you could be governor,’ ” Ms. Chase recalled.
“She replied, ‘I want to be president.’

Her brother,Chuck Heath Jr.made a video during the campaign in which he said:"We've talked
you know within the family about national inspirations and what-not but it just happened
a lot sooner than we thought,"

So yeah I,d say that she has had this dream for a long time.I really think her dream went
up in smoke the minute she accepted John McCain,s offer.

Therese said...

Ok, so no one from her office noticed she was pg. No one from the media noticed. No one from the public noticed. But how did her children not notice? This has always bothered me. Piper didn't give her a hug during those months? She could not have worn coats and giant scarves at home. That certainly would have been curious to Willow.I would like to comment on this, as I do not find a silence by the children unlikely in such a situation (if, indeed, it was a faked pregnancy.)

The Palin family has always struck me as quite disfunctional, in many matters, not just the sudden arrival of Trig. I came from a troubled family myself - who, like the Palins, were in a good class of society. Despite this, we were riddled with problems and life was a series of juggling acts and keeping up appearances.

Children from disfunctional families - and children of celebrities and politicians - are very good at keeping secrets. Especially those concerning the behaviour of a parent. They do not comment on issues which a normal child would ask about, and they do not talk about the dramas at home to outsiders. They have an early maturity, are very reticent, and want to avoid intrusion and "sympathy" from outsiders. The child is also quite used to the idea that X and Y in the family will go completely crazy if their secrets are ever mentioned.

Looking back, I am amazed by the things which I kept to myself - at only 10, I was abandoned by my legal guardian because she had "a breakdown" and temporarily run off to another city. For the family's sake, I lived temporarily with another relative and kept going to school, pretending I was still living with my guardian. When she returned, I was admonished by her and family members supporting her, because she had been "worried" by what I might say, and this had hampered her recovery.

Looking back, it is all completely nuts. But I learnt to deal with it, and went on that way until I was in my early 20s.

mlewis said...

A note for Center Stage, your request for the article in which Sarah Palin, as Mayor of Wasilla aims high, looking ahead to the office of President: It was a long article in September 14, 2008 New York Times, the article is headed: "Once Elected, Sarah Palin hired friends, hit critics hard." Jumping ahead to the second page, "Laura Chase, the campaign manager during Ms.Palin's first run for mayor in 1996, recalled the night the two women chatted about her ambitions. "I said, 'You know, Sarah, within 10 years, you could be governor.'" Ms.Chase recalled. "She replied, 'I want to be president.'" If you want to read the whole article, try the link of
htto://tinyurl.com/c8gncw

NY tabloid chick said...

*** Lilybart said...
Regarding the post about the kids and the secret: I don't think Piper would have noticed her mother and whether she was pg or not. My daughter is 7 and two years ago, she might say I was getting fat but she wouldn't know anything.***

But that's the thing: no one thought SP was getting fat.

***Once she told people, I don't know what Willow might have thought, but maybe she was just not around much or her mother was not around much.***

I thought the time frame was Willow supposedly telling her boyfriend that BP was pregnant, followed by SP announcing she, SP, was pregnant. That sounds to me like there was some knowledge of A pregnancy in the P household, and that WP knew it was BP. If WP thought it was her mom that was pregnant, then I'd think she'd say THAT to her bf rather than saying it was BP.

Journeygal said...

Ivyfree, I have felt the same way about the Palin kids getting shuffled around.

I remember when SP was campaigning in Michigan and she made a big deal about Michigan being such a great state, and she had never been there before. And I thought, "What the heck? She let her son move somewhere to live with another family and she never checked it out first, helped him move, or visited him while he was there???" (Sorry, I don't have a source except my memory. But I'm pretty sure it was on MSNBC because I was addicted by then).

And then there's the girls ... going to school here for a month, there for a month, etc.

They do try to play the 'We're one big family and we help eachother out' card whenever possible. But it's probably more like everyone helps the Palins out because SP is busy in the state of which she is the Administrator of. And no one wants to get on her bad side. Also. Too.

Truthseeker2 said...

While I'm all for a balanced presentation of the facts and theories here, I think it is time to leave behind the "anyone's guess" type comments, like the one at the end of this post. Based on the information already presented on the website and blog, it is not really anyone's guess why Sarah didn't look pregnant. She didn't look pregnant because she wasn't pregnant. I think these comments undermine the effectiveness of the work you have already done.

Lilybart said...

Craig: I wish I believed she was DONE on the National Stage. I hope you are correct.

But I am not sure so that's why I stay on these stories. The pressure alone from the blogs will eventually shake loose some truth.

As a woman, I am offended by her pretending to be the Earth Mother of the Year and most women I know think that lying about a pg and trying to pass off her flat stomach at 6 months as "tight abs." is insulting.

Like I said before, I will send her a personal letter of apology if we find out she faked it for compassionate humanitarian reason.

ProChoiceGrandma said...

Lilybart, I was really disturbed by your comment at 5/1/09 at 6:17 am:
“Like I said before, I will send her a personal letter of apology if we find out she faked it for compassionate humanitarian reason.”

There is no reason or excuse to fake a pregnancy! None! Sarah Palin took a situation that was politically embarrassing to her (as if she is the ONLY mother who ever had a pregnant teenage daughter) and manufactured this incredulous scheme to fake her pregnancy with Trig. Whatever happened to just telling the TRUTH? Simply say “yes, my daughter is pregnant, but that is a private family matter”. End of story.

If Sarah had done that, instead of putting her daughter through the intense stress of remaining hidden (captive?) until she gave birth to Trig, and remaining hidden while Sarah developed her 6 week faked pregnancy with Trig, perhaps there would not have been a second successive pregnancy with Tripp. If there is any apology, it would be to Bristol for having to endure her mother’s maniacal ambitions and the shame, fear and dread that was imposed upon her. Bristol, if you are reading this, I recognize that you were too young to realize that your mother’s cockeyed scheme was not to protect you, it was to protect her. I am truly sorry for you that she put you through that terrible ordeal.

There was absolutely nothing compassionate or humanitarian for what Sarah did to Bristol. It had to be terrifying and lonely for Bristol.

And THAT is just one of the many reasons why Sarah Palin must never attain national office of any kind. She cannot tell the simple truth and she is a fanatical despot.

Ivyfree said...

"I will send her a personal letter of apology if we find out she faked it for compassionate humanitarian reason."

I would make a fairly large wager that whatever reason she faked it for, it wasn't compassionate humanitarian reasons. If she was the kind of person who'd fake a pregnancy to be compassionate, you'd think she'd do something about the people on the Kenai Peninsula who've been hungry this winter. Something besides showing up with Franklin Graham and his mission and a plate of homebaked cookies.

Punkinbugg said...

Okay so with Ghostbuster's terrific find, can we safely date THIS_PICTURE, the family picture taken from the roof of the Governor's Mansion in Juneau, as Christmastime, 2007?

Here are photos taken the same day:

CHRISTMASTIMESEE_THE_WREATHand I have to include THIS_ONE, because it captures the unfortunate reality of Piper's life. That's her cousin behind her, and they are dressed just alike. Funny how those Palin cousins like to dress alike, isn't it?

(You can right-click these links and select Open in New Window, so that you don't lose your place online.)

midnightcajun said...

I've been doing a lot of research on the Dominionists (Joel's Army, Reconstructionists, Third Wave, etc), the extreme form of Theocratic Nationalism that Sarah Palin embraces. One of the interesting aspects of this movement is their sanctioning--perhaps advocacy would be a more accurate term--of what many of us would call child abuse.

Their interpretation of the "spare the rod and spoil the child" philosophy can be quite horrifying. It's a part of their extreme emphasis on conditioning the child to obey. Now, I'm not saying this is what is going on in the Palin family. But it might explain a few things. Theresa's comment on the way in which dysfunctional families are conditioned to keep secrets is also a good insight. Someone as dysfunctional as Sarah Palin doubtless comes from a severely dysfunctional family, and from what we can see is perpetuating the pattern in her own family.

With all their talk about "family values," what really is important to these people is 1) that they have "a quiverfull" of children to serve as God's Warriors, and 2) that they are able force everyone else to conform to their definition of morality, i.e., subservient to their pastors, no tolerance of homosexuality, reproductive rights, etc.

Morgan said...

**MODERATOR ALERT**

While I share midnightcajun's concern over those who embrace Theocratic Nationalism, I urge everyone to pay heed when she states that she is *not* saying this is what is going on in the Palin family.

This blog strives to be evidence-driven, which is why we regularly reject some of the wilder or plain unfair speculation about what may be going on in their family.

So. To that end while folks are free to comment *in general* on what midnightcajun wrote, remember that baseless allegations or speculation about abuse within the Palin family or Sarah's direct ties to fringe groups will not be approved.

Child abuse is a very, very serious allegation and we can't tolerate any suggestion that the Palin children are physically abused or under some kind of mind control without more to go on.

Thanks in advance for you cooperation.

Morgan

Duncan said...

Punkinbugg said...

"Okay so with Ghostbuster's terrific find, can we safely date THIS_PICTURE, the family picture taken from the roof of the Governor's Mansion in Juneau, as Christmastime, 2007?"

Sorry, but there is no snow showing in that picture as there would be around Christmastime.

duncan

AKPetMom said...

Punkinbugg:

Definitely not Xmas time in Juneau for that series of photos. The wreath on the door must have been some sort of fall decoration.

There are still leaves on the trees and berries on the ash trees. In Dec the mountains in the background would have lots of snow on them. This looks to me like mid to late Sept. Could even be early Oct, as fall comes a bit later down there than here in Wasilla.

Here's the avg temp and precip for Juneau in Dec:

http://tinyurl.com/deddb7

The few times I've traveled to Southeast AK in the fall there has been snow on the ground in Juneau in November, and there are definitely no leaves on the trees past mid to late Oct.

Hope this helps.

Kathleen said...

Further to Duncan's comment at 9.38am I'd like to add that the photos referred to by Pukinbugg at 7.39am were found by the research team to have been taken on the 14th September 2007. Our proof for that date is backed up by the travel expense documents of the Palin children and from the official schedule of the Alaskan Governor for 2007.

Thanks again for all your contributions.

Kathleen

Nana said...

In this picture of Piper hugging Sarah, there is no evidence of a pregnant belly. The picture is dated Feb 5 and I believe from the jacket she is wearing it would be 2008.
http://tinyurl.com/48q86t

Nana said...

In this Juneau newspaper dated March 21, in the third picture you will see Palin holding a teddy bear. The picture is dated the Mar 18. It is very noticeable that she does not have the pregnant posture.

Nana said...

So sorry I forgot the url
http://tinyurl.com/da6ne5

LZanne said...

I just saw on an online article that the picture of Bristol in the Juneau basketball uniform is dated Feb 2008.

Are you all in agreement with that date for that photo?

MES said...

Hi, longtime reader but infrequent commenter here--

For me, the "compassionate humanitarian" excuse became inoperative by attention-seeking embellishments like "putting down the Blackberry and picking up the breast pump." It's one thing to fib to protect a minor child for a compassionate reason, but to construct an artificial reality that serves only to pump up one's superwoman credentials is completely another.

Palin Pregnancy Truth said...

To Punkinbugg,

Although I think that's a good find, not sure we can conclude it was taken at Christmas time. It's not uncommon to shoot Christmas photos months in advance, particularly for promotional pieces.

However, I think other photos have dated these sets to mid Sept. While too early for Bristol to show if she was due in April, not too early if she was due in January or February as some have speculated. It's particularly interesting since myspace comments were deleted up until June. Why that time point? Why not delete them all? Unless someone instructed you to delete everything until a particular date, such as the conception date.

B said...

Punkinbugg said...
"Okay so with Ghostbuster's terrific find, can we safely date THIS_PICTURE, the family picture taken from the roof of the Governor's Mansion in Juneau, as Christmastime, 2007?" ***

What was wrong with around Sept. 13, 2007 as the photo caption says?

Not all wreaths are Xmas wreaths. No sign of holiday decor inside. No snow outside. No coats outside. In fact, Juneau looks very green.

Ohio mom said...

Punkinbugg and Duncan, RE: the date of the Bristol camo-dress picture. I don't think it's later than Sept/very early Oct. The tree behind Bristol on the right has what appear to be leaves and blossoms, although I suppose the red things could be berries.

In the picture of the gov outside walking, followed by Piper with the jump rope, there is grass growing in front of the stone wall. We know that Juneau is warmer than Anchorage, but the average high temp in Juneau for Nov is 36.7 and 31.6 for Dec.

Also, the gov has on a black jacket in the Bristol/baby bump picture. She has on a red jacket in all the other photos.

My take? All the girls have one really good dress that Sarah tells them to wear on special occasions.

Mu funny take on this picture (http://tinyurl.com/c8njtc)
of the gov inside where she is holding a pepsi bottle: if everyone else were cut out of the photo, I would swear the lady is Tina Fey.

Rationalist said...

Duncan said:

"Sorry, but there is no snow showing in that picture as there would be around Christmastime."

Well...how about the Christmas decor? I'm guessing it's got to be between Thanksgiving and Christmas, probably closer to Thanksgiving if these are pictures for a Christmas card, which I bet they are. I bet they got the governor's mansion (I'm sorry: "people's house") decorated not long after Thanksgiving and had this picture taken 2-3 weeks before Christmas in time to get the cards out.

Punkinbugg said...

By "Christmastime" that could be as early as November.

I don't think they would have put that wreath on the outside door if it wasn't fairly close to Christmas.

The total snowfall in Juneau November 2008 was 2.1 inches. Avg hi 39.5, avg low 33.4


HERE is the photographer's extensive portfolio of the Palins in Juneau, Anchorage and Wasilla.

Ghostbuster said...

Punkinbugg,

The photographer's caption for one of the photos, the one where the family is standing on the stairs, reads:
"Sarah Palin, Governor of Alaska, poses with her husband Todd and children Track, Bristol, Willow and Piper for their Christmas 2007 family photo at the Governor's Mansion in Juneau...."

Likely the Christmas decorations were put up temporarily for that photo session. The September date is pretty well established by three facts: the photographer Andrew Testa's dates in the captions; the appearance of an image from that collection appearing in the Oct 15, 2007 issue of Newsweek; and the travel reimbursement for the portrait session.

But good catch.

Do we have a copy of that official Christmas family portrait? I'm guessing it went out on the official Governor's Christmas cards (to supporters).

mlewis said...

I just had a thought about the Christmas photos. Magazines that run a Christmas feature do not shoot the pictures in December; the photos are shot months ahead because it takes a while to get everything into print. If Sarah, as governor, planned to send out Christmas cards in December, she may have had the actual photo (with wreath and stairway decorations) taken a month or two earlier-- hence, no snow on the ground. It's just a thought, and it makes it hard to absolutely date some of these photos without the original or a time stamp.

Truthseeker2 said...

Punkinbugg, the photos were from Sept 13-14, 2007.

Amy1 said...

Therese--thank you for your post. Took guts and offered a new perspective to me. Having known several adults who had v difficult childhoods, I can only say they are the BEST -- people I love to be around. Somehow, hard times --> good people. Not my recipe for parenting, but maybe it's the silver lining.

jeanette said...

Punkinbugg said...

"Okay so with Ghostbuster's terrific find, can we safely date THIS_PICTURE, the family picture taken from the roof of the Governor's Mansion in Juneau, as Christmastime, 2007?"

I thought that picture was taken Sept. 14th 2007 since Track flew to Juneau for the picture and back the same day. I think Sarah, Bristol, Willow and Piper flew to Juneau on the 13th. Am not sure now where I got that from but it doesn't seem to make sense to have the Christmas decorations up then.

I don't think there would have to be snow on the land that is close to sea level in Juneau, even in December. It is kept pretty warm by the ocean currents.

leu2500 said...

Punkinbugg - Oh, what you found. The staircase in your Christmas Time link IS decorated for Xmas. But the photographer's info indicates fall; the color in the trees in the related pictures indicates fall, and we "know" that Track signed up around 11 Sep - the fall. Also, I checked Juneau's climate. Climate supports fall timeframe, not Xmas timeframe.

Diana, Patrick, and other photo collectors - do we have any "Xmas" 07 pictures that may have to be reconsidered?

Diana said...

Punkinbugg said...

"Okay so with Ghostbuster's terrific find, can we safely date THIS_PICTURE, the family picture taken from the roof of the Governor's Mansion in Juneau, as Christmastime, 2007?"

Duncans right, no snow on the ground! That is from Sept. 2007.

Sunshine1970 said...

Interesting photos there. But yeah, there's no snow if it's around Christmastime. If these photos were being used for Christmas cards or something, then they may be taken much earlier in the year. Maybe October, or even early November?

When does Juneau usually get snow? Anyone got a forecast for that year?

It could still have been cold outside, when the photos were taken, tho.

jeanette said...

In interview the interview with Esquire magazine, Todd said Track had been home for Christmas in 2008. That certainly shows how well secrets are kept in Wasilla. My question is where did he “come” from?

The deployment ceremony was September 11, 2008 in Fairbanks and Army officials said they would be actually leaving the base later that month. Did Track actually go to Iraq? There was some press last Fall about the amount of detail that was given about where Track was going. It seems as though either the Team hasn’t left the US yet although that seems strange, the Team left but Track didn’t go, or Track went with the Team and was able to get leave and fly home after being in Iraq for only two months. How many soldiers get to do that?

If he didn’t go with his team, it was likely that happened before the election and I think Sarah was talking about her son in Iraq right up until the end.

jeanette said...

The roof picture was taken in September and i think what another poster suggested is probably what happened, that they took what they thought they might use for the first family Christmas picture at the same time.

Track's deployment ceremony was 9/11/08 and his Team was supposed to be leaving Fairbanks later that month. I think Track flew in an out of Juneau on the 14th for the picture and that day would likely have been the only opportunity for a First Family Christmas picture with him in it.

Was there actually a First Family card for the Christmas of 2008?

leu2500 said...

Jeanette - here's a Fairbanks Daily News-Miner article on the deployment of Track's unit in Fall 2008 http://tiny.cc/Vd2tO.

Here's another FDN-M article about Xmas at Ft Wainright. http://tiny.cc/RGNfi.

And given that they were providing security for an election in Jan 09, I wouldn't bet that much leave was granted in Dec. http://tiny.cc/RGNfi

Truthseeker2 said...

Nana, that's a good find of the March 18th photo; SP certainly shows no signs whatsoever that she is pregnant, let alone that she would give birth to a 6+ lb baby exactly a month later.

LZanne, Bristol was not in school in Juneau in 2008. The photo you refer to was from February 2007. See: http://tinyurl.com/c6zjez

B said...

LZanne said...
I just saw on an online article that the picture of Bristol in the Juneau basketball uniform is dated Feb 2008.

Nope. Bristol was in school in Juneau in winer/spring semester of 2007, not 2008.

nilap said...

I'm seeing green leaves on the trees. That says September to me no matter what decorations are up. Also I think Piper would have had a jacket on, even on a nice Nov-sec day.

jeanette said...

According to C4P, Track is in Iraq. He first went to Kuwait and then his Combat Team went to Iraq. The transition of authority ceremony where his Team took over for the departing troops, was on October 27th. The long story said they were going to be very busy preparing for the elections to take place in January. So how did he get to come home for Christmas two months from the time her arrived in Iraq?

Elizabeth said...

I find that picture of Sarah on her blackberry while Piper follows behind, jumping rope and ignored (while crossing the road, nonetheless!)to be telling. Anyone with me?

Sarah in SC said...

Has anyone already seen this video footage of the 2008 Iron Dog start? I'm not sure how it factors into the time line, but she's wearing the red coat, not the Arctic Cat number, so it has to be last year, not this one.

Anyway, there's some interesting angles here. I'm not sure if this is new footage to anyone, but I found it interesting. Especially one shot where she pins the start flag between her torso & arm to adjust something she's holding, and it's painfully obvious there is no bump of any kind in her totally zipped up coat.

Here's the link: http://www.palinfootage.com/

Scroll down to the Iron Dog part.

moonbeam said...

A professional photog's Christmas family picture with one family member's face completley hidden? Yeah right!

Amy1 said...

Bretta -- re your intuition about pregnancy and your well-written post: I do not think I have any such intuitive ability whatsoever, never even thought about such a thing re myself.

But starting in Sept it slowly dawned on me as I became progressively more interested and then more concerned about SP -- it dawned on me way before all the conclusive photos that I was sure she had not been PG. Just from all the red flags that would make a huge list and we have listed on this blog repeatedly. But I was mulling this over all by myself since at that point it seemed too outrageous to be true. Still does, actually.

But then I found this blog and saw the photos that made me believe it without doubt. And I learned via this blog how many others had followed that same path, sensing a rat all by themselves, doubting themselves, then looking a little closer and finding the proof unassailable.

Anyway, just wanted to say hi to someone who actually lives in AK.

Palin Pregnancy Truth said...

I don't know if this has been discussed before (its so hard to keep track), but did Palin give an interview on April 18th to the PBS show "To The Contrary"?

Adam Brickley's blog makes reference to it here:

http://palinforvp.blogspot.com/2008/04/palin-on-to-contrary-today.html

After looking it up, it appears to have been recorded April 18th (scroll down):

http://www.pbs.org/ttc/podcasts.html

The audio recording is here:

http://www-tc.pbs.org/ttc/rss/media/ttc_041808.mp3

I'd be interested to see that video.

LZanne said...

Sarah in SC

Great find!

But if I was honest with myself in the beginning of that video she does look like she could be 6 months pregnant. The zipper of the jacket is protruding out when she is holding her stomach. The questionable part is when she has the flag but its so short that its hard to tell

penny said...

I think with Ghostbuster's photo find shows us four women, who on that date according to SP's pregnancy time line could have been a few weeks pregnant.

But, let's assume one of those women was actually two and a half months pregnant...

SP should not have been drinking an energy drink when pregnant.

These photos show a young and flexible Willow curled up on a couch and in the other photos with no discernible pooch, bulge, or bump. (We all know that until we do know the truth, this ball will keep getting picked up and batted around in every thread, but IMHO, someone was 2 1/2 months pregnant in September, and it was not SP, Willow, or Sister Molly.)

One additional thought: The caption with the photo of Track and his mom on the roof, says he had enlisted a few days earlier. I wonder why then?

OT-I have put together three photos of the recent Slushcup where the Palins are all posing with a mystery man and seem very open to his arm being around them, and Bristol looks downright giddy! Is this Bristol's new beau? I have also posted a photo of a possible contender. Did they date before? Would a new love be the reason she split with Levi? Too many questions!

http://tinyurl.com/cmd7xy

Sarah in SC said...

Well, guess what? That link I listed earlier about the Iron Dog 2008--is no longer working!! At least, the three times I've tried it, I get the old "the website you're trying to access is no longer available" message.

Did ANYone get a screen shot or anything? Crap. Crap. Crap.

Sam said...

I'm small, similar build to Sarah, my first pregnancy barely showed until the last month but each pregnancy got decidedly bigger and bigger still--I have four children. She is (and was), in my opinion as a mom of four--full of crap, NOT baby.

Littl' Me said...

I am a bit late - was away from computer for a while and desperately trying to catch up...

Anyway, Peter April 29, 2009 1:04 PM:
If you look at the mouth of the woman in red, you will definitely have to recognize SPs smirk... A dead giveaway that it is her!

Kathleen said...

Sarah in SC

I have just checked the link and it is working fine. Patrick copied that video in January so another link to the video can also be found here

http://tinyurl.com/dc3kzl

Kathleen

B said...

Penny,

Thanks for putting those pictures together. Sarah doesn't look all that thrilled in her photo, perhaps because she doesn't know the fans, or perhaps because she knows that people like us will wonder if this is Bristol's boyfriend. Someone at Gryphen's said it wasn't Johnny Chandler, that he has a part Native American appearance. This guy looks like a swimmer, but as to whether he looks like that photo of Matt Hanley, there's too little of his face showing for me to say.

Littl' Me said...

Some people have commented on the 'mystery' man putting his arm around BP... I see he does it to all the palins - including todd. I would suggest there is 'nothing there to see'...

KaJo said...

Sarah in SC, LZanne...the video you're talking about has many still pictures of the same event, and we talked about them here about 2 weeks ago...my conclusion was that Palin was wearing a vest, jacket or sweatshirt under that pink-red parka, thus the protrusion of the parka. It's cold in February in Fairbanks.

Like so many naysayers will point out, that picture doesn't prove she's 6 months pregnant, and it's difficult to point to it as proof she's NOT 6 months pregnant, either. Not when she's THAT bundled up.

Better examples abound in the March-April 2008 timeframe on Diana's Truthsayer222 Flickr account ( http://tinyurl.com/c8wsqq ), and the PD Flicker account maintained by Katherine and Patrick ( http://tinyurl.com/cnpqkd )

Sarah in SC said...

Kathleen--thank you! I wonder why I can't get to it. Hmm.

So glad someone had a hardcopy, tho!

Diana said...

I find it interesting that we haven't heard a correction from the Larry King show with Bristol holding Trig with the caption...
~ Sarah Palin's first Grandchild ~

You would think that if it wasn't true she would have them correct it...wouldn't you think??

Here is a nice screenshot showing the caption!

http://tinyurl.com/catmnn

And here are my favorite and most compelling photos indicating that Levi and Bristol are Trig's parents!

http://tinyurl.com/dzzrj6

BTW...veri word...Co-liess

Vaughn said...

RE: Palin Pregnancy Truth said...
I don't know if this has been discussed before (its so hard to keep track), but did Palin
give an interview on April 18th to the PBS show "To The Contrary"?

There was an interview on the april 18 show with SP but it was taped before Trig was born.
She mentioned Track as being her only son.
I could not find a tape of the show,found the audio recording only. I believe this interview
was probably taped in Feb.when she was in Washington,DC for the National Governors winter
meeting.That took place Feb. 23-25 2008.
I know Adam Brickley mentioned it on his blog and said he would follow up on it the next day.
but he never did because he knew when he watched it that it had nothing to do with Trig.He did
apparently think the interview was done along about the time Trig was born.

The production company that does To The Contrary is in Washington,DC. It,s possible if this
wasn,t a face to face interview that it may have been done while she was in Alaska and the
person that interviewed her was in Washington,DC.

penny said...

After a audio recording of Mary Glazier, Gryphen at IM ponders...

"What could bring these people to their senses about her faults and limitations? Only a story so incredible and bizarre that it would shock them to their core."

Makes me think that our theories might actually be a bit tame. Should we be considering the fringe scenarios instead of the obvious?

midnightcajun said...

There was some question a few weeks ago about whether Sarah won the Miss Congeniality award at the Wasilla pageant or the Alaska State pageant. Here's a Flickr photo of her winning the award at the STATE pageant. No doubt her fellow contestants in Wasilla knew the nasty Barracuda that lurked behind the smile. (Sorry if this has been posted before)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/huggerindustries/2824973140/

Dinky P. said...

Do you think that picture of Beth Kertulla and Sarah has anything to do with Beth not being choosen for the open senate seat?

Pictures of Sarah during this time have been hard to come by. Sarah was probably not happy Beth provided this picture that clearly shows she was not preggo!

Bretta said...

Hi Amy1 - I agree as unbelievable as SP's birthstory of Trig sounds, I believed her, as I think most Alaskans wanted to, at the time.

It became clear in September '08 that it was a complete fabrication. The fact that she had to tell the Whole World her teenage daughter was "about five months" along made it click for me. The unsaid was the truth.

Why tell Bristol's gestation point? To divert the rumor Bristol was preggo before, that Bristol was the mother of Trig.

Everything addition to the birthstory is characteristic of liars caught but unwilling or unable to 'fess up: Liars add more and more details.

Alaska votes strongly Republican but I think people here are recognizing the Peter Principle in action.

SP demonstrates every day, under the stress of her ethics complaints, her bad choices in appointees and legislator replacements, family member actions, her intense negative reactivity, and just plain ignorance, that she has reached that level of incompetence. In a huge fishbowl.

I won't underestimate that she is 'done' on the national stage. I want blogs such as PD to keep the pressure on. She's embarrassed Alaskans enough. It could get worse.

Anne said...

It just occurred to me after looking through Diana's lovely collection of Levi&Trig photos that at the RNC where we saw those senstitive and touching moments of Levi with baby Trig there were no such moments of Track and baby Trig. My point is that here we had two young men of similar age and background, and one was repeatedly expressing tenderness toward this baby and one didn't at all. It just struck me how the one young man who supposedly is the baby's full brother seemed pretty much oblivious to him while this other young man who we are to believe is completely unrelated to the baby was repeatedly expressing kindness and care in front of a national audience.

B said...

Diana said...
I find it interesting that we haven't heard a correction from the Larry King show with Bristol holding Trig with the caption...
~ Sarah Palin's first Grandchild ~

Diana, Thanks for doing the screenshot. I hoped someone would. I don't know how, yet. I doubt anyone has asked LKL for a retraction or clarification. If you were able to get that photo and caption to go viral, then the show might say something. Or if they meant it that way, maybe not.

Truthseeker2 said...

I was thinking about how many people have commented over the past few months that Sarah Palin is getting bad advice and should stop listening to her advisors, including GVS and her husband John Coale, her press office, her SarahPAC people, etc. This happened again in the ADN piece posted on Gryphen's site. But I think everyone is forgetting the comments made by senior staff of the McCain-Palin Campaign, who called Palin a diva and whack job and said she does not listen to anyone's advice, not even that of her own family. That seems to be the case, as she self-destructs with each decision more pitiful than the last. I mean, who in their right mind would fake a pregnancy and then alienate the Johnstons, knowing what they must know? I think people should stop blaming her advisors -- the buck stops with Sarah. She is nuts.

Alex said...

Brilliant observation, Anne. And well-stated.

midnightcajun said...

I found this very interesting quote in an article about Sarah Palin written last September:

"Palin reportedly drew early attention from state GOP leadership when, during her first mayoral campaign, she ran on an anti-abortion platform. Normally, political parties do not get involved in Alaskan municipal elections because they are nonpartisan. But once word of her evangelical views made its way to Juneau, the state capitol, state Republicans put money behind her campaign. According to researcher Charley James, "Once in office, Palin set out to build a machine that chewed up anyone who got in her way. The good, Godly Christian turns out to be anything but."

This tells us two things: 1) Sarah's run for mayor was financed by the Republicans, who were doubtless planning to groom her for bigger things--and did, and 2) Sarah has a long reputation for being vindictive (but we already knew that).

If you're interested, the full article is at

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10167

veebee said...

Could someone please direct me to SP's travel records? I wanted to check something out but couldn't remember where I saw the link.

Thanks

B said...

penny said, "Should we be considering the fringe scenarios instead of the obvious?" ***

The original story was Bristol had TriG and Sarah faked it. We have photos to prove the latter and evidence consistent with the former. But as Dangerous has reminded us repeatedly, we have no compelling (to us) motive for Sarah to do this.

Yes, we have a handful of possible motives, and yes, Sarah's reasoning doesn't work like ours. It could be as simple as wanting to save Bristol from early motherhood. It could be as cynical as needing a DS baby to boost her credentials with her political base. Covering for a younger daughter or for a victim of rape or incest who was being forced to carry to term -- that would be more understandable.

But there's no evidence of those circumstances. Without evidence, we need to avoid the fringes or we lose credibility for the cause.

Enter Gryphen. He's close to Wasilla. He's decided to look for evidence. He's hinting it may be shocking. If so, then we'll have reason to go to the fringes. In the meantime, Audrey builds the record, one post at a time.

MadcityKaren said...

Elizabeth said: I find that picture of Sarah on her blackberry while Piper follows behind, jumping rope and ignored (while crossing the road, nonetheless!)to be telling. Anyone with me?I guess what caught my eye more was the RedBull that she's carrying in her hand ... and then the other picture where she's holding the bottle of Pepsi (or Diet Pepsi). Pregnant women are supposed to go with little to no caffeine.

Granted, if she had been pregnant, she would have just been barely pregnant at the time of these pictures ... and if she was NOT pregnant (*wink*), then she'd drink as much caffeine as she'd like, I suppose.

NoMore said...

Nice catch, Nana, May 1, 2009 10:51 AM... ;)


http://tinyurl.com/da6ne5

jeanette said...

Diana, Just a minor correction to one of your pictures. In the picture taken of Sarah and Lisa on March 18, 2008, the caption said the date wasn't correct since Sarah was in Anchorage that day. Sarah evidently was in Juneau part of the day since that was the day she was in the picture with the Girl Scouts. Lisa was in Juneau that day addressing the Legislature.

Kathleen said...

For those who are interested here is a link to the FULL 10 minutes long and unedited Rex Butler interview with KBYR's Eddie Burke -

http://tinyurl.com/d4cosu

Dangerous said...

B wrote:

The original story was Bristol had TriG and Sarah faked it. We have photos to prove the latter and evidence consistent with the former. But as Dangerous has reminded us repeatedly, we have no compelling (to us) motive for Sarah to do this.
I take issue with the analysis "evidence consistent with the former". I disagree. There is conjecture consistent that attempts to link Bristol as Trig's birth mother, but no evidence at all. "Rumors" that Bristol was pregnant are not evidence. Mis-dated photos and supposed "baby-bumps" are not evidence. Psychic evaluations of Levi's state of mind while holding Trig are not evidence.

Meanwhile, Bristol giving birth to Tripp eight months after Trig was born is evidence, whether you choose to ignore it or not. There's conjecture challenging the official timeline, but no evidence that would be accepted in court (or in MSM).

I assert that Bx2 proponents are not even close to proving their case, you completely lack evidence in support of the theory, and what evidence would be accepted in court disputes the theory completely. Now, perhaps during cross-examination you might be able to shake something loose and you might be right after all. So I'll add another reminder that feelings, beliefs, conjecture and assumptions add up to zero proof, no matter how much you engage in them. Lack of a compelling motive -- rational or seemly irrational -- is the least of your problems.

Dangerous

Morgan said...

***MODERATOR REMINDER***

If you include links in your comments make sure they work and/or go where you say they are going to go before you post your comment.

wayofpeace said...

from POLITICO:

In the latest instance of a high-profile GOP member taking a passing swipe at the party's 2008 vice-presidential candidate, former Massachusetts Governor and GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney jokingly dismissed Sarah Palin’s inclusion on Time’s list of influential people in an interview broadcast Sunday.

He asked, was “the issue on the most beautiful people or the most influential people?”

Romney, appearing on CNN’s “State of the Union,” was replying to a question from moderator John King on whether Time’s inclusion of Palin and talk show host Rush Limbaugh on their list of “The World’s Most Influential People” was good or bad for the Republican Party.

...

Asked about Romney’s comment, Palin didn’t respond to the reference to her appearance.

"I think there are 100 influential Republicans alone who have tremendous ideas and I hope that we can all work together to accomplish what we believe is best for America,” Palin said through a spokeswoman.

....
But Romney’s quip reflects the deep unease among many in the GOP establishment about the continued high-profile of Limbaugh and especially Palin. There is almost a sense of exasperation among many party elites over the media coverage the two polarizing figures get – attention which, in Palin’s case, is widely seen as a product largely of her good looks and tabloid-fodder family troubles.

“She’s bigger in the media than in reality,” lamented GOP consultant Mike Murphy, a longtime friend and adviser to John McCain.

Ocean said...

Andrew Sullivan has another Palin pregnancy comment:

http://tinyurl.com/c3o5bw

"For the record, she says that she kept her pregnancy secret for seven months because there were "neanderthals" out there who would have refused to believe that a pregnant woman could handle her public duties as governor, and because of her own conflicted feelings about having a Down Syndrome child at the age of 44. She does not explain the bizarre circumstances of the day-long labor on various airplanes. But, hey, maybe at some point, she will. When she does, I will do my best to bring it to you. Maybe one day - who knows? - a journalist might even ask."

More comments at link

Ivyfree said...

"as Dangerous has reminded us repeatedly, we have no compelling (to us) motive for Sarah to do this."

Motive, though- when you're investigating something, motive is the least thing you worry about. It would be interesting to know why she faked a pregnancy, but that's all.

"Meanwhile, Bristol giving birth to Tripp eight months after Trig was born is evidence, whether you choose to ignore it or not."

It would be evidence if it was true. We don't know when Trig was born.

Ghostbuster said...

Someone else would have confirm that those are caffeinated sodas Sarah is holding in the Testa pics.

But really, does it matter either way?

IF Sarah really were pregnant and IF her due date really was May 5 as she claimed, she would have been at least a couple of weeks late on Sept 14th.

OK. You would think she would have been at least considering the possibility of pregnancy at that point; but that's assuming that her cycles were regular, not a given particularly for a woman her age (I know) and that she didn't have any implantation spotting or early pregnancy bleeding mistaken for a period, something not all that unusual. You would also think that, as many times as she's been pregnant, she would have noticed whatever early pregnancy signs are typical for her body, e.g. nausea, breast tenderness, hip joints loosening, etc. But it's not a given that she has a typical "giveaway" sign that she'd recognize so we can't fault her for that either.

And last, IF we take at face value her story of taking the pregnancy test while at the oil & gas conference in New Orleans 9/23-25, she wouldn't have known for sure until about ten days after these photos were taken. It COULD be that she suspected earlier but didn't want to risk being seen buying a pregnancy test and waited until she was out of state. But it also could be that she didn't have much reason to suspect she were pregnant until then. Or that she had a suspicion but didn't care to give up the caffeine.

And of course, it's also possible that caffeine was a moot issue because she wasn't pregnant at all. ;-)

So anyway, whether or not she was drinking caffeinated beverages during this photo shoot isn't going to prove much of anything one way or another. It's not inconsistent with her version of events.

Tully said...

Yes, Bristol's giving birth to Tripp eight months after Trig's birth is evidence -- HEARSAY evidence. Without reliable supporting documentation of the dates of birth in question, it remanins meaningless. With reliable documentation, it would be virtually ironclad. (It wouldn't prove SP gave birth to Trig, mind you, just that BP didn't.) So, Dangerous, why haven't they supplied such documentation?

penny said...

I intentionally did not post any "fringe" theories. I respect Audrey and her hard working team too much to do such a thing, but I am sure everyone here has considered some "out there" scenarios, and the thought that the truth may be something unexpected is intriguing!

The topic of SP came up at a small gathering of expats here yesterday. They asked what inspired me to start blogging and I told them my interest in SP ultimately led me to the fantastic AK political bloggers. They couldn't understand why I was still interested in SP, asked why there was not much coverage of a "faked" pregnancy and seemed unaware of her future political aspirations. Most did seem to agree that she was incompetent and they could not imagine a future in politics, but I wished I kept my mouth shut, or at least had all of you sitting there next to me for support!

I look forward to the day we will all be vindicated of being silly conspiracy theorists. I feel that day is near.

Ghostbuster said...

A few of random points:

On a motive for the deception: my money is on health insurance for Trig. His situation is certainly much better in that respect as Sarah's child than as Bristol's.

For "healthy, perfect" Tripp this would be hardly an issue at all, certainly not something to fake a pregnancy for. But Trigg, as we know, is in an altogether different boat.

And one more time about the Christmas decorations in the Testa photos: The only decorations we see are on the banister and the wreath on the front door. They were put up for the Christmas portrait photo shoot and then, I'm sure, taken down until the mansion was decorated for real in November/December. Track's having signed up for the army just three days previous might have had something to do with having the Christmas shoot so early, if they needed to work around his training schedule.

About Track's face being obscured in the "portrait" on the banister: there are two professional photographers there, one, the portrait photographer, and two, the photojournalist on assignment from Newsweek, Andrew Testa. The family is facing the camera of the portrait photographer. Testa got a shot from the side of this portrait session.

You can see the portrait photographer setting up in the hallway behind Palin in one of the Testa pictures. Also, too, read his captions. :-)

It would be quite interesting to see results of that portrait session. Did they end up just using the the rooftop family pic for the holiday cards that year? Anyone know the name of the portrait photographer?

T in Canada said...

Still reading with interest - just not able to post as often. But there have been many moments of "wow!" for me here the last two months or so. Great job, everyone.

I am surprised the Right to Life lie has gone over so well with the general public. All it said to me was "This is me saying I really was pregnant, but I can't keep saying that or you'll be suspicious. But, if I admit something that sounds totally unbelievable about the pregnancy, you will believe the pregnancy was mine. It is another lie to reinforce a lie, but it will subtly make the first lie sound that much more plausible. Because nobody is going to think Trig is anyone else's but mine if I say I thought about aborting him.".

This is getting sickening.
The more lies she tells, the more she'll have to explain. The RTL banquet is a big one, I think. She'll now have to admit that once the Trig lie is exposed once and for all (which, I feel, is getting very close at this point).
Not only was she not pregnant, but she's spent the last year trying to convince us after the fact.

Mercede and Bristol seemed to be getting along very well in the pics with Trig, btw.

vw is: trivel? As in, drivel, or trivial? ;)

Vaughn said...

Dangerous you said Bristol giving birth to Tripp eight months after Trig was born is evidence, whether you choose to
ignore it or not.

We have about as much evidence of that so called fact as we do that Sarah actually gave birth to Trig.

A statement does not make it the truth.

Sarah in SC said...

Caffeine or decaf shouldn't even be a talking point. I know plenty of women who never even pretend to give up caffeine while pregnant.

"Studies may show" is one thing, but there are plenty of people who either dismiss "studies," or just consider them a nonfactor, or who just don't consider it any of anyone else's business what they ingest.

I'm with you that the Redbull seems a little over the top--but consider the source, here. We are talking about SP--and we also know she wasn't pregnant.

Short of having video footage of her doing shots of tequila while "pregnant," no one would give a flip. I'm not sure, but suspect that even the radicals in the pro-life movement wouldn't call HER on the carpet for some caffeine. There's always some explanation for her, tho, isn't there? (rolling eyes)

Ghostbuster said...

Research question:

The December 2007 issue of Alaska Business Magazine had a cover story "Christmas with the First Family". I can find the text online but not the pics anywhere. The article talks about the Palins' plans for Christmas, their tradition of building an ice rink their back yard, and so on. I wonder if the pics used were from the Sept photo session...

Anyone seen this magazine?

Ocean said...

Motive to fake a pregnancy:

How about a anti-choice Christianist (Andrew Sullivan's term) with Presidential aspirations finding out her 16 year old daughter (who has only completed 2 years of high school) is pregnant.

midnightcajun said...

Ghostbuster said, "On a motive for the deception: my money is on health insurance for Trig. His situation is certainly much better in that respect as Sarah's child than as Bristol's."

This is a good motive for adoption, but not for deception. If either of my two beautiful young daughters became pregnant and decided to keep the baby, I would have to adopt the baby--even if it was healthy--simply so that it would be covered by my insurance. The frightening cost of medical care in the US these days requires that. BUT, I would have no reason to strap a pillow to my belly and say to the world, "Look at me! I'm pregnant!" I could simply legally adopt the child. No need for deception!

Nor can I accept that Sarah did this to "protect" Bristol's "reputation." This is not the 1950s. Many, many people in Wasilla and in the legislature have said that "everyone" knew what Bristol was up to (and the MySpace postings prove that Sarah knew it, too). So Bristol's sexual activity was already common knowledge on the local stage--which is where it counts as far as Bristol is concerned. Heck, this is the girl that got up on national TV and talked about her sexual activity. Premarital pregnancies are a Heath family tradition.

My scenario is this: Sarah Palin forced her young daughter to hide her pregnancy in order to avoid the political embarrassment of "Family Values Sarah" having to admit her 16 yr old daughter got knocked up. Trig (due in mid-April) was born premature in February, at which point Bristol balked at giving away the child and tests showed the child had DS.

At that point, Sarah realized the need to cover the child with her own insurance would force her to adopt it. And then she got a brilliant idea: since she was going to have to adopt Trig anyway, why not lie and pretend the child was REALLY hers? That way she would not only save herself the political embarrassment, but also give her "pro-life" credentials megawatt power by painting herself as a saint who gave birth to a DS child. Instead of being a political embarrassment, Trig became a political gift.

Sarah knows her base, and she was right. Thanks to Trig, the Palinistas see her as the new Madonna and Mother Theresa, all rolled into one.

As always, it's all about Sarah.

Lilybart said...

Here is what surprises me: NO ONE in her church, her allies in God, has chosen to send Audrey any photos of Palin where she looks actually pregnant or even to write a letter with some first hand knowledge. And what about that exercise studio? Darn hard to hide a pg there and really hard to hide fake padding when you are jumping and dancing in class.

I am sure that everyone in Wasilla knows about this website.

There is a weird silence.

Shelby said...

t in canada: I agree with you there. I notice Andrew Sullivan posted a comment from a reader who was 'moved' by Palin's 'choice' statement at the RTL event. http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/05/thinking-about-sarah.html

This is exactly why Palin did that speech. Even hard-core anti-Palinists found themselves 'moved' by her statement of confusion and doubt regarding her late life pregnancy with a DS child.

Since I am 100% certain she faked her pregnancy and has lied repeatedly to protect her naked political ambition I look at the RTL speech in a completely different light. I have no doubt in my mind that upon finding out her teenage daughter was pregnant, this deluded, narcissistic, dangerously ambitious woman was torn with a terrible decision. And it probably really was after a lot of soul-searching, heart-wrenching anguish that she and Bristol made the decision upon which their faith is based – no abortion. I think Sarah Palin may have spoke from the heart in Indiana but I think she spoke not of her decision but the choice her teenager made.

And WHEN (not IF) the truth surfaces many, many people will look at the speech again in Indiana in a different light and see Sarah Palin for what she really is. A professional liar who was willing to take the hardest, most personal, most soul-wrenching decision any woman, let alone a 16 year old unwed teenager, will ever have to make in her life, and claim it as her own for pure political gain.

I realize what is missing from Sarah Palin and why she is so scary to me. She lacks the simple human emotions that we must demand from our leaders and those emotions are compassion, humanity and empathy. She is a empty shell of a person who is so out of touch with true human emotions that she even stole her own daughter’s anguish and claimed it as her own just to gain some political capital.

There are no words to describe a person like that.

---

my wv is redlyar!

Bretta said...

""" Vaughn said...
Dangerous you said Bristol giving birth to Tripp eight months after Trig was born is evidence, whether you choose to ignore it or not.
We have about as much evidence of that so-called fact as we do that Sarah actually gave birth to Trig.
A statement does not make it the truth.
May 4, 2009 9:29 AM"""

We don't actually have a fact or a statement, just Hearsay, about the birth date of TriPP.

The announcement was made by a great-aunt (sister of Bristol's grandmother Sally Heath) to People magazine.

Newspapers have the function of publishing the "Vital Statistics Records" of births and deaths for their community.

In the Anchorage Borough, death notices seem to be published within a day or two but birth notices may take a few months. TriG's birth announcement was published in the Anchorage Daily News although he was supposedly born in the Matanuska-Susitna Borough. The Frontiersman would be the community newspaper for a birth in Wasilla.

I'm will follow up to see if the Anch Daily News publishes Vital Statistics Records for the Mat-Su Borough, or if the Frontiersman does.

Dangerous said...

Ivyfree wrote:

It would be evidence if it was true. We don't know when Trig was born.
Along with other comments ...

Sorry, no. There is pictures of Trig on April 18. His size in the pictures is consistent with a newborn. That is direct evidence. Some have chosen to define their interpretation of that evidence as fact to support an otherwise unsupported theory regarding Trig's birth. There's no evidence Trig was stashed as a premie somewhere until possibly the most inconvenient time to roll him out. But many Bx2 proponents have decided that those crazy circumstances were intentional.

So I have direct and circumstantial evidence to support that Trig was born on or about April 18. You've got bubkiss.

For Tripp's birth, there are the announcements reported in the media and never disputed with an alternative date, and Tripp's with GVS when his appearance is consistent with an infant about six weeks old. That's direct evidence.

Many have convinced that the direct evidence of both births are somehow subject to question as support for the Bx2 theory. Questioning evidence for the sake of sustaining an alternate theory weakens the theory.

So again, show me one piece of circumstantial or direct evidence that either Bristol gave birth to Trig, or gave birth much later to Tripp than reported, that doesn't include any of the following:

1) conjecture
2) speculation
3) evidence of absence as absence of evidence
4) rumors
5) hearsay (subject to exceptions of the hearsay rule including: spontaneous utterance, statement against interest, state of mind, etc.)

I read Andrew Sullivan's post, and perhaps he should ask, rather than waiting for some MSM person to do so. Isn't he MSM?

Dangerous

Ghostbuster said...

Shelby, she could as well be drawing from her own experience but from an earlier pregnancy (say, her first).

Having now seen the video I believe she really was speaking from the heart there, about her deepest beliefs and religious convictions.

But don't confuse the "truthiness" of her story with literal historical truth. She is telling a moral story, a parable, and the details are not as important to her or her audience as the message. I tried to analyze how it would be understood but her audience/base, here:
http://www.themudflats.net/2009/04/17/palin-in-indiana-the-whole-enchilada/?cp=2#comment-44554

http://tinyurl.com/RTL-story

mlewis said...

Adding to Shelby's great analysis, remember Bristol's quote when talking to GVS in her now-famous Fox interview. Bristol insisted that it was her choice to have the child when she found out she was pregant. Whether she was talking about Trig or Tripp, Sarah's agony and emotion surely would be doubled if she was involved in a tug-of-war with Bristol-- either pregnancy. In either case, here is Sarah, the champion of abstinence only and the clear proof in her daughter that it didn't work. Add the complication of an unwed mother-- where are your family values? We really have to conclude from Bristol's remark that subject must have come up between them. Sarah used every bit of that emotion to her advantage--- again!

Laura said...

I have a question for the two posters from or living near Wasilla: what were people saying before the Veep announcement? What have people in that town/valley been saying about who was or wasn't pregnant? Is is true that people whispered that SP was covering for her pregnant daughter? I mean, WHAT WERE THEY SAYING around town? One of you said on ImMor that you live 3 miles from the P's. So, while you might not have the definitive answer, tell us at least what the buzz was. Because if you asked me if it's true that the head of my son's school was sleeping with a mother/administrator there, I'd say, well, I haven't been in the bedroom, hotel room or car with them, but THAT IS PRETTY MUCH WHAT EVERYONE IS SAYING! Everyone! From all sides of the issue. My point being, that I can at least verify that it is what was said and what was taken for common knowledge. So, also, too, then, for the love of God, what were/are they saying up there?

midnightcajun said...

Ghostbuster, I followed the link to your explanation on Mudflats, and want to thank you for that. Having been raised by an atheist father and a backsliding Catholic mother, I simply do not understand how fundamentalists think and speak. Her target audience, however, obviously understood the pattern and subtext immediately. The rest of us went, "Huh?"

This is a perfect example of how brilliantly she knows her target audience, but at the same time makes the mistake of thinking that a majority of Americans are the same. Whereas her Christianist disciples heard a gratifying parable of temptation resisted by the grace of God, the rest of us were horrified that a woman would get up and tell the world and ultimately her child that she'd considered aborting him. Plus appalled at the suggestion that a woman with a high-paying job, investments, a husband, health insurance and two built-in teenaged babysitters, can now as a result "understand" how a "girl" might be tempted to have an abortion.

She's clueless. Only, she's so self-absorbed she doesn't realize she's clueless.

Lilybart said...

It does seem to me that the birthdate for Tripp is what they say. The Johnstons have said that all the aunts and cousins of the extended Heath family were there, but they were only allowed 5 minutes.

I know disfunctional families stick together, but that is a lot of people coming and going.

For me, the photos of the non-pregnant Palin are the piece that just can't be explained away.

That 25 week/6+ months photo with Beth Kertulla is just too NOT pregnant to get past. And the scrubbing of photos from the 2008 legislative session from ADN and the local TV is just too weird for a woman who lives to be photographed and doesn't take a bad photo. Unless you count bad photos as ones where you don't look Pregnant!

So I am sure Palin did not give birth. I don't know who did. Bristol is possible.

Nova Land said...

Ghostbuster wrote: The December 2007 issue of Alaska Business Magazine had a cover story "Christmas with the First Family". I can find the text online but not the pics anywhere...

Anyone seen this magazine?
There's a very useful website, WorldCat.org, which tells the location of libraries carrying a particular book or magazine.

If you go to WorldCat.org, and enter Alaska Business into the search window, the second entry in the list which comes up is Alaska Business Monthly.

Click on the link I provided, click on the second listing, enter a city or zip code in the space provided, click on search, and WorldCat will provide a list of all the libraries which carry this magazine, arranged in order to let you know which are nearest to location specified.

There are 65 libraries on the list. About 25 are in Alaska and about 40 are in the rest of the US.

I live in middle-of-nowhere Tennessee. None of the listed libraries are ones I can get to. But those of you who live in larger cities such as Dayton (listed), Cleveland (listed), Chicago (listed), Louisville (listed), St. Louis (listed), etc. -- or in Alaska -- might give WorldCat a try to see if a library in your area subscribes to this magazine.

jeanette said...

Here is a link to a story in newsminer that I haven’t seen before. It is during the NGA conference in February of 2008 and features one of those leaning forward with legs crosses pictures although not as dramatic as the LA film clip. She says she had two meetings with McCain, including dinner with him and his wife. Knowing how she embellishes things, one of the meetings and the dinner may have been with all Republican governors. Here is the link http://tiny.cc/vzEe4

Dangerous said...

I fail to see how anyone can doubt Bristol gave birth to Tripp at the time announced. With so many MSM outlets watching, attempting to perpetrate a ruse on that is close to impossible.

Plus, we have video of Tripp. Some have suggested that they borrowed a baby which would look older in order to deceive everyone. That would also be problematic since then there have to be other parties participating in the scheme.

But this is entirely besides the point. You all have to produce evidence that the reported birthdates are incorrect, and you can't. The only thing propping up Bx2 is supposition built on supposition, existing only to support that theory. I'm not surprise people can find circumstances that correlate to their suppositions. Fantasies don't require evidence.

Did anyone consider that SP hid Bristol and Tripp for weeks in order to keep you speculating, without the ability to prove your contentions?

Here's another question to ask yourselves: Have you seriously considered any other possibilities since you concluded last September that it had to be Bx2?

Dangerous

Ivyfree said...

"So I have direct and circumstantial evidence to support that Trig was born on or about April 18. You've got bubkiss.

For Tripp's birth, there are the announcements reported in the media and never disputed with an alternative date, and Tripp's with GVS when his appearance is consistent with an infant about six weeks old. That's direct evidence"

Well, no, you don't have direct evidence that they was born on or near the days announced. You have proof that Trig had been born by April 18,2008, when he was seen, and that Tripp was born before whatever the date was that Bristol did the GVS interview.

The appearance of the babies on those dates are also consistent with babies up to the age of about 2 months. A baby typically will put on 1-2 pounds a month until its sixth month. A six-pound neonate and an 8 lb 2-monther? A seven-pound baby and a nine-pounder? Can you see the difference? I suggest most people can't. Yes, there are developmental milestones that a 2 month baby has reached, none of which can be seen when the baby is snuggled up in blankies and held against a somebody's chest- which also helps disguise the size of the infant.

Given the highly peculiar circumstances surrounding both births- the Flight Out of Texas and Bristol Palin and the Mystery of the Invisible Baby- and complete lack of corroborating evidence, such as actual birth certificates, or statements at the time, etc.,- I'd say you've got the wishful thinking, because you seem to think that Sarah Palin and Bristol Palin might tell the truth. I never assume that. I assume that they will say whatever they think sounds best to whatever audience they want to reach; and whatever they think might convey the image they want to project. That's pretty much how they've played it so far, and I try to go with the betting odds.

Any relationship to the truth, from them, would be strictly coincidental.

Headtrip Honey said...

Ahahahaha, I found this graphic "flow chart" of SP's "wild ride".

Pretty funny, albeit with spelling mistakes.

http://hollywood-elsewhere.com/images/column/9308/sarahpalinmap.jpg

mlewis said...

A note to Nova Land: When I looked up the article, no illustration provided, it is dated Dec.1, 2007. I don't want to be a spoiler here, but I don't think that the photo will show much of anything. In order to be in print, the picture was most likely taken in October or early November at the very latest. It takes a while to print the magazine, bind it all together, address it to subscribers and hit the new stands by Dec.1. So, we all pretty much agree that the Christmas decorations could be staged anytime for the photo op. A previous poster made a remark about a professional photographer not taking a picture with one face in front of another. Come on. Haven't you ever heard of "outtakes?" For every picture they print, many many more are discarded, some one blinked, oh- I looked away, could we do it over?

I did find that you can buy the article through Amazon.com, but I don't know if it includes the picture that you want. Good Luck, I hope that you find something there.

Ivyfree said...

"I fail to see how anyone can doubt Bristol gave birth to Tripp at the time announced. With so many MSM outlets watching, attempting to perpetrate a ruse on that is close to impossible."

They weren't watching. A great-aunt of Bristol's, from out of Alaska, notified People Magazine. Several days passed before the governor "corroborated" the story. It was seven weeks before anybody saw the baby, which means nobody really knows except the immediate family- and they're not known for truthing.

In view of the fact that Bristol's baby is supposed to be Sarah's proof of maternity, it's very odd that she wouldn't seize the opportunity to publish pictures immediately and vindicate herself.

Sandia Blanca said...

Another point about the coat she appears to be holding: one frequent observation from the alleged Trig pregnancy pictures has been that SP is ALWAYS wearing a coat indoors. But here, when she's really pregnant, she is not. Although I am not a bio mom, I have heard from many mothers that your body temperature is higher than normal during pregnancy. This picture tends to support the theory that SP also experienced the warmer body temperature while pregnant with Piper. But with Trig, not so.

AKPetMom said...

Laura,

I live 3 miles from Palin and 3 miles from the Johnstons. I am a diehard liberal that was astounded when Palin got elected as Gov in 2006; I was in a cloud of disbelief for many a month.

I supported Tony Knowles for Gov, a Democrat who was previously Mayor of Anchorage then Governor.
Some of my friends supported Palin. These women are very Christian soccer mom types and thought that the sun rose and set around Palin.

Me, on the other hand, had watched her career since she was Mayor of Wasilla and then launched her failed run for Lt. Gov in 2002. I personally laughed off her campaign for Gov and thought that it was too farfetched to even be considered. How wrong I was.

At any rate, when the preg was announced in March 2008, along with the statements from Beth Kertula and Lyda Green regarding the lack of baby belly from Palin, I assumed, as many others did, that she was covering for one of her daughters, for whatever reason. My reaction was "whatever", Sarah Palin never tells the truth and is basically just an idiot, so I'd not put anything past her regarding lying about anything, including being pregnant. I just wrote if off and figured we'd be done with her soon enough when her term was up in 2010 and Alaska would move on to greener pastures.

Please realize, amongst intellectuals in this state, Sarah Palin and her family are not well thought of. They don't participate in the arts and well, they just snowmachine and "stuff" and are not really part of the greater cultural scene here in our state. They are a solid representation of a percentage of our state, but certainly don't represent ALL of us.

As I said, many of us were just waiting to see her do herself in and have no chance in 2010.

Yes rumors abounded regarding the pregnancy, but no one that I knew really cared, and many still don't. I developed more of an interest in this possible duplicity, only after it became national news and tabloid fodder. (I do have one weakness, celebrity and tabloid news...I guess it is my guilty pleasure)

So, that's what my take is on the Palin saga. I do live in Wasilla, but once again, don't associate w/the Palins or very many political types in the valley.

Sorry I can't be of more assistance. My take on the Palins is that they are dysfunctional in more ways than we will probably ever know and most likely the outcome of this baby saga will be one that will not have been discussed here due to it being extremely unpalatable to most. I don't think it is Bx2. I think it is probably family related in some way, how I do not know. If it was as simple as Bristol having both, then the truth would have already been exposed.

onething said...

Dangerous says,

"I fail to see how anyone can doubt Bristol gave birth to Tripp at the time announced. With so many MSM outlets watching, attempting to perpetrate a ruse on that is close to impossible."

As you know, I do indeed doubt Tripp was born on 12-27, although his appearance on GVS was consistent with a baby of several weeks. I find their behavior in hiding him for 6 weeks when they so desperately needed him to appear completely incomprehensible, and the idea that Sarah was deliberately hiding him to play more games with us is just plain - oh I better not say it or this post might not make it. Completely implausible.

As for the MSM, they were totally, totally locked out and so I think that comment is irrelevant. I don't know whether the MSM was parked outside the house, but they got nothing, zilch, nada to show for any such efforts. Nothing for 6 weeks.

I suppose your theory is that Sarah is deliberately cultivating the speculation that Bristol is the mother of Trig while loudly complaining about exactly that speculation, because she knows that a lot of people are never really going to believe she herself is the mother of Trig, and wants no one to suspect Willow.

I have no problem at all with Willow being the mother. I just don't think she is.

MrsTarquinBiscuitbarrel said...

AK Pet Mom, I share your fondness for tabloids--in fact, while on a family road trip Sunday, I ducked into a convenience store in Pennsylvania, figuring that the week's tabs would be up, and they were.

For Amy1 and others, there's not much new Palin news in the May 11, 2009, National Enquirer, and a frustrating reliance of "insiders say" comments. That said, here's the full-page article from that issue, which appears on page 24:

BRISTOL PALIN USING SON TO 'BLACKMAIL' BABY DADDY

"She doesn't want Levi Johnston, but she doesn't want anyone else to have him either

"NEW behind-the-scenes drama has erupted in the all-out war between Alaska Governor Sarah Palin and the family of Levi Johnston, the father of her grandson.

"Gov. Palin's daughter Bristol recently cut Levi out of her life, but she's still trying to control him and even stop him from dating other women, a close source told THE ENQUIRER.

"'What Bristol is doing amounts to emotional blackmail,' says the source.

"'She no longer wants Levi in her life and is threatening to have him cut out of their son Tripp's life.

"'Bristol is extremely controlling and jealous of Levi, and she's made it clear to him that if he hooks up with another girl, he won't be seeing Tripp.

"'BRISTOL IS VERY IMMATURE. She doesn't want to date Levi, but she doesn't want him dating anyone else either. She wants him to sit around pining over her--but that's not about to happen.

"'With all the publicity the Palins have received, Bristol knows there's a line of girls who want to date him!'

"Bristol's immaturity was further highlighted when Levi, along with his mother and sister, appeared on CNN's 'Larry King Live' on April 22 to discuss the feud they're having with the former Republican vice presidential candidate's family.

"Levi's sister Mercede disclosed to the national TV audience that Bristol barred Levi from speaking to her when the teenage lovers were together!

"'Bristol held a grudge against Mercede because some of her friends had dated Levi,' the close source explained. 'The girls meant nothing to Levi, but Bristol wouldn't accept that.

"'The irony is that Bristol stole Levi from her childhood friend Lanesia Garcia, who dated Levi for three years before Bristol did!'

"The ENQUIRER reported exclusively [Typist's note: Oh yeah?] in last week's issue that Levi was planning a custody battle. He had previously revealed on Tyra Banks' talk show that he is not allowed to take his 4-month-old son out of the Palin home. And he told Tyra that Bristol 'doesn't want me around.'

"Both Levi and his mother confirmed to Larry King that they've retained lawyers to help Levi battle for the custody of his child.

"Levi, 19, also told Larry he wasn't paying Bristol any child support, but added: 'I have everything my boy needs back home--diapers, toys, everything.'

"Meanwhile, 18-year-old Bristol is stunned that Levi is fighting back publicly.

"'Bristol constantly threatens him, telling him that if he keeps up the publicity stunt she won't let him see Tripp,' said the close source.

"'But in the end, she'll have to listen to whatever a judge decides. Her mother may be governor, but Levi has a right to see his son whether she likes it or not!'"

--by Sarah Cordes
scordes@nationalenquirer.com

The same photo from the GVS interview that appeared in the NE last week, in which Bristol cradles Possible Tripp, is repeated. The same photo of an angry SP is repeated, though greatly reduced, with the caption, "Her mother may be governor [Typist's note: Who, Sarah's mother?], but Levi has a right to see his son." There's a grainy reproduction of a photo, as tall as the page, of Levi shambling down the street, and also a small picture of the Johnstons, identified as their appearance on "Larry King Live."

It is likely that Sarah Cordes reads this blog, Audrey, as she cited Levi's broken relationship with Lanesia Garcia. I haven't seen that information anywhere else.

jeanette said...

I am in the camp that thinks that Trig was born before April 18th. April 18th was just the first day that Sarah could “give birth” to him. The legislature was in session until April 13th and Sarah couldn’t give birth in Juneau because Trig wasn’t in the Alaska panhandle. She had to go to the Republican Governor’s conference so she couldn’t give birth on the 14th. She traveled to Dallas on the 15th and gave her speech on the 17th leaving immediately after it to fly back to Alaska. Arriving in the middle of the night had the added benefit of no press coverage and the “emergency” nature meant there was not advance notice of her travel schedule.

I had always thought that Trig looked very small in the pictures taken in the Palin house and maybe they were taken before April 18th. I think the one with Sarah was photoshopped to put Sarah in and that is why it is in sepia when the others are in full color. For a non professional, it is harder to be clean with the edging while adding a whole person into a photo if it is in full color. The issue pretty much goes away with sepia. Does anyone have the picture with Sarah in color or another picture of Sarah in that position?

I think the reason there are the feet in the picture with Levi is that the Johnson’s computer was scrubbed by the McCain folks and since this one hadn’t been posted on the internet that we know of, it was taken from a scrapbook. There were McCain folks at the Johnson house right after the announcement of Bristol’s pregnancy and in a recent interview Levi’s mom said “they” took pictures off their computer without being clear who “they” were.

Tully said...

AK Pet Mom,

I have read your entire post four times now and if I had to come up with one word to express how I feel about it, the closest I could come would be “chagrined.” I find it so sad that the people in Wasilla don’t care about this.

I live in a red area of a blue state. We have a very intelligent and competent Governor who inherited a lot of problems from our former toad of a governor. I can tell you that the CINO (christian in name only) soccer mom types around here totally detest our lovely guv and think SP rocked in the 2008 election.

I can’t imagine our leader pulling any of the many shenanigans that SP has pulled. But, if she did, I can even less imagine the citizens of this state shrugging their shoulders, rolling their eyes, and waiting patiently for her term to be over. And a fake pregnancy while in office!– if that were known or widely assumed, her political opponents would use it to completely eviscerate her. No “whatever” attitude on the left or the right, she would be toast.

So, I sigh and struggle and wonder if babygate really does matter. If Wasilla doesn’t care, why do I care? Yet it would matter if it happened in my state. A big machine with nearly limitless resources would make it matter.

Ivyfree said...

"My take on the Palins is that they are dysfunctional in more ways than we will probably ever know and most likely the outcome of this baby saga will be one that will not have been discussed here due to it being extremely unpalatable to most."

Oh, I am SO hoping I live long enough to read the tell-all bios that might come out of the kids-

sg said...

Mrs TarquinB:

The story that Lanesia Garcia was Levi's girlfriend before Bristol was first reported in Sept. 2008 by a UK publication, then picked up by US celebrity gossip sites.

Here's an example, Perez Hilton, 9/14/2008:

http://tinyurl.com/perez-hilton-lanesia

Lynn said...

eneifighIt's so hard to follow the truth in this fog of lies and unknowns. It sounds like a possible truth that there were friends and family around for Tripp's birth. (Those stories would still be "true" on any number of dates) IF it's true that they were there then would it be possible to figure out the whereabouts of some of the smaller characters in this strange saga at the relevant time periods--when the birth was said to take place as well as when we speculate that it did. Once again all we have is vague references and not names, though.

midnightcajun said...

Thanks, AKPetMom, for your explanation of how Sarah's "I'm pregnant" news was greeted up in Alaska--
"when the preg was announced in March 2008, along with the statements from Beth Kertula and Lyda Green regarding the lack of baby belly from Palin, I assumed, as many others did, that she was covering for one of her daughters..."

I can see how, when she first did the whole fake pregnancy routine, a lot of people would have thought, "whatever." She was doing so much else that more directly effected residents of the state. What makes it so particularly offensive now is the string of lies that has followed, the ugly denunciations of anyone who dares to question her, the horror of anyone with such contempt for the truth and her fellow citizens ever being anywhere near power.

I have a question for those of you with "Christian hockey mom" type friends (I may live in Louisiana, but all my friends tend to be liberal academics or professionals): Now that they have learned more about Palin, seen her unprofessional demeanor on full display, watched the petty drama of Levi and Bristol played out in the tabloids, have ANY of them changed their minds about her? Or are they still besotted, convinced she's been done dirty by the "liberal media"?

Nova Land said...

mlewis said: A note to Nova Land: When I looked up the article, no illustration provided, it is dated Dec.1, 2007. I don't want to be a spoiler here, but I don't think that the photo will show much of anything.I posted the WorldCat information mainly to help Ghostbuster, who is interested in finding that article -- but also to let others on this site know about a very useful tool.

On several occasions, people have had questions about on-line pictures. In some cases, pictures which were originally published in a magazine or newspaper are no longer available on-line. In other cases, there have been questions about when a picture first appeared (such as the controversial Bristol green sweater picture).

Audrey argues convincingly in the post "Once And For All" that the picture was probably published in the October 23, 2006, copy of the ADN. Even so, people here spent a lot of time in that thread speculating in circles about what the actual date of the picture might be. (And I have no doubt there will continue to be people who bring it up in future threads with additional time spend speculating on whether it might actually be from late 2007.)

That was a good case -- and this is another -- in which one trip to the library on someone's part can provide a definitive answer.

There are many questions we can't get the answers to. But in questions such as these -- where the answer can be found -- I think it makes a lot more sense for someone to look up the answer than to leave it open and spend time on maybes and what ifs.

WorldCat is a very useful resource, because it tells you the location of the nearest library which contains what you're looking for is. As someone with a strong sense of curiosity which I like to satisfy when I am able, I find it WorldCat very helpful and recommend it highly.

AKPetMom said...

I feel w/my earlier post I might not have explained very well how many of us in AK felt about a possible Palin fake pregnancy. What I meant to say, in a nutshell, was that a lot of people's attitude was, "well, we know she's a whack job anyway, so what if she faked a pregnancy. What would it really matter in context to her being in office"?

Troopergate garnered much more media attention because it was a possible ethics violation and an abuse of power situation. People were very interested Troopergate because it could cost Palin her job. Faking a pregnancy, while odd, wouldn't get her thrown out of office. It was just more proof that she is a deranged liar.

Many people in AK do want her out of office ASAP, hence all of the ethics violations piling up. I just think that most people didn't think too much about the Trig affair because it wasn't political and any investigation would be on the personal, and not political level. I think the local press was unwilling to go "tabloid" on the Gov's personal life. The local press did dance around it for a while but then, boom, Troopergate broke and Trig was dropped like a hot potato.

So after letting the matter cool down, Palin THEN had to go outting Bristol to the nation and parading her family around for all to see, that's when her family life became fair game for news agencies.

Here in AK the press and the public just let it go and if Sarah Palin would have just let it go as well I don't think anyone would have brought it back up.

Palin did bring this additional scrutiny regarding Trig's maternity on herself. Was faking a pregnancy a stupid thing to do? Perhaps. Will it ruin her politically? Probably not, and that's what we want; we want her gone from office never to rear her mentally deficient head again. It will take more than a faked maternity to do that, and her die hard palinbots will never change their opinion of her, regardless of what comes out in the wash re:Trig. The worse the truth is, the more Sarah will spin it as being a "victim" and her bots will rally 'round her and give her a big pity party. Good thing there aren't enough bots to ensure her a future in nat'l politics.

So yes, now I'd like to know the truth re:Trig and I suspect that something will come to light at some point. Sarah has made her personal life my business by airing her dirty laundry to the world. Before 8/29 I did not care, now I do as a matter of personal curiosity. She should have just kept her family out of the spotlight instead of parading them around as an example of "family values".

I know I made it sound like Alaskans are just twiddling their thumbs waiting for her term to be over, but you all know about the 14 ethics charges brought against her, you can see that people in AK are working hard to bring her down. However, before Troopergate I guess most were just waiting and waiting for 2010...now she keeps messing up and people keep calling her on it.

I hope that I explained myself a little better.

steven said...

When I became pregnant with my (only) child in 1981, I couldn't wait to "show". Unfortunately, I didn't until right at my 7th month, at which point I literally popped outta my britches!

I'm small (110), so I can attest that it's not horribly unusual for smaller women to be pregnant a while without obvious signs. However, I am in complete agreement with those who said "I WANTED to "show"!!!!

This is all just weird, but then again, so is the Guv.

ilovepoodles said...

I just saw this on cnn's ticker:
Group says Bristol Plain to promote teen pregnancy prevention
http://tiny.cc/2gG87

Ivyfree said...

"I just saw this on cnn's ticker:
Group says Bristol Plain to promote teen pregnancy prevention"

Yeah, she's the poster child for pregnancy prevention. Of course, pregnancy prevention doesn't mean abstinence. Abortion takes care of it nicely, too.

onething said...

Another piece of evidence is the video of the family walking into church just before Christmas, in which Bristol looked pregnant, but did not look near term.

If Bristol is not the mother of Trig but just so happened to be pregnant with Tripp, they might have fudged the dates for Tripp's birth to make a viable cover story.

The true birth date for Trig is far more pliable than Tripp's. I would be surprised if he was not born earlier. It is obvious that Sarah decided to fake the pregnancy late in the game. As I have said many times, we could have him born at least a month earlier without significant health problems and without the need to hide him in a NICU.

However, my comments never get acknowledged by a certain party, because despite his stance that we must remain rational and evidence based, it appears to me that he is just as biased as anyone with which facts get taken into account and which ones get explained away.

But AKpetmom makes a good point. If it were as simple as Bristol X2, why hasn't it been exposed by now?

NoMore said...

Question: Wasn't there an announcement of Tripp whatever *Johnston* being born? If so, Tripp has Levi's last name, and as such, Levi *should* have a much easier fight for custody than if the kid were named *... Palin*.

Ghostbuster said...

Nova Land, thank you! Turns out, the Alaska Business Journal is in a couple of electronic databases that most libraries should have! I was able to log in to the thompson-gale database through my public library website and access both the pdf and the html text plus images versions of the story.

The image illustrating the story is indeed the banister family Christmas portrait that was taken Sept 14 2007(or was it a day or two later? Can't remember off the top of my head...in any case there is NO doubt that this photo was taken mid-September, not during the holiday season, so it is *consistent* with the possibility Bristol was pregnant with Trig at the time).

I was hoping that the photographer would be credited by name but no dice; it is simply "courtesy of the Governor's office."

Bristol does look remarkably pudgy around the middle in the picture. Just sayin'. ;-)

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 282   Newer› Newest»