Sunday, July 12, 2009

When I was Living There...

On July 9th, Levi Johnston gave a press conference in his lawyer's office in Alaska.

He states clearly and explicitly that he was living with the Palins before she was selected as McCain's running mate. What? BEFORE late August 2008? Why would he be living there then?

1. He's lying. Palin's spokesperson, Meghan Stapleton, has already released a statement claiming this.
"It is interesting to learn Levi is working on a piece of fiction while honing his acting skills," Palin family spokeswoman Meghan Stapleton said in an e-mail to The Associated Press.

The Palins have steadfastly denied that Levi ever "lived" with them, though it's been reported in numerous publications, including People magazine, which has over the months tended to be quite favorable to Palin.

2. He's telling the truth. So why would he have been living with the Palins prior to August 2008? Because they liked Levi and were cool about Levi and Bristol's relationship and openly allowed their daughter's boyfriend to spend the night? OR Because Levi and Bristol were jointly caring for a child who was not born on December 27, 2008?

Since Levi began going public in spring of 2009, thing just have not added up. There have been lots of little slip-ups. Sherry Johnston described to People magazine on (or around) January 5th how Levi and Bristol had spent their first "weeks" as parents. Only problem was that, as of January 5th, Tripp supposedly was barely a week old, had not even been home from the hospital a full week, and simultaenously the Anchorage Daily News was reporting that Levi was not even IN Wasilla.

When Levi was describing to Larry King how they told Sarah that Bristol was pregnant, he very clearly slips up and starts to say she was sixteen... then quickly corrects it to say "eighteen." Except she was neither, IF the Tripp pregnancy was "as reported." If Tripp was born December 27th 2008, and Levi stayed with the Palins to care for him, Bristol would have been 17 when she got pregnant. Here's the video... watch to around the four minute point. Look at Levi's eyes when he makes the slip up. He knows exactly what he said.

It's been stated in numerous places that Levi was actively involved with the Palins after the campaign right up until after Tripp's birth in late December. But then other places, Levi has stated that things started to fall apart "right after the campaign." And when Sarah Palin was interviewed in her home by Matt Lauer on November 11th, he asks her point blank about Levi and Bristol's plans. She won't even answer the question and is so cold to the topic that it's as if a door has slammed. It's more than clear that things were already off - way off - between Bristol and Levi as of that point. Yet ... he lived there - in December - prior to Tripp's birth?

Things that make you go HMMMM...


Mary said...

1. Trig was born earlier than reported. This is why no birth certificate has been presented.

2. Tripp was born later than reported. No pictures or birth certificate.

If I have to choose between Levi or Sarah....I choose Levi.

Hammer and a Feather said...

Audrey ~ this is an awesome catch!

The ice queen must have reminded everyone "if you're going to tell a lie, tell it as close to the truth as possible"

Shenanigans. He'll slip again probably because it's not in his inherent nature to lie.

Best regards,

Amy1 said...

If "things stared to fall apart right after the campaign," as Levi says, then there must have been a time before (and of course during) the campaign when they had not fallen apart. How long is that "time before"?

How early did Levi start living with the Palins, or a least being an intimate member of their family? Why do we care? Because it sheds light on the apparent "back-up plan" of implicitly (if not explicitly) presenting him as the dad figure of Trig in case SP's non-pregnancy were ever revealed. And it sheds light on what he might have been in a position to observe, to confirm/deny re the SP hoax.

I am not that interested in Tripp: he was obviously Bristol's baby, and Levi seems to think he is the dad, but if he is not, so what? Even if conceived/born on the SP-stated schedule, that info never swayed me one iota from thinking SP hoaxed us regarding Trig's birth. The time-tested practice of fiddling with such dates to support a desired (and inaccurate) retrospective schedule seemed obvious to me from the beginning.

If, as we now seem to have concluded, Trig was born way earlier than April 18, the particulars of Trigg's dates become even more irrelevant to the SP hoax.

So now we have Levi claiming to have lived with the Palins in Dec08-Jan09 AND at some point before SP was picked.

We mostly care about what he observed and what he is going to tell about:
--Was SP pregnant with Trig?
--Was Bristol pregnant with Trig?
--Who does he think Trig's dad is?
--Why did SP hoax us?
--When, exactly, was Track at home? What role, if any, does he have in all this?
--Are there any other key players?
--If he can tell us what the hoax-producing secret was, who else knew it? And when?
--Was there any coercive effort by SP to shut people up?
--What did the McCain campaign know, and when did they know it.

It seems likely that an intimate member of a household (whether he was technically living there or not, whether he+BP were sexually active on Palin real estate or not) would know the answers to many if not all of these questions.

Levi has said earlier that their relationship was several years long. Perhaps it was on Levi's side, and shorter from BP's point of view. Doesn't matter. A person in love with someone is a good observer. Or so we hope.

Levi might have observations that he believes to be true about all of the above but that in fact are not true. It's possible.

Or, he could have seen it all with laser accuracy. Bring it on, Levi.

patstevens said...

Audrey, when was Levi living in the North Slope? I thought that it was in November and December '08.

Dee said...

Levi also states in the Tyra Banks interview that he began living with the Palins right after Trig was supposedly born. I can think of no reason why he moved in then, except he was believed to be the father of Trig. Bristol and Levi were probably sleeping together and foolishly thought that Brtistol couldn't get pregnant again so soon, so didn't bother to use birth control which would explain how Bristol managed to have two babys in such a short period of time. It also explains why Bristol looked to be someone who was nursing last summer. She was probably nursing Trig and a few months pregnant with Tripp.

islandguy said...

Here's a little Palin humor that you might find enjoyable:

Hitler Finds Out Sarah Palin Resigns

Nova Land said...

Another well-done post! I greatly appreciate that you write these things calmly and simply, avoiding sensationalism, avoiding overstatement, avoiding rhetorical gimmickry, and just taking the pieces, one by one, examining them honestly and weighing them fairly.

If the truth ever comes out, I think this is likely how it will happen -- not by confrontations over big questions (such as trying to force Sarah to produce the birth certificate, or trying to get Cathy Baldwin-Johnson to issue a clear statement) but by getting those involved to talk freely about the small details.

Big lies are comparatively easy -- one simply issues a sweeping general statement and refuses to go into detail (as Sarah has done, and continues to do). But small lies, lies about all the little details which make up daily life, are hard.

We have no detailed accounts from Sarah of events during her pregnancy -- no stories about visiting with her sister, say, and her sister putting a hand on her belly to feel little Trig kicking away. No stories from Bristol about her life in spring of 2008 while she was home-schooling. No stories from Levy about going back and forth from the North Shore to Wasilla in winter 2008 in order to balance earning money to provide for his soon-to-be-born son with being there to support Bristol in her pregnancy and to be there for the birth of his son.

It's relatively easy for the Palins to cow the media into staying clear of questions about Trig's time in the womb by going into attack mode on how scurrilous it is for anyone to doubt she gave birth to Trig and how that's all part of the whole media unfairness thing and the whole media is against me thing, etc., etc., which gives her an excuse for refusing to talk to anyone who comes anywhere near those topics.

But there are so many areas which the Palins have to avoid if they are lying about who was pregnant with Trig but which are quite legitimate areas of inquiry and which (if they are not lying) they should be happy to talk about.

For instance: home-schooling. There are many people who believe in home-schooling, or who would like to home-school their kids but aren't sure how it works in practice and would like to know more about it. As kids who were home-schooled, Bristol and Levy could be helpful to thousands of families if they were to describe their own experiences with it.

Likewise, as someone who dropped out of school, tried to get work, lost his job because of his lack of education, worked to complete his education, and is trying to make his way in the world, Levy has a lot to share that could be useful to other kids. It would be great if some magazine or tv show were to interview him about that.

But of course in the process of talking about that stuff it would be natural for him to talk about when he was on the slopes and when he was in Wasilla. That's the kind of detail which people, when they're telling the truth, just naturally include in order to tell their story. And that's the kind of detail Sarah can't afford to have coming out if the story she's trying to sell is a lie.

Livvy said...

Audrey, My issue of Time magazine came today and I glanced over the story of SP. The authors state flatly that her pregnancy was not fake.

I thought of writing to the authors, but it would be a whole lot stronger coming from you or your team.

mlewis said...

On the subject of Levi living in the Palin house before Sarah was selected as VP candidate: Let's replay our scenario one more time. Bristol is pregnant, and then there is the issue of having to raise a child with Down Syndrome. Sarah decides to "adopt" her grandson to raise as her own son, being better able to provide medical care, bear the added expenses, and perhaps enhance her family values credentials. A win win all around. And, to make sure the story doesn't get out, better to stay on the good side of Levi, keep him around, keep him happy so he would have no reason to describe the plot. Pardon a little conjecture here, but if the kids' previous reputation was too much party and party substances, that makes for loose tongues. Better to keep him in the bedroom with Bristol so he (they) won't be so tempted to rejoin the party scene. Sarah also needed the baby sitting.
Just a guess here, not based on any facts). Would this be when they were home schooling together?

With Levi around, it was so easy for Bristol to conceive again. Especially when she and Levi are Trig's care givers, and the hormones are pumping. This time Sarah was so angry! She outed Bristol on the national campaign stage, still keeping Levi around for appearances (and to keep him quiet). We all saw how tender he was with Trig, from the new born photo to the convention kiss.

So the big question is: Why Turn on Levi?? It started falling apart after she lost; there was no further need for the charade. Or, in her bitterness at the loss, she wasn't thinking clearly. Sherri's arrest falls into the time line, too. It always seemed suspicious to me that although they had the goods on Sherri before the election, the arrest was made after the election. Maybe it was a threat to hang over Levi's head while awaiting the birth of Tripp.

To pick a fight with Levi seems like the worst thing that the Palins could do. Wasn't he being paid enough money? Was it his sister? (Didn't she give great interviews??!!) Sarah exercised power over Levi until-- well, until Levi hired a lawyer and body guard. I don't know why Sarah thinks she can win a fight with him when he can do her in with an interview or a book.

As far as using Levi, the Johnstons and just about every one else-- that seems like Sarah's typical behavior. Look how she is using that conservative website to raise money for her PAC when it is obvious that there is no future political action in Sarah's near future. She used John Coale to set up her defense fund and pay her legal expenses, while considering quitting her job as governor. (Coale was giving her advice regarding her political future). Alaska politics are filled with former friends and associates that she discarded when they were no longer useful.

There is another ingredient that makes this a real soap opera! If everything was cold and calculated, Sarah would have picked the right time for a resignation speech, and had time craft a better speech. What we saw was a breathless, scared, panicky person who was not in control. We
are all waiting to see what spooked Sarah!

Anonymous said...

I am confused. When did people start to question whether Levi was Trig's father and why?

Amy1 said...

Dee, I agree, it seems possible that Levi was "living with" or "an intimate member of" the Palins from very early in 2008 until after the RNC. Perhaps off and on, perhaps not. But definitely able to notice a lot and hear a lot via pillow talk if not dinner-table-talk or other family-talk.

Islandguy: I wondered if I was enjoying the youtube you suggested TOO much -- or I would have added the link myself.

For anyone looking at it, be sure to look a this, too (start at 2:30 for Carey saying outright that SP was not pregnant with Trig): "Michael Carey (ADN columnist) about Sarah Palin's faked pregnancy with Trig."

(The latter still has only 2900 hits, compared to 90,000 for the Hitler hilarity. We still have work to do.)

B said...

Dee said...
Levi also states in the Tyra Banks interview that he began living with the Palins right after Trig was supposedly born. ***

Thanks for finding this, Dee. I recalled hearing it somewhere.

Levi may be shopping his book just to get a $$ amount needed for the Palins to buy his and his family's silence. But can the Palins, Heaths, Johnstons, and CBJ really be the only ones who know the truth? Won't Sarah always be at risk of someone telling?

Someone suggested an Alaskan should file an ethics complaint about Babygate, since at least it would get national notice again. Would be great if it were legit, but faking pregnancy being unethical isn't good enough. I think she needs to have violated Alaska ethics law. She didn't take maternity leave for her fake pregnancy, did she? Privacy laws would keep us from knowing if she misused state health insurance. Any ideas?

Amy1 said...

GenieO: the official version is that Todd and SP are the birth parents. But photos show us that SP can't have been the birth mother. So, over time, speculation has centered on Bristol being the Mom (her maternal behavior in handling Trig during the RNC, her post-partum or pregnant look at the RNC, etc.). But since SP has rigorously maintained that SHE (SP) is the birth mother of Trig, few people have speculated on Trig's paternity.

One can make the obvious assumption by seeing Bristol and Levi as a couple, and seeing Levi kissing Trig in that famous RNC photo, but that does not constitute proof of paternity.

If Levi WERE the bio-Dad, why the hoax? Why not show the birth certificate?

But he is not the bio-Dad. He himself has never claimed to be. And if anyone DID claim that he was, they would be up against DNA paternity testing that would prove otherwise. Undoubtedly such paternity testing has already been done. By Levi, and his lawyers, if no one else.

So who is the bio-dad? And why the hoax? I say it's because the bio-dad was not acceptable to SP. And I further say that SP would like nothing better than for one and all to assume Trig is Levi's. Because then she can say she magnanimously did the hoax to spare the kids embarrassment.

But if she says that, DNA paternity testing on Trig better be able to confirm that, because it's so easy to do nowadays, and misrepresentaion (as well as the likely actual bio-dad's identity) would quickly come to light.

Darklady said...

Who was the "friend of Bristol" that sat down with her and Levi to break the news to Sarah?

Seems like said friend might be a fascinating source of information on the topic.

It seems very likely that things may have still been going essentially okay between the couple as the campaign ended -- but that the adults had decided that since the White House was lost, Bristol and the Palins could do better than Levi. Regardless of how many kids they have, I'm sure that the stress of the campaign and other personal issues were intense for the couple and neither of them had the strength or wisdom to be able to stand up against Sarah's bottomless narcissistic energy.

I can't say that I'd be wild about having Levi as a son-in-law, but I wouldn't be pushing my daughter to become an international symbol of teen parenthood so I could flex my moral muscle, either.

KaJo said...

I'd be willing to bet that Levi Johnston has already -- some time ago -- documented a sworn statement and probably recorded it on video a complete summary of what he personally has observed and heard while he was living with the Palin Family, or any other time he was with them -- to be withdrawn once his book is published, if everything is in the book -- and retained if he's holding some really incriminating stuff back (like, for a sequel? :) )

I'll also bet that news got back to Sarah Palin that Levi has done this, as insurance, and she probably found out what's IN his statement. You know what kind of insurance I'm talking about.

That would certainly explain the talk that she'd been contemplating quitting her job as Governor for some time, and what precipitated such an apparently hastily concocted speech.

Smart kid, smart attorney -- I really believe there is a Wasilla Mafia, and that it's a good idea for Levi Johnston to keep moving around and to have a bodyguard.

Amy1 said...

mlewis: not so fast with the paternity of Trig.

Levi has never claimed he was the bio-dad of Trig.

I'm with you on all the rest.

The Editor said...

I agree with those who think that Sarah's initial idea to pass off Trig as her own was to give him the access to medical care he would need for his lifetime and "enhance her family values credentials." After the election loss, she became a vicious, sore loser who sought revenge on those she thought responsible for her loss - the press and the Johnstons namely Levi, for getting Bristol "knocked up" not once but twice. It was she who pushed her daughter Bristol out into the public to promote abstinence. It backfired and caused Bristol to be the butt of jokes (Letterman.) I think Sarah has such a short fuse and such anger issues that she decided to chuck it all when she heard that certain investigators were sniffing around - again. Plus the relentless coverage from websites like this one, just sent her into orbit. She was so angry at her press conference, she was hyperventilating.

B said...


I'm generally with you, but I still think Levi is most likely TriG's bio dad. He can't say that without giving away that Sarah isn't the bio mom, and he hasn't seen fit to reveal babygate yet. Maybe he promised not to when TriG was adopted? Maybe he tries to protect Bristol?

The bio dad could be someone less acceptable to society, and Sarah could have faked pregnancy to avoid that "terrible truth." But she is impulsive, dishonest, and accustomed to getting her way. She also could have faked pregnancy to hide less terrible things since, unlike most of us, she would just assume she'd get away with it. And maybe she will.

midnightcajun said...

i couldn't believe how Levi's little comment just slid past the press.

I keep remembering that conversation in the kitchen about Levi losing "his wedding ring." I'm finding it more and more possible that Sarah forced the young couple to marry when Bristol refused to give the baby away. Then Trig was born very premature with the expectation being he probably wouldn't make it, so they held off on the announcement of his birth. Then they discovered he had DS and Sarah got the bright idea of claiming him as her own, to hide Bristol's pregnancy at 16, give herself kudos with the anti-abortion crowd, and incidentally cover the baby with her insurance.

At this point the couple were fairly close--all that bonding in the NICU. Since they were married, they lived together, taking care of Trig at the Palins' in Wasilla while the rest of the gang were in Juneau. Then, oops they did it again. What I don't understand is why they didn't simply announce that they'd been quietly married that summer?

If Sarah did have "that boy" just shacking up with her daughter in her own house, all I have to say is, Eeeww.

mlewis said...

To Amy 1: I don't know if Levi is Trig's father, but there he was holding that new born baby in such a tender way in the photo. (The photo matched Mercede holding the baby, Sarah holding the baby, all in the same setting.) That's no proof, but it is suspicious that we didn't know about that photo until Levi showed up on Tyra's show. So, whether or not Levi is the biological father, he was acting as if he thought that he was the father.

We also have those cryptic remarks from Mercede about Mommy-in-law and Triggy Bear being a little brother. There just seems to be some relationship between the two families. If Levi isn't the father, his sister acts as if she believes he is.

He moved into the Palin house after Trig was born. Two explainations: he liked sleeping with Bristol and the folks said that it was OK --or-- he thought it was his kid and he wanted to be close to him (even though, and this is a big "if" here) even though he may have signed away his rights in the "secret adoption process."

Could Bristol have had several possible candidates as the father of Trig? How about the Abba musical, "Mama Mia," which is based on the classic story of a woman raising her daughter alone, not knowing which of three possible lovers was the bio-father of the girl. It's a classic story.

So, I do agree that Levi may not be Trig's father, but his actions made him look that way. It could also be that the Palins thought that Levi was their best public choice if it was some one else.

mel said...

Sheesh, yet another lie?

Didn't SP specifically name McCain as someone who advised her on her resignation decision? At least in her written version? Here McCain says he was surprised and that he hadn't told her.

They just don't stop, these lies. Really a frightening habit she's got.

In regard to Levi's reasons for living in the Palin household way before Tripp, I side with those who say he could have done that without having fathered Trig. Esp. if he was in love with BP and wanted to help get her thru what might have been an enormously traumatic time. I often wonder about the vehemence with which SP and 1st Dud went after the trooper. Dud seemed to devote his days to nothing but, right in SP's office. Have often wondered if it was about something even more personal than the things (drinking, faking disability) that they accused him of. Something worth faking a pregnancy over.

ron m said...

NovaLand & mlewis are right on and other thoughts that the family has finally said enough is probably a very significant factor in Sarah's decision. Watching John McCain this am on Meet the Press shows his "uncomfortable " support of the Governor.

sg said...


BTW, thanks for your detailed and thoughtful answers to my question on the previous thread. I think I understand your position now.

I do wish to take issue with a couple of your points. You say that there is "zero data," "no evidence" that Levi is Trig's father. You seem to be arguing that the Levi and Not-Levi theories are on equal factual footing. I think most people would disagree with that: Levi and Bristol have a sexual history together; they were a couple during the period in question. Yes, this is only circumstantial evidence of Levi being the father of Trig. But it does make Levi Prime Candidate #1, head and shoulders above any mythical Not-Levi you've not identified.

Secondly, I would bet that a majority of commenters on this blog would say that SP's motives to fake the pregnancy were one or more of the following: sparing Bristol embarrassment; SP/TP better able to financially provide for Trig; political appeal to pro-life GOP base (with perhaps an eye to the VP nomination). Of course, there would likely be disagreement over which motive was most significant. But a list of prominent, plausible motive possibilities exists.

Yet you have rejected these plausible motives, instead jumping onto...I really don't know what, given your vague innuendos. In your previous posts, you claim that SP's motive was based on something "unholy," "awful," "distressing," and "not acceptable" about Trig's father. I'm puzzled how you can so confidently make such assertions, when you've also stated you don't know who Trig's father is, and you haven't proferred any evidence for who Mr. Awful Not-Levi might be. It strikes me that you're working backwards to solve the mystery: you've assumed "the answer" (i.e., something really "awful" took place); now you're trying to force the facts to fit your theory. But facts determine the theory, not the other way around.

I'm not saying Trig's father couldn't turn out to be someone other than Levi. It's just that Levi is the most likely candidate right now, based on what we know.

I don't know about anyone else, but you haven't persuaded me.

wayofpeace said...

MC, that's my take, too: a quiet, shotgun wedding... it's the ONLY way to explain LEVY being allowed to live in the PALIN's house. perhaps married by their pastor at the house, hush-like.

i think that explsins a lot and it might one of the msny delicious tidbit that LEVY shall offer in his book, and which $ARAH batty.

trish in SW FL said...

I'm agreeing with Amy1, and left a comment about it in the previous post.

It seems to me that most everyone who thinks Bristol is the birth-mom, is thinking the father must be Levi.

Not necessarily so--it could be someone else; we don't know for sure!

lila said...

Some Christian denominations do not believe that state marriage is valid or even religiously correct. I don't know what Palin's views are on this. It is possible that Bristol and Levi had a religious wedding only. Then there would not be religious issues with Levi "staying" with them. That would also explain the wedding ring issues. If there were records from the religious ceremony, it could also explain the fire at Palin's Wasilla church last winter after the election.

Amy1 said...

big nytimes piece on SP.

MrsTarquinBiscuitbarrel said...

I worked for more than four years as a transcriber of oral histories for two highly regarded institutions. In those days, we didn't have video to accompany the tapes. So we had to listen... listen... listen--rewinding and replaying the reel-to-reel tapes that we heard through our headphones---to discern any verbal "slips," such as the very telling one in which Levi announces that Bristol first became pregnant at "si... eighteen years" of age.

I've replayed that particular clip many times. Putting my hunches aside, the evidence clearly demonstrates to me that BP's first conception occurred at the age of sixteen.

Determining whether a comment was a "Freudian slip" would not have been left solely to me. I would have brought the matter to the head of the office, the person(s) who conducted the interview, and they then would have re-questioned the subject(s). Often such a matter would have prompted another interview to clarify the issue.

Many of the oral histories that I transcribed were sealed for a pre-ordained number of years--until the subjects' death, until the year 2000 or beyond (which seemed so far off in the '70s!), or until a time period set by the office and the interview subject. I, of course, was required to zip my lip.

That's all to say about Levi, and about my former employers, whose goal was to document history before their subjects died.

I was motivated to tell this tale because a number of the interviews (most of which took many hours to transcribe) on which I worked now have been unsealed, and now can be accessed online. That easy access is something we never could have foreseen; we imagined that researchers would have had to come all the way to the archives to read the bound volumes, and suss out any telling tidbits they might have contained.

It's a long, long trail a-winding from bulky headphones, reel-to-reel tape recorders, and IBM Selectric typewriters! But one thing remains the same--people want to tell their stories for history. And Levi Johnston is part of it, which he never might have imagined.

bike said...

You know it was funny how Sarah countered Levi's statement, but why has noone ever posed the sttement to Bristol?

Things that make you go HMMMM...

The day after his mama gets sentenced is going to be very interesting! Maybe even the same day.

Livvy said...

The MSM just doesn't get it. I watch "Morning Joe" a moment ago and they are positively "cooing" over SP. Pat Buchanan and Nora O'Donnel were just swooding over her and kept mentioning the five children. I'm about to give up hope.

Truthseeker2 said...

To B, the ethics complaint would be using the governor's office and its resources to perpetrate a hoax on the Alaskan people, to wit that Sarah was the birth mother of Trig. She had this all over the governor's website, for example.

Anonymous said...

Here's a Levi/Bristol scenario:

Bristol is pregnant with Trig. Begs to marry Levi. Sarah and Todd agree. Bristol delivers Trig, with Down's, in Jan 08. Parents reconsider. Convince "kids" that Trig will need longterm care; and that they shouldn't start out that way. Kids agree Todd and Sarah will adopt Trig.

Meanwhile Repubs are nosing Sarah. She doesn't want to air this "dirty laundry" so she cooks up a scheme (she doesn't realize she's plagerizing from tv show) to pass Trig as her own for insurance and to make the entire Bristol-Levi thing go away. Kill two birds!

All agree. And in the Palin household such shenanigans are normal procedure.

BUT Bristol and Levi fnd out that masquerading as non-parents, never-been-married-people feels dirty. A lie. They slip in public, because it all doesn't feel right. Nor are they comfortable with the lies.

BUT Sarah controls them and their baby. Sub-consciously or not, they rebel by conceiving again. . .

And what appears to us as a major conspiracy (Faked Pregnancy) is just a crazy woman's plan to rewrite the past and make it go away.

wayofpeace said...

WELL, it seems we were right about the weight and her thinning hair:

the NYT piece:

The piece describes Palin as obsessed with her critics, and under severe strain from souring relationships with Alaska legislators and encounters with the national media and paparazzi.

Perhaps the strangest details of the story come from accounts from Palin's friends about her physical deterioration:

Friends worried that she appeared anxious and underweight. Her hair had thinned to the point where she needed emergency help from her hairdresser and close friend, Jessica Steele.

Anonymous said...

At least the NYTimes piece let's loose the news that Repub. friends and advisors tried to help Palin this spring, steer a steady course-- and that she went rogue.

I'm convinced there is no iceberg. The resignation is just Palin realizing that she couldn't do the Governor job any more; and victim that she is, she blames it all on everybody else.

How can the people of AK not feel conned? That this woman would leave office with so much loot grifted at their expense?

Dinky P. said...

Maybe the church fire had to do with wedding and adoption documents? Odd that nothing has been discovered about that fire? Not even a mention that they have suspects!

B said...


I recall someone in Wasilla saying that Trooper Wooten watched the Palin kids a lot when their parents were gone, and we know Bristol was at that house when he tasered his stepson. However, if Wooten had anything to do with TriG, I think the Palins would have had him arrested for statutory rape (Bristol was 16 but he was more than three years older) rather than sweep it under the rug. I believe Troopergate was simply because they were taking baby sister Molly's side against the bad husband who cheated on her, and using the Governor's office to do it.

Levi may or may not be TriG's dad. Sarah may or may not have had a good reason to fake a pregnancy. But fake it she did.

wayofpeace said...


Republican pundits open fire on Palin... Developing...

PAT BUCHANNAN said this morning that FIRST DUDE should take LEVY to a creek and drown him for bad-mouthing his wife. WTF?

has PAT heard about the slew of the dam-of-lies to be opened wide by LEVY.

WV: expolut, as in sarah the ex pollutant!

NY tabloid chick said...

There's one element in this story that always gets mentioned and never fully explored that would seem to make everyone in the P and J families look better: Levi's wedding ring. Am I not understanding something here? Wouldn't it 'look better' if BP and LJ had been married at some point? Why wouldn't this have been touted by SP? Sure it didn't work out for them, but at least they tried, and the baby wouldn't have been born out of wedlock. I'd think that SP would love to have this one 'mitigating factor' on her side that would make this look like two kids that didn't bother with birth control.

B said...

Amy1, thanks for that NYTimes article.

They do not mention one of the most glaring of the unnecessary fights she picked with the legislature, refusing to appoint the State Senate replacement the Juneau-area Democrats requested, and instead nominating a supporter who became a Democrat it seemed just so she could appoint him. And then nominating someone else. And finally appointing a compromise at the the end of the session.

Her problem with their initial request, Beth Kertula (sp?), a Stanford-educated lawyer in the AK House whom Palin had previously worked with politically, seemed to be a perceived personal slight, that Democrat Kertula had commented in the fall that Palin was not ready to be VP.

I think this scenario showed much of what was wrong with Gov. Palin.

Suz said...

Have y'all seen this, on The Daily Beast? Palin's resignation & appointment of the wrong guy to succeed the Lt. Gov..

Amy1 said...

sg: thx for your response. You almost have me convinced I am wrong.

For me, the elephant in the room is "why do a hoax?" Levi+BP=Trig does not seem nearly compelling enough, and even advance knowledge of DS does not seem compelling enough either. To me. Plus, if it's Bristol's baby, the amnio is hard to fit in: why do it on a teen? why do it so early? why do it if you would not abort? Why accept the slight risk to the fetus if you are pro-life?

Deception is so much trouble, and so very shameful if discovered. My thinking was that such a deception, if discovered, would have meant an immediate end to her public career, so I can't see her doing it unless it was to counteract something that would disgrace the family even more greatly.

Although you are prob right that others might agree with the three motives you suggest, none of them seems worth a hoax to me.

Alex, your scenario also has me almost convinced -- but I don't see SP doing "the kids" any favors (only herself), and I don't see her going into fraud (the insurance) when the truth would not have been any worse than what she announced at the RNC, plus the truth would paint her as the rescuing Madonna who understands and deals with family problems.

To me, a hoax sill requires a more threatening beginning to be credible.

B said...


Using her office to lie isn't enough. Politicians do that. Palin needed to be advancing a personal, financial, or partisan political interest with the hoax. Protecting her political future from scandal? I think the legal case needs to be stronger than that to keep from backfiring. But thanks, and please keep thinking!

Jeanette said...

This tweet from Sarah always seemed strange to me. Why was Todd “Grateful”? It seems like a strange word to use.

"Grateful Todd left fishing grnds to join me this wkend; but now he's back slaying salmon & working the kids @ the site; anxious to join 'em!

2:01 PM Jul 5th from TwitterBerry"

Amy1 said...

See the Today Show Levi video:

--isn't 0:58 one of the photo ops that should have showed a bigger pregnancy? I recall that we had dated that photo op as being a very few weeks before the Apr 18 "delivery," and I don't recall a still photo at that angle -- sitting, showing no preg bump.

--Levi's call of $7-9M for SP's book sounded to me like little more than what he would have read in the newspapers.

--When he says things are going well now, I would have thought he'd mention Trig (although not identifying him as his son) if Trig were in fact his son.

--It puzzles me when he says "the money offered to us" "we had tons of offers" -- the "us/we" part. Suggests they viewed the whole adventure (Trig included?) as a joint project.

--and he says "us and the kids didn't want any part of that" so the joint project aspect was unraveling post election.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Molly said...

I noticed that in both interviews I saw of Levi, that he said "we" were getting offers. I thought that was an odd choice of words since the discussion was about Sarah's book deals and such. I thought perhaps he could have meant "we" as in the Palin family, of which he was so closely intertwined with that he was considered part of it, and perhaps, even secretly married into. (wedding ring?)

Goes along with Mercede being all hunky dory with GINO in those Trig photos--she definitely looked like the proud AUNT in those photos. Of course, that would have been before (?) the faked pregnancy and buying of secrecy (maybe the hush money Gryph is speculating about?) from the Johnston family.

This sure sounds far-fetched when I type it out. I still believe it more than that Sarah gave birth to Trig.

Molly said...

"anxious and underweight"

Too much Red Bull? Not enough Mooseburgers?

Guilty conscience?

Family problems?

Daughter she can no longer control?

Fear of what Levi will say next?

Rationalist said...

I think she may have meant she was grateful Todd left the fishing grounds.

NY tabloid chick said...

Dear Levi,
Please don't take this the wrong way, but I saw you on Today, and unless you learn to stop mumbling and develop some sort of 'presence' you really have no career ahead of you in modeling or acting, even if you are sort of pretty. You can't even lie convincingly (like the birth control story you tried to tell Tyra). And carpentry, while a good Jesus-like, honorable profession, isn't going to get you the money that you'll need to take care of yourself and any children you have or will have.
So can I make a suggestion to you? Tell the truth when you have someone write your book. It's the only way to make money, and whether or not you play nice with SP, she will gut you like a salmon. You can't trust her, and I know you know that. Prove the kid(s) is/are yours, and get yourself in a financial position to fight for them, because whether or not you have money, SP will put up a fight for them. You know she loves to fight and can't resist the pettiest (that means smallest) of challenges. You have killed big bears! You can outsmart this lame duck. Just tell the truth and you can rise from this mess.
The Anti-SP Pac

Amy1 said...

Jeanette -- she meant Todd was grateful that SP quit?

Rogue said...

Alex - The article states Track is registered as "nonpartisan," not "Democrat." Todd currently has the same registration.

wayofpeace said...

i happened to check the PEE ZOO as i was eating lunch. that's a bad idea.

this is the nausea-inducing BS piece that they've posted:

Sarah Palin loves God. God loves Sarah Palin.

And that is why they hate her...and Him.

And why she -- and He -- will be back.

That love, an essential part of her everyday life, holds out the hope of a return to the nation envisioned by the unapologetically spiritual generation that birthed the U.S.

Like Ronald Reagan, of whom it was said that his relationship with God "had a profound affect on how he lived, on what he did, and on those around him,"

Sarah Palin's spirituality has affected every part of her life, allowing her to clearly recognize the evil that has leached into our political and media culture.


JESUS said, take the log of your eye before you attempt to take the speck out of someone else's eye!

their HYPOCRISY rubs me RAW!

Ivyfree said...

"Plus, if it's Bristol's baby, the amnio is hard to fit in: why do it on a teen? why do it so early? why do it if you would not abort? Why accept the slight risk to the fetus if you are pro-life?"

GINO doesn't get as much pro-life credit if she didn't know about the Down's syndrome. If you are antichoice and have a Down's baby, you just have it. If you KNOW the baby is Down's, then wow, you're a hero, aren't you? We only have Sarah's word for it that an amnio was performed, and we all know what her word is worth.

wayofpeace said...

TO THE POINT. a comment at HUFFPOST:

frankel1205 wrote:

Why can't this woman understand that with FIVE KIDS, including a SPECIAL NEEDS baby, an UNWED TEEN MOTHER, and a GRANDBABY that she needs to GO HOME and take care of business there before she galavants all over the country trying to run the country?????

For the love of God, Sarah Palin, GO HOME!!! I find it incredible and ironic that conservatives call themselves the party of family values, but give adulation to a woman who has desserted her young, needful family for her own, personal, selfish political gain.

They would deride and never stop trashing any woman in the Democratic party if she had a Down's baby and an unwed teen daughter who gave birth to an out of wedlock grandchild, if she was attempting to run for any office, much less the Presidency.

Clearly, all these children need her to be there for them and she continues to flee her responsibility.
This defies logic, decent morals and good sense. But of course, that's what being a conservative is all about.

Dan G said...


"...if it's Bristol's baby, the amnio is hard to fit in: why do it on a teen? why do it so early? why do it if you would not abort? Why accept the slight risk to the fetus if you are pro-life?"

Like everybody else I had pretty much accepted what was being tossed around here and on other sites - about how an amnio is dangerous to the infant in utero. So why would Sarah have this done if she was truly pro-life?

Then today I came across a doctor's assessment of prenatal genetic testing - he says both amniocentesis (the more invasive form of genetic testing) and CVS (chorionic villus sampling) are actually considered "routine" and "neither is high risk." Both will tell you who's the "daddy" if that's something you needed to know.

His post in its entirety:

"Pre-natal genetic testing is done all of the time and is considered routine in many cases. The two methods are chorionic villus sampling (CVS) and amniocentesis. Amniocentesis is an older, more time consuming procedure that uses transabdominal needle penetration under ultrasound guidance. CVS can be performed using either the amniocentesis method or transvaginally. CVS is faster and considered the preferred method based on the location and quality of the samples obtained."

"Neither procedure is considered high risk. CVS became the preferred method largely because it is faster and considered by most to be more reliable. It takes only a small amount of DNA to do a complete genetic risk profile based on identified abnormalities. CVS is a standard procedure used in high risk pregnancies, such as a moo over 40 or where a genetic disease may be uncovered during pregnancy. The DNA testing may be ordered for several different reasons, and I have had patients that were required to submit to the procedure under court order where paternity, inheritance or other legal issues were in question. Examples include an HIV patient with a specific viral strain and another patient who slept with two brothers and there was an inheritance involved. CVS and amnio are also the only reliable methods of determining the gender of a child, as ultrasound carries a significant amount of uncertainty that is considered higher than the accepted specificity and sensitivity requirements for diagnostic laboratory and imaging procedures."

"More information at - note that "paternity testing" is included in the article."
-------end quoted post

This forum post from the doctor was on a childfree by choice forum and you can read the entire thread here: (scroll down to Dr. Dan Corelli's post)

Can any medical folks here (including Audrey!) who are experienced with the prenatal/birthing stuff speak to the accuracy of his remarks? I'm not a medical person so I can't evaluate his material to guage if it's accurate.

If it's true that most doctors consider prenatal genetic testing to determine the parentage of an infant in utero "normal" and not high risk at all, that might put a different spin on our theory that an amnio would have seemed like a big deal to Sarah, pro-life or not. Her physicians may have presented it as not being such a big deal at all.

And Sarah might have felt strongly motivated to get DNA testing done if the father of Trig was considered a controversial dad - perhaps the wrong race, perhaps Jewish, or any other type of dad who would be considered unacceptable for whatever reason. Chances are the dad was someone Sarah worried would spoil her "appeal" to her political base given that she was becoming the VP nom. So maybe it wasn't just about Bristol becoming pregnant, it was about Bristol becoming pregnant by an "undesirable," thus the relatively easy decision to get prenatal genetic testing done.


Anonymous said...

Thanks, Rogue! Sorry for my mistake about Track. . .I misread. Will remove comment, even though she did throw another child under.

bike said...

Okay, does the Bible condone politics? I'm pretty sure it says to give Ceasar's things to Ceasar and God's things to God. It certainly doesn't say to become Ceasar.

Would Jesus try to become Ceasar?

God's Kingdom is not of this earth, Sarah. Time to read your Bible, again.

Next thing you know Sarah will tell us all the lying cheating and stealing she is doing is in HIS name, lol.

If you believe in Hell, Sarah, you also got to believe you're headed, there.


AKPetMom said...

Are we sure that Track Palin didn't "accidentally" check the box that made him a member of the Alaska Independence Party (AIP)? Ya know, like his Dad did, but neglected to change for 7 years. Ya know, the party that wants for us (Alaska) to secede from the Union.

Guess it's a step up if Track just chooses to be "independent" instead of AIP.

Anonymous said...

Howdy, Amy1. You wrote, "To me, a hoax sill requires a more threatening beginning to be credible."

And it reminded me of a response I heard (on NPR's Wait, Wait,Don't Tell Me! radio show) to Palin's resignation. The host said something like, "Everybody's trying to make sense of Palin's resignation. Sense??! Sense!!??? When has this woman ever made sense!"

It made me laugh but it's true. We keep trying to explain her actions using rational thought. She QUIT the governorship like it was a checkers game. I can imagine she might perpetrate a crazy hoax with less thought than she puts to choosing the morning's shoes.

Even Levi's head may be spinning regarding the zoo he's been living for a year and a half.

NYTabloid Chick: Maybe the campaign we need to mount is emails/letters/calls to Rhett Butler!

midnightcajun said...

wayofpeace said...
i happened to check the PEE ZOO ...this is the nausea-inducing BS piece that they've posted..."Sarah Palin loves God. God loves Sarah Palin. And that is why they hate her...and Him."

I just love it when these whacko "christians" claim to know what God thinks and feels, and why people "really" hate Sarah as opposed to why they say they do. Since God supposedly loves Sarah, and they love Sarah, I guess that means that God loves them? Or that they're Godlike? Is that how they can, like, read God's mind and everyone else's? It's always so nice to be on the side of God. I'd think they were funny except that it's this kind of thinking leads to burning people at the stake, and genocide, and lots of other nasties.

Jen said...

NY Tabloid Chick -- If there were already a marriage, they may not have wanted to tout it if it were before Tripp. They didn't want anyone to know Bristol was pregnant with Trig so to announce a marriage between two teens would have raised RED flags much sooner.


Jen said...

Amy 1 -- I saw that footage of Sarah in her office on KO or something the other day. The footage I saw had her getting up and walking to her desk. I don't recall seeing it before and was SUPER confused because it was her typical "hiding the pregnancy" outfit but there is a parent of a service member flag hanging in the window. I wish I could remember where I saw the footage the other day...


Alexenjie said...

Does anyone else find it impossible to believe that anyone could be interested in a book by Levy? He is a boy who has lived a short life. I can see him writing, with help, a chapter or two, a magazine article at best, but never a whole book. The idea of it just seems so ridiculous to me. Publishers are interested in books that sell and I just can't picture his book having anything interesting to say, other than who the parents of Trig are, what the period of time was like after Sarah was chosen for VP, etc. I can't picture anything that would fill up more than 25 pages.

AKPetMom said...

Off topic but I hope that it makes people laugh...

Here are some photos of Nicole Richie, very pregnant, perhaps 7-8 months on a beach wearing a bikini, but WAIT, she has a scarf too and it's not doing much to cover her "bump".

Just another photo that proves that you can't cover a baby bump with a scarf (not that Nicole was attempting to:-)

Amy1 said...

DanG -- I hope no one on this site ever said that amnio is a high-risk procedure: it is not. It is a low-risk procedure that is sometimes used in high-risk pregnancies (and pregnancies of older women are considered high-risk, even without the other factors [like hypertension] that older people often add to the mix).

I don't recall anyone ever calling it a high-risk test here. Or dangerous, except in a very, very limited way (i.e., low risk -- a non-zero low risk). But it is not a zero-risk procedure, either. There is a small non-zero risk, as there is with any invasive procedure.

That's why any and every amnio I've ever heard of is preceded by the MD explicitly saying (and explaining, if needed): "if you are not going to act upon the results you get from this test, you should not do it." In other words, if you know in advance you will not abort an abnormal fetus, you are advised to skip the tiny risk. A low but non-zero risk.

A zero-risk test (for paternity) is doing a q-tip swipe of the cells on the inside of one's mouth. But that can be done only after birth.

Teens' risk of genetic abnormaliies in a pregnancy are low. Lower than the risk they would experience from an amnio. So one doesn't routinely do them. Unless there is a reason to think that a specific teen might have a higher risk of an abnormality (like some worrisome family history of genetic defects).

The medical oath is "first, do no harm." So if you are doing something with a very low risk of harm -- but for no purpose -- then you should avoid even that v low-risk action.

People do lots of things that put their fetuses at risk: substance abuse, speeding, falling down, etc. But an MD is not supposed to.

Can you talk an MD into doing a procedure that is not needed? Sometimes. Can you claim that satisfying your curiosity is a valid reason for putting your fetus through a tiny risk? Probably, with some MDs. Should you? The party line is "no." So it is not routine, but it does happen.

It's just odd enough to raise a red flag, which is what we've seen so often re SP's supposed pregnancy -- just odd enough to stop many of us, to take a second look, to wonder why always something odd that doesn't fit right with everything surrounding SP. Could it signal a lie?

Diana said...

Mary, I agree with you completely. I believe Levi any day over Sarah!

Midnightcajun....I think you have the story right!

B said...

Levi goes out of his way to be nice to Palin. He has said nothing that needed Stapletongue's "fiction" reply. Rex is just trying to remind people that Levi was an insider and his book will be worth $$$$$$.

Might Levi and Bristol be romantically involved again? After all, he's now worth more than the h.s. dropout she dumped.

Audrey, someone suggested a post on DS vs. FAS, since the topic keeps recurring. I suggest a post on another recurring topic: whether or not Levi and Bristol were married -- Sue's rumor, the Esquire ring, Sarah's pronouncement about no one living with her daughter, Levi's account of living with the Palins, etc. If they did marry, Sarah may have decided not to reveal that in Sept. because it might have pointed to a wedding around TriG, not TriPP.

B said...

Sarah Palin took an axe,
Gave her Party forty whacks.
When she saw what she had done,
Gave Alaska forty-one.

Amy1 said...

DanG: Also (also, too!), you said:

"If it's true that most doctors consider prenatal genetic testing to determine the parentage of an infant in utero "normal" and not high risk at all," . . .

Although amnio CAN be used to determine parentage, I have never heard of it being used for this (in reading, yes; in my real life, NO!) because the people I know are not unclear on who the parents are! No need!

In fact, we had a little joke on this site a while ago. It concerned the fact that a bit of a baby's genetic material can be compared with the Mom's and the Dad's to confirm/deny that they are the actual parents. But that there's not that much call for maternity testing. (Just the supreme obviousness of that last sentence is where the joke was: I guess you had to be there.)

Throughout history, there has been little need to prove maternity. In rare cases, absolute proof was needed where chicanery might have a big payoff and thus be suspected (like a barren queen wishing to fake a pregnancy [easy enough to do] AND a birth [almost impossible!] so as to provide the longed-for heir and guarantee her own place in the world). But other folks were on to that, so royal births were often scrupulously witnessed. Mary Queen of Scots was in such a situation at one point and her bio by Antonia Fraser goes into some detail about how it would have been impossible for MQofScots to fake a birth, given the surveillance around her.

But in the case of our little Trig, maternity AND paternity testing could well have its role. Since everything SP says is a lie, including "a," "and," and "the." (To steal Mary McCarthy's battle salvo re Lillian Hellman.)

Sorry to natter on so long. I just wanted to say that, although the non-zero risk is v small, amnio is NOT routinely used for paternity testing, and only extremely rarely for maternity testing. But it can be.

The person you quoted is exactly right in everything he said. And so were we, on this blog.

Hulibow said...

I'm just a reader who has checked in with your blog on and off since last November. I am not particularly fond of Sarah Palin and I certainly don't want her anywhere near elected office ever again (her political and religious beliefs scare me). In my humble opinion, this is how the story goes... Teenager gets pregnant in the summer of 2007. Mom and teenager take a trip to NYC but it's too late. Mom sends pregnant teenager away and plan to put baby up for adoption. Baby is born with complications in January/February of 2008 and adoption is no longer an option. McCain wins nomination. Mom wants a job and hatches plan B, the phantom pregnancy. Meanwhile, teenager and boyfriend "home school" and play house with baby. Teenager gets pregnant again. Also, too, there never was an amniocentesis, that was just a story to fire up the base (just like the abortion consideration story, although that one was partially true). Again, this is only my theory after reading this blog and looking at the photos. I only hope that someone is taking great care of that beautiful child.

wayofpeace said...


CBS POLL: just 22 percent say Palin has the ability to be an effective president. Sixty-five percent say she does not.

A majority of Americans believe that Sarah Palin is resigning as governor of Alaska not because it's in the best interest of her state but because it will benefit her political career, a new CBS News poll finds.

Just 24 percent of those accept Palin's explanation that she resigned because it was the right thing to do for Alaska.

More than twice that percentage – 52 percent – cited her political ambition as the reason for her resignation. An additional 14 percent said they don't know the reason.

Even Republicans are skeptical of the explanation, with a higher percentage saying Palin resigned for her political career (36 percent) than saying she did so for Alaska (31 percent).

Thirty-nine percent of those surveyed expect Palin to run for president in 2012, while 43 percent say she will not. If she runs, she'll likely face widespread skepticism: As CBS News revealed Monday morning, just 22 percent say Palin has the ability to be an effective president. Sixty-five percent say she does not.

Less than one in four Americans – 23 percent – hold a favorable view of Palin. Thirty-seven percent hold an unfavorable view of the former Republican vice presidential nominee. Another 39 percent are undecided.

wayofpeace said...

SARAH's 12 stupid moments. i did not know about a couple of them:

Amy1 said...

NewYorker magazine article on SP.

LondonBridges said...

I think it is possible that the pre-natal testing story is a fabrication designed to make bringing a Down's syndrome child into the world a more heroic event and a test of biblical proportions. Certainly, $arah continues to milk it.

While I have generally thought that Bristol may have been Trig's mother, my thinking has changed.

If Bristol was Trig's mother, Sarah had a golden opportunity to come clean, anytime after her election loss, even after Tripp's birth that she, Sarah, had covered for her teenage daughter, being the noble christian that she was.

Sarah would have not suffered one iota, politically.

Thus, the real truth must be more damaging to Sarah, politically.

My new theory: Sarah is Trig's mother, but she really hid her pregnancy because Todd is not the father. Sarah says Trig is mine, not ours. Trig's birth could have occurred earlier than April 17-18.

This would be politically damaging to a woman politician.

Also, Sarah & Todd may have had agreements that messing around was generally ok and Todd knows who is the breadwinner in the Palin family.

Sarah has never demonstrated any high moral standards in her public life.

wayofpeace said...


Republicans continue to trash, badmouth Palin / Daniel Tencer

“In all my years in politics, nobody has left Alaska in such a mess.”

That’s an Alaska Republican talking, and that voice is just the latest in a torrent of criticism aimed at Sarah Palin in the wake of her July 3 resignation as Alaska governor.

And much of that criticism is coming from her own party.

A report at the Daily Beast says that Palin’s resignation “has created a constitutional crisis that could cost state legislators hundreds of thousands of dollars in taxpayers’ money to resolve.”

It’ll cost at least $200,000 to hold a special legislative session to figure out who will replace Palin’s replacement, Lt. Gov. Sean Parnell.

From the Daily Beast: “Honestly, Sarah’s resignation was complete bullshit and I’m saying that as a Republican,” a Republican political veteran working in the legislature told me.

“In all my years in politics, nobody has left Alaska in such a mess. Everyone here is just shocked.” The Republican added, “There’s no choice but to hold a special session. The conflict has to be handled in an orderly way.”

Jeanette said...

Amy 1

I think you are right. In normal language someone would have said “I’m grateful Todd left the fishing grounds”. The only thing that could be more incomprehensible than twitter or Sarah language is a combination of the two!

However, this interpretation seems to add to the evidence that even if we believe Sarah that resignation had been considered for some time, the decision to make the announcement on that Friday was a sudden one. So it seems either something happened to push her into it or she was so out of control she just did it.

The money could have been the reason that she would have ultimately resigned, but I don’t think it was the reason she resigned that Friday that way.

NakedTruth said...


I think that your version is exactly the way it happened.

Great summary of events.

NakedTruth said...

Alexenjie said:

"Does anyone else find it impossible to believe that anyone could be interested in a book by Levy? He is a boy who has lived a short life. I can see him writing, with help, a chapter or two, a magazine article at best, but never a whole book. The idea of it just seems so ridiculous to me. Publishers are interested in books that sell and I just can't picture his book having anything interesting to say, other than who the parents of Trig are, what the period of time was like after Sarah was chosen for VP, etc. I can't picture anything that would fill up more than 25 pages."

This is exactly why I believe that Levi has more to tell than what we may have already considered. Below are some topics that I think he could bring up that would make for an interesting book:

1. Of course, SP's fake pregnancy and all the details surrounding it.
2. Drug use in the Palin family.
3. His relationship with Bristol and other possible sexual relationships of Bristol and others in the family.
4. Tracks real reason for joining the military and his criminal behavior.
5. Information he may know about Troopergate and Housegate.
6. Personal accounts of living in the Palin's home and sleeping with Bristol.
7. Possible marriage between him and Bristol and status of that marriage now.
8. The Palins connection with the arrest of his mother, Sherry.
9. Reveal divisive and racist comments made by the Palin clan while he was acting as part of the family.
10. Give us more insight on the vetting of Sarah for the VP nomination. How soon did she know that she would be running for VP?

Just a few things I think would make Levi's book very interesting.

wayofpeace said...

THE DAILY SHOW nails it:

Ivyfree said...

"If Bristol was Trig's mother, Sarah had a golden opportunity to come clean, anytime after her election loss, even after Tripp's birth that she, Sarah, had covered for her teenage daughter, being the noble christian that she was."

I suspect that even die-hard SP fans might wonder what's going on with an unmarried teenage daughter getting pregnant TWICE.

"My new theory: Sarah is Trig's mother, but she really hid her pregnancy because Todd is not the father. Sarah says Trig is mine, not ours. Trig's birth could have occurred earlier than April 17-18."

I think that's unlikely for the same reason that the whole Trig thing's always been unlikely. Sarah wasn't pregnant: she never LOOKED pregnant, and you can't hide a pregnancy all the way through. Remember she was working with people on a daily basis. Somebody would have noticed. She's human, despite her claims of abs of steel. She'd have a belly- and she didn't.

Ivyfree said...

"I just love it when these whacko "christians" claim to know what God thinks and feels, and why people "really" hate Sarah as opposed to why they say they do."

And frankly, I doubt if many of us truly hate Sarah Palin. I don't. I simply hold her in contempt.

johnie2xs said...

I think this kid is the "Rosetta Stone" in this drama. I also think he is going to play it out for all it's worth, and I don't blame him nor do I hold it against him. I agree with "Hammer and Feather",in that I think the kid is truthful by nature. If Sarah makes the mistake of taking this kid on, she'll end up the loser.

Go Levi!!!! We're with you,kid.

mlewis said...

If we assume that amniocentesis was performed to determine the prenatal parentage of the baby (referring to Trig)-- they would need to have Levi's DNA to compare and match. Ditto for any other parental possibilities.

How does that work? Did Bristol go around collecting cigarette butts from her boy friends? Give each a free Starbucks and hid the empty cup in her purse? What would be an acceptable genetic sample? (I'm guessing when the guy is willing to take part in the test, it is done with a cheek swab in a controlled setting).

The other possibility that we haven't considered is that it was not an easy pregnancy. The experts will have to weigh in on this one. Supposed that Bristol had unusual cramping, spotting, something outside the norm. Would they perform an amnio in this case?

At what point can they detect fetal heart sounds? Perhaps something in either the ultra sound or other diagnostic showed something abnormal. Would they do further testing with amnio? I'd appreciate the opinions of those who are more qualified to I am to discuss these possibilities. Thanks

Punkinbugg said...

Well I guess I'm one of those "Whacko Christians" who "claims to know what God thinks and feels". I can't possibly know everything, but a LOT of what God feels is spelled out quite clearly in the Bible.

That's why politicians like Palin, who LITERALLY WRAP themselves in the flag & claim to be Christians are so galling to me.

Matthew 23:27 comes to mind... "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You are like whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full of dead men's bones and everything unclean."

and this:

Matthew 6:5-8 "And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be SEEN BY MEN. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full. But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. And when you pray, do not keep on BABBLING like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words. Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him."

wv: inglorem In Glory to Him

Morgan said...


I do want to remind everyone here that Punkibugg makes a good point. A number of our readers are Christian, and being a Christian doesn't mean a person agrees with Sarah Palin. In fact, I know a number of pretty fundamentalist Christians who think she's nuttier than squirrel poo.

So let's be respectful of one another, shall we, and resist the urge to broad-brush people simply because they are Christians.

Punkinbugg reminds us of why that's not fair.

LisanTX said...

Every article that I've read about Levi's recent TV appearance states that Levi lived with the Palins in December and January.

Not one article that I've seen mentions that Levi stated he lived with the Palins BEFORE Palin was chosen by McCain for the VP candidacy.

Is there some suppression of information by powerful groups or people going on here? How can all the media miss this obvious statement, that would be BIG NEWS for a reporter to "break?"

I don't understand how Levi's statement can be ignored, missed or suppressed by all the media. Do any of you media professionals have any ideas on this issue?

Anonymous said...

I was reminded of Harry Frankfort's brilliant analysis of bullshit vs. lying by a quote from his book on mudflats blog.

While the liar deliberately makes false claims, the bullshitter is simply uninterested in the truth. Bullshitters aim primarily to impress and persuade their audiences. While liars need to know the truth, the better to conceal it, the bullshitter, interested solely in advancing his own agenda, has no use for the truth. Bullshit is a greater enemy of the truth than lies are. (ON BULLSHIT, Princeton University Press)

There was no amnio test, no Sarah pregnancy, no mono, no responsibility pledged to Alaskans. There was (possibly) a teen marriage, (definitely) two Bristol-born babies, and an op-ed piece in today's Washington Post purported to be "by Sarah Palin" that a second grader would know Palin couldn't have written much less understood.

What terrifies us about Palin is her bullshit. We learned from Bush what bullshit costs us.

Frankfort shows us that a liar is afraid of being found out. A liar has a conscience. A liar bends and stretches truth.

A bullshitter has no idea how far afield they are from reality and truth -- and the crimes they perpetrate are unfathomable in scope and absurdity. Would you ever have imagined a governor quitting? With no good reason?

We cannot accept anything Palin says or does as "truth." It's all bullshit. My suspicion (and fear) is that Levi is still trying to figure out what happened to him, because the last few Palin years have been so totally unreal.

Anonymous said...

Hulibow: love your thinking and simplicity. Yes, I totally agree with your scenario.

After months of being here with folks trying to figure Palin out, I think we're finally getting somewhere-- at least with what may have happened.

B said...

Morgan said...

I like that. You are both moderator and commentator. (And dominatrix.)

Lisan, I think the MSM was looking only for the part of Levi's comments that went to the question of the week, "Why did she quit?"

He spoke of her wish that she could take some of the lucrative offers after the Veep run, so knowing he lived in her house in Dec. explained how he would know that. They need a news-worthy excuse to include such personal details.

If the MSM were writing "The Truth about Bristol and Levi," which they never will, they would have mentioned that he said he had lived with the Palins before McCain picked her, and wondered why Sarah denied that before, and who was telling the truth.

So the W.Post has a Sarah op-ed?

Ivyfree said...

"A number of our readers are Christian, and being a Christian doesn't mean a person agrees with Sarah Palin."

But the original statement was "whack Christian who know what God thinks or feels" and believes in Sarah Palin. Unless the Christian reading is a whacko- and not all Christians are whacko- who believes in Sarah Palin, the comment did not apply to them.

For those of you who ARE Christians and were offended by the term, welcome to the world of a nonChristian living in the USA. Don't like your religion being slurred? Nobody does.

Lilybart said...

Levi must have some major dirt otherwise, who is paying Rex Butler and a personal bodyguard? If Butler is paying because he works on contingency, then Buler must feel that what they have will make lots of money.

Or, who IS paying for a full time bodyguard and personal atty??

Lilybart said...

Bristol would have no reason for prenatal testing unless a blood test or ultrasound showed something called the Nuchal fold, which is a marker for Downs. Not foolproof, so people usually follow-up with a CVS or amnio.

Still, they don't entertain aborting so no need for amnio in this case.

wayofpeace said...

AUDREY, thanks for the upgrade.

one suggestion. i looked at the HOME page as a first-time visitor would see it, and the thing that i wanted to do was ZOOM the image of the 3 sarah's on the left; the one that exposes her faux pregnancy with the dates. can that be done with the new widgets?

just a thought,

wayofpeace said...

thanks ALEX for that enlightening post on BULLSHIT: it totally applies to SARAH!

a wonderful WV: SHINE, as in TRUTH!

Lilybart said...

Alex, it's that she couldn't do the gov job AND do whatever else she wanted. WE would say she can't do the job, she would never admit that.

Dan G said...

re: Lilybart's comment:

"Bristol would have no reason for prenatal testing unless a blood test or ultrasound showed something called the Nuchal fold, which is a marker for Downs. Not foolproof, so people usually follow-up with a CVS or amnio."

There would be a reason for prenatal testing if Sarah was desperate to determine who was the daddy of Bristol's (or her own) baby. As in - Bristol dating two guys with one of them being "unacceptable" as baby daddy or Sarah wondering if her own baby daddy was the guy she was allegedly having an affair with (in case it wasn't Todd's.) They could always tell the doctor some story about why they needed to determine parentage - especially if it was a doctor in Sarah's "pocket" willing to do whatever she asked.

Amy1 said...

DanG -- neither SP nor anyone else needs to make up a story for the MD -- it's all confidential, just like with a lawyer or a priest.

But Dan, how can you say "her own baby" after you look at this (and other photos that show she was NOT pregnant)?

Ivyfree said...

"There would be a reason for prenatal testing if Sarah was desperate to determine who was the daddy of Bristol's (or her own) baby."

I'm less interested in who the father is than who the mother is!

Amy1 said...

Ivyfree: YES! that's what "ze leetle joke (djoke)" was about: not many situations where you need a maternity test!

As one of my kids said recently: "We've got a situation here." Yup.