Saturday, May 9, 2009

Ho! Ho! Ho!

As I have stated many times, it has always been my preference to focus on Gov. Palin's behavior and appearance regarding the "Who's Your Mommy? And What Does She Do?" conspiracy. I was - like so many other mothers - disgusted by Palin's behavior regarding her children during the campaign, first quite specifically her choosing to use the announcement of Bristol's then-current pregnancy as the direct - and sole - proof that Bristol could NOT be Trig's mother, meaning that Sarah then had to be, and second, the way she paraded and displayed the children like so many stage props. There's one video in particular in which she carries a rather inert Trig out on stage like a big stuffed doll, strides briskly around with him, then hands him off like a football. I literally cried when I saw it. (I can't find the link at the moment, but if I do I will update this post to include it.)

OK, rant over.

Anyway... I really have not wanted to focus on Palin's children but it has been inevitable that the children - in particular Bristol - had to be brought into the dialogue for the simple reason that Bristol was (and really continues to be) Sarah's only proof that she - and not Bristol - gave birth to Trig. No birth certificate, no doctor's statement, no happy family in the hospital photos, nothing. Just Bristol. (Oh, and "Sarah wouldn't lie." I guess we can't forget that.)

So Bristol's whereabouts, behavior, and appearance are regrettably "fair game." And recently, two discoveries have opened yet more legitimate queries into just where Bristol Palin was and what she was doing - and how she "looked" - in the fall of 2007.

When the rumors first hit the Internet the last few days of August, 2008 that Palin had faked a pregnancy to cover for Bristol, two photos were widely shown in which Bristol Palin purportedly had a "baby bump." The first, in which Bristol is wearing a green sweater, was taken at the Palin's home in Wasilla. I have felt confident dating this to 2006, based on the fact that we discovered another photo from the same shoot in which Todd is wearing a campaign button.

But the second photo was a bit more troublesome.



People said many different things about this photo. One of the first was that it was from February of 2008. (I always thought that was most unlikely unless Alaska is a whole lot warmer than I have been led to believe.) Fairly early on, a correspondent identified this photo as having been taken in Juneau - and sometime in the summer or early fall, as the mountain in the background - according to him - typically has snow on it by late September. That seemed reasonable, and from this we could date the picture with more accuracy. It had to be the summer / early fall of 2007. Why? In summer of 2006, Palin was not yet governor; by summer of 2008, Trig was born and he is not in the photo.

I have always been bothered by this photo because - frankly - I never thought that the person in the photo that HAD to be Bristol looked much like other photos available of her. And of course the reason we are looking at this photo is the alleged "baby bump." Is there one? Possibly, though it did not look much different than the picture I felt dated from 2006. What bothered me more - a lot more - was how different and frankly "fatter" her face looked! But all in all, it's hard to tell, and you can't deny that she does look "full" in the middle.

I never felt confident saying anything with any certainty, however, because dates just did not add up in my mind. Operating from the assumption that Trig was really "due" in mid May 2008 and born a month early, if this photo was taken "before the end of the September" whoever is pregnant here could only have been 4-6 weeks - at the most - too early to show no matter who it is.

But one rumor that has persisted since the onset of this investigation was that Trig was born much earlier than announced. People have based this on numerous (and frankly very divergent) "evidence," not the least being that Trig - from the very beginning of his public debut in September looked much older and larger than you would expect a baby who, on Sept 1, was 4 1/2 months old and had been born prematurely. Other researchers have found clear evidence of a jar of baby food for much older babies (nine months plus) in a photograph of Sarah's desk from August on 2008 when Trig would have been barely four months old. Numerous people have commented that Trig looked much older than his supposed nine months in a recent promotional video Sarah did for the Special Olympics.

And of course as was revealed on this blog several weeks ago - we have clear evidence that Bristol Palin's presence was "scrubbed" almost entirely from MySpace beginning approximately July 1, 2007. Why? We had our suspicions but could prove nothing.

However, with the discovery of some additional photos which clearly show that Bristol Palin experienced rather striking physical changes between June of 2007 and September of 2007 PLUS our discovery that the Palin family may have intentionally released a "Christmas 2007" photo which was actually from Christmas 2006, it's hard not to have our suspicion alert level go to orange, if not red.

Here's what we know:

Several weeks ago, an alert blog reader provided us with this link. Apparently, these photos have been available all along but languished, undiscovered, on a UK photo website. Here's the link and here's another. (For this second link, you need to enter the site and you can search either on photographer's name (Andrew Testa) or "Palin.")

These links were critical because it allowed us to date - absolutely - that the photo of the Palin family on the balcony was taken on September 13th (or 14th - there seems to be a bit of confusion about the date, but a one day discrepancy is not an issue.) We already had suspected this because Palin's agenda, released under a FOIA request, indicated that official family portraits had been taken in Juneau on these dates, but we could not prove that THIS photo was taken then. Now we could.

One thing that is striking about these photos is that Bristol clearly shows signs of a weight gain, both in her face and in her body, when you contrast these shots with ones taken of her only three months earlier, on June 10, 2007.



She is slim hipped, lean through the face, completely flat in the belly, and frankly not very large on top. And three months later - we have this:



This is another photograph that we recently ran across. It was - we think - supposed to have been the "official Palin family holiday portrait for Christmas 2007" and it was obviously taken the same day as all the other photos in September. It was released for use in the Alaska Business Journal's December issue, but I still have not been able to determine if it ever appeared on the state website, or any where else for that matter. It could have been - but considering the fact that we have never seen this photo before now, my guess is that sometime between when it was released to the Alaska Business Journal and Christmas, the Palins changed their mind about using it. Hmmm. Wonder why....

Want another comparison between June 10 and September 14? Here it is:



And this brings me to the second interesting little tidbit that my ever vigilant helpers discovered. One of the things that has always struck us is the complete dearth of any photos of Bristol Palin between (now we know) September 14, 2007 and April 25, 2008 (when she posed in a candid shot with Mercede Johnston before Mercede attended the prom at Burchell High School.)

Bristol supposedly went with her mother to New York City in October of 2007. She is mentioned briefly on the state of Alaska website as having attended a license plate art ceremony (now there's some fun!) in early January, 2008, and again - according to travel reimbursement forms Palin filed, Bristol was also supposed to have attended an American Heart Association event in Fairbanks in mid February, 2008 though no photos of Bristol that we can locate seem to exist for any of these. (Queries to the Heart Association about this event have been met with a surprisingly, even shocking amount of obfuscation and stonewalling. More on this in a future post.) But other than that, the public record is amazingly silent on the whereabouts of Bristol Palin between September 2007 and April 2008.

One "sole" official photo seemed to exist, this Palin family photo released in the Kaylene Johnson biography of Palin, and dated to Christmas 2007. Here - naysayers have claimed - HERE is a photo of Bristol. Nothing to see here. Put THAT in your pipe and smoke it, you Trig Truthers you.

Except, not so fast.

Here's the picture released in Kaylene Johnson's book:



It's clearly dated 2007.

But here's a picture released in another Palin biography, Lorenzo Benet's Trailblazer.




It's dated 2006. Every person in the photo is wearing the same clothes, so it's reasonable to assume it's from the same year. But which year is it? Who's wrong? Kaylene Johnson or Lorenzo Benet? How to know?

Conveniently, every year at the Governor's Mansion in Juneau, the Governor of Alaska hosts an open house. Many high quality and reliably dated pictures are available of this event from mainstream media for both years. Careful analysis of the photos have shown that the decorations - specifically ornaments on the wreath visible behind the Palin family - are consistent with 2006 NOT 2007. It's not easy to see in the photo released in the Benet book, but when you really look, the conclusion is obvious.

Here's the wreath from the Lorenzo Benet book:



Here's the wreath from Christmas 2006, according to the official state of Alaska website:



Here's the wreath from Christmas 2007, again from the official state site:



It's obvious that the wreath in the photos from both the Kaylene Johnson book and Lorenzo Benet book is from 2006. A "typo" on Kaylene Johnson's part? An OOPS on the Palin family's part? Whatever the answer, this photograph is not from 2007. It's from 2006. Yet another "possible" sighting of Bristol from the time period in question is proved false.

So - what can we conclude?

1. In spite of rigorous efforts to locate one, not a single piece of photographic evidence exists of Bristol Palin from mid September 2007 until April 2008. This is a girl who had many friends with social networking pages. This is the daughter of the governor of Alaska, who prior to this time, had required her daughter to attend numerous "First Family" events.

2. Photographs that do exist show a striking amount of physical change in Bristol Palin during the early months of the time when "someone" would have been pregnant with Trig.

3. The one photograph ever released "officially" by Palin which purported to show her daughter in December of 2007 was misdated. By whom, we do not know.

Stay tuned...

445 comments:

1 – 200 of 445   Newer›   Newest»
mlewis said...

Wow! What attention to details! Wow!

B said...

We had a convincing (to me) blog discussion about that baby food being a sample, or memento, jar of salmon that was supplied by Todd's company to the baby food company. May have nothing to do with what Trig was eating.

I haven't yet been won over by the TriG was due before mid-April arguments. If Bristol were several months along, Sarah should know and would not have released a picture with Bristol standing in front and emphasizing her newly broad middle.

Patrick said...

Great post, Audrey!

All the new pictures of Bristol Palin can be viewed on flickr here:

http://tinyurl.com/dzqyod

A big THANK YOU to our reader Ghostbuster who had discovered the agency sites which contain these previously unseen pictures of Bristol Palin and her family!

And we shouldn't forget to mention our team-member Mary who after a lot of digging found the "lost" official Palin family Christmas picture for 2007!

The article containing this "lost" Christmas picture, which was published in December 2007, can be downloaded here:

http://www.box.net/shared/sbx0z6eo66

Patrick (PD research)

Patrick said...

B,

I think that it's highly likely that the Christmas picture for 2007 published in "Alaska Business Monthly" was released to the magazine "by mistake". After all, this picture apparently appeared nowhere else, including the official website. It was clearly an "unwanted" picture.

The significance of this picture and the other pictures taken on 14th September 2007 which were recently discovered shouldn't be underestimated. Within three months in the summer, from June to September 2007, Bristol changed in size dramatically - and she was an active, sporty girl. We are now able to prove that this change happened, which is a real breakthrough.

To our readers who haven't been following this discussion closely during the last weeks, I also recommend to watch this clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DA-M2NfFAjU

Patrick (PD research)

Abuela25 said...

It feels like Christmas in May! I opened up the blog and there was this sparkly new post! WOW keep the "presents" coming!

I think the shine is about to come off GINO, the Palinites might have too take a fresh look at their next best hope.

historiesmysteries said...

A carefully reasoned and detailed post. I know we have shied away from looking too closely at these aspects of the situation because it seemed intrusive, but Bristol has now been on TV four times talking about her sex life and her pregnancy, and at least three of those times were for monetary remuneration. She has now placed herself in the public forum.

As a continuation to this sequence, I think it's helpful to see what happened to Bristol's form in 2008. By the end of April, she looked both thin and flat, and stayed that way into the summer when we see her with the family all in blue sweatshirts (the gov's picnic?). Then, by the beginning of September when she is outed as being pregnant with Tripp, she is once more full of face, broad of breast, and chunky of body. In the February 09 Iron Dog shot, she shows a very obvious--and very recent--postpartum tummy. Now, in the shots of her taken in New York just a few months since, she's once again slim hipped and flat stomached. It's all consistent.

It's my suspicion that Trig was due in April if not sooner, with Sarah planning all along to "have the baby early." I will never understand that wild ride story, since even if Trig were born that night there was simply no reason to tell such a ridiculous tale other than to burnish Sarah's tough frontier woman image--which is undeniably the way it played to so many. As for when the child was actually born, who knows? He could have arrived premature as early as February.

And B, I don't think Sarah knew Bristol was pg when this photo was released to the Alaska Business Monthly. That woman is so self-obsessed I doubt she would have noticed until Bristol told her. I think that confession came sometime between when the photo was released (a week after it was taken?) and the mystery trip Sarah and Bristol made to NYC in October.

Sunshine1970 said...

Wow. More convincing than ever. Way to go Audrey & Research team!

Question: In the X-Mas pics taken in September, how far along would Bristol seem to be?

Mary G. said...

The size change from June 2007 to Sept. 2007 is extremely telling. I agree with Patrick that the family, on seeing the photos, decided they did not want to use them--but some had perhaps been promised to these news agencies (the calendar pages clearly state that the family, including Track who was about to leave for basic training, were to take part in photo shoots for Alaska Magazine, the official Christmas card, and Newsweek magazine). And Palin may not have realized how far along Bristol was--often, in a first time mother, the changes are sudden and not necessarily limited to the stomach area.
Further research on the calendar shows numerous references to Willow's running, basketball games, etc--but nothing for Bristol throughout the Fall of 2007. This is in contrast to Bristol's previous years in school, and one sees in the summer 2007 pictures that she is trim and fit. A last bit of circumstantial detail is that, in trying to chase down rumors and stories about Bristol's school attendance and when the pregnancy suspicions began (this is ongoing!!), it became clear that in the Fall of 2007 Bristol may not have been in school very much. Even the Anchorage Daily News has been unable to determine anything about Bristol's school attendance.
Finally--it seems so impossible that out of the 350 attendees at the 2008 Go Red for Women AHA event in Fairbanks, no one has a photo to share or to pass along to Audrey. If you have one, or can take a picture of a picture, please do!

wayofpeace said...

what LISA (from the previous thread) and all PALIN-deniers DO NOT GET is that while intuition and a well-honed BS-detector brought us here; it is the 3 Rs that keeps us going now: Reason Rigor and Research.

all of which are compellingly exemplified by AUDREY's recent post.

i just wish their rebuttal were as well argued and crafted. but alas, all they got is 'faith' in SAINT SARAH!

wv: HYBUKE as in the HYPER-REBUKE that audrey just delivered.

Chi Town Mom said...

The Mat-Su hospital CEO resigned and is going to take a position in Idaho.

http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/matsu/story/789380.html

I have ABSOLUTELY NO PROOF that this has anything to do with GINO, but let's pretend he is trying to save himself from tough Palin questions by leaving the state. HA HA HA

Alex said...

At first I was troubled by this post. Teenage girls gain weight, lose weight. . .

. . .but the most convincing part of Audrey's argument is Why Was this Perfectly Gorgeous (and UnPalinesque, Classy, and Proper) Christmas Photo scrubbed?

There had to be a BIG reason.

Maybe circumstantial. But, damn, imo, Audrey, this is a NAIL.

leu2500 said...

B - I'm in the camp of SP is mostly interested in SP, and her kids don't get much of her attention. She's the same mom who let her 7 yr old daughter walk around in high heels while carrying baby Trig. That's a safety issue, and she didn't do anything. So I can see her not noticing Bristol's condition until too late.

However, and this is pure speculation, our suspicions about Bristol's condition at this time mesh neatly with some of the theories about the Oct trip to NY.

Floyd M. Orr said...

Pardon me, Audrey, but it seems that you listed incorrectly the dates Bristol was missing in one instance underneath the twin photos of Bristol in June and September, 2007. It appears that you stated 2008 and 2009 instead of 2007 and 2008. Am I just dense, or is this a detail that needs to be corrected? Thank you for doing all this research!

Truthseeker2 said...

More good stuff -- kudos to everyone working on this!

The mid-September photos make clear to me that Bristol was 3-4 months pregnant by then, not 1-2 months, meaning she may very well have known she was pregnant by late June. (This brings to mind the mama duck and slut comments.)

I wonder how Sarah, who is so image conscious, could not have noticed such big changes in Bristol... especially given her suspicion about Bristol being pregnant in the May 14 2007 MySpace comment. Except she was away in Iraq (I mean she could see Iraq from where she was), so maybe she was too busy or oblivious to pay attention to Bristol. And possibly it was really Bristol who engaged in "fashion assisted camouflage." I doubt Sarah went ahead with family photos knowing that Bristol was pregnant. I tend to think that Sarah didn't know for sure about Bristol's pregnancy until that fall (maybe it was when she saw these photos that she figured it out!). Given what we know now, I tend to agree with prior blog-posts that Bristol's pregnancy may well have been the motivation for their extended trip to NYC.

The likelihood that Bristol was pregnant by early-mid June seems to bring Johnny back into the picture, though. I still suspect that Levi is Trig's father, but perhaps there was some testing needed to establish paternity, as others have suggested.

Chi Town Mom said...

Speaking of Bristol's figure. Look how trim she is after giving birth just a few months ago. Today she looks thinner than she does in the Christmas photo.

Laura said...

The elephant in the room, for me, if you'll pardon the pun, is SP's sister. There has been speculation before that SP might have adopted to help out her sister, the one with 9 kids or something like that. In the series of mansion photos, SP's sister is, let's be honest, fat. In the Xmas photo, I took a double take. She was slim wasted. Wasp wasted. So, if that's a year later, maybe she had a baby in between. Or, maybe she was quite pregnant in Sept 07. Just a thought. While I do believe in Bx2, I've also, too, wondered whether there were three babies. The first given up for adoption. Or maybe twins, and they kept the DS baby. At any rate, the wreath looks the same to me.

Also too, some interesting comments on other sites. Lots of buzz that something's brewing. I doubt she returned home b/c of flooding. I'll bet she's hunkered down with some pesky characters to hammer out an agreement on custody and money this weekend.

trish in SW FL said...

These newest photos are amazing!

And as self-centered as SP is, it wouldn't be shocking that she didn't really notice Bristol's changing figure until later. In the picstures, I'd bet she focuses on how SHE loos, not how the kids look.

Audrey and team, tou're doing an amazing job; keep on it! The truth must be found out!

B said...

Laura,

I had noticed Molly's weight in the Sept. 2007 photos, how every female looked more pregnant than Sarah, but had not noticed the contrast to Xmas 2006, 9 months before. Good eyes!

I believe she divorced Trooper Wooten in 2005 or so. Troopergate was 2007. Somewhere in there she married Mr. Hackett, the same name (maybe same man) as the PI hired by the Heaths to track Trooper Wooten.

By September 2007 Molly is 42-ish, has remarried, and could be pregnant. No Hackett baby has been announced. The judge in the Wooten child custody/support fight chided Molly for being underemployed, so it's possible she couldn't afford another child, especially a special needs child.

All to say that if Bristol were ruled out, Molly would be a remote possibility.

I assume Hackett is the man with Molly in the 2006 Xmas picture, though that man bears a strong resemblance to Wooten. Does anyone know who he is?

jeanette said...

Wow, I was away for the day and really didn’t expect much new. What a surprise.

Eileen, thank you so much for coming forward with that photo and story. I realize the decision to do so was probably not an easy one but this is an important piece of evidence.

Audrey, thanks for sharing that wonderful Sarah/moose letter with us.

Diana, thanks for that montage of Megan McCain’s pictures of Bristol. http://tinyurl.com/qs4nql A couple of thoughts on the pictures at the rally in Dayton. Bristol is clearly angry with mom. The look she gave in a couple of them was the same look she had when Sarah burst into the Greta interview.

Was Sarah nursing Trig at that time? I thought I read that she was. If Sarah was nursing Trig, why the need for the bottle when she was right there? I think Bristol may have been nursing Trig but she couldn’t very well do so in that environment. Clearly the picture of Sarah sitting down didn’t show the profile of a nursing mom.

T in Canada said...

This has certainly been an interesting day here! Nice work, Team! I am riveted. Audrey and company, I have a feeling the jig is almost up and we will have you to thank for pursuing the truth of this matter with such courage.

The NYC trip is a good point to speculate about in light of the September Xmas pics and Sarah's abortion "confession". I believe there's a definite connection.
Possibly Sarah saw for sure in those photos what she'd probably suspected but had been denying, keeps it to herself, brings Bristol along on the NYC trip to discuss it away from the family (far from home, where nobody knew her, it would be so easy, or something to that effect?).

I think SP is trying but failing miserably to keep this a secret because, in her family, it is a secret, and sometimes those weird small-town parental question mysteries are sad stories when the truth is finally told (even though usually everyone knows, except for those closest to it).

It is possible that only Bristol, Sarah, and CBJ know the truth. All the rest close by may be afraid to ask for fear that the truth may be really that reprehensible. You know - bad enough to make someone that high-profile do something so strange and unexplained, unexplainable, as faking a pregnancy for her teenaged daughter.
I lean towards Sarah suggesting an abortion to Bristol exactly the way she told her RTL audience she thought about it for herself. And Cathy B-J is involved somehow to a larger degree than we, or the MSM, can ethically discuss. Hence the silence, and protection of the secret, for so long now.

B said...

We're constantly saying, "How could Sarah expect to pull off such a deception?" And so far she seems to be right that she could.

Just saw this possible answer on HuffPost: "[Sarah] is the most confidant person I've ever met."

The whole quote: Klein talks all about the politicians that "SNL" has hosted over the years. She says John McCain has a "great sense of humor" and that Sarah Palin was one of the most confident people she's ever met. "I actually was the first person to meet her," Klein said of Palin. "I was standing there, and I thought, 'Oh my God, she looks just like Tina!'" Klein said Palin had an "incredibly strong handshake" and that she was overwhelmed by her resemblance to Tina Fey. "A lot of people come to our show — actors, musicians — and they're nervous...she was not nervous. I thought, this is the most confident person I've ever met."

Daisydem said...

Alex, yes teenage girls do gain weight/lose weight - but not to this degree in 2-3 months? if the thin Bristol pic can be validated to be June 2007 and not in the face, breasts and tummy area all at once in a short period of time unless there is a medical reason. I did have problems with the difference in her hair but then I realized that pics taken in September follow a summer when time spent in the sun lightens hair and wasn't there talk in the myspace pages of time spent doing water sports on the lake?

Darklady said...

I agree that the clothing is identical and that we're looking at the same wreath... but I need to point out that the wreath in the supposed 2007 image is not identical in the ornament placement to the one shown in 2006.

It could be that between the taking of the two pix some items were moved around... or it could be that it's the same wreath used two years in a row but turned slightly differently.

Nonetheless, curiouser and curiouser from the Land of Palin.

novemburd said...

I was reading another blog about the Levi vs Bristol custody war. On one of the TV appearances, maybe the Tyra Banks one, a number of pictures were flashed on the screen, showing Levi holding Tripp. Oops, except 1 of those pictures was of Levi holding Trig. It appeared to be dated at the same time as the other "newborn" photos of Trig.

Interesting.

Dangerous said...

The sequencing on these pictures is becoming difficult to follow. Between the June and Sept 2007 -- as labelled by Audrey -- not only is Bristol's figure different, but it barely looks like the same girl. Hair color is different, the face is different, etc.

But if you look at the original "baby bump" picture (Bristol in green) she looks a lot like she does in the Sept 2007 picture. I just reviewed the photo from Dec 2, 2006 showing "Alaska's New First Family", and Bristol and Willow are clearly younger, and don't look at all like they do in 2007.

I think my point is that Audrey would help us all if she would post a time-series of Bristol (and Willow, if in the same photo) so that we can debate picture dates based on known, unknown and uncertain benchmarks. THEN we can decide if Bristol's appearance tells us anything about her internal physical condition. (My assessment is that it's a huge leap, for the reason Alex stated.)

Of course, if the assertion is that Bristol appearance in the Sept 2007 pictures is an indication she was about two-months pregnant (as opposed to just carrying a little extra weight), somebody better explain how nobody in Wasilla or Anchorage noticed she was pregnant later in the year. If she was three months pregnant in September, and gave birth to Trig in Feburary (full or nearly full term), someone in school during the fall term would have noticed, if anyone thinks that they can tell from a few photos from months earlier.

So you have to make a choice: either Bristol appears pregnant in September and thereafter and nobody noticed (or everyone is silent about it), or these pictures don't indicate anything about it at all.

(Hint: If you don't want to appear foolish, choose the second option.)

Dangerous

Avvid said...

Really interesting analysis, Audrey, thanks!

One thing that jumps out at me with the June/September photo comparison is that her hair seems to be different colors. Which is her natural color? Is the lighter September hair consistent with sun from Alaska summer? Is there any relevance to the color difference? (I've heard that pregnant women are not supposed to die their hair)...

kygirl915 said...

Check out this poll at Sarah Palin news topix:

http://www.topix.com/forum/us-governors/sarah-palin/TPOE039F7J7VA99G0

Sorry, I don't know how to do tiny url. But check it out.

wolfwoman said...

Am I missing something? Bristol looks pregnant in 2006 (the green sweater photo), doesn't look pregnant in June 2007, and looks pregnant again in September 2007. If she looked pregnant, but wasn't, in 2006, then her looking similarly pregnant in September 2007 isn't particularly strong evidence that she was pregnant then. Another plausible explanation is that her weight fluctuates and that she was thin in June because she dieted, like so many teens.

Are there enough photos to allow the conclusion that she is generally thin, and that her extra weight in September was likely due to a pregnancy?

Avvid said...

Wait, Bristol in the September 2007 photo doesn't look that different from Bristol in the 2006 family picture where Bristol is wearing a green shirt (other than hair color). Having been a teenage girl, I think a possible explanation for Bristol's body changes is that she struggles with her weight and had dieted to get herself down to the June 2007 size, but was not able to maintain that size.

jeanie said...

Great job, Audrey!

I have to apologize, because I think I was the one who had started a 'was that family photo (the green sweater-bump one) in 2006 or 2007 a couple of months ago. All because I know I saw it dated 2007 on the governor's website. And then suddenly gone, of course.

I guess I'm just not devious-minded enough, because it didn't even occur to me that it may have been released and mis-dated on purpose!! Sorry for getting everyone off-track on that one.

Awesome sleuthing with the wreath, and other details.

As far as I'm concerned, just the fact that they would stage a "Christmas" photo in September is a major nail in the coffin!!

Jean
:)

jeanie said...

Oh - my bad - revoke my last comment (well, at least the suspicion about the photo in Sept.) I hadn't been looking at ol' Track back there. Clearly they were doing this so he could be in the shot.

Ennealogic said...

@ Dangerous

You said, "(Hint: If you don't want to appear foolish, choose the second option.)"

With apologies to Morgan and Audrey and the rest of the team, I have to say that this poster is growing more insufferable with every new post.

Please, Dangerous, you are welcome to have a theory and support it whenever you like, but you are the only poster on here that regularly finds a way to tell other people how they should think and tell other people how dumb they are if they don't think like you do.

Please stop it. Thank you.

Amy1 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
wayofpeace said...

what is going on?

are all these teens fat or pregnant?

weird...

http://community.webshots.com/album/266308418cULhxl

Alex said...

A bit OT but in response to above mention of Palin's self-confidence:

Parents worry about their children's confidence, but constant, preemptive praise can turn kids into cynics; studies show that playground bullies (and later in life, criminals) exhibit high self-esteem.(The Parents We Mean to Be, Richard Weissbourd)

Alex said...

The Very Professional and Governoresque Photo would have had to be taken in September to be available for use for pre-Christmas publication. For once, Palin was doing something correctly.

Did Bristol know she was pregnant? Weight is such a huge issue for girls that she would have had to know. No teenage girl puts on that much weight without wondering where it came from.

How did Sarah not realize until after the photo was taken-- and sent out to at least one publication? Well, we all know the answer to that. For a Family-Values Chick, she is extraordinarily out-of-touch with the realities/needs/behavior of her children. Vandalism, partying, Piper's high heels, Trig Sack o' Potatoes. . .

Alex said...

On behalf of True Mothers Everywhere, thank you, Audrey, Morgan, and Audrey's Army.

NakedTruth said...

Has it occurred to anyone besides me that Bristol could have been pregnant multiple times and could have possibly been pregnant as well in the 2006 Green Sweater?

Just saying I find it strange that Bristol told Johnny on her Myspace page that Sarah thought she was pregnant. Now why would Sarah think that? When I was sixteen, my mother never would have accused me of being pregnant without a reason. IMO it had to be because Sarah knew that Bristol was sexually active and/or Bristol had been pregnant before.

Maybe Sarah caught the 2006 pregnancy in time to get Bristol and abortion. With the rounder, larger tummy in the Sept. 2007 photo maybe Bristol was too far along in the pregnancy to have an abortion when Sarah found out. Maybe they considered a late term abortion during their trip to NY but Bristol couldn't go through with it and had to be shipped away to Anchorage.

I still think the 'mother duck' comment made by Bristol is her telling a girlfriend that she had sex with Levi and couldn't get rid of him. Remember before the 'mother duck' comment was the urgent 'call me' comment which was Bristol telling her girlfriend that she had slept with her other friend's (Laneisha's) boyfriend (Levi). Then there was the comment after the 'mother duck' comment 'I'm a slut'. Bristol was admitting what she did was wrong.

Just my opinion....Unfortunately I have many teenage nieces, nephews and cousins that have experienced quite a few of these 'growing experiences'and I have seen the results.

B said...

Dangerous said ...
So you have to make a choice: either Bristol appears pregnant in September and thereafter and nobody noticed (or everyone is silent about it), or these pictures don't indicate anything about it at all. (Hint: If you don't want to appear foolish, choose the second option.) ***


To say Bristol looks pregnant is too strong.

To say Bristol's looks are consistent with pregnancy is valid.

So I disagree that the photos don't say anything at all.

Remember the Inside Edition "reporter" back in September saying students told her that Bristol sat pregnant in the high school stands and watched Levi play hockey. She reported this as if it were the TriPP pregnancy, but since Levi played his last game in Feb. or March, that doesn't fly. In essence someone told her people knew Bristol was pregnant in fall 2007 or winter 2008. (Audrey has talked about this somewhere.)

I agree that Wasilla's silence is stunning. You'd think at least Lanesia would be talking since she and Bristol now hate each other. At the same time, if you substitute "Willow" for "Bristol" in your comment about no one noticing, it's just as true.

nilap said...

Ive been using the firefox plugin Cooliris to do some image searches.

Here's what I came up with today. Ive looked through lots of photos so I hope these arent something that was already addressed.

Here are the Palin girls in Dec 2006 for comparison

http://www.tinyurl.com/oaaoxs

Good shot of GINO from Feb 5, 2008
http://www.tinyurl.com/48q86t

And a picture from Mar 18- I believe 2008
http://www.tinyurl.com/brrt8z

Amy1 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
MimiC said...

I'm confused as to why this Christmas 2007 picture is on the official biography page of the Governor's website. None of the pictures on the official site with the family includes Trig. Isn't this strange? Is someone setting the stage for a "I never said Trig was my son" finale?

ss in ca said...

If we conclude that the picture in the "Alaska Business Monthly" was provided by mistake, isn't it possible that it was provided by someone other than SP (an assistant or aide?) because she was too busy to look at the proofs before the magazine's deadline?

I think it would be interesting to find out when the submission deadline was, and compare it to SP's travel schedule.

It might be a situation where SP did not see the pic until it was too late, had a confrontation with BP, then demanded that it not be used once she knew the truth.

That said, the "lost" pic is not altogether more revealing than the camo pic from the roof that was officially released, so perhaps there is no more to the "lost" picture than the Palins decided they liked the other one better.

In any event, I continue to be so impressed by the thorough research and investigative standards done and set by Audrey and the Team. Great job!

Doubting Thomas said...

B said...
We're constantly saying, "How could Sarah expect to pull off such a deception?" And so far she seems to be right that she could.

Just saw this possible answer on HuffPost: "[Sarah] is the most confidant person I've ever met."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The longer this deception goes on, the more confident that Sarah is that it will NEVER come out!

She made it through a VP vetting, an election process and showing off an unmarried, pregnant daughter to the public, the story of her "Wild Ride" was accepted blindly by many. With only small whispers that Sarah is not the Mother of Trigg that Sarah has tried desperately to squash.

She managed to use Bristol to cover for the birth date of Trigg, hid the actual birth date of Tripp, has Bristol in the limelight as an advocate for abstinence. All with nary a whisper about who is Trig's birth Mother.

She has blatantly lied about Troopergate, Ethicsgate, Babygate, and a ton other "gates" and she is still standing and going strong.
Is it any wonder that she is still thinking about 2012?

Unless we can get the Mainstream Media to report on this story, we will always be the PJ clad, basement dwelling, crazy bloggers she says we are. No matter how much proof we have, no matter who in Wasilla and around Alaska really knows the truth. Levi and the Johnston's seem to be Sarah's biggest fear, yet she still seems to be pretty confident that they will keep her secret too. (By holding Tripp as her trump card maybe?)

jeanette said...

I think Sarah is so self-centered that she would not have noticed that Bristol was pregnant in the Juneau and porch pictures and if seeing these pictures that made her realize the fact, they couldn’t redo the shots since Track was leaving for Iraq. (I think he left the 18th but am not sure of that date.) He flew into and out of Juneau the same day for this shoot. What excuse could they give for asking that he come back again?

I think they had to release the Christmas photo since they had promised it to the magazine and what excuse could they give as to why they weren’t giving it to them? “None of the pictures came out.” It looks like although it was supposed to be the official Palin Christmas photo, it wasn’t used anywhere else. That they could get away with. Does anyone know what the Palins did use for a Christmas photo or card or did they just not have one?

They had to use one of the photos on the porch as a family photo and so they probably chose the one in which Bristol looked the least pregnant. They couldn’t just photshop Piper in front of Bristol. I think the photographer might have noticed.

I think the reason all the photos are dated September 13th is that Testy was in Juneau photographing the Palins on the 13th and then followed them to Juneau on the 14th (or the evening of the 13th. Whoever dated the photos on the web site must have just thought they were all taken on the same day.

Audrey, did the second link have the same pictures as the first. I get a server error when I try to enter that site. Maybe some scrubbing going on?

B said...

*** novemburd said...
I was reading another blog about the Levi vs Bristol custody war. On one of the TV appearances, maybe the Tyra Banks one, a number of pictures were flashed on the screen, showing Levi holding Tripp. Oops, except 1 of those pictures was of Levi holding Trig. ***

See Audrey's fairly recent post Message.in.a.Bottle. That other blog probably got it from here.

MrsTarquinBiscuitbarrel said...

ChiTownMom, the ADN link about the Mat-Su hospital director splitting for Idaho appears to have been taken down ALREADY. Started searching archives, but haven't found it yet.

And Penny, thanks for posting your Flicker pix. The one you titled "Hold still, dammit, I'm multitasking!" shows Trig precariously squeezed in SP's left arm while GINO studies one Blackberry on the table and fiddles with another BB in her hand. Not exactly the kind of "devoted gran" behavior one wants to see on the Web.

And thanks, Eileen, for all those great posts pecked out for us in between looking after your toddler nearby. *I worship you.*

Leadfoot said...

When it stands on its own -- this post is amazing evidence! However, I have to agree that the green sweater photo makes this analysis somewhat weak. I put the Sept. Christmas pic next to the green sweater pic and Bristol looks identical -- same hair, same figure, same full face.

The only way I can reconcile Bristol being heavy in 2006, then skinny in summer 2007, then heavy in fall 2007, then missing for months, then heavy and pregnant (with Tripp), and now skinny again -- is to date the green sweater pic to 2007, or to conclude that Bristol was also pregnant in the green sweater pic in 2006.

I know we have been over (and over and over) the fact that the green sweater pic is 2006. But can we revisit that? One obvious difference -- Willow DOES have braces in the Sept. Christmas pic. She does NOT have braces in the green sweater pic. Can we date when Willow got braces? Everyone else looks pretty much the same.

midnightcajun said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Truthseeker2 said...

After seeing Bristol glamming for the cameras at Candie's Foundation, I'm convinced that this abstinence campaign is a complete fraud. All they are doing is glamorizing Palin's unwed motherhood. That's not going to deter one single kid -- likely the opposite -- and they know it.

I'd like to see one of these interviewers have the guts to ask Bristol Palin if she has been abstinent since Tripp was born, if she is abstinent now, how long she has been abstinent, and when she first had sex. And why she called herself a slut when she was still only 16. And ask Bristol or Levi if Trig is their (biological) son.

OTOH, I realized that Levi could have a career as a model after all -- just put him in an ad for condoms, and put Trig in one arm and Tripp in the other, dirty diapers and piles of laundry nearby...now THAT might make a few kids think twice. Certainly it would be more effective than the BS that BP is up to.

jeanette said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Dee said...

It is amazing that Bristol has choosen to take a job that is guarenteed to have people ask probing questions about her sex life and to actually have a valid reason for doing so. Bristol has to know that many people suspect that she is the birthmother of Trig, which would mean that she experienced TWO unwanted pregnancies in a 20 month period. And yet she has the nerve to be a spokesperson for the effectivness of the scientifically disproven Abstinence Only method of birth control. As someone with a teenage daughter who abhors this method and the resulting unwanted pregancys, Bristol career choice has renewed my desire to see the truth come out.

Amy1 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
penny said...

I'm not sure what to make of the green sweater photo, because it shows a fuller figured Bristol, similar to the 2007 photo. I've been trying to compare the maturity and height of Piper, and am still a bit mystified. The '06 inauguration photos show a more immature Piper face and shorter girl, compared to the bust lines of her mom and siblings. Willows hair is pulled back in the green sweater photos, which may make her look younger, I still lean to these as possibly "07 shots. I know we have discussed these adnauseam, and some would say I am trying to justify the green sweater photo with being from '07 to jive with mbucteshy Bristol x2 theory...well, so be it!

Take a look and see what you guys think...

http://tinyurl.com/p6wdjy

tasha said...

Post from Oz Mudflats blog:
blackton says:
What aggravates me about Palin is her acting as though her having a down’s syndrome child is a mark of heroism on her part. My wife and I recently had a baby, I am Palin’s age and even having one older parent increases the risk, but we had no amnio done. It was just something we did not even consider since we were having the baby and amnio presents some risk. We would only have done it at the express wish of the doctor.

How is it that she knew she was having a down’s baby unless she had an amnio? Maybe it is SOP for women her age but she could simply have asked if there was any risk to her life. If she were truly pro life she would not have known, as my wife and I did not know. We did not even want to know the sex except when having the ultrasound his little unit displayed itself prominently. We had 2 sons, and wanted a daughter, but que sera sera.

I am not pro-life, except personally. I told my wife before we got married that if she became pregnant she would have the baby unless her health were at risk, or we would not get married. It was not as draconian as it sounds since she felt the same way. Our adhering to our own principles doesn’t make us heroic, it is far easier to live by ones own code than to go against it.

But Palin, hell she wants to live by her code, get applauded for doing so, and have the option to violate her own code secretly if it ever becomes inconvenient while acting as though she were against the option. She is a disgrace. It is a mark of how loathsome Republicans have become that if she did not have a downs syndrome baby, but just a normal Iq baby, she probably never would have gotten picked as VP.

So there you have it Sarah – when you decided to tout yourself as Pro-Life to get a few votes, you really should have done your homework first and figured out what being a Pro-Lifer actually entailed. Oh wait. You don’t do homework, do you…

tennesseeteacher said...

I agree that these photos are HUGE finds, despite Dangerous's admonitions that we're "foolish" if we think so. Well done, team! Also, I agree with the poster who said that there's definitely a reason (other than the purported one....flooding) that made Sarah miss the White House correspondent's dinner. I think she knows that her goose is being cooked with the continual addition of evidence on this blog and is perhaps afraid of being in a room FULL of journalists.

Sue said...

I find this photo caption odd "Auntie Piper helps out":
http://tinyurl.com/q7yca8. That is a picture of Trig, not Tripp, so why would she be an Auntie when she's really his big sis?

AKPetMom said...

to B:
Troopergate was July 2008. Here's the ADN article.

http://www.adn.com/monegan/story/492964.html

Audrey said...

Sue, the answer to your question as to why the caption says "Auntie Piper helps out" is that whomever uploaded the photo chose to use that caption.

They could have said "Santa Claus is coming to town," or "The Titanic Sinks," too. That doesn't make it true.

This is why we check things carefully. A private individual uploaded that picture, with his or her own interpretation - that it's "Auntie" Piper. Fine, a lot of us would agree with that.

But this photo was originally relased by Meghan McCain on her blog, and it's important to note that she never claimed that this was "Auntie" Piper or anything of the sort.

lexky said...

i just hope the truth comes out before 2012 whatever it is.

B said...

AKPetMom, You are correct. I should have said Troopergate *activity* in 2007. That's when the Palins took over the GOv's office and started pressuring Monegan. I found a timeline at canarypapers, starting with:

Dec. 4, 2006

Sarah Palin was sworn in as Governor of Alaska.

January – February 2007

In January 2007, Todd Palin invited Public Safety Commissioner Monegan to the governor’s office, where Todd Palin urged Monegan to reopen the Wooten case. After checking on it, Monegan said he informed Todd Palinthat he couldn’t do anything because the matter had been processed and the case was closed. In an interview with the Washington Post, Monegan said that a few days later, the governor also called him about the Wooten matter and he gave her the same answer. Monegan said Gov. Palin brought the issue up again in a February 2007 meeting at the state capitol, prompting him to warn Gov. Palin that she should back off.

During this same time period, Sarah and Todd began what has been termed a “rogue investigation,” that was to last for months, over a worker’s compensation claim made by Wooten. The Palins alleged that Wooten was faking a job-related injury he claimed in January 2007, when he suffered a back injury while pulling a dead body from a wrecked automobile and slipped on icy pavement. After Wooten started receiving workers comp, Todd Palin began following him around “snapping pictures.” Palin’s office added these pictures to a dossier of information against Wooten, which they turned over to the state’s workers compensation board, purportedly to prove that Wooten was not too sick or injured to work.

B said...

Penny asks, "How tall is Piper?"

It depends on her choice of high heels.

Dangerous said...

How can ANYONE assert on the basis of any of these photos of Bristol that she is pregnant? From the posts I'm reading (including Audrey's, although I greatly respect her efforts), everyone's eyes are seeing what they're minds want to see.

In Sept 2007, Bristol was surrounded by people that knew her well and would definitely notice if her appearance changed radically. From all accounts, Bristol was in school either in Wasilla or Anchorage for the fall term. By the end of that period -- if once claims she is visibly pregnant in September -- she'd be huge in December.

Now, if someone can show that Bristol wasn't in school during the Fall of 2007, then you may have something. But there's no evidence out there that she was out of school that whole time, and the Wasilla High principal said on the record that Bristol transferred "mid-term". Perhaps that was just a month or so into the school year, but someone better get some clarification before going off half-cocked with new theories based on completely inconclusive photos.

Further, we have statements from people (Misty?) who claim to have seen Bristol in person in January and maybe even as late as February of 2008. There's also the car accident in February 2008.

So if you are claiming Trig at full term or nearly full term in February before the car accident, she has to be hidden from November on. Further, you have to explain why Trig looks like a newborn on April 18!! Sure, you can now reinterpret those pictures as he could be two-plus months old, but now you're making large guesses on flimsy evidence to support an extraordinary theory.

I'm not convinced, and I can understand why MSM and others would not be convinced, either.

I think the truth, or at least a possible truth, is staring you all in the face. Looking at those Sept 2007 pictures, there are THREE Palin women, not two. If you admit that Willow could have a child, I might be more inclined to accept your conjecture as unbiased.

Dangerous

B said...

Re: Green sweater photo

The only photo that would help us is a picture of Bristol dated between 09/07 and 04/08 in which she is clearly not pregnant.

I still believe this.

That said, Audrey's dating the green sweater photo to 2006 tends to disprove those who believe the 9/07 camo dress photos actually PROVE pregnancy, by showing Bristol already or previously had a rounded belly.

I don't see Bristol looking the same in the green sweater and the camo dress, but I would welcome one of you photo people putting the two shots of Bristol together, as Audrey did here with the boat and camo pics. Then compare.

The green sweater has another white shirt under it (see at hem) which thickens the body and is over a pair of low riding jeans, which tend to emphasize or even create a rounded belly. That was the style. I recall wondering back then why teen girls wore unflattering (imo), form-fitting clothes. Bristol puts her hands below her belly, which also calls attention to it. In her boat photo she wears a T-shirt hanging over her belly so we can't see if she is naturally rounded. Let's face it, the green sweater photo could have been right before her period and she may not have realized she looked swollen.

Again, I would welcome someone putting the two photos together for comparison.

jeanette said...

I made an earlier post about the Sept 14, 2007 porch and Christmas pictures but I was wrong about the premise that that they had to use the pictures because Track was being deployed to Iraq. That was incorrect since the deployment took place in 2008. Track was stationed in Fairbanks in September of 2007. Sorry for my mistake.

B said...

kygirl915, welcome to this site. Over at Gryphen's you said the Palin babies were a sad and sordid tale. What is sordid about Levi and Bristol being parents of two babies? Is that not the case? If you know something, please email Audrey, info@palindeception.com. You can tell her things in confidence, and that would still help her know where to look next.

sg said...

B:

I couldn't find the Inside Edition report that Wasilla kids saw a pregnant Bristol cheering Levi at hockey games.

Here's what they do have at their web site, dated 9/2/2008:

http://www.insideedition.com/news.aspx?storyID=2067

"Levi has been dating Bristol Palin for about a year. INSIDE EDITION was told that Bristol often cheered for her beau and the other Wasilla Warriors from these stands at the town's hockey arena.

"Halfway through the school year, about the time Bristol discovered she was pregnant, she transferred to another high school."

Maybe the televised report was different and/or the web writeup was altered after the fact.

That having been said, the comment about Bristol transferring when she found out she was pregnant is perhaps even more interesting...

sg said...

This is amusing. And unsurprising.

Gossip from the correspondents' dinner via NY Daily News:

http://tinyurl.com/nydailynews-dinner-gossip

"At least one member of the GOP had fun. Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin couldn't make the festivities due to tending to her state's flooding problem, so she sent hubby, Todd, who had a whale of a time.

"Todd happily lapped up the attention from his tablemates and rarely left the side of his date for the evening, Fox News anchor Greta van Susteren.

"The two became so close that we caught them hanging out together well past midnight at Capitol File magazine's annual after-dinner bash."

midnightcajun said...

I'm curious: does anyone know if the photos released by the Heaths at the time of Sarah's nomination are all gathered altogether on the web someplace?

I ask because in the course of some totally unrelated research, I ran across the following photo:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9/18/184652/680/948/603152

This is a photo of a very pretty, smiling Sarah in 1995 reading some John Birch Society literature. The article says it's one of the photos released by the Heaths. So it got me to thinking, we seem to see the same Heath photos over and over again, but there are obviously others. SInce Chuckie seems to have been out of the Guess Who's My Mamma loop, he may have let out something else. (And yes, a smiling Sarah holding a folder of JBS newsletters is something to give one pause.)

Brew Monger said...

Here is a poll on topix.com asking who gave birth to Trig. Currently, Bristol is winning the vote by a WIDE margin:

http://www.topix.com/forum/us-governors/sarah-palin/TPOE039F7J7VA99G0

B said...

Sorry, sg. The hockey and pregnancy paragraphs must have melded in my mind! The hockey was before "halfway through the school year," which was when she knew she was pregnant and switched schools. And someone around Wasilla told the reporter this!

Audrey wrote this in March:

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

B said...

Dangerous,

Who here has ever said that Willow could not have a child?

Many of us just think Bristol -- older, sexually active, disappearing, TriG's primary care giver, yada yada yada -- more likely.

wv = warpe. No comment.

MrsTarquinBiscuitbarrel said...

midnightcajun, despite all of the Heath folk insisting that SP is a "voracious reader," despite the disastrous Gibson and Couric interviews, that photo of seated SP with the John Birch Society newsletter remains the only one I've seen showing GINO with printed material that she ostensibly is reading. *Brrrr.*

Ohio mom said...

Dangerous, let's face it: none of us knows for sure who gave birth to Trig. Most of us are at this site because we feel strongly that Trig's mom is someone other than Sarah.

That said, in my other life I am a high school counselor and I have been an educator for over thirty years. Back when teenager girls being pregnant was not as accepted as it is today, girls could and did hide pregnancies for nine months. How? They wore large baggy clothes, sweatshirts, huge winter coats.

If for some reason it was important that Bristol hide a pregnancy, she could have done so, then disappeared from school if hiding her condition became too difficult.

Remember all the rumors that Bristol was pregnant in the the fall winter of 97/98? I just watched the link to the PBS interview during the RC with the jounalist from the ADN who discussed it on national television. It was out there, lots of people in Alaska were talking about Bristol as the mom of Trig. You may not believe it, but lots of Alaskans did.

Michele said...

Ok - so we know who the mom is. Who is the Dad? I don't believe its Levi because I truly believe he would want to be involved with both children. Seeing the way he looked Trig, and held him makes sense if he was expecting a child of his own. Also I believe the Palins would want to keep on his good side if he were the father of Trig.

LisanTX said...

midnightcajun--I saw that picture last fall in a photojournalism blog. There was some interesting information along with the picture. Here is the link, in case anyone is interested.

http://tinyurl.com/odyw9h

(I noticed that the dailykos article, linked by mdncjn, referenced BAGnews notes, which is where I first saw the picture.)

She has quite a background.

patstevens said...

midnight-I came across this:

www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0908
/Whats_on_the_desk.html

Diana said...

midnightcajun said...
I'm curious: does anyone know if the photos released by the Heaths at the time of Sarah's nomination are all gathered altogether on the web someplace?

-------------------------------
This flicker set has about 100 photos and there are other sets in the collection with even more:

http://tinyurl.com/r96w7f

wayofpeace said...

re SARAH's confidence:

here's MARK TWAIN take:

"All you need is
ignorance and confidence
and the success is sure."

onething said...

"Has it occurred to anyone besides me that Bristol could have been pregnant multiple times and could have possibly been pregnant as well in the 2006 Green Sweater?"

I'm beginning to wonder too.

mlaiuppa said...

Thought you might like this.

Vote early, vote often.

Who is Trig's Mom?

http://www.topix.com/forum/us-governors/sarah-palin/TPOE039F7J7VA99G0

KaJo said...

Reiterating your comment, sg, on 5/11/09 @ 8:04 AM linking to the Inside Edition story, especially the quote about "Levi has been dating Bristol Palin for about a year....Halfway through the school year, about the time Bristol discovered she was pregnant, she transferred to another high school."http://www.insideedition.com/news.aspx?storyID=2067

Even though the airdate of that Inside Edition story was 9/2/08, that quote is startling, if only that it never got any feedback (not any I remember, anyway).

The critical comments regarding Bristol dating Levi on the Wasilla kids' MySpace pages were from 2007. Halfway through ANY school year for a high school kid is 4-1/2 months from early September. That would be mid-to-late January -- 2008, not 2009.

Do you think Inside Edition realized what they were reporting, or were unaware of the discrepancy? My bet is on the former, and that they were probably surprised that what they reported never took off as a real story.

No doubt thanks to the crack McCain campaign thugs.

-----------

Another thing, sg: If you think that story about Greta van Susteren and Todd Palin was amusing, you should go over to Greta VS's blog and see how she had a Sarah Palin-like snit about "reporters" not telling the "whole truth" about there being 2 other women in the group and GVS's big black shadow of a husband lurking. Her reaction was pretty funny.

She got all huffy and reactive about a GOSSIP COLUMN, fergawdsake! She called the writers of the column REPORTERS! Wow, whatever happened to maintaining your dignity, not responding to gossip, and rising above the fray?

Moshea bat Abraham said...

There's one video in particular in which she carries a rather inert Trig out on stage like a big stuffed doll, strides briskly around with him, then hands him off like a football.I never saw this, but I did hear a brief description of it in some article at the time. Even though it was described very briefly, and by a Palin supporter, it still managed to sound horribly callous to me.

Unfortunately, it seems my impression was correct.

Ohio mom said...

Dangerous, sorry I couldn't find this link from Patrick to include in my last comment. Here is the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DA-M2NfFAjU

The link is to a segment of the PBS online News Hour broadcast from the Republican National Convention. In this segment Ray Suarez interviews Michael Carey, a columnist and former editorial page editor for the ADN.

Mr. Carey reports that many people in Alaska felt the Gov had faked her pregnancy to cover for Bristol, and the recent announcement of the Bristol/Levi pregnancy was to counteract the earlier rumor.

Is this proof positive that Bristol is Trig's mother? Of course not. But it proves that the rumor was out there, and knowledgeable people were still talking about it in early September, 2008.

MrsTarquinBiscuitbarrel said...

Those interested in SP's loopier political connections also may be interested in David Neiwert's blog, Orcinus, starting with http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2008/09/palin-pandered-to-wasillas-wackiest.html. Neiwert is a Seattle-based Idaho native who for years has been chronicling the doings of separatist and far-right groups in the Pacific Northwest.

MrsTarquinBiscuitbarrel said...

Seeforpee may have discovered the topix poll posted by miuppa last night: The "Bristol is Trig's mom" vote has dropped from 88% yesterday morning, to 86% by evening, and 85% this morning. The first comment, though, directs skeptics (and others!) to THIS blog!

Morgan said...

**MODERATOR NOTE****

Some of you will notice your comments are absent this morning. Here are some tips to help you get your thoughts published instead of rejected.

1.) Don't come on here posting under another identity to make it appear that you have more people supporting your viewpoint. Have enough faith in your views to argue your own points under your own name.

2. If you want to send a message directly to Sarah Palin, email her directly.

3. Don't open your comment by taking an unwarranted, snarky pot shot at other readers who don't agree with you. If you truly have faith in your arguments, allow them to stand on their own merit. Trying to shame or ridicule others into silence will not be tolerated.

tennesseeteacher said...

Really interesting article in today's paper that confirms our suspicions re: the laziness of mainstream journalists, and their inability/unwillingness to authenticate facts. The gist of the article is that this kid in Ireland deliberately put a fake, un-cited quote on the Wikipedia page of a famous musician. When that musician died, all the major newspapers in the UK took that quote and ran with it....publishing it in their obituaries, without bothering to reference the quote. However, within a short amount of time, Wikipedia editors removed it b/c of lack of reference. The mainstream media, however, had no idea until the kid contacted them and told them what he had done. Only one UK newspaper printed a retraction. The point of this kid's joke, which we've all suspected, is that mainstream journalists are pretty lazy in authenticating facts. Once one outlet prints it, apparently even if that source is a unsourced Wikipedia reference, that's enough for journalists! We all knew this anyway,especially since People magazine quoted Bristol's great-aunt by phone as their source of details on Trig's birth, and then every mainstream media outlet took that info and ran with it as confirmed fact!

sg said...

Ohio mom:

You characterized the Michael Carey (former editor of ADN) 9/2/2008 comment at the RNC to Ray Suarez of PBS this way:

"Mr. Carey reports that many people in Alaska felt the Gov had faked her pregnancy to cover for Bristol, and the recent announcement of the Bristol/Levi pregnancy was to counteract the earlier rumor."

That wasn't exactly the recollection I had of what he said, so I watched the video again. Then I dug up the transcript:

http://tinyurl.com/pbs-rnc-suarez-carey

IMHO, here's the most interesting portion of what he said (about halfway down the page):

...

MICHAEL CAREY: Yeah, that's been -- that story [the fake pregnancy story] has been around for quite a while. I first heard it when a lawyer who I like very much and is a very smart guy presented this to me as the absolute truth.

...

I bring this up to highlight a bigger issue: Mr. Carey's got a credibility problem. Why do I say this? I say this because of what Carey himself said to NPR affiliate WBUR/Boston just the day before, 9/1/2008:

"Responsible reporters and editors including those at the [Anchorage] Daily News looked at this [the fake pregnancy story] and could find no basis for it except that people who didn't like Sarah Palin believed it."

You can listen to the interview here:

http://www.onpointradio.org/2008/09/the-bush-legacy

The discussion with Carey starts about 2:30 in; the above quote is at 4:53.

No mention to NPR re the comments of the smart, likable lawyer.

Not that Carey's two statements are inconsistent; on the contrary, both could be true. My point is that on consecutive days Carey gave diametrically opposite takes on the fake pregnancy story to the national media: on Monday, it's a lot of partisan hooey; on Tuesday, a person he respects says it's absolutely true. The two interviews taken together give the impression that Carey had a story, ripped it in two, read one part to NPR, then the second part to PBS.

That's "responsible reporting?" And the mainstream media want to know why they get no respect?

Also, I can't help but notice the similarity of Carey's double-speak to that practiced by current ADN editor Pat Dougherty. Remember, back in December 2008, Pat D. said the fake pregnancy story was "nutty nonsense" which he "knew" to be false, at the same time that he was having one of his reporters, Lisa Demer, investigate it?

I guess double-speak is a job requirement for ADN editor.

pearlygirl said...

I appreciate everyone's attention to detail, so here is mine. Although I do believe that the Christmas picture is an old one trying to be passed off as a later date, I think that it is the actually the same wreath but hung differently. It is most common for holiday decorations, especially professionally designed ones which would be typical for a governor's mansion to be reused for several years rather than dismantled,reassembled, or changed every year. The decorative items are the same but in a different sequence indicating just a different section of the wreath and not a new one. If the wreath fell off the wall and was put back up hanging from a different top point, this could account for the change even within the same photo shoot, but EVERYONE wearing the same clothing? Maybe the guys wore the same suits, but women would not wear the exact outfit with the exact jewelry and exact hairstyles two years in a row especially not a fashion plate as Sarah. It may be the same wreath but I believe that the change is from being hung differently the following year.

Dangerous said...

B, speaking for many, I suppose, said:

Who here has ever said that Willow could not have a child?

Many of us just think Bristol -- older, sexually active, disappearing, TriG's primary care giver, yada yada yada -- more likely.
There are many evidentiary problems with the "more likely" conclusion. First, from the statement itself, none of us can say who Trig's "primary care giver" is. Surely with Tripp in the picture, we don't think it's Bristol, particularly during the Fall campaign when she was not traveling with the Palins.

Second, we don't know whether Bristol "disappeared" or not. We just can't find direct evidence of where she was. The same applies to Willow and I freely admit that.

Third, we are inferring that Bristol was sexually active -- based on her pregnancy with Tripp -- but for all we know that was her first time. We have no direct testimony or admission regarding her actions. Again, the same applies to Willow. All the MySpace stuff could just be big talk.

But for the Bx2 theory, there are huge calendar and circumstantial problems that I see people gloss-over time and again.
You can't agree on Trig's birth date or even his birth month.
You can't agree on when was Tripp's born.
You can't agree on whether Trig was full term or not.
You can't agree on whether the Sept 2007 pictures show a pregnant Bristol or not.
You can't agree on whether Levi is the father of both babies or not.
You can't agree on where Trig was hidden, if he was born in February to open a window for Tripp's birth at full term.
You can't agree on Trig's age in Sadie's web site photos.

But not only all of the above (and more), you can't present any concrete evidence to support your conjectures on any of the above. It's supposition built on supposition.

What we don't have to build on supposition is our conclusion that SP faked the pregnancy. The evidence of that is very strong. As Mr. Carey of ADN makes clear in his comments on camera, we are not the first to reach that conclusion based on the evidence.

What Mr. Carey doesn't say is that his lawyer friend confidently told him that SP was faking the pregnancy for "her daughter", not 'for Bristol'. Everyone just assumed Bristol, which made the announcement of her pregnancy with Tripp so effective at eviscerating the "rumor". I passed along the scenario, without names, to a friend of mine who is a police detective. Quoting him:
"Ignore nothing, assume nothing."

Now, maybe Bristol's pregnancy and delivery of Tripp was lies upon lies. If so, that's a very risky strategy for a cover-up. But what's really "more likely" is that they attacked the theory at it's weakest point. Everyone assumed that SP faked for Bristol. (Even me at first.) The Palins know the truth. They can defeat the correct conclusion by attacking the part that's wrong. "If it doesn't fit, you must acquit."

It's time to ignore nothing, assume nothing. The Sept 2007 photos clearly show that Willow is mature enough to bear a child in April 2008, eight months later. All the other circumstances align equally or better for SP to fake for Willow as for Bristol. There are no calendar problems with Willow being Trig's mother. The Palins only need the original ruse, not dozens of overlapping lies and deceptions.

So which scenario is really "more likely"?

Dangerous

pearlygirl said...

Here's a slightly Off topic story about how easy it can be for the Media to believe false information and to not fess up to redaction. As an experiment, a student knowingly posted a false quote to see if it would be taken up as fact. It would be pretty embarrassing to admit that Palin got away with the scam for so long

http://tech.yahoo.com/news/ap/20090512/ap_on_hi_te/eu_ireland_wikipedia_hoaxer

Lilybart said...

sg: the ADN did investigate the story and they couldn't do a story becuase they got NO cooperation from the Palin family.

So in the end, they could not do a story proving that the Trig rumors were false. Even the ADN did not get enough proof that the baby IS Sarah Palin's own genetic child. My not show the ADN the birth certificate and hospital birth photos?

That is another one of the "what?!" things that is strange about this story.

Lilybart said...

Dangerous: don't you think that the reason a lot of us don't want to hop on the Willow wagon is that it would be extra sad if it were her. We don't want to think that someone so young was taken advantage of that way, I know I don't.

Palin needs to be stopped but I am afraid the truth will be sad.

Morgan said...

"Ignore nothing, assume nothing."

Well said, Dangerous.

Silvergirl said...

I'm not sure what will be the final big "trip" in this case we are following (pun intended), but I love reading this blog.

Eventually, the truth will come out. I don't think the true parentage of Trig can be hidden forever. When the true story finally comes out, I think we all will be vindicated for questioning such a strange birth story, with it's many clues to it being a huge lie.

Thanks, Audrey and Morgan, and the Research team, for keeping this topic up to date, not to mention interesting.

WV: squewinf

Ivyfree said...

"The Sept 2007 photos clearly show that Willow is mature enough to bear a child in April 2008, eight months later."

I'm afraid a photo really doesn't give that information. She may have been developing her figure but that doesn't mean that she was ovulating, although it is likely she was going through menarche.

"People magazine quoted Bristol's great-aunt by phone as their source of details on Trig's birth, and then every mainstream media outlet took that info and ran with it as confirmed fact!"

Every article I saw referenced the People Magazine article as their source.

B said...

Dangerous, the reason most of us are still talking about TriG's birth mom is because the MSM seems to need to know where Sarah got a baby if not hers, and because we HAVEN'T proved who the mother is.

"Ignore nothing, assume nothing."

Stop assuming we think we've proved it was Bristol. We haven't claimed that. Almost 9 months later, most of us still think she's the most likely mom.

Stop ignoring Audrey's post about why Willow is unlikely TriG's mom, the January 2008 State of the State picture of Willow and family sans Bristol, Willow's Spring 2008 honor roll. Stop ignoring the statements from Heather and Inside Edition and Sue the caterer that are presented as TriPP's pregnancy but make sense only as TriG's. Heck, stop ignoring most of Audrey's posts.

Fine to disagree, and just because it is evidence doesn't mean it is good evidence or correct or provable, but not fine to act like there's no support for any theory other than yours. In fact, Misty is the only evidence I can think of that if true could disprove Bristol. But she (whatever her real name is) hasn't sworn to it.

You earlier pointed out that the Palins have been very public about TriPP while private about TriG. I then pointed out that that was not the case for TriPP's birth, and that this departure from their m.o. supported that there was no TriPP to show in December 2008. We/you should not ignore that.

Being Devil's Advocate is a worthy task. Even sticking to a theory when you are unable to convince anyone else (or anyone who speaks up here) has value. Isn't that your role here, to keep us honest? (I'm not ignoring you but I am assuming things about you.) Or do you really think -- for you surely haven't proved -- Willow gave birth to TriG?

"Ignore nothing, assume nothing."

What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Dangerous said...

Lilybart said:

[D]on't you think that the reason a lot of us don't want to hop on the Willow wagon is that it would be extra sad if it were her. We don't want to think that someone so young was taken advantage of that way, I know I don't.

Palin needs to be stopped but I am afraid the truth will be sad.
No matter what, the truth is going to be sad. I hope it isn't Willow. This is still just a theory since I admit I don't have the evidence to prove it. There's just no conclusive evidence to disprove it, and logical deduction tells me it's right, but tragic.

Not that having a child is a tragedy; just the need to cover it up, no matter the circumstances. Stuff happens, and whoever is Trig's mother I hope she is at peace with the status quo or with the truth coming out. We can't turn away from the possibility simply because it's uncomfortable. That actually makes it more likely to be the case since then SP et. al. would want us to look away.

I've said more than once that if Willow were Trig's mother, I would have far more sympathy for SP and everyone involved for having faked the pregnancy and covered it up. Everyone except the GOP who either covered up the truth, or covered up their grossly negligent vetting process to not know about this and allow SP to make a stupid decision to expose her family to scrutiny.

But nobody can blame the scrutinizers, particularly after being vilified for using our minds to understand the truth.

Dangerous

wv = "immorm" (no kidding)

Mark said...

The green sweater photo... a complete conjecture...

As others have said here, Bristol's green sweater photo raises the question of whether she was pregnant in 2006. The nuttiness of Sarah's sham pregnancy to conceal a Bristol Trig pregnancy seems a LITTLE more reasonable if Bristol already had an abortion to end a 2006 pregnancy. Sarah couldn't abide ANOTHER abortion just a year later, and wanted to conceal Bristol's trig pregnancy for some reason -- maybe to protect Bristol, but more likely to protect Sarah's own political image.

But then, even after Sarah's sham Trig pregnancy, Bristol gets pregnant yet again - a third time in 3 years... This would be almost as incredible as Sarah's mad dash from Texas to Mat-Su General...

Who can tell what really happened...

Morgan said...

B,

Dangerous' quote should apply to everyone, including Dangerous.

A lot of folks apparently think the fat lady is clearing her throat as we speak, but until she sings this thing's not over.

Once it does we can say we know. And some people here may have to extend a hand to others and say, "Hey, you were right all along."

When that happens, hopefully all parties will be gracious. Until that happens I think we need to keep considering any possible option and not marry ourselves to any one theory.

Patrick said...

Dangerous,

you are free to argue your case here regarding your "Willow-theory". It remains a fact, however, that until today, despite all the intense research which was going on during the last months, no evidence for this theory has ever been found, including the content of confidential "off-the-record" conversations.

On the contrary, the evidence that Bristol is the mother of Trig is mounting on a daily basis. Of course we cannot rule anything out yet. Any females who are close to Sarah Palin are possible "suspects". However, let me repeat again, that no evidence for the Willow-theory has ever been found.

I also would like to draw your attention to this photo...

http://tinyurl.com/orhr89

...which shows Willow in September 2007, clearly not pregnant.

And this one...

http://tinyurl.com/bklg77

...which shows Willow on the 15th January 2008 in a short-sleeved dress and without a coat, right in the middle of the audience during the State of the Union address.

I had compiled several other arguments against the "Willow-theory" already several weeks ago in a response to you, they can be found in this document and need not to be repeated here again:

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

All opinions are valued here, but some evidence would help your case.

Patrick (PD research)

KaJo said...

When folks here began speculating that Bristol Palin might even have been pregnant in September 2006 based on the green sweater picture and her rounded tummy, I said "uh, oh" to myself... That's quite a stretch.

There are pictures of Bristol in a JV basketball uniform dated Feb. 8, 2007, and of course, the Carhhart-pants/t-shirt pictures show an athletic figure.

I figure in addition to school athletics, she had been swimming, waterskiing, and probably fishing with her dad which will help any youngster stay fit and lean.

If she put a significant amount of weight on at the start of the school year (2006 or 2007) it could just as easily be eating the same but exercising less until school sports programs started. Or premenstrual bloating. :) Or, indeed, pregnancy.

Would Gov. Palin's public disclosure reports about travel, etc. have to include information about 2006 if she took office in early 2007? If so, I suppose that's one way to research the speculation.

(my WV is "unceduca")

MrsTarquinBiscuitbarrel said...

MOST interesting that the Flickr pix show SP visiting the Providence Anchorage hospital's neonatal care unit on August 31, 2007. She's even seen peering into a preemie's isolette. Whoever was gestating TriG was doing so within that time frame. So if SP made the "wild ride" back to Alaska after her alleged water allegedly broke, why would she have bypassed the Anchorage NICU in order to drive farther and allegedly give birth at the Mat-Su facility that will not even perform twin births? Made me go Hmmmmm, what about you?

Dangerous said...

B,

I'm not ignoring anything!

But you've misstated several "facts" that presumably make Willow less likely:

1) The photo at State of State speech does not have a clear (or any) view of Willow's midsection. Based on an eight-month birth of Trig in April (supported by his size in contemporaneous photos and the wild ride circumstances), a pregnant Willow would be less than five months pregnant. She probably didn't show much at that point.

2) Honor roll was "winter term" not spring term. Winter term could have ended in February for all we know. I believe the posting in Juneau Empire was in March. It is also no proof of school attendance, and we know based on travel records that Willow missed large chunks of school from mid-February until April 18.

3) Sue Williams' statements are third-party hearsay, and would not be offered in a court of law as evidence of the facts she is stated. Hence, I (quite properly) give little-to-zero weight to those statements, particularly absent cross-examination.

I'm countering evidence with evidence, not conjecture.

Do I really think that Willow is Trig's mother? What I think doesn't matter, only what I can prove. Proof doesn't need to be direct, however. Most mathematical proofs are based on inference and deduction.

I deduce that Willow is Trig's mother, based on the reasonable conclusions that
a) SP is not;
b) Bristol can't be, based on the direct and circumstantial evidence; and
c) There is no direct or circumstantial evidence that rules Willow out.

You may disagree with c), but if you applied the same standard to evaluating the evidence for Bristol, you would never conclude she could be Trig's mother.

In short, if we had to go to court with our theories, Wx1 / Bx1 would survive a motion to dismiss. Bx2 would be laughed out of court for lack of evidence.

Dangerous

MN_Gal said...

You are on the right track, Audrey. I truly believe that Bristol is Trig's mom, and that Trig was born earlier than the mid-April birthdate. If Trig was born in late February or in March, Bristol could have gotten pregnant again by late April. And there is no proof that Trigg was actually born in December. He could have been born later, say in January.

Pregnant teens aren't going to tell Mom and Dad until they absolutely have to, so Bristol could have been pregnant for a while before her parents knew, hence Bristol standing in the front of the picture.

Keep up the good work! Sooner or later the truth will come out.

Morgan said...

Dangerous, your reasoning in that last comment gave me a touch of whiplash.

You say you are countering with evidence and then go on to state that somehow your indirect proof is valid while the stronger indirect proof the team has gathered pointing towards Bristol is invalid.

That just....doesn't make sense.

I don't think we've proved anything yet to an absolute certainty, but lack of evidence ruling Willow out is NOT evidence that she is the mother.

Bretta said...

"""Ivyfree said..."People magazine quoted Bristol's great-aunt by phone as their source of details on Trig's birth, and then every mainstream media outlet took that info and ran with it as confirmed fact!" May 12, 2009 10:03 AM"""

Should be TriPP's birth.

The great-aunt announced Tripp's birth to People magazine and there has been no formal announcement - only Hearsay. I agree with you; there is no confirmed fact of TriPP's birthday.

wv: rediesp as in "Ready, SP?"

B said...

Dangerous said,

"But you've misstated several "facts" that presumably make Willow less likely:

1) The photo at State of State speech does not have a clear (or any) view of Willow's midsection."

I didn't say it did. I said head and bare arms. Sleeveless dress. She was there. People saw her. If she looked pregnant she probably wouldn't have been there. You are ignoring what I said and assuming I said something else.

"a pregnant Willow would be less than five months pregnant. She probably didn't show much at that point."

Probably is much too strong a word. Unlike you, I've been less than five months pregnant. More girls and women show by three months than don't. And Willow wasn't wearing the jeans and sweatshirt camo.

"2) Honor roll was "winter term" not spring term. Winter term could have ended in February for all we know."

I get it. She didn't show by the end of February either. No assumptions there.

"3) Sue Williams' statements are third-party hearsay, and would not be offered in a court of law as evidence of the facts she is stated. Hence, I (quite properly) give little-to-zero weight to those statements, particularly absent cross-examination."

They may be hearsay, but that doesn't mean they aren't evidence. When did we go to a court-of-law standard for even taking note of things? If Sue had said, "Willow's boyfriend said Bristol wasn't pregnant," I'd consider that as well.

"I deduce that Willow is Trig's mother, based on the reasonable conclusions that
a) SP is not;
b) Bristol can't be, based on the direct and circumstantial evidence; and
c) There is no direct or circumstantial evidence that rules Willow out.

You may disagree with c)"

It is b I disagree with.

"if you applied the same standard to evaluating the evidence for Bristol, you would never conclude she could be Trig's mother."

What an assumption.

"if we had to go to court with our theories, Wx1 / Bx1 would survive a motion to dismiss. Bx2 would be laughed out of court for lack of evidence."

I have said before that no jury that contains women would buy your soon-to-be seventh grader getting pregnant over the older self-described slut getting pregnant without a whole lot more to back it up. This blog is full of the evidence I would offer. You would have to manufacture your own.

To say I would be laughed out of court for making the case that Bristol had TriG while you would not be for arguing Willow did it is . . . quite an ASSumption. But, hey, go for it.

Chi Town Mom said...

Your kidding me, right? Sarah Palin has a book coming out in Spring 2010.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090512/ap_en_ot/us_books_palin

Dangerous said...

Morgan,

"Stronger indirect proof ... pointing toward Bristol"?

The evidence points away from Bristol, not toward her.

For any Bx2 theory to work, you have to assume a wide range of circumstances for which you have no direct evidence AND you have to assume multiple, simultaneous ruses perpetrated by a wide range of parties. I'll be stunned beyond belief if it turns out that Bristol managed to produce two children in less than a year under any circumstances. Bx2 theories having her do it in ten months or less.

I'm hardly alone in this conclusion. Most of the world that's paying any attention at all has concluded that Bristol could not have given birth to Trig AND Tripp. I know Bx2 theorists think they have some special insight that others lack, but they don't.

Much direct and circumstantial evidence, not just unconfirmed statements from various parties, dispute Bristol giving birth to Trig. It's not a wacky or fringe position I'm taking. That's the lay of the land until you can prove some critical element of the birth timeline false. Bx2 simply does not fit the calendar. So to make it work, Bx2 proponents have to invent a new one. In the process, those calendars create all sorts of new circumstantial problems.

Unattributed "rumors" of a Bristol pregnancy and conjecture about a few inconclusive photos is not evidence. If it was, MSM would be out there with it.

Once Bristol no longer looks viable, one's attention should naturally turn to anyone else for whom SP would fake a pregnancy. If Willow was 15 then, would we not immediately consider her? Okay, then why not at 14?

I can't *prove* Willow is Trig's mother, but if she did not attend school from February - May, that would be conclusive.

I admit there is a tiny, tiny sliver of possibility that Bristol is Trig's mother, but the number of undiscovered lies and deceptions necessary for that to be true is daunting. If you stepped back from it, I think you would all see it the same way MSM and the general public does.

If you wish to dispute the Willow theory, it should be simple to get the evidence. Prove she attended to school.

Dangerous

Laura said...

This is a little OT, but something struck me about B's comment about Tripp being "exhausted" as the reason why he was "out cold" on the Today Show. It took me a while to realize that this was just another phony PR phrase or comment from this family. Four month old babies aren't "exhausted." They sleep. They sleep on the airplanes. It's not as if it were a four year old who was so excited he couldn't sleep on the plane. It was just so phony baloney. And the thought of that lifeless baby still haunts me. The whole darn tootin' family haunts me. Now, those photos of Piper sucking on a pacifier on the other website (PalinGates?) Those have creeped me out even more, to coin a verb. Keep digging Audrey and co. There is no shortage of detritus this family is leaving everywhere. L.A. in S.F.

midnightcajun said...

Here it comes: " Sarah Palin is ready to tell her side, agreeing to publish a memoir with HarperCollins. The book comes out in Spring 2010 _ the year she is up for re-election.

"There's been so much written about and spoken about in the mainstream media and in the anonymous blogosphere world, that this will be a wonderful, refreshing chance for me to get to tell my story, that a lot of people have asked about, unfiltered," the Alaska governor and 2008 vice presidential candidate said." She's gonna use her journalism degree, ya know, although the publisher keeps talking about a "collaborator."

So now her lies will be down in black and white, in her own words. I wish someone else (Palingates?) would come out with a REAL book about this witch.

Morgan said...

Dangerous,

You seem willing to support a Willow theory under no more "evidence" than her a.) entering the age where childbearing may be possible and b.) lack of proof she attended school.

Both of those same things apply to Bristol, along with rumors of pregnancy, photographs of her looking rather thick in the middle for such a slim, athletic girl, messages she sent that indicated she was sexually active to the point her mom asked if she were pregnant....

Are these things proof? No, but they tip the scale further in Bristol's direction than Willow's.

Per why the MSM isn't picking up on this, do you really they aren't watching and waiting? This is a very touchy subject. No one wants to be the first journalist to "go after" kids for the sins of the mother. I think they're quite content to leave the dirty work to the bloggers until the story can no longer be ignored.

And when a publication like Vanity Fair prints a subhead that says "Is the father of Sarah Palin's first acknowledged grandchild destined to be America's Next Top Model?" then I think we're getting quite close to a break.

That headline indicates there are two children, and given the way Bristol Palin and Levi appeared with Trig at the RNC, I'm thinking they aren't looking at Willow as a possibility.

So it would seem that even the MSM agrees with the Bristol theorists more than they agree with you.

But even so, the fat lady has yet to sing. So you're free to continue to float your Bristol theory. But I personally think you need to make sure there's air in your life raft.

nilap said...

Someone on the immoral minority blog commented that Sarah hasn't taken advantage of the Infant Learning Program for Trig.

I've always wondered how she was going to enroll him in school if the bc doesn't match dates/names reported.

Maybe the infant learning program requires a bc to register. Seems msm could question why she doesn't take advantage of this program. Again, I don't know that she doesn't, only what I read on the comment.

NakedTruth said...

Kajo said:

"When folks here began speculating that Bristol Palin might even have been pregnant in September 2006 based on the green sweater picture and her rounded tummy, I said "uh, oh" to myself... That's quite a stretch.

There are pictures of Bristol in a JV basketball uniform dated Feb. 8, 2007, and of course, the Carhhart-pants/t-shirt pictures show an athletic figure."

Kajo,

I was one of those folks who think that Bristol could have been pregnant in the 2006 Green Sweater family photo and possibly had an abortion.

Based on Bristol's comments to Johnny about Sarah overhearing a conversation and accusing Bristol of being pregnant, it just makes me wonder if Bristol being pregnant was something SP was somewhat familiar with. I am only speculating but I thought it to be strange that a mother would just accuse her 16 year old of being pregnant for no reason as all. If nothing else IMO the pregnant comment by Sarah definitely makes me think that she knew Bristol was sexually active in 2007.

MrsTarquinBiscuitbarrel said...

ChiTownMom said, "You're kidding me, right? Sarah Palin has a book coming out in Spring 2010..."

Relax, ChiTownMom, it's not like SP actually has to WRITE it. Likely Kaylene Johnson or another hagiographer will do a cut 'n paste between their swooning prose and GINO's dictated jabs at "bloggers" and what TeamS called "crazy, delusional women!"

Unless certain inconvenient facts damn GINO sufficiently via wide circulation from the MSM, SP has a re-election campaign coming up next year, and presumably still dreams of the presidential race in '12. Believe me, she wouldn't write the book herself, any more than Ivana Trump wrote the novel published under her own name in the early '90s...

WV: This is too much--snobyspl

SmacK said...

Dangerous,

You should apply your standards to your own thinking...

You said: I deduce that Willow is Trig's mother, based on the reasonable conclusions that
a) SP is not;
b) Bristol can't be, based on the direct and circumstantial evidence; and
c) There is no direct or circumstantial evidence that rules Willow out.

Bristol can't be? Based on what? The missing Birth Certificate that would prove TRIG's birth date? The missing Birth Cert that would prove TRIPP's birth date? The missing pictures of TRIPP before the GVS interview? The non existent pictures of Bristol during TRIG's gestation?

Did I miss something? It seems to me you have NO real evidence that disqualifies Bristol. The fact that there is no evidence that proves Bx2 cannot be equated with foreclosing that possibility.

Kathleen said...

Further to Morgan's mention of the "first acknowledged grandchild" comment in Vanity Fair can I draw everyone's attention to this snippet from the Anchorage Daily News on Saturday May 9th -

http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/story/790141.html

"YET ANOTHER ONE ... Todd Purdham, a writer for Vanity Fair magazine, has been in Alaska for a couple of weeks, working on a story about our Sarah. Earwigs report he chatted with Wally during a stop in Anchorage, presumably about Wally's brief fling (politically speaking) with Palin, followed by his current disenchantment."

I wonder who else he could be talking to?

Ivyfree said...

"I can't *prove* Willow is Trig's mother, but if she did not attend school from February - May, that would be conclusive."

No. If Willow did not attend school from February to May, that demonstrates only that she did not attend school. It doesn't prove she was pregnant.

Ivyfree said...

" Bretta said...
"""Ivyfree said..."People magazine quoted Bristol's great-aunt by phone as their source of details on Trig's birth, and then every mainstream media outlet took that info and ran with it as confirmed fact!" May 12, 2009 10:03 AM"""

Should be TriPP's birth."

You're right. Interesting how easy it is to mix up those two names. If the Palins were brighter I'd say they did it on purpose.

B said...

Laura said...
This is a little OT, but something struck me about B's comment about Tripp being "exhausted" as the reason why he was "out cold" on the Today Show. It took me a while to realize that this was just another phony PR phrase or comment from this family. Four month old babies aren't "exhausted." They sleep. They sleep on the airplanes. ***

I didn't say TriPP was exhausted. I said it was possible.

I have the mental and emotional scars to show that infants 2 weeks - 4 months and older do not always sleep on planes. The air pressure screws up their ears. They scream. Passengers and fllight attendants give their mothers dirty looks. The babies can't chew gum. Sometimes they will drink and swallow and that helps. Sometimes they won't or it doesn't. They can get exhausted. So can their mothers.

Remember, I also said the B-word was a possibility: Benedryl. Which interestingly is what a gazillion moms encouraged me to use to get my infant to sleep on airplanes rather than to scream, which they all knew was a real possibility.

Look, I think TriPP was TriPPed out. As Punkinbugg cleverly said, "Dryl, baby, dryl." But exhaustion is also possible. That's all I was saying.

Amy1 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bretta said...

"""Chi Town Mom said...
Your kidding me, right? Sarah Palin has a book coming out in Spring 2010. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090512/ap_en_ot/us_books_palin
May 12, 2009 3:25 PM"""

You heard it... me, I'm waiting for the English translation.

wv= uncons

ProChoiceGrandma said...

I have trouble understanding why some people continue to try to brush off or discredit the 9-14-07 pictures (thanks to Ghostbuster, we now have several 9-14-07 pictures!) of Bristol in the camo dress in which IMHO Bristol is approximately 4 months pregnant. When someone remarks Bristol may be “1 or 2” months pregnant in that photo, they are just trying to match up to when Bristol and LEVI became a couple, as well as trying to match Sarah Palin’s lie that Trig was “due” in May 2008 but was born “premature at 35 weeks” on 4-18-08. By now I would think most people should know not to rely on ANYTHING stated by Sarah Palin.

Some people still seem to be hung up on Sarah Palin’s “official” birth date of Trig as 4-18-08. And as far as Trig’s “newborn” appearance on 4-18-08, Trig could easily have been premature in late January/early February 2008. I again saw the preemie I mentioned earlier who was now 12 weeks old, weighs 10 pounds and could EASILY have passed as a 3 week old baby. This is the first preemie I have ever seen in person, and I was astonished at the difference compared to how big my children and grandchildren were at that age. If Tripp was really born on 12/27/08, look at how well Tripp was kept hidden until the big reveal on 2-15-09 with Greta. That certainly proves they could have done the same with Trig for February, March and half of April 2008. Practice makes perfect.

B, you asked at 5/11/09 at 7:50 am in reference to kygirl915: “What is sordid about Levi and Bristol being parents of two babies?” You are assuming LEVI is the father of both babies. Kygirl915 did not say that. I strongly believe that Levi was duped to believe that he was Trig’s father, giving him a guilt tripp (yes, pun intended!) to keep him silent. But the timing is wrong. Bristol’s MySpace revealed that she and Johnny had a heart thing going on in mid-May 2007, as well as Bristol’s 5-14-07 MySpace comment to Johnny about Sarah overhearing Bristol’s telephone conversation “last night” (5-13-07) and now Sarah is thinking Bristol is pregnant. A conception in mid-May 2007 precisely fits the approximate 4 month baby bump in the camo dress pictures of 9-14-07. I remember I looked like that at 4 months pregnant with my children, and so did my daughter with her children. Dangerous, just out of curiosity, how big was your baby bump at 4 months pregnant?

My question is who is Johnny and why has there been NO information about him? Is the “sad and sordid tale” in reference to something about Johnny? I keep hearing about the small population of Alaska. Could Johnny have been an unknown relative and hence Trig’s DS appearance? Is that significant enough to cause Sarah to panic and fake a (six week) pregnancy?

amy said...

Interesting tidbit about Todd Purdum (correct spelling, ADN has it wrong) doing a story on Palin... he wrote a scathing piece about Bill Clinton's jet-setting post-presidential life that was extremely revealing.

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/07/clinton200807

Bretta said...

I want to keep an open mind about Dangerous' hypothesis concerning Wx1; about any hypothesis for that matter.

The preponderance of evidence that SP did not carry TriG is in her behavior and the photographs, so I believe that she lied and did not carry.

I lean toward the Bx2 in one year because of the way she handled TriG versus the way other family members did at the RNC.

And, BTW, I had regular periods within 28 days of delivery, twice, while I was breastfeeding, so I do know that it is entirely possible to become pregnant and deliver a second child in less than a year of the firstborn.

NY tabloid chick said...

*** B said...

I haven't yet been won over by the TriG was due before mid-April arguments. If Bristol were several months along, Sarah should know and would not have released a picture with Bristol standing in front and emphasizing her newly broad middle.***

"Should" is the operative word there... I think SP is simply too self-absorbed to notice anyone but herself. Think about how tone-deaf she is to her surroundings (death turkey interview; a plate of cookies for starving natives up north) and to her family's appearance most times (Piper in high heels carrying a baby, or a Vuitton bag; Trig ignored in favor of a handful of BlackBerrys). I always thought the green sweater photo looked like a pregnant tummy; a slim, sporty, attractive girl doesn't usually yo-yo in her weight like that.

cooky doogan said...

I don't know that folks should dismiss Dangerous' theory quite so quickly. The photo Patrick posts allegedly from Sept. 2007, showing Willow carting her niece on her back is odd in that SP and the niece are wearing the same outfits which appear in the Christmas picture put out as 2007, but now believed to be 2006. When it comes to photos as indicative or as evidence, we should be thoughtful.

I agree that there could be a hard and sad truth behind all this. These poor children - Good Lord if SP is Trig's birth mother - she should just make the statement. If not, just say so and that no further details will be forthcoming, no further questions will be taken. Enforce privacy for your children. God knows you seem to be able to enforce plenty in Alaska. End it for your children's sake. When they're older they will certainly wonder why you couldn't have done at least that much for them.

NY tabloid chick said...

*** Chi Town Mom said...
The Mat-Su hospital CEO resigned and is going to take a position in Idaho.

http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/matsu/story/789380.html

I have ABSOLUTELY NO PROOF that this has anything to do with GINO, but let's pretend he is trying to save himself from tough Palin questions by leaving the state. HA HA HA***

And that's good ol' SP's home state, doncha know! What I found really intriguing were the comments after the story; it seems the Wasilla hospital (which many commenters called "Death Valley") has a less-than-stellar reputation for health care, making the Wild Ride® even more bizarre.

Lilybart said...

This is still bugging me. The ADN tried to do a story that would debunk the Trig rumors. They wanted to do Palin a favor in fact. But they said they couldn't get "access" or enough information.

If I were her I would have shown the reporter, privately, the hospital bracelets I saved with my daughter's and my names and dates clearly printed, the photos of the first moment i held her, the hospital cert with the footprints, also with dates and the birth cert I got at the hospital, a temporary one until the official one arrived, soon after. THAT would have proved my maternity to the reporter.

So why didn't Palin do this?? She obviously didn't or they could have run the story about the silly rumor. I thought this reporter was friendly and I have gathered that the ADN is very friendly to her too.

This is just too weird to get past or explain away.

ProChoiceGrandma said...

Dangerous, several months ago I remembered you had one very logical posting in which you talked about “unnecessary embellishment” to describe Sarah’s story telling. That was an excellent description. But thereafter you lost credibility IMO with your insistence that Willow “could be” Trig’s mother and posting your mathematical theories. I have seen several people address you directly and (politely) calling your attention to the evidence showing that it could not have been Willow, especially the video of the 1-15-08 State of the State address in which Willow is wearing that sleeveless dress. Case closed – Willow was knocked OUT of the running, not knocked UP. But you continued as if you never even looked at the information that was specifically addressing your comments. However, at least you acknowledge that Sarah Palin did not give birth to Trig. I just wish you were not so hung up on the 4-18-08 “birth” date. That was a “presentation” date.

NY tabloid chick said...

*** NakedTruth said...
Has it occurred to anyone besides me that Bristol could have been pregnant multiple times and could have possibly been pregnant as well in the 2006 Green Sweater?***

(waving hand wildly) Yes! I completely trust Audrey's dating of the photo to 2006, but everything about it screams "Notice me mom! I'm knocked up and you can't do anything about it, like you can't do anything about the fact that I'm wearing torn jeans in a family portrait!"

Some of the hints about a sad, sordid secret in this family are making me think Bristol's an old hand at the pregnancy game, and her anti-YOUR-choice mom got her an abortion sometime after Green Sweater shot.

Bretta said...

"""nilap said... Someone on the immoral minority blog commented that Sarah hasn't taken advantage of the Infant Learning Program for Trig. May 12, 2009 4:12 PM"""

That makes me so, so sad. My special needs daughter graduated from high school yesterday - it was very important to me - it was accomplished by her tenacity and the excellent work of the Anchorage School District Special Education Team.

These special needs children can go to the maximum of their abilities if support is in place early. And I am not the only parent with this experience.

It is possible to say that I don't share values with SP.

ProChoiceGrandma said...

Midnightcajun at 5/10/09 at 1:27 pm gave this site which has 160 pictures of Sarah Palin:

http://www.adn.com/photos/sarah-palin/v-gallery/story/512227.html?/1522/gallery/512225-a714206-t3.html

Picture #44 “Pretty in pink Sarah Iditarod March 1, 2008” Photo courtesy of Jordan Alaska/ADN reader submission. (Sarah does NOT look preggo at all! Her pink coat is hanging straight down, has clipboard clutched close.)
Picture #45 “Sarah Palin @ Iditarod March 1, 2008” Photo courtesy of Jordan Alaska/ADN reader submission.
Picture #61 “DJ Brian from APE Alaska Profession Entertainment running sound at the Iron Dog” (This picture is not dated, however Sarah is wearing an orange ski jacket with black & white stripes on sleeves, which Iron Dog year was this?) www.gowithape.com

I was jotting down notes about possibly useful pictures, however, while I was viewing and up to about picture #90 or so, suddenly the pictures stopped and a page came up that I had to register/log in as an ADN member! Ugh! From all the cover-ups ADN has made and continues to make for Sarah Palin, that feels like being forced to become a member of C4P. Ewww, I feel violated!

Darklady said...

Re: SP's unwillingness to work with even the friendly ADN press, which hoped to dispel the "Who is Trigg's Mom" question once and for all...

One thing I've consistently noted in SP's interactions with the press is the utter contempt that she appears to hold it in. When it can serve her as a PR resource, she's wild about the media, but when its members actually do their job and ask her a substantive question, the so-called journalism major becomes an indignant maverick diva, shocked that anyone would dare ask her to be accountable to anyone for anything.

After all, she's Sarah Palin. Dodn't they realize what that means?

I honestly don't have a clue who Trigg's mom is, but I do know that SP sure didn't look pregnant except in that one photo that makes her look like she's ready to give birth to the Liberty Bell.

I admit that it strikes me as weirder than Mercede's wrist tattoo that the names "Trigg" and "Tripp" were chosen for these two male children born so close together, though. It's more like a puzzle clue than two real names.

Laura said...

No, not you, B., but Bristol! Bristol said on the Today show that the baby was "exhausted." I didn't realize you said anything about it. And I didn't mean you.

Now for this book deal: isn't that a conflict with her state ethics requirements? How does this woman get away with the "catch me if you can, and if you can't then I'll just do what I want" act? How does she?

And now she'll just "jot down" her thoughts after hours!!! She plays the entire world for idiots. What more can she do to push those kids out of her mind/sight/world? Two pda's in her hands at all times; flying all over; working full time; babies, relatives, contracts for this trust fund and that. Does she sleep? Does she give a hoot about those kids of hers she keeps having?

The telling photo of her was in Meghan M's blog: she's holding Trig in her black suit but she's typing on one pda while actually looking at the other one. That kid is the farthest thing from her mind.

She is despicable, simply reprehensible. Alaksan's should be furious about this. Dig, Audrey, DIG!!!!

NY tabloid chick said...

***Dangerous said...

If you admit that Willow could have a child, I might be more inclined to accept your conjecture as unbiased.***

I haven't seen one person assert that Willow at 14, or 13, was 'unable' to have a child.

But hey, as long as we're tossing out the unlikely... how about Track? He's as likely as Willow; heck, with all of the ambiguous names in this family, perhaps he's female, raised as male and now rebelling by havin' those babies. Never seen his birth certificate, never seen any evidence that he's in the army, out of view most of the time. I can prove he's the mommy as easily as you can prove Willow.
While I'm leaning toward Bx2, with this family, nothing would surprise me at this point.

Sarah in SC said...

Has anyone seen the quote over on palingates about GINO's book--that she started jounaling "when I found out that I was pregnant with Trig..." ????

Hmmm. Sounds like she's really, really committed to this story. ;) How's she going to pass fiction off as a tell-all book?

NY tabloid chick said...

** Dangerous said...
B, speaking for many, I suppose, said:

Who here has ever said that Willow could not have a child?

Many of us just think Bristol -- older, sexually active, disappearing, TriG's primary care giver, yada yada yada -- more likely.There are many evidentiary problems with the "more likely" conclusion. First, from the statement itself, none of us can say who Trig's "primary care giver" is. Surely with Tripp in the picture, we don't think it's Bristol, particularly during the Fall campaign when she was not traveling with the Palins.***

In the Esquire article, BP herself says to her father, after he's asked BP to watch Trig, "She [Willow] never friggin' watches him." BP also brought Trig to one of her own prenatal doctors' visits, per the same article. If you can find any evidence that someone other than BP is Trig's primary caregiver, you're welcome to present it!

NY tabloid chick said...

*** Ivyfree said...
"The Sept 2007 photos clearly show that Willow is mature enough to bear a child in April 2008, eight months later."

I'm afraid a photo really doesn't give that information. She may have been developing her figure but that doesn't mean that she was ovulating, although it is likely she was going through menarche.

"People magazine quoted Bristol's great-aunt by phone as their source of details on Trig's birth, and then every mainstream media outlet took that info and ran with it as confirmed fact!"

Every article I saw referenced the People Magazine article as their source.***

Yes... not one media outlet was willing to print that info EXCEPT after stating that People was the sole source. Media-savvy folks knew exactly what that meant.

B said...

ProChoiceGrandma,

I agree. If this is a simple story of Levi and Bristol having two babies I would not call it sordid. I hoped the person who said it was sordid would say why: Statutory rape? Parents closely related? Three pregnancies? Lied to Levi that he was father?

No one is talking.

Over at Gryphen's someone said the Slush Cup Hugger was not Johnny because Johnny looks at least part Native American. Someone else said he is a snowboarder. No one has said he is from Todd's tribe.

Maybe Johnny and Mercede became a couple while Bristol was in Juneau, and then Bristol went after Levi just for revenge against Mercede, even though Bristol's former best friend Lanesia was Levi's long time girlfriend? Mean, but not sordid.

wayofpeace said...

from HUFF.POST:

SARAH on her upcoming book:

"In fairness to my family, this is going be a good opportunity for them, too, because there have been so many misperceptions out there about who we are and what we believe in, and I'm excited to get to put my journalism degree to work and tell my story as it relates to my family," said Palin...

Palin declined to name any specific misunderstandings and avoided detailed comments about her family...

....

Palin's book will address, and complicate, the push-pull between home and public life. With the release date just one year away, the governor will have to work quickly. Barnett said that the governor has formed an outline in her mind, but has yet to start writing.

Burnham said Palin did not submit any writing samples when she met with HarperCollins executives in Washington, earlier this year. She will work with a collaborator, to be determined.

"She's obviously going to be engaged in the whole process of the book," said Burnham, adding that the role of the collaborator would depend on who was chosen. "Every word of the book will be her words," Barnett said.

Palin and Burnham said the memoir will emphasize Palin's Alaskan upbringing, and the governor will talk about her "unpretentious" lifestyle. Burnham described the book as the story of an Alaskan encountering a national audience, "the soccer mom and the political operative, and how one became the other."

Palin has never written a book and her critics, noting her disjointed CBS interviews with Katie Couric, have questioned whether she could. Two years ago, Palin told PBS' Charlie Rose that her favorite writers were C.S. Lewis ("very, very deep") and a Runner's World columnist, Dr. George Sheehan. ...

"Being a voracious reader, I read a lot today and have read a lot growing up. And having that journalism degree, all of that, will be a great assistance for me in writing this book, talking about the challenges and the joys, balancing the work and parenting, and, in my case, work means running the state," Palin said.

"I've read a variety of books, and that helps shape my opinions and my views."

Ohio mom said...

sg: thanks for the link to the September 1, 2008, NPR discussion that features Richard Carey's views on Sarah Palin and what Alaskans think of her. It's remarkable that Richard Carey put two such different spins on what he had to say, on consecutive days, yet.

On NPR he seemed to be dismissing the "Sarah wasn't really pregnant" rumors as something that just her detracters believed, while the next day on PBS he gave the indication that many rational people in Alaska thought that Sarah had never been pregnant.

Did the Daily Kos Diary about Sarah's fake pregnancy come out after the NPR interview, but before the PBS one? I found it strange that in the PBS interview he never knocked down the idea of Sarah faking a pregnancy or gave any reasons not to believe it.

This whole thing is making my head hurt. I see that Sarah has signed to write a memoir, but I guess I shouldn't hold my breath waiting for her to enlighten us!

B said...

cooky doogan said...
I don't know that folks should dismiss Dangerous' theory quite so quickly. ***

It is the other way around: Dangerous is dismissing the prevailing theory.

Most commenters here are open to Dangerous's theory, but only if Bristol were ruled out or if there were evidence of a Willow pregnancy. And this isn't a "quick" dismissal. The debate has been raging since last fall.

Are you saying there is a picture from September 2007 of Willow and Piper dressed as they were for the Green Sweater Picture? That's the picture (GS) Audrey dates to 2006. Sorry, but I'm confused.

B said...

Disjointedly discussing her book:

"Being a voracious reader, I read a lot today and have read a lot growing up. And having that journalism degree, all of that, will be a great assistance for me in writing this book, talking about the challenges and the joys, balancing the work and parenting, and, in my case, work means running the state," Palin said.

Same agent as Obama. Possible title: The Audacity

Same agent as Hillary. Title: It Takes a Village Freezing or Flooding to (Sorta) Get My Attention

Maybe, just like the VP debate:
Nothing You Asked or Really Wanted to Know, But What I Want to Tell

onething said...

"Dangerous: don't you think that the reason a lot of us don't want to hop on the Willow wagon is that it would be extra sad if it were her. We don't want to think that someone so young was taken advantage of that way, I know I don't."

Whereas that plays no part in my opinions whatsoever.

Amy1 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Amy1 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
onething said...

"I don't think we've proved anything yet to an absolute certainty, but lack of evidence ruling Willow out is NOT evidence that she is the mother."

Yes but you have to combine it with the statement that the evidence for Bristol would be laughed out of court.

But I think the comment in Inside Edition about her dropping out of school midyear is surpassing strange, as others have noted, and that is not the only such statement. As someone pointed out, there are several such, which only make sense if they are talking about Trig and Bristol.

NY tabloid chick said...

*** Chi Town Mom said...
Your kidding me, right? Sarah Palin has a book coming out in Spring 2010.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090512/ap_en_ot/us_bo***

Oh, what a shocker; from HarperCollins, part of the Rupert Murdoch empire...

onething said...

I knew a brother and sister who were ten and one half months apart.

I, too, would like to see a picture of Johnny. It appears Levi thinks he is the father of Trig based upon the pictures he took with Mercede and Bristol and Trig at the Palin house. But the switch between Johnny and Levi was so quick...

I do puzzle over the camo dress picture because it seems to me a slim girl does not really show in a first pregnancy until closer to 4 months than 3, and facial fatness may or may not occur at all but usually later in a pregnancy, not right away. Or, at least that is what I have thought. If she wee 4 months in that picture it means that Trig would be due mid or late February. So he could be full term, the premature birth never happened.
But the photos on April 18 do show a newborn. He could have been a couple of weeks, yes, or he could have been more weeks if he had been born premature. But if the camo dress is about a pregnancy, then he was not born prematurely, and would not look like a newborn at 2 months.

Punkinbugg said...

Patrick,

Nilap at 9:05 posted this picture that I hadn't seen before:

http://www.tinyurl.com/brrt8z

When you right-click, the date of 2008/03/21 comes up under "Properties".

I tried to zoom in and reverse the colors, then post the results here, but my link was probably messed up.

What are your thoughts on this one?

Just for fun, I wish we had a collage of all the shots where she's holding an object in front of her stomach. (Piper honey? yah -- hey come over here and cover up mama's ummm front!)

Chi Town Mom said...

About Gino's book: Remember when it was discovered that Milli Vanilli didn't actually sing on their CD and everyone wanted their money back? If Gino's book is proved to be full of lies, can everyone get their money back?

Ivyfree said...

Sarah Palin thinks writing a book will put her journalism degree to work?
I thought her degree was in broadcast journalism!

Morgan said...

Pat,

Could you email me at thetokenhippie@gmail.com so I can address your question? I don't address questions to the moderator on the board.

MrsTarquinBiscuitbarrel said...

NY tabloid chick, the link you posted last night from the ADN about the Mat-Su hospital adminstrator leaving ALSO has been taken down!

MrsTarquinBiscuitbarrel said...

Here's what Shannyn Moore has to say:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/shannyn-moore/palin-signs-book-deal_b_202663.html

Among other things, she cites the state law that prohibits governors from profiting from "outside employment."

B said...

Ivyfree said...
Sarah Palin thinks writing a book will put her journalism degree to work? I thought her degree was in broadcast journalism! ***

An audio book?

Dangerous said...

SmacK said:

Did I miss something? It seems to me you have NO real evidence that disqualifies Bristol. The fact that there is no evidence that proves Bx2 cannot be equated with foeclosing that possibility.
Apparently, yes. The calendar disqualifies Bristol unless you make multiple assumptions and apply inconsistent conjectures to the direct and circumstantial evidence that does exit.

1) The pictures of Trig in April 2008 are of a new born, unless a) you claim a premature Feburary birth or b) you decide he's just a very small two-month old.

2) Either way, the circumstances of the wild ride make no sense unless a) you decide that SP intended it AND b) you conclude she'd do so with a lame story that really makes her look reckless. But,

3) In SP's taped interview with Lisa Demer, she tries very hard to downplay the bravery aspect, and could not rely on the media to cast it that way, and knows it. So the wild ride could not be so she can make herself look better, because she KNOWS it makes her look worse.

4) So if you decide that Trig was born as reported, others conclude that Tripp was born later than reported because we didn't see him. But,

5) When we do see him, he's definitely not a newborn and his appearance is consistent with a six-week-old infant.

Hence, Bristol's alibi for Trig is that she was pregnant with Tripp, so all the earlier rumors and hiding and "missing" evidence is irrelevant.

For Bx2 to work at all, you have to assume facts not in evidence and ignore or recast direct evidence before you assume circumstances for which there is no direct evidence.

That is why I discount the theory. I don't have space here to defeat each person's conjectures and unsupported theories. I'm confident in my conclusion beyond a reasonable doubt that Bristol did not give birth to Trig. I'm also confident that SP was never pregnant, based on the direct evidence, her own admissions to deceptive acts, and the circumstances of the wild ride.

So why do I deduce that Willow is Trig's mother?

1) Absent Bristol, the only other person for whom I can attribute a motive for SP to fake the pregnancy is Willow. There may be a valid motive for SP to fake (versus straight adoption) for someone else that I can't fathom, but I haven't heard it yet.

2) Direct evidence (travel records) show that Willow was not in school in Juneau for at least five of the eight weeks between mid-Feb and April 18.

3) Travel records indicate Willow went one-way from Juneau to Wasilla on March 28. Hence, she was in Wasilla for April 17-18. (There is other direct evidence that she remained in Wasilla rather than return to Juneau at this time.)

4) There is no direct evidence that Willow attended school anywhere else during that critical eight week period when a pregnancy would be virtually impossible to hide in a middle school. We also don't know if she attended school after April 18.

5) Willow holds Trig about as often as Bristol, for the .0001% of the time we can actually observe the dynamic. (That is, there's nothing probative about a few fleeting images.)

6) There are no photos of Willow during the critical time period, and only one from before. There's no view of her midsection in that photo.

7) "Winter term" honor roll mention is not conclusive of school attendance because the travel records show she wasn't in school, so she could have submitted work from where she was.

8) Willow did not give birth to Tripp.

There is more I could cover in my case, but I'll let everyone chew on this for a while without comment. Many will ignore it and resume speculation on Bx2 theories, never getting closer to the truth.

Dangerous

MrsTarquinBiscuitbarrel said...

Googled the Mat-Su hospital head leaving, and the link below to the story in the ADN does work. IMO, the comments posted are much more interesting and informative than the news story itself. A number of posters say that management gets big bonuses while nursing staff is cut. Nobody has posted anything--as of five minutes ago--about SP and the alleged birth of Trig at Mat-Su. Alaska residents/readers, here's your opportunity!

http://www.adn.com/news/alaska/matsu/story/789380.html

WV: isellour [!!!]

DianneP said...

"GINO's book--that she started jounaling "when I found out that I was pregnant with Trig..." ???? "

At least she finally said the words "I was pregnant with Trig"

B said...

I hope Levi's book comes out first.

Alex said...

I read and read on here, and think to myself: it can't get anymore complicated or my brain will explode.

The last time I felt this confused by a family saga was the first time I read a novel by William Faulkner.

Faulkner uses ambiguity, similar (or same) names, family secrets, mysterious parentage-- all to weave his stories of the decadent and lost Southern civilization, as it struggles to survive and be reborn as a new society. The Romance of the Old South, in his view, was in some ways a facade behind which people lived the way they pleased and did what they wanted to do. Lawlessly, with a moral code of their own invention.

Their sins-- caused the South's fall.

This is totally apropros of nothing really. Except the fact that all the confusion in the Palin family-- the similar names, the undated photos, the rearranged stories and obvious mistruths-- are a signal to me of a "sordid" family story.

Now if Palin could write that! Or if her collaborator is a reader of William Faulkner! It would be a bestseller.

B said...

cooky doogan said...
I don't know that folks should dismiss Dangerous' theory quite so quickly. The photo Patrick posts allegedly from Sept. 2007, showing Willow carting her niece on her back is odd in that SP and the niece are wearing the same outfits which appear in the Christmas picture put out as 2007, but now believed to be 2006. ***

I just looked at the photo in question. It is from the September 2007 shoot day, the day of the Xmas 2007 photo. That photo is not believed to be 2006. Bristol, not Willow, wears a green sweater in the 2006 photo. So Patrick's piggyback photo is not odd. (Except who is the man with Molly?)

Craig said...

What will be important about the book will not be any details that she gives surrounding Trig and Tripp's birth (such information will simply fall victim of the "that's the truth - that's a lie" push/pull between Palin's supporters and detractors). It will be if Sarah uses this opportunity to provide any pictures from her personal collection, that show, for example, any photos of an obviously pregnant Sarah dated from early 2008, or photos from the delivery room when she gave birth to Trig (with her family members around her). Maybe she might even slip in a seemingly benign photo of her and her daughters that just happens to be from around, say, January of 2008, to address conspiracists' accusations without being too direct.

I think it will still be an interesting read, regardless of whether someone thinks its a work of fact or of fiction.

Also, keep in mind that a book promotion tour of the media will occur with the book's release. This will involve some additional comments from Palin regarding some of the rumours. And for those who feel the media is simply waiting, for some reason, for the right opportunity to bring their suspicions out into the open, well, this will be it.

For me, the only part she'll have to sweat is the reopening of the whole "flight from Texas" thing. Mainly because, the question can be framed as "How can a pro-life advocate feel comfortable with taking a long flight home after the early signs of labor begin, while carrying a special needs baby, with only a telephone consultation with your doctor? If every child's life is sacred, why take a questionable risk to an unborn child just to have the child born in Alaska?"

midnightcajun said...

I'm in the camp with those who think the 2006 green sweater photo shows Bristol pregnant for the first time. It is highly believable that Sarah forced her to get an abortion that year, only to have Bristol turn around and accidently/deliberately get pregnant again with Trig (I'll show you, mom) and refuse to abort the second time ("It was MY decision to have him!"). Three pregnancies in one teenaged girl is pretty sad and sordid (especially if you're dealing with three different fathers).

wv: copecal! I'm not even going there...

While I have leaned toward a premature delivery of Trig in February, I also agree with those who think Bristol looks more than 2 months along in the September 07 family shots, although this does not fit well with the size of Trig when he was shown off in April and May. I suppose it's possible Sarah was "borrowing" someone else's baby, but that seems like a stretch.

Oh, and for those of you concerned that Sarah will neglect her children even more to "write" this book, not to worry: she's going to have a "collaborator." Sarah may like to go around pretending she's "writing" this book, but as I said before when talking about Levi, to get this book into production by next spring is going to be a RUSH. The ghost writer will do a few intensive interviews then quickly write the book themselves, probably also using some of Sarah's letters, interviews, etc. I doubt Sarah has read either of Obama's books or Hillary's and therefore doesn't understand that their impact comes from their insightful, intelligent (whatever you think of those two, they ARE intelligent!) exploration of the human condition rather than the kind of boastful self-promotion Sarah has in mind; if she thinks this "book" is going to lead to her being taken seriously, she is seriously delusional (but we already knew that).

Ohio mom said...

It's hard to believe that someone who talks consistantly in the passive tense and litters her speech with dangling participles and misplaced gerunds was a journalism major.

But, as we have all learned, with Sarah anything is possible, also too.

Lilybart said...

Maybe it would be good now to distill the items of information that just cannot be explained away:

1) Why wouldn't Palin cooperate with the ADN who tried to do a story debunking the Trig rumors, a favor to her??!!

2) Why were all photos of Palin SCRUBBED from the internet for the time period from Jan-April 08. ??!!

3) Why was Bristol taken out of school for Jan-May 08.??!!

If someone could get these questions answered, we would have our truth.

The scrubbing of myspace would be consistent with protecting the VP candidate from potential bad stuff her kids were saying. That could be a normal thing.

But Sarah has never seen a camera lens she didn't like, so why would she have photos scrubbed? I think this really is the biggest unanswered question that has NO good explanation or excuse. Her main talent, apart from lying, is that she is photogenic. So, where are the official photos from the months when the legislature is in session, the months when most official photos would be taken?

If anyone knows someone at the ADN or local TV, it would be interesting to see what the rumors are about this.

Bretta said...

""" Sarah in SC said...
...GINO's book--that she started jounaling "when I found out that I was pregnant with Trig..." ????
...How's she going to pass fiction off as a tell-all book? ... May 12, 2009 7:44 PM"""

It's called 'dry-labbing' - you write the report as if you actually did the work. Usually after it should have been done and you got caught or are about to be. Make the results fit what you think the out-come should have been (or is) and you're good to go.

Maybe that's how SP got a journalism degree when she doesn't speak in english. That and a wink with high heels.

Sunshine1970 said...

RE Green sweater 2006 pic.

I really don't think that shows a pregnant girl. It could but I just don't think so.

Many moons ago when I was around Bristol's age, I lost a lot of weight (around 50 lbs, and went down to about 110 lbs. I'm 5'5"), and became very active, ie biking, running, walking etc. I had a little paunch like Bristol does. One could have said *I* was pregnant. I did sit ups, crunches anything to try and get a flat belly, but, alas, it was not to be. I could even see some muscle definition in my stomach, but the pouch stayed. The blasted thing just. Won't. Go. Away. Even to this day, after doing lots of Pilates, it's still there. (GAHHH!) I chalk it up to just having bad genes. I'd have to either: A. be so anorexic that my bones would be sticking through to get it to go away or B. some sort of liposuction or tummy tuck to get rid of it.

It's very possible that Bristol has the same thing going on here.

midnightcajun said...

Thought you'all might like to know that I just spoke to a little birdy in New York. Believe me, everyone in the publishing world is running around trying to find out how much Sarah's advance was. I may have more definite info soon, but word is a figure around $1 million is about it, since they figure the market will be pretty much limited to the TeamSarah types and liberal pundits looking to make fun of her. As my source said, "What's she going to write that no one hasn't heard about?" When I said, "The truth?" she went into hysterics.

Bretta said...

“””Dangerous said...
2) Either way, the circumstances of the wild ride make no sense unless a) you decide that SP intended it …

3) … So the wild ride could not be so she can make herself look better...
…………………………………………………..
… Bristol's alibi for Trig is that she was pregnant with Tripp, so all the earlier rumors and hiding and "missing" evidence is irrelevant.
…………………………………………………..
So why do I deduce that Willow is Trig's mother?

1) Absent Bristol, the only other person for whom I can attribute a motive for SP to fake the pregnancy is Willow. There may be a valid motive for SP to fake (versus straight adoption) for someone else that I can't fathom, but I haven't heard it yet.
Dangerous May 13, 2009 7:46 AM”””

Okay, following your train of thought, something just clicked for me here:
1. “Misdirecting the public” during the initial days of her VP campaign by putting the spotlight on Bristol was a successful ploy “to prove” SP birthed TriG. And it worked, because we have speculated long and hard about a Bx2.
2. The real birth mother was one SP would have a high motivation to fake a pregnancy for, and no one else fits that except Willow, once Bristol is put in the position of being the red herring, becoming the “most famous unwed pregnant teen in America.” SP could have adopted a DS child of Molly or Heather, for example, or even from Track, and everyone would have praised her compassion.
3. But hiding a pregnancy for Willow must have had shameful reasons behind it, like why was your very young daughter left un-chaperoned? Who got her pregnant? Why cover for him? What else did you have to hide?
Whatever SP’s motivation, I believe it was impulsive, last minute and not thought through long and hard and completely. I believe she thought she could control a large population just like she has controlled her clique in the past political years.
I truly think she thinks she can fool us because she believes we are less intelligent than she is.

TruthPatrol said...

I’ve been out of the loop in regard to SP for quite some time…so if any of this has been said, I’m sorry. I don’t have enough time to read all of the comments. Audrey, good posts…keep up the pressure! I still think that the keys to solving this little mystery are Track Palin and his whereabouts during the summer of 2007 prior to boot camp and the Johnston family finally “telling all…unfiltered”. In closing…don’t give up, we must stay strong…the bumper stickers are increasing in my neighborhood that say Palin 2012.

B said...

To those of you who helpfully studied travel records:

I'm under the impression that Willow's travel records show travel the state paid for.

If Willow flew (or rode in a car)on the Palin dime, is that necessarily in her travel records?

If the records show her flying from Juneau to Anchorage but do not show her returning to Juneau, doesn't that just mean that the state wasn't asked to pay for her return?

Punkinbugg? Patrick? Anyone?

I want to understand, since Dangerous seems to assume that Willow didn't travel if it wasn't in the released travel records:

***
2) Direct evidence (travel records) show that Willow was not in school in Juneau for at least five of the eight weeks between mid-Feb and April 18.

3) Travel records indicate Willow went one-way from Juneau to Wasilla on March 28. Hence, she was in Wasilla for April 17-18. (There is other direct evidence that she remained in Wasilla rather than return to Juneau at this time.) ***

Thanks for helping me understand.

Sarah in SC said...

TruthPatrol said... "the bumper stickers are increasing in my neighborhood that say Palin 2012."

Yup, yup. In my neck of the woods, too. In fact I parked my big ole Obama sticker next to a Palin 2012 sticker the other day & it took great restraint not to find a Sharpie and add some embellishments to it. lol

KaJo said...

I went to the same ADN picture site you found, ProChoiceGrandma (your post May 12 @ 6:45 PM), and slogged through the whole thing, and managed to identify some pretty interesting pix that might be worth saving.

( http://www.adn.com/photos/sarah-palin/v-gallery/story/512227.html?/1522/gallery/512225-a714206-t3.html for anyone else who wants to)

I don't know how old Picture #10 is, but it's a good example of how crosseyed Palin is, even WITH her glasses on. She must have been tired that day.

Picture #61 is from the 2007 Iron Dog, I think -- Picture #30 is labeled with that date, anyway.

Picture #67 is an interesting one -- it's labelled as being during Palin's campaign for governor. She has Piper in tow, who looks DISTINCTLY younger than in the "green sweater" picture that's been the subject of so much discussion.

Someone should tell Regina of Palingates about picture #75 -- it's of Palin with two women dressed in "cow suits" in front of a Matanuska Maid Dairy sign at the Alaska State Fair. Funny, in light of the MMDairy fraud scandal....

Picture #93 is another view of the March 2008 "thrashed abs" videography still pictures in Palin's office, not a professional photo, apparently. It shows that dark brown/aqua jacket Palin was wearing, zipper cover apparently reflective -- and flat vertical!

Picture #94 is a back view of Palin at the Iditarod March 2008 wearing that pink-red parka -- notice that there is no tightness across Palin's backside where you'd think a pregnant belly would pull at the fabric.

Picture #96, another one of zonked-out Trig during the campaign. I'm not sure, but I think that is Bristol holding him.

Pictures #98 and 145 -- biker buddies -- photo captioned "vets of AK on their memorial celebration.

Pictures #100 and 107 -- another picture of the 2007 Christmas open house at the Gov's Mansion, with wreath in background.

Pictures #111 and 129 -- another large-scarf picture (Yakutat Delegation) where the scarf is artfully spread out to cover her stomach, or she hides her stomach behind a poster.

Picture #112 -- from the caption, the implication is that this is another March 2008 Iditarod picture of Palin. Notice the straight-up-and-down line of her zipper, and edge of her parka against the man's body.

Regina's "Piper with pacifier" pictures at the Nalukataq are #117 and #139. I thought the red under the "pacifier" was a stick, but it looks like the red lanyard Palin is wearing in #153. #141 shows the "nanny" with Trig behind Palin. Several other pictures of Palin at the Nalukataq are mis-captioned as "with her children". They aren't hers.

Picture #130 -- Another one of the spring 2008 pictures of Palin with that sling carrier for the baby -- and in this picture you have to wonder how the baby can breathe, or if it's even IN the sling.

Picture #138 looks like someone took a candid shot of Palin trying to enter a Portapotty.

Picture #142 -- Palin holding Trig, zonked out as usual, like a sack of groceries instead of the usual posture of a mother (such as Bristol at the RNC). Sorry, a little snark crept in there...

Picture #152 might be another Christmas 2007 candid shot at a Christmas breakfast.

And the cherry on top, a fashion faux pas if ever I saw one -- Picture #109. Wow. I wish she'd worn that one on the campaign... :)

Ocean said...

New interview with Sherry Johnston :

ML: As a mother, did you give any parenting advice to Levi? If so, what did you tell him?
Sherry Johnston: Tripp would often spit up as an infant and I gave advice to Bristol and Levi because Levi was the same way as a baby. Now, we don't really get Tripp that often to impart parenting advice. We only see him a few hours a week, but I did get to spend time with him this morning. Because Sarah Palin had her baby son, Trigg, Levi and Bristol were around a newborn and helped take care of him, so when Bristol became pregnant and had Tripp, it seemed both Bristol and Levi felt comfortable with their newborn. It came naturally to them.

More of interview at http://www.momlogic.com/2009/05/sherry_johnston_speaks_out.php

Ocean said...

ML: As a first time grandmother, how does it feel to not see your grandson as often as you'd like? How often do you see him?
Sherry Johnston: It tears me apart. Every time I see him he's a different child.Even Sherry's confused about Trig and Tripp ;D

B said...

Oz Mudflats blog had this summary of rinkgate/housegate that raised my eyebrows. I had noticed that the interior of her house looks like the inside of the ice rink, from using the same materials and workers. Even aside from Waterbreakgate/Babygate, is no one writing an expose of Palin?

***
As Mayor of Wasilla she authorized the start of construction on the building of a hockey rink-slash-community center, knowingly preempting the property title search, resulting in the city of Wasilla not only incurring $20 million of debt, but continuing, years later, to be embroiled in a costly legal battle over ownership of the land upon which the center is built. Which is sort of what a title search is supposed to prevent from happening .

She immediatley selected a second piece of property aproximately one mile from the community center’s building site, eliminated all building code requirements in her town and had her husband put an unnamed construction crew together to build their now multi-million dollar house. After the house was built, the building codes were reinstated. There are local, ongoing investigations as to how much of her house is built from the same construction materials, (and by the same workers) as the community center – all paid for, of course, by the citizens of Wasilla.

As first-year Governor of Alaska she collected per diem money from fellow Alaskans for living in said house, falsely submitting day to day living expenses as routine travel expenses, and so far has not been made to pay any of it back.
***

wv = ear cones, to help Sarah hear her constituents

Lilybart said...

OT maybe but the best title for Palin's book so far:

What to Expect when you're Faking Expecting

B said...

Alaskans, take note. Eileen, of stairwell picture fame, comments on another post:

Looks like you need PHOTOS from public events such as Iron Dog-the Feb08 BANQUET held, the outdoors start and the finish line? You need I.Dog Feb.2008 of the Palin gals and any mid-winter 08-09 of Bristol. Plus late winter-Spring 08 of SP.

Alaska has small population, many of us know folks in the Iron Dog and Iditarod races as well as being SPECTATORS ourselves to all these northern soap operas.
Also, more of us use cameras now due to digital choices and speed of development. More photographic evidence and chance encounters,
first person accounts .

We need to get the word out for folks here to share photos-I say the best way is via ADN.com comments after SP articles. Bring up the site, bring up the request.

B said...

Ocean,

Thanks for today's Sherry interview. Another statement that Levi helped take care of TriG. Just what most high school boys would do for their girlfriend's infant brother, right?

Last paragraph was interesting:

Sherry Johnston: The press always makes us sound like we're at war. We're not saying that. When Bristol came to pick up Tripp this week, she said if we want him more often, all I have to do is call. She said if I want to come to their house, I can come over and see him all the time. I am hopeful we'll be able to work together to raise Tripp.

ProChoiceGrandma said...

B at 5/13/09 at 3:14 pm Thanks for asking the question, because sometimes we take for granted what we thought was obvious.

Just because there is not a travel authorization that is paid by the state, it does not mean that a kid was stuck in one place.

The travel authorizations are only for “official” events that Sarah Palin had to attend or wanted to be invited to attend (with her children) so she could sponge off the constituents’ dime instead of her own and get a free flight home to Wasilla. But, dag nab it, sometimes she just had to pay the travel expenses herself when she could not find some dull innocuous event to latch upon. Or as Bristol put it in her 4-18-07 MySpace comment to Johnny: “its going to be gay, im going to glenallen. GAY” Hmm, I take it Bristol didn’t like Glenallen? Can’t say I blame her - what 16 year old has any interest to “Meet with Elders and Community dinner in Glennallen; attend AK Prudential Community Student Recognition ceremony and attend AK Moose Federation” Woohoo! I’ll bet it was a rocking good time at the Moose Federation!

However, thank you B, for asking the question for the benefit of Dangerous, since he seems to think Willow was stuck in Wasilla and upon which he has based his entire theory with Willow as his suspect-in-chief as Trig’s birth mother. I am filing a motion in limine and asking that the case be dismissed against Willow for lack of evidence.

onething said...

If the camo dress shows a 3 months pregnant Bristol, then the baby would be born mid March at the latest, and the mid April photos would be barely within the realm of possible. Although, the public photos of Todd and Sarah with Trig do appear older than the tiny baby taken with Levi holding him.

So, maybe.

I don't think she could be 4 months, because then Trig would be two months old in the April photos.

NY tabloid chick said...

Dangerous said:

***2) Direct evidence (travel records) show that Willow was not in school in Juneau for at least five of the eight weeks between mid-Feb and April 18.***

No one was in school for at least one of those weeks, for spring break/Easter.

***3) Travel records indicate Willow went one-way from Juneau to Wasilla on March 28. Hence, she was in Wasilla for April 17-18. (There is other direct evidence that she remained in Wasilla rather than return to Juneau at this time.)***

What you're calling "travel records" are records of 'official' travel for which reimbursement is sought. Just because reimbursement wasn't sought doesn't mean travel didn't occur. These records only tell us where someone went when reimbursement was sought.

I won't address the rest of your points, because you're so married to the Willow idea you've dismissed every other theory (with a great amount of very unbecoming distain for the theories of others).

NY tabloid chick said...

*** Sunshine1970 said...
RE Green sweater 2006 pic.

I really don't think that shows a pregnant girl. It could but I just don't think so.

Many moons ago when I was around Bristol's age, I lost a lot of weight (around 50 lbs, and went down to about 110 lbs. I'm 5'5"), and became very active, ie biking, running, walking etc. I had a little paunch like Bristol does. One could have said *I* was pregnant. I did sit ups, crunches anything to try and get a flat belly, but, alas, it was not to be. I could even see some muscle definition in my stomach, but the pouch stayed. The blasted thing just. Won't. Go. Away. Even to this day, after doing lots of Pilates, it's still there. (GAHHH!) I chalk it up to just having bad genes. I'd have to either: A. be so anorexic that my bones would be sticking through to get it to go away or B. some sort of liposuction or tummy tuck to get rid of it.

It's very possible that Bristol has the same thing going on here.***

I agree that we all gain/lose weight in different places; some of us will never have flat tummies and others will never have thin thighs. But it's not so much that she's got a tummy in that picture; it's that she doesn't have one when she's slimmer. So she is capable of losing the weight there. What I find puzzling is that she chose such an unflattering dress for her figure (if indeed it was just tummy-weight-gain). Same with the green sweater. You couldn't pick worse outfits if you'd gained a bit in the middle and weren't thrilled about it. Those outfits were like giant arrows pointing to her 'problem spot' (if, again, this was just where her excess weight went). On the other hand.... a girl who wasn't getting much attention at home and was going to have to let her mom know she was pregnant might choose these outfits to drop a big hint to her oblivious mother...

wv: submestr (when you pretend-carry a baby for less than a trimester before 'giving birth')

Punkinbugg said...

Hi B,

RE: Travel records

I agree with Prochoicegramma. The state travel records only show tickets purchased for the kids by the state of Alaska.

There would be no record of a ticket purchased using a personal credit card (or even cash) on this report, unless they sought reimbursement.

If she were trying to cover-up some other issue, she just might be smart enough to pay cash and keep her mouth shut.

I know, I know... hard to imagine!

jeanette said...

I hadn’t seen this picture before and given the fact that it is on the ADN, it may not be dated correctly. However, March 1st was on a Saturday in 2008 and Sarah did attend Iditarod activities that day. That pose is just not possible for a woman who will give birth in 6 weeks. Can anyone confirm that this picture’s date is accurate?

http://tiny.cc/P7Pu8

B said...

onething said...
If the camo dress shows a 3 months pregnant Bristol, then the baby would be born mid March at the latest . . . I don't think she could be 4 months, because then Trig would be two months old in the April photos. ***

Plus, the May 5 shower photos (p.14 of Patrick's flickr). Can that be an almost 3 month old infant?

SmacK said...

Dangerous

I did not miss your assumptions. You seem to miss that they are assumptions and claim superiority over the assumptions made by the Bx2 camp. They are all assumptions.

Make your case. No one has any issue with that. But recognize that you have not one scintilla of evidence for your case that is anything but an assumption.

There is evidence and someday it will out and the assumptions can be tested. Until then it is anybody's guess.

Morgan said...

****MODERATOR WARNING****

I should not have to repeat myself and I don't like to. And if I have to keep it up, certain posters who can't refrain from injecting needless snark into their comments may notice that nothing they say gets through.

If you want to make your case, make it politely or don't make it at all.

This is the *last* time I'm going to issue this warning. If your comments don't show up it's for a reason.

Keep it up and none of them will.

Kathleen said...

B makes a very good point with regard to the children's travel expenses and the occassions upon which Palin can make legitimate claims for them.

We should also remember that SP also uses the state King Air for air travel.Any of her family or friends could have accompanied her on those trips and been unaccounted for.

According to the following article she used the plane for 20 per cent of its flying time, in 2007 - 2008. A total of 110 hours.

http://tinyurl.com/oydz8g

The Editor said...

The biggest red flag for me in all of this is the lack of definitive pictures showing SP pregnant or not; Bristol pregnant or not; Willow pregnant or not in the period from January to April, 2008. The very fact that there is no definitive proof that Sarah gave birth to Trigg how, when or where she claims she did is the kicker. I do lean in the direction of BX2 for the babies, but I am open to other suggestions. I think that there just have to be pictures and documents out there (the recent ones are very close, but still not indisputable) that will prove that Sarah was not pregnant with Trigg. That needs to be proved and established first and foremost. I am convinced, but I still want to see it in black and white - or living colour. SP needs to be stopped before she runs for re-election or another run at the White House.

onething said...

NYTC,

"wv: submestr (when you pretend-carry a baby for less than a trimester before 'giving birth')"

Now THAT was funny!

muah said...

NY tabloid chick,

That is very true about "the paunch".

I also saw a recent side view Bristol that looked very paunch free.
http://www.daylife.com/photo/01pseW681ng03?q=Bristol+Palin
I'm looking for it.

Celebrities have their ways of getting rid of a pauch at record speed. She could have had a tuck or ?

Chi Town Mom said...

From Sherri's interview: "Tripp would often spit up as an infant and I gave advice to Bristol and Levi because Levi was the same way as a baby". Tripp is not an infant anymore? He's only 4 1/2 months old (let's pretend. TriG, however, WAS an infant and is now a toddler.

Leadfoot said...

David Letterman's top 10 surprises in the Sarah Palin memoir:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/14/top-ten-surprises-in-sara_n_203426.html

Chi Town Mom said...

Re comments about Mat-Su hospital:

I read the comments after the article about the CEO quitting. I got the general impression that the place is horribly run and the staff is overworked. What a great place to "say" you had a baby. Everyone is too busy worrying about something else. If you asked the staff about Trigg's birth, they couldn't possibly remember because of the heavy patient load.

Doubting Thomas said...

I know there are a few people that do not know how a Preemie baby matures, and the difference between a full term Baby and and a Preemie.

Since much of the Bx2 debate hangs on a Preemie Trigg. I thought I would share some research I have been doing.

Many people seem to think a Preemie at two months after birth age would look nearly the same as a Full Term baby at two months after birth. This is simply NOT true! A preemie who was born 2 months premature, would look slightly smaller at two months of age, then the full term baby at birth!

Here are some very useful links to the development and care of a premature baby, that you will not find informative, but quite interesting as well.

http://tinyurl.com/p65dp6

http://tinyurl.com/qf9xux

http://tinyurl.com/qe3o49

http://tinyurl.com/yy25t2

These should get you on your way to researching more about babies that have been born prematurely (and are around the size of the tiny baby that Levi and Sis were seen holding) and approx how long it takes for a Preemie to mature into a baby the size of Trigg when we was "revealed" on the 18th of April.....

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 445   Newer› Newest»