Tuesday, August 4, 2009

Go Ahead. Make my Day

The title, as I am sure you all know, is not mine. It belongs to Harry Callahan (a.k.a. Dirty Harry) and is from the 1983 film Sudden Impact. It's probably one of the most famous single movie quotes ever.

"Go ahead. Make my day."

Approximately five days ago, Gryphen on his Immoral Minority blog reported that he'd been told by a source in Wasilla that Sarah and Todd Palin were splitting up. He also reported several other pieces of info, including:
1. Sarah Palin had purchased property in Montana.
2. Sarah Palin had pitched her wedding ring into a lake.

Within hours, Dennis Zaki had stated that he was able to confirm Gryphen's information (at least the splitsville part) with a former Palin staffer.

Within a few hours more, Gryphen had received a letter from Palin attorney Thomas Van Flein, which threatened to sue him and asked him (oh so politely) if he'd rather be served papers at home or at the "kindergarten where he works." Since school is not even in session it was a ludicrous question asked for one reason only: to threaten and intimidate him.

Since then, numerous right-wing fundamentalist blogs have delighted in republishing Gryphen's private information. Not only that, but at least one has contained explicit allegations (claiming first hand knowledge) that Gryphen is a pedophile, warnings to parents to keep their children away from "this demon," and (helpfully) providing the blog's readers with the email addresses of many of Gryphen's fellow teachers so that they, too, could be contacted and presumably warned about the MONSTER in their MIDST.

This is all incredibly disgusting. Sarah Palin drew far more attention to the story by squawking about it than Gryphen ever could have. And, somewhat lost in the entire shuffle is of course, the fact no suit has been filed.

Palin has threatened to sue bloggers before. One, Shannyn Moore responded by standing in front of Palin's office in Anchorage, with a group of reporters and said, "Ok, so sue me." I'm sure you're all waiting with baited breath to find out what happened that time. Yup, you guessed right. No suit that time either.

But at least these guys got threatened. But what I find even more interesting are the issues she's never even threatened to sue over. Is there a pattern there? I think so.

There've been a couple of these. National Enquirer claimed during the campaign that they'd watched a video of 15 year old Bristol smoking pot and laughing about her mother being the future governor. They made very explicit statements about Track's involvement with drugs as well. These were not only fairly serious allegations, involving illegal behavior, (which divorce is not) but also involved two of Mama Grizzly's cubs. Threats to sue the National Enquirer? Not a mention. Could it be... gasp... that there really IS a video tape? That the info about Track was accurate?

Ditto for allegations that Sarah OR Todd OR both have had affairs. That's not gonna play too hot with the family values crowd, but again not a whisper of legal action. Another gasp. Maybe there really were some affairs?

And then, we have the elephant in the room: The topic we have come to call Babygate. The allegations that Sarah Palin faked a pregnancy in the spring of 2008 and did not give birth to Trig Palin on April 18, 2008.

Unlike the stories about Bristol smoking weed and Sarah and/or Todd looking for a little strange, (neither of which I believe Ex. Gov. Palin has ever mentioned or addressed) she's mentioned the allegations about Trig many times. She's brought the "answer" up in interviews even when no one asked the question. I have made very strong statements. I and others have accused her flat out of being a liar. Yet neither I nor numerous other bloggers who have looked at the discrepancies in her story has ever been threatened in any way.

Even her fans have noticed this. On numerous boards and forums that support Sarah Palin, many people have wondered and commented. "Why doesn't she sue?" "It's time to sue." "Why doesn't she do something about these crazies?" "Why doesn't Sarah DO something about this?"

Ummm, let this crazy give you a little clue. Truth is an absolute defense against libel. If Gov. Palin sues someone concerning allegations that her pregnancy was not "as reported," the burden of proof is on her (as plaintiff), not on the defendant. She would have to prove she gave birth to Trig. And just saying, "Trig is mine because I say he's mine and I wouldn't lie" might be a closer for Team Sarah, but it isn't going to cut it with a judge.

The defendant would have the right to subpoena just about anyone he wanted for depositions. Sarah and Todd for starters, but the list might soon be long (and most impressive.) Use your imagination. Who would you like to talk to? Cathy Baldwin-Johnson? Definitely. Andrea Gusty? Oh yeah. Flight attendants on the two four hour flights she took from Texas back to Alaska with her water leaking the whole time? You betchya.

In addition, she'd have to produce medical records and, of course, produce a certified copy of an official state birth certificate. Maybe even a DNA test. And, as I have been saying for months, she either can't or won't produce any of this.

For starters, does anyone here really think that Dr. Baldwin-Johnson will risk her medical license by lying under oath? So far, she probably (probably) has only skirted the edge of medical ethics issues. But if she's subpoenaed, she's going to fold like a K-Mart lawn chair. Palin knows that...

So, in the words of that great sage, Harry Callahan, "Go ahead. Make my day."

100 comments:

Matt said...

How can she sue an anonymous blogger?

mlewis said...

Dear Audrey (and team),
I have been a faithful follower of your website (almost) from the time it started. I stayed because you write well, you address issues with fact, photos and information, and you do not descend into that deep well of personal attacks. If anything, it has been strict here, but for good reason. You have maintained a good atmosphere for fair and honest discussion. And, I think that you have made your case very well.

I also remember a website which followed after yours, enhancing Palin photos to show a perfectly flat tummy while wearing hard to photograph black-on-black outfits. Morgan did such a believable job that when she suddenly disappeared, I was quite surprised. And, I was concerned that anyone who took a brave stand against the then-governor was a likely target for the same kind of trouble.

So, yes, it is more than suspicious that when you consider the threat to sue Shannyn Moore for repeating a well known rumor, the threat to fire David Letterman for a tasteless joke, and all of Sarah Palin's other threats, thankfully, there don't appear to be any headed this way. As you say, to make her legal case, she would have to produce the evidence of her giving birth to Trig, not to mention the fact that you really knew it all along, and kept writing this blog despite knowing the truth of the matter.

As Gryphen's followers write to him with notes of encouragement, I am doing the same here, to tell you that I appreciate the thorough work that you do and the format you provide to discuss it. And, my thoughts for your safety (physical and mental) are always there, too. Best wishes, and keep up the good fight.

Amy1 said...

"Sudden Impact" is 1983; it's "Dirty Harry" that's 1971.

Sarah in SC said...

Popping the popcorn & throwing in some Junior Mints! :)

"This is gonna be good, I can tell!" (Dory, from Finding Nemo)

Thank you, Audrey. I just can't wait til this is all out in the open.

Michael said...

Your commentators seem to like their new hero-which do they most approve of his purported mastubation techniques or his purported gay underwear choice (as per his site-supposedly).They should however get the facts straight-"Palin" did not threaten to serve a lawsuit at a kindergarden-he was simply given the choice of venues by her lawyer. Cheers

The Editor said...

I run a blog myself and I recently received an e-mail from a lawyer claiming that I would be sued by a certain town official whom I had alleged had been fired from a previous job for incompetence. The lawyer asserted that what I published was "a blatant lie." I had 14 days to print a retraction. I posted similar information on my site about what I would be able to do to defend myself e.g. ask for documents and statements from previous employers, etc. Never heard another word again and never received a hard copy of the demand. As you stated, the truth is the best defense in such a situation. BTW, where is Sarah? What happened to the Qwitter?No photos of a PDA with her and Todd? For such a fame whore, she certainly is quiet. It makes me think that the reports are true.

Eileen said...

Don't forget she'd have to produce DNA and perhaps hubby as well to show parentage. And if there was no birth certificate then since she was Governor- she'd have to answer why her Vital Statistics department doesn't have it on file etc. Oops. Can't "fix" everything,XGINO.
By the way, Happy 48th Birthday, President of our United States, Barack H. Obama of Chicago via BIRTH in 50th state of Hawaii with interesting travels and well-bred upbringing in between. Bless your parents, grandparents and great family. From a 49th state resident.

Veritas said...

It really is that simple.

Sarah Palin is NOT the birth mother of Trig Palin and Sarah Palin was NOT pregnant in 2008.

Palin will never file a lawsuit because she cannot prove what never happened.

Sarah Palin is a liar and a fraud.

Ivyfree said...

The other illegal claims that Gryphen made- and I keep repeating this- is that Sarah was using her office as Governor to put pressure on Sherry Johnston. That's what she did with Walt Monagan (sp?) and it's not a stretch to believe she'd do it to Sherry. And why Sherry? Maybe because Sherry's son knows a lot about infant Trig, and the threat of going to jail is a way to keep her quiet?

The other allegation is that Todd pulled a gun on Levi.

Interesting, both these issues could so easily pertain to Babygate, and she hasn't threatened to sue over them. They're illegal, and they were stated in the same story as Splitsville, but she's not threatening to sue over them.

NY tabloid chick said...

*** Michael said...
Your commentators seem to like their new hero-which do they most approve of his purported mastubation techniques or his purported gay underwear choice (as per his site-supposedly).They should however get the facts straight-"Palin" did not threaten to serve a lawsuit at a kindergarden-he was simply given the choice of venues by her lawyer. Cheers***

Why, cheers to you too also, you betcha! I'll just speak for myself here: I don't have any 'new hero'; I'm not interested in anyone's masturbation techniques; I'm not sure how underwear could be attracted to same-sex underwear, but if it is I'll have to do a bit of surveillance in my drawer-drawers to make sure there's no naughty monkey business about; and of course, you know a lawyer doesn't offer a choice of venues for serving papers, especially when one venue is not currently applicable (I assume school's out in AK for summer), unless such choice is offered as a courtesy. Cheers!

GenieO said...

I couldn't say it better than mlewis already has, so I'm chiming in with my praise, support, and encouragement.

wayofpeace said...

and speaking of -GATES, here comes GIFTGATE: at MUDFLATS i found this comment by PD blogger, sjk from the belly of the plane:

APOC is giving Palin until Aug. 17 to make public “information related to the dollar amount of the discounts from Arctic Cat,” as well as any gifts received in 2008 that she has not reported, said Holly Hill, the agency’s director. Hill found that the state law Palin cited in arguing for an exemption from the Arctic Cat disclosure “only protects information submitted under the Alaska Gasline Inducement Act, and does not apply in this matter.”

the Alaska Public Offices Commission has refused Palin’s request to keep secret the discounts that come from her husband’s Arctic Cat sponsorship. APOC also said Palin needs to disclose all the gifts she received last year, rejecting her interpretation that she doesn’t need to until after she gets around to actually opening the gifts.

twodot said...

baited breath

Should be "bated breath". From Shakespeare, I believe. Might refer to a falconry term(Oxford English Dictionary: "To beat the wings impatiently and flutter away from the fist or perch").

passinthru said...

If McCain's team had put as much energy into checking out the credentials (and Skeletons) of MsPalin as his supporters do in disrupting town meetings and targeting civilians for supposed "crimes" (which behavior is too similar to Kristallnacht for my taste, frankly), none of us would be here. She'd still be running small grift against the people of Alaska, and shortening her skirt for GOP bigwigs.
They won't come after you with lawyers, Audrey. That doesn't mean they won't come after you. :(

Judy said...

Just wanted to offer my support and appreciation for your website and diligence in getting this story out. mlewis said it best above, and I couldn't agree more. One way or another the truth will come out, and I'm guessing it's even more bizarre than we think (if that's possible).

wayofpeace said...

FYI: LOL over the last sentence: typical SP, a chronic bullsh*tter.

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin tells POLITICO that widespread blogosphere reports about a possible divorce from her husband, Todd, are “made up.”

In a brief telephone interview on Tuesday night, Palin quipped that she loves finding out “what’s goin’ on in my life from the news.”

“Do you want to talk to Todd?” she teased. “He’s sitting right next to me.” But he didn’t come on the line.

Molly said...

What mlewis said.

:)

Dangerous said...

On the previous thread, LisaG inquired as to the availability of Two Babies on Kindle.

I have pursued that option as there is a company that will distribute the book that way. They also provide distribution through major houses so that bookstores can order it, and it will be available directly through Amazon. The downside is that there's hardly any money in that method, and the book is print-on-demand, rather than ready to ship.

I have the option to have that firm distribute only for Kindle, and I will probably take them up on that within a couple of months. In the interim, I'd encourage anyone interested to order now, and to post reviews on Amazon and suggest the novel to others, particularly anyone who is dubious about Babygate. As a fictionalized version of the real events we've experienced, they will be more likely to accept the reality behind the story.

Audrey's post brings up some good points about reputation torts, but our problem remains the same. If SP were to sue someone, that would bring media coverage and the opportunity to air some of the facts surrounding Babygate. That's what has to happen. All the MSM pundits know about it, but don't talk about it. And they talk about everything else, whether the underlying facts are accurate or not!!

As a comparison, last night on CNN they interviewed a Boston cop who was fired for a racially offensive email he sent in response to an editorial about the Dr. Gates thing. He and his lawyer were suing, although he had no case and he couldn't deny what he had written. He only defended that the didn't "intend" to offend. Yet, CNN interviewed him.

Someone has to go on CNN or whatever and air this stuff. I suggest Gryphen do it, since Gryphen can claim aggrieved status on right-wing bloggers spreading lies, and SP's lawyer threatening to sue. Gryphen can claim it is really about Babygate, not the divorce thing. That will open the door.

If Gryphen or anyone else finally gets to air the Babygate evidence, reliance of Bx2 would kill the effort, since MSM has decided (probably correctly) that that isn't true. It's not incumbent on us to determine who Trig's mother is. SP must prove that she gave birth to him, or at least that she really was pregnant if birth evidence is too indelicate for her. She must do so because the evidence we can confirm is inconsistent with the behavior and appearance of a pregnant woman, and consistent with a woman who was faking a pregnancy.

It is possible that the attention will flush out documentation that will show SP really was pregnant after all, as unlikely as that seems based on the evidence we have now. It could be a one-in-a-million pregnancy. But then she's open to charges of recklessness in the Wild Ride. And we can all turn out attention to other stuff.

Dan

NakedTruth said...

It was reported earlier this week that President Obama gets 30 death threats per day which is a 400% increase over George W. Bush. People like Sarah Palin's divisive rhetoric and lies incite the extremists to make these death threats. Remember the statements at her rallies. Palin must be stopped and I still believe that babygate is the key to stopping her.

Sarah will never sue over babygate. She only mentioned it the few times she did because she knew the journalists she was speaking to would not question her further. Even Bristol on The GVS show when asked by Grettal what was the most horrible rumor she experienced would not state babygate but stated something stupid like people saying that it wasn't her choice to have Tripp. You just can't tell me that Bristol knew nothing about babygate and that she thought this 'madeup' rumor was worst than babygate. Now come on, what teenager wouldn't be pissed if a rumor was that her brother was actually her son and it wasn't true?! Just doesn't sound right to me.

Keep up the good work Audrey and team. I really do hope that the Palin camp sue you. Like you, I really doubt we will see that happen.

Oh yea, I wonder will they sue Dan/Dangerous for his book TwoBabies? I know it's fiction but it's definitely based on the Palin's lives. I doubt that too. I am sure it is just too close to the naked truth.

Alex said...

The very juvenile attack on Gryphen proved one thing to me: that AK people around Palin may well have reason to fear her wrath. We've always wondered why people who know things don't speak up.

And Dan's got a point. The coverage the Obama birth-certificate maniacs have gotten is like something out of a bad thriller. So where is the coverage of the reasoned, calm argument demonstating Palin's non-pregnancy?

Well, Mizz Audrey, you've done their work for them. If this post doesn't incur the attention of a wider audience, I'll be more baffled than ever.

Skeptical said...

Please read Alaska Rules of Civil Procedure in which Service of Process is provided for under Rule 4. The rule specifically calls for service to an individual's home address and absent that, the court can order service by other means that are reasonably calculated to give the individual notice of the claim against him/her.

I don't see anything here allowing for service at one's place of employment when his home address can be ascertained. Pulling stunts like that are nearly always for show and not because the person's home address cannot be obtained.

HollyP said...

Don't forget the subpeona for the airport security cameras past which SP supposedly waddled leaking amniotic fluid.

The behavior re: Gryphen is frightful. And thanks for clearing up the question I had: Do kindergarteners attend school year-round in AK?

midnightcajun said...

Audrey, if I remember correctly the McCain camp did threaten to sue the NE over the Hansen affair story, but they never followed through on it. It's a pretty standard tactic: get your denial into print and make it seem stronger by threatening to sue.

I think one of the reasons she hasn't threatened to sue over babygate is that the information simply exploded all over the internet when she was chosen as VP. (Does anyone know who actually started it?) It was too late to try to put the genie back in the bag. Her threats to sue Shannyn and Gryphen were attempts to nip damaging information in the bud. Or maybe they were the opposite--attempts to attract more media attention and simultaneously bolster her "they're picking on me" credentials.

But the last thing she'd want to do is sue Palins Deceptions. What's involved here isn't just a one line "rumor", but a cesspool of deceit. A lawsuit or even the threat of one would send a flood of traffic to your site (probably crash your server!), where many, many people would discover a ton of information that would make them realize this "crazy conspiracy theory" isn't so crazy after all. In fact, it's not actually a conspiracy; it's just a cheap lie.

rmclement2001 said...

I am beginning to seriously wonder if the divorce story was a plant devised by SP to prove that bloggers "make things up." People argue that SP isn't intelligent enough to think through a deception like that - but she does have a reptilian brain kind of cunning that has helped her to survive up to now. That doesn't mean to say I would be surprised to find her relationship with TP was on the rocks.

Another point - I'm struck by the fact that every day on my home page there are headlines suggesting that so-and-so may be pregnant. Strange that there were never any rumors that SP was pregnant in late '07, early '08, but there were rumors that BP was.

Ivyfree said...

"The very juvenile attack on Gryphen proved one thing to me: that AK people around Palin may well have reason to fear her wrath."

The attacks on Gryphen have been juvenile so far, and the gods know I hope they'll stay so. However, there is a possibility that they won't remain juvenile, and Alaska residents seem to have a lot of guns.

A 400% increase in death threats from Bush to Obama seem to indicate that conservatives are more apt to be a threat of violence than liberals are.

mlewis said...

Regarding Sarah's threats to sue somebody: I think that she does it for several reasons:
1. First, emotional. Sarah is purely reactive, lashing out at any comment made about her. ("I don't shop at Bloomingdales," when the joke was about buying slutty flight attendant makeup. Sorry, flight attendants, you are always very well made up).
2. Sarah screams at the lawyer, sue them. It's the same as telling your big brother to beat them up.
3. It attracts media attention for her, because Sarah is about keeping her name in the media. Good news, bad news, it doesn't matter as long as they spell her name correctly.
4. It produces donations. Thank goodness for John Coale. Previously, the money was just showing up at her house and had to be stored in boxes. Now, it's in an account administered by her BFF, with no particular oversight. (The lawyer is glad to do Sarah's bidding because he is enjoying a steady flow of income).
5. Can't say it often enough. Sarah has thin skin. Whether it is a joke, a rumor, or sometimes the truth, she just can't let it go.

As someone else noted here, Sarah doesn't have to sue to keep people quiet. Remember the strong arm tactics involved with her former brother-in-law. We're making our own guesses about Sherri Johnston, and for that matter, Levi, too, also. So, Audrey, we know that you are very careful about how you post things, but still, watch your back and be careful! We want to keep reading your blog until you write the definitive chapter of Two Babies, the Nonfiction version.

sjk from the belly of the plane said...

if all of the like minded blogs all start pushing the Babygate issue and she doesnt sue, that will may finally draw the attention of the MSM.

wv=probly

Shayfray said...

Articles about the 2008 campaign suggested that the GOP brought out their big gun lawyers to help Palin "navigate" certain scandals and then left her with the bill.

Perhaps Palin learned from this experience that any personal embarassments could be made to disappear with the help of big time lawyers and legal threats.

Her recent behavior leads me to believe that she is still of that mindset but does not realize 1) the value of discretion in legal threats; 2)that Van Flein is no hot shot GOP lawyer; 3) lawyers power comer from deep pockets with motives/incentives to pull strings (a la Coale or Murdock).

P.S.
Shayfray=previously Palin Pregnancy Truth. I've been lurking and haven't commented in a while but I most certainly have not disappeared or given up on the truth being exposed.

Alex said...

Ivyfree--

The ones with guns are juvenile as well just more frightening and dangerous.

(The behavior we're seeing in right wing extremists is perfectly outlined in the lower levels of Kohlberg's Stages of Moral Development. Appropriate behavior for children who may not know better, not adults. "I'll hit you if you do that again,stupid. . .")

Emily said...

Audrey, please don't forget your twitter account. It's great for creating buzz and you also don't have the burden of writing a long blog post (not that I don't like them). It would be great if at the very least you could tweet when you put a new post up here. Thanks, and thanks for all that you do.

MrsTarquinBiscuitbarrel said...

midnightcajun, I believe the seminal (as it were) Babygate post was ArcXIX's extensive diary posted on DailyKos on August 31, 2008. I read it there that day, and still kick myself for not printing it out. If you search for it, on the Kos website at least, it is long gone.

NakedTruth wonders "will they sue Dan/Dangerous for his book TwoBabies? I know it's fiction but it's definitely based on the Palin's lives." There's a long tradition of writing roman a clef novels based on actual events; I don't know of one in which the author was prosecuted. Most memorable to me at the moment is To Die For by Joyce Maynard, later made by Gus Van Sant into a movie starring Nicole Kidman.

Maynard tried to get in touch with Pamela Smart in prison and didn't succeed. She decided to avoid getting involved in any way with a murderer, writing a story very close in concept to the true story of a New Hampshire high school teacher who convinces her teen lover to kill her husband. I recommend both the book and the movie of To Die For. Usually I mourn movies-based-on-books because of how much has to be left out, but Van Sant and Buck Henry, who wrote the screenplay, work wonders. Trivia note: Maynard plays a cameo role in one scene as Kidman's attorney.

Come to think of it, the main character in To Die For is a small-station broadcaster. As played by Kidman, she shows all of the desperation for perpetual attention and glory as... oh, what's her name? Briefly worked as a local sportscaster? Ran for VP?

sg said...

Bill O'Reilly covered the SP vs. Gryphen matter on his TV show Tuesday evening, 8/4. He had his two lawyer friends, Lis Wiehl and Megyn Kelly, on for the show's "Is It Legal?" segment.

You can find the video here; click the "Is It Legal?" tab, then look for "Vicious Attack." The SP segment is the first three minutes.

http://www.foxnews.com/oreilly/index.html

Basically, they were debating whether or not SP had a winning defamation case against Gryphen. BOR said the show had talked to SP's attorney: "they're angry, they may go." Megyn Kelly defended SP, "who could blame them?" if they wanted to sue. She referred to Gryphen as a self-described Trig Truther (yes, she did say it), a nut. She said SP's case was "tough, but they might have a way." But MK only would answer "maybe," in answer to BOR's saying that Gryphen's statement was indeed reckless and with actual malice. Lis Wiehl, on the other hand, said emphatically that there was absolutely no way a suit could succeed. MK disagreed, but not strenuously: "well, I don't know." BOR, summing up, pronounced that SP should absolutely sue, since otherwise the attacks will never stop.

Helen said...

Oh, there's the kiwi MICHAEL up there, who is so quick to point fingers and accuse others of a Palin obsession. Funny Michael that you've apparently read your way through all the Palin sites very very carefully! Must keep track of all those obsessors, right?

Michael the facts are very straight - Palin de facto threatened to serve a lawsuit at a kindergarten that wasn't even in session through her lawyer. A threat can be made in the form of a choice. In this case that was how it was done.

Cheers!

Chi Town Mom said...

Am I correct that no one around here has the original post/pictures from the ArcXIX post? I have only heard about it and would love to see it.

mlewis said...

Anchorage Press has a new article, The Book of Levi (you know who) on their website: http://tinyurl.com/kjgrk7

There isn't much new information in there, but it paints of different picture of Levi's relation with the Palin Family. He says that when he was 17, Bristol got pregnant (with Tripp). They told her parents on May 5. (I can't remember if Levi is the same age as Bristol or older. He said that they were in the same grade in school, started dating when they were 15.)

He claims to have been living there (with pregnant Bristol) when Palin was chosen as VP candidate. Remember all of the discussion about missing wedding rings. Could there have been a quiet wedding in there someplace?? If so, was there also a quiet divorce? In any case, when it was over, it was over with a certain amount of ill feelings.

Levi said that he didn't ask to be in the situation; this was the card that he was dealt. Well, we are all mature here, and the thing is that at whatever age kids decide to have sex, they do take on the adult responsibility of the consequences. They aren't dealt the cards; they are supposed to be in control-- at least to have some information and some form of protection if they are not planning on starting a family at age 15. Both Bristol and Levi could have prevented "the cards they were dealt." The only thing that Levi had a choice in was his relationship with Bristol. He did not have any choice in the grandparents of his child. If he has a story to tell, he had better cash in quickly. I think that his 15 minutes are almost up.

Bretta said...

Audrey You're My Hero, I am so happy for all your hard work. Thank God for you.

wayofpeace said...

can you smell the IRONY at the PEE-ZOO:

"Obama himself can put to rest this conspiracy nonsense any time he wants to. All he has to do is release his official birth certificate (not the "certification of live birth"). John McCain released his.

"What’s the big deal? It’s not an invasion of privacy. It’s just a document. What’s the problem?"

Ivyfree said...

"but it paints of different picture of Levi's relation with the Palin Family. He says that when he was 17, Bristol got pregnant (with Tripp)."

I am looking forward to reading the article when I get home. I was under the impression that Bristol is a few months younger than Levi. If Levi was 17, then it's likely that Bristol was 16... which links it to his answer to the question in the past, how did Sarah take the news of Bristol's pregnancy. He answered that she took it the way you'd expect the mother of a si...er, eighteen year old who'd just gotten pregnant would take it.

If Bristol was 16 when she got pregnant, then that pregnancy isn't Tripp.

Dangerous said...

"Gryphen's statement was indeed reckless and with actual malice."

This kind of intent is easy to state, nearly impossible to prove. And the GOP spinners are experts at malice, with a tinge of truth to protect themselves.

SP is a public figure upon whom all sorts or abuse, valid and otherwise, has been laid. Picking out one, easily rebutted item and writer will make it virtually impossible to convince an impartial jury. A judge would probably grant a motion to dismiss.

"Trig Truthers" huh? Okay, Megyn Kelly. Prove she's Trig's mother. Just shut up until you prove Sarah Palin gave birth to Trig. Then you can call us names. Until then, you're a coward.

Dan

Vaughn said...

Daily Kos deleted this diary by ArcXIX but I found it here.


http://tinyurl.com/mhhlhf

spintest said...

Politico.com reported yesterday: Palin Calls Divorce Rumors "Made Up":

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0809/Palin_calls_divorce_rumors_made_up.html


After this story was published online yesterday, Mike Allen at Politico.com appeared on MSNBC to report on the interview he got with her about the divorce, and it supports a hunch I've had since I first heard about the divorce (more on that after the link) -- Yeah, 'made up' by Palin!:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGYd-BTxn1A


Palin, in NYC with her kids her husband, and her spokeswoman (who is Meg Stapleton actually working for, anyway, and who is paying her salary?) to meet with her publisher.

Palin was having dinner with her lawyer in a restaurant that is a high profile journalists' hangout (where you go to be seen and, hopefully, written about) and had "one of her aides" call Politico's Mike Allen at home, late at night/early in the morning to offer him an interview right then (sometime after he had gotten home at 10:45 pm and gone to bed; the phone call woke him up). But only if he agreed to ask her 2 questions and only those 2 questions. One was so she could answer that the divorce rumors were "made up" .


I've been convinced since I heard the divorce rumors that Palin, herself, started them (and possibly other ones in the last few weeks) just so she could have some vehicle to remain in the public eye, get almost daily coverage in the media, and denounce "those darned media, who make things up".


I think Palin has adopted this strategy as it "kills two birds with one stone": She knows that something is in the pipeline that really is damaging and will end her political ambitions and comeback, but she thinks to lay the groundwork of having had denied "crazy rumors" for months is effective damage control -- It would allow her to initially denounce the story, give her some control over the timing to try to manipulate the reaction and effect.

The woman is beyond pathetic.

After William Shatner's 'beat' reading of her speech (and subsequently, her Twitterings), I came to the conclusion that whatever designs she has on national public office are really over because there's only one thing in politics that you can't come back from. And it's not that old saw about a politician's career ending only if he's caught in bed with a dead woman or a live boy. It's if you've become a laughingstock.

While Palin's been that, a bad joke, to so many of us for so long now, the media has been reluctant to report her realistically and have assisted in the vetting of her as competent and legitimate for the "spare" job. That's starting to change -- The media is now turning her into a punchline.

While that's hopeful, it's nothing that I would or will count on, and hope Audrey doesn't either. Because I could always be wrong, she might manage to pull out this scam (with enough help from big time conservatives who see using her as their ticket) and re-mesmerize the media into legitimizing her as a national leader.

spintest said...

As long as we're scrutinizing photographs, has Levi always had these marks on his face?

http://www.anchoragepress.com/content/articles/2009/08/05/news/doc4a7a01f225810255520505.jpg

Chi Town Mom said...

Thanks, I found the Kos diary. Nothing that we haven't already seen. The other thing that I found interesting in the new Levi article was it's claim that in Dec Levi's mom was arrested, Bristol/Levi broke up, and Levi wasn't allowed to see his son. If Tripp was (supposedly) born the last couple of days in Dec, it seems odd to lump this together in such a way without mentioning Tripp actually being born. Unless Levi was not allowed to see his OTHER son.

hrh said...

Vaughan, didn't know about this article and was shocked. And Babble Spice isn't suing over THIS?!?!?! Boy, that sure do say a lot, don' it?

wv: soreli Not sister (Sorella), Dummy, DAUGHTER! (Figlia)

mel said...

From new interview w/ Levi: "And the Palins didn’t seem to fight back—there were a couple snarky comments from Palin spokeswoman Meghan Stapleton, but for the most part, other than Bristol becoming an “abstinence ambassador” for a non-profit, the Palins were quiet. “They’re smart,” Levi says. “They know I know things. I can tell you [Sarah’s] not happy with me, but she can’t do anything about it.”

I like hearing this from Levi, finally.

spintest said...

Palin's response to the divorce rumors and the missing wedding ring was that “it's in Todd's pocket cause it hurts sometimes when I shake hands and it gets squished."

You wear a wedding ring on your left hand, and shake with your right.

Can Palin produce her wedding ring? Has anybody seen her wearing it since she said that? Can she produce it?

I know that wedding rings are fairly generic, and hers doesn't look unique or special from what I'm able to see in photographs. Does anybody know if there's some identifiable engraving or marking on the original so that she couldn't just go out and buy a new one?


She has said she bought it for $35 in Hawaii (along with a $35 marriage license--everything was '35') in 1988? It looks to be 2mm. Mine is 8mm and cost $50 in 1978 at a Zales-type store. I assume hers, like mine, is 14k gold, which does take on a used patina (those little nicks and scrapes after years of being exposed to the frontline activity of your life through your hands) that polishing does not buff out. If she got a new one to replace it, it would definitely look new, even if she tried to rough it up.

I found this photograph of Palin taken one week after the election, on November 12, 2008, in Miami, Florida:
http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/0dEh7kS3MW9Ot/520x.jpg

The ring looks loose enough to fall off, which seems strange since fingers and feet tend to swell in hot, humid climate. My fingers swell when I go to Miami (or any hot, humid climate) and during and after riding on a plane.

I know she lost weight during the 2008 campaign, but she wasn't nearly as thin as she's been lately. That would have made more sense as an excuse for not wearing it than to say it was due to swelling from shaking hands (wrong hand for shaking).

Molly said...

Ach!!

For the wizbang site, it's htm on the end, not html. I thought it copied wrong and I added the l on the end.

http://wizbangblog.com/docs/Daily-Kos-Sarah-Palin-Smear.htm

Use this one instead!!

WV--cyterrav Nerdy Cyberterrorist?

Kenneth Mark Hoover said...

Keep fighting Audrey.

Republican jabber 24/7 about "family values" and "personal responsibility." You are showing them up for the hypocrites they are.

spintest said...

He says that when he was 17, Bristol got pregnant (with Tripp). They told her parents on May 5. (I can't remember if Levi is the same age as Bristol or older.

Levi Johnston's DOB: 5/3/90

Bristol Palin's DOB: 10/18/90


Remember all of the discussion about missing wedding rings. Could there have been a quiet wedding in there someplace?? If so, was there also a quiet divorce?

Marriages and divorces are public records. If they got married and/or divorced, there would be a record.

There is such a thing as secret marriage (the laws governing secret marriages vary from state to state), where the marriage license is held secretly, just as adoption records are kept. But it works kind of in reverse. You have to petition the court to bury the records, and it's not to hide the fact of marriage, only the date that the marriage took place.

It's for couples who have been living together, but had never actually done it legally. They might have children and years later they decide they don't want the children to know that they weren't conceived in marriage. Or they don't want anyone to know that they hadn't been married when they began living together. It was more common back in the 1950s.

I think the "missing wedding rings" discussion that you're talking about is really Sarah Palin's missing wedding ring.

HollyP said...

@Ivy: Bristol Palin's dob is 10/18/90. In May 2008 she was 17 years old.

Headtrip Honey said...

Hmmmm.....Levi's admission that he was 17 when Bristol got pregnant is interesting.

He was born on May 3, 1990 (god I'm feeling old...I remember 1990. And I'm only 23!).

So he turned 18 on May 3, 2008.

If (!) Tripp was born full-term on Dec. 27, 2008, then he was conceived sometime in April.

Unfortunately, Levi WAS 17 then, but when do you think Bristol actually realized she was pregnant? Probably by the time he had already turned 18.

But Trig was conceived (if we take for granted an actual due date of May) sometime around August of 07...when Levi was VERY much 17, and Bristol was still 16.

However....

Bristol didn't turn 18 until October of 08. So why would he say that she was 18 when she got pregnant?

Because he'd just made a big slip and his brain couldn't think of the "correct" age fast enough so he just said her current age.

Things that make you go hmmmmmmmmm.

mlewis said...

I am in agreement with spintest. But, I would add one more reason why Sarah won't do well in a run for President 2012. She galvanizes the far right wing of her party, but she loses moderates, minorities, independents, all needed to win. She won't do well in the states with alot of electoral votes; she appeals to that narrow segment of the population and country who are still going on about Obama's birth certificate, (Southeastern part of US. Sorry if some PD readers come from that part of the country. Of course, you are the exceptions).

They say that Sarah will do well in primaries which attract the party faithful (far right), but there is no way that she can survive those presidential debates without answering questions, going on Meet the Press and doing interviews. Silence, in this case, is not golden.

Last night, appearing on Craig Ferguson's show, Wolff Blitzer from CNN said that we haven't heard the last of Sarah Palin. She will have a book, a book tour and go around making speeches. Wolff has far more experience than I do in looking at politics. I will say this; blow off a few more speaking engagements like the Republican Women in Simi Valley, and Sarah won't have that many offers. Especially when the contract has to be approved by her lawyer.

The book will be ghost written by Ms.Vincent, who seems to crank out a load of books for people. This will entitle Sarah to go on tour and appear on Fox. But, what happened to her suggested radio or TV show? Not ready for prime time yet? Let's see how she handles herself on the book tour. I'll be glad to make one bet. She is going to cost Harper Collins one whopping big sum of money. She will need to come to NY for numerous discussions, bringing along the family and staff (spokesperson)on their expense account. On tour, she will need a suitable wardrobe, makeup, hair, think Republican Convention again. Once you've toted a Gucci Bag around, you can't go back to a neoprene backpack by Arctic Cat. The question is: At what point will Harper Collins/Rupert Murdoch have enough? Will it be too many lobster dinners? Big rooms service tabs? Over the top diva behavior? She most certainly will be in the media for some time to come, even if she has to make up some more stories to be really upset about.

KaJo said...

You go to the Anchorage Press story about Levi Johnston, and you see this quote: “We’ve never picked up the phone and said, ‘hey, come do a story,’” Tank says. “Everybody’s pursued him.”

And then compare it with the story that no one knew where Sarah Palin was or what she was doing until SHE called a reporter while she was having dinner at Michael's with Meg Stapleton, a lawyer representing her in the book deal, and Todd Palin.

Someone at Mudflats said "One reason Palin probably chose Mike Allen [the reporter she reached at 10:45 at night] is that Politico is owned by the far right Allbritton Company and definitely tilts right in its reporting."

and later, "One catty note about Michael's. I live in NYC and hubby is a member of the Elite Liberal Media. He often LUNCHES at Michaels, because that is the scene, NO ONE goes to dinner at Michaels, NO ONE. You do that if you don’t want to be seen by anyone.

I know it is a small catty point, but really, if you know the media world in NYC, going to Michaels for dinner (in August no less when everyone is away) is just not done by anyone but rubes and losers."

AKPetMom said...

I guess this could be off topic but heck, the more photos we have of pregnant women, well, the less Palin ever seems to have been pregnant at all!

I'd love to see the scarf that could cover this bump:

http://gofugyourself.celebuzz.com/go_fug_yourself/2009/08/well_played_marley_shelton_and.html

NakedTruth said...

HeadTrip Honey, I'm with you. There are just too many discrepancies in the stories told by Levi, Sherry and Bristol about the announcement of the pregnancy and the age of Levi and Bristol when the pregnancy was announced.

Audrey and team, is it possible to put together a document that outline discrepancies of the pregnancy announcement and dates Levi supposedly lived with the Palins? There is something different said in each interview.

Brief outline of events:

Bristol and Levi living together:
1. Levi states that he lived with Bristol while she was pregnant with Tripp. We are assuming based on his comments that this was Summer 2008 and also after the campaign and before Tripp's birth in Dec/Jan.
2. On the today show Mercede confirmed that Levi lived in the Palin's home. She didn't state when but said that his clothes were there and she never saw him.
3. Levi states in his GQ interview that he and Bristol were homeschooled during the school year of 2007/08. Why? Was he living with the Palins during this time also?
4. Also I thought Sherry Johnston stated on Tyra or LKL that Bristol briefly lived with the Johnston's. I am not sure. Someone please confirm. If so when did this take place and why?

Telling the Johnston's and Palin's about the pregnancy:
1. Levi is stating in the Anchorage Press interview they got pregnant when he was 17 and told his family first and then the Palin's on May 5, 2008. (I wonder why he gave an exact date here.) Levi would have been 18 on May 3, 2008. Bristol was 17. Levi said his family took it well (why I don't know they were only teenagers) but the Palin's were upset and told them that they had to get married. (Did the Palin's let Levi move in at this time since he claims he lived with them in the Summer of 08?)
2. Remember Sherry Johnston stating in an article that Levi and Bristol was happy about the pregnancy and waved a positive pregnancy stick in front of Palin to announce it. Not Levi's or Bristol's story.
3. Now Bristol on the other hand said on the GVS show that telling her parents was 'harder than labor' and that she got a friend to come with her to tell Todd and Sarah. Was Levi with her and the friend? Was this on May 3, 2008. I know I am just making an assumption here but Levi's statement that they told the parents on May 3, 2008 does not even hint to someone else being present with them.
4. Also we can't forget about Mercede saying that Levi did not talk to her the entire Summer of 08 because Bristol would not allow him to. This to me was another confirmation that Levi was not living in the same house with Mercede so he was definitely living somewhere else. And if it is true that he lived with the Palin's during the Summer of 08, why was he there? And according to Sherry's own statement, he was definitely helping to take care of Trig before Tripp was born. Sherry used Levi's experience caring for Trig to make a point that Levi would be a great father to Tripp.

I personally think that Levi, Sherry and Bristol have been discussing two different pregnacies but I just think that it would be a good idea to point out the discrepancies in Levi's story and hopefully the next time a so-called journalist interview him they will ask him when exactly did he live with the Palins and why.

Punkinbugg said...

My 17 & 23 year old kids can tell you EXACTLY how old they were when something big happened in their lives, because they remember what grade they were in, etc.

The best way to trip up a kid who might be using a fake ID is to ask their birth day, then ask how old they ARE right now... They can't do the math fast enough,,, unless they are telling the truth.

wv: anchear Anchorage ears, listen up!

mel said...

Naked Truth: "There are just too many discrepancies in the stories told by Levi, Sherry and Bristol about the announcement of the pregnancy and the age of Levi and Bristol when the pregnancy was announced."

You gotta remember, all of these people were probably stoned a lot of the time. On oxy, on pot, maybe meth, X, who knows what else. They may have embroidered what they can't remember or think they remember. I guess that's not much better than purposely lying, but just pointing it out. Sometimes I think the only one out and out lying is SP. In any case, it all makes Audrey's/our job that much harder.

Bree Palin said...

I am curious about Levi's wedding band situation. We know he had Bristol's name on his ring finger at the RNC. And we were told the story that he got the tattoo because he lost the wedding band (did we ever hear that he had lost more than one, or am I imagining that?). And we've seen the photo of the two of them asleep on a bus where he is wearing the band. I don't believe we have a date for that photo? And I believe there is an interview with Sarah at the house in Wasilla where they are teasing Levi about losing the wedding band, but I have lost track of when that took place.

My point in trying to nail down when Levi was wearing a wedding band is that it seems unusual to me for a teenaged boy to wear a wedding band in school (but maybe they were being homeschooled all during this period, that isn't clear) if he isn't actually married. And the only reason I can imagine the two of them considering themselves married (in spirit, in the church?) is if they had a baby together. I would find it really curious if he were going around wearing the wedding band before Bristol was pregnant with Trip.

And I really don't understand people going to the effort to get and wear the bands without actually just going down and getting married. Even if they intend to have a fancy ceremony at church later, if the girl is already pregnant wouldn't it be better to go down to city hall and get the quickie wedding than to not but wear rings? I really don't get this!

I'm sorry this is so disjointed, but so are my thoughts on this matter:)

onething said...

Is it understandable that I am anxiously awaiting the explanation that there is pictorial evidence that Willow could not be Trig's mother?

ProChoiceGrandma said...

Nailinpalinnow wrote a great article about Scientologist John Coale:
http://nailinpalinnow.blogspot.com/2009/04/palins-coale-keeps-scientologys.html

It is VERY long, but the important part is about how the Scientologists will use an aggressive offense to deflect from something they want to cover up.

It makes me f*ing furious that the dimwit Orley Taitz gets so much airtime on MSNBC or anywhere else to spout her lies about President Obama’s birth certificate and newspaper birth announcements. But Taitz is too stupid to have developed this birther movement herself. I would like to know who REALLY is behind the Obama birther nutjobs. It smells a lot like a Scientologist John Coale psychological warfare technique. Evil thug, but smart. They went on the offense with this “birther” story as an aggressive defense to debunk the evidence of Sarah Palin’s fake pregnancy.

The originators of the Obama birther movement know it is ludicrous and fruitless, but the whole point of their “birther” movement is to make it seem that if anyone even mentions Sarah Palin’s fake pregnancy, they can point a finger to claim that the fake pregnancy theory is just as crazy, even though we now have several pictures showing Sarah Palin was NOT pregnant right up to 10 days before Trig’s presentation on 4-18-08. IMHO, Trig was born in January 2008.

Ennealogic just wrote an article about 5-week premature babies that everyone should read if they are still inclined to believe Trig was “born” on 4-18-08.
http://threebrain.blogspot.com/2009/08/what-5-week-preemie-really-looks-like.html

HollyP said...

@AKPetMom, I was thinking the same thing.

SP says she didn't show because she was in such great physical shape. I've been searching the web for photos of pregnant professional athletes. The two whose photos I've found so far (soccer star Mia Hamm and a WNBA star featured pg on the cover of a major sports mag last March) showed way more than SP.

Chi Town Mom said...

Has this ideas been discussed before: The rate of c-sections among down syndrome babies? If c-sections are very common, if not routine, in those pregnancies how did she get around it? Did it just add to the miracle of her pregnancy?

wayofpeace said...

BREEPALIN,

if i can put myself in SARAH's shoes (an outrageous risk) upon hearing that BRISTOL was pregnant (with TRIG): my take is that the first person she would go for advice would be her pastor.

thus, it's not a stretch to assume that the 2 of them cooked up the idea of getting them married 'spiritually' (and in secret) as a way of erasing the 'sin'.

their religious temperament disdains government anyway, so only a religious wedding REALLY counts in their eyes.

THAT is the only way that LEVY's cohabitation with BRISTOL under SARAH's and TODD's noses makes any sense, and also the ring-talk.

Headtrip Honey said...

re: Levi's ring and the strangeness of a boy wearing one.

I think I read somewhere that this was a "promise ring," not a wedding band. So he probably either got it when he and Bristol got engaged, or maybe perhaps even before that, if he felt so romantically inclined.

I've had a guy friend do the same thing for his girlfriend.

Granted, she ended up stomping on his heart, too...but....

Bree Palin said...

wayofpeace - I like your line of thinking. A church blessing would explain Levi living in the Palin home and his wearing a wedding band.

Ennealogic said...

wayofpeace (August 7, 2009 8:52 AM), that is the direction my ponderings were headed too...

Would church 'wedding' records be among what got destroyed in that fire, I wonder?

wayofpeace said...

posted now at IM: revealed: a FEDERAL LAWSUIT against SARAH for BRIBERY.

here's a comment which explains the gravity of the matter:

Anonymous at 9:39 AM said: original complaint was that Palin violated the constitution of Alaska by refusing to sign the Juneteenth Proclamation, as the law mandates she do as gov. she also refused to attend the celebrations or send anyone in her place. No other AK gov has ever done any of the above.

bear in mind that her relationships with minorities were already bad, as she refused to hire any blacks in her administation and fired all of the existing employees (some of whom were black) and replaced them with her friends.

...this -- using state money to bribe someone and offering to pass legislation which would appease them if they would drop the lawsuit-- this makes Blago look like a kid.

... If Sarah is so dumb as to deny that she knew the feds were looking into her after the original lawsuit which was filed in March 09, then she is either: illiterate or a liar -- Oh! or both.
...
never have I felt that any of the other charges would stick (not that they weren't legit- a different issue). But this one?...

A racist who willfully violates the constitution out of pettiness, so as to avoid celebrating the freedom of slaves? Jesus. She is sick.

and then she violated FEDERAL law and BRIBES the plaintiffs. Oh, and this plaintiff sued someone quite successfully before. I am sure they have all of the evidence for bribery they need.

I can assure you, the "feds" were notified and are involved on some level. Just because you don't hear about it doesn't mean it isn't happening. Look at Norm coleman (R) -- he was also sued by an individual for something which was a federal crime (pay to play) and he's being investigated by FBI. This was widely known but never reported until recently (the FBI part).

...

ICEBERG? is this the SHOE-DROP we've been waiting?

MrsTarquinBiscuitbarrel said...

KaJo says: "I know it is a small catty point, but really, if you know the media world in NYC, going to Michaels for dinner (in August no less when everyone is away) is just not done by anyone but rubes and losers."

Doubtless $P would call this a "small catty point" if called on the fact, but you were absolutely right: Things like where you go for lunch matter immensely to the very people whom $P either scorns or courts. She hates the press when they ask any question that's not an obvious softball, but without the bright lights, $P apparently feels that she ceases to exist, at least in the flattering, high-profile manner in which she wants to be seen.

Remember when $P made her blanket statement to THE MEDIA, in "honor of the troops," to "stop making stuff up"? Well, I seriously doubt $P will mind if Lynn Vincent "makes up" a story that $P thinks will enhance her image. It's happened before, it'll happen again.

OTOH, if $P is just a regular gal from Wasilla with whom ordinary folk are supposed to identify, why is she sucking down champagne and lobster in evil New York City in the company of Robert Barnett, believed to be the highest-paid agent/publishing attorney on the East Cost? I guess her "gal of the people" image remains intact, in $P's magical thinking, if she isn't stuck with the check.

Bree Palin said...

AKPetMom and HollyP - Here's a female bodybuilder who had her first baby at age 32 - and her abs of steel couldn't hold in her uterus:
http://tinyurl.com/nkvpax

mlewis said...

Sarah is weighing in on health care, using guess-who as a prop again. The quote which caught my eye (it's all on her facebook):

The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s “death panel” so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their “level of productivity in society,” whether they are worthy of health care.

The phrase that caught me eye is "my baby with Down Syndrome." How old is that baby now? He was supposed to have been one year old in April (according to Palin). So, I am asking anyone who ever had a child or refers to a child, at what point do you stop calling him "baby?"

Should she have used the words, "my son, Trig, the child with Down Syndrome?"

Aside from her use of language, which is never quite meets the standards of Jornalism 101, what kind of care does that child receive right now? I am not familiar with all of the services that would be available to Trig in Alaska, some state, some federal, some private resources. So, please, if there are people with knowledge in this field, I'll be interested in reading your comments.

I'll resolve one question, sort of. I doubt that Sarah wrote anything that long that involved paragraphs. So, the person who did write it for her is the one who chose "baby" where a mother would write "my son, Trig." By writing "baby," the writer makes Trig appear smaller and more helpless. And, my guess is that Meg is the author, and she is neither married nor a mother. However, when Meg writes in Sarah's voice, the statement is automatically attributed to Sarah.

wayofpeace said...

LOL, a comment from HUFF.POST:

DannyEastVillage: As a threat to her child's wellbeing, I would worry about her parenting skills much more than about ANY healthcare package

HollyP said...

I knew someone who referred to her 8 yo son as "the baby" so I wouldn't blink at SP calling Trig the baby.

This is WNBA star Candace Parker at around 6 mo on the cover of ESPN magazine:
http://www.wnba.com/features/parker_espn_090312.html

And here are two photos of Mia Hamm. http://www.celebritybabies.info/index.php/category/mia-hamm/ At 4 months, Hamm was as big as SP at her so-called "6 3/4 month" mark.

That Sarah must have one in a billion abs.

Ivyfree said...

"How old is that baby now? He was supposed to have been one year old in April (according to Palin). So, I am asking anyone who ever had a child or refers to a child, at what point do you stop calling him "baby?"

Well, IF Trig's DOB is indeed April 18,2008, he is now 16 months old. I believe they're supposed to be babies until they're 1 year old, after which they're toddlers.

But there is a lot of individual usage. My 20 month old grandson is still "the baby." "Kiss the baby for me," is how I usually end phone calls, or "Give the baby a hug from Gammie." My son is still "Baby" when I talk to him, and he points out that a 29-year-old man in law school is not technically a baby, but he really is a good sport about it. Also, when I get home from work? I'm greeted by two rapturous English Mastiffs- approximately 400 pounds of dog- and I immediately greet them with cries of "Such good babies! Mama missed the babies!"

So I think it's reasonable for a 16 month old to be referred to as "baby." I'd give Sarah a pass on this one.

Martha said...

My mother introduced me as "her baby" until she died at the age of 92. My father always chimed in right after her, "Mary, when are you going to learn? She's our little girl!" I was usually embarrassed at the stupidity, but now I miss them.

anne s said...

I think Palin's abs of steel .. if she was pregnant
.. was not eating and "thrashing her thighs"

She didnt want that baby

She talks about finding out he had DS with gloom and doom

That poor child is going to see the look of anguish on her face when she discusses hiding her pregnancy from her own family out of shame one day when he is older and looks back

Hiding her pregnancy with scarves and NOT eating as to keep small as possible
Ashamed and intentionally neglectful

So there you have it if she was really pregnant.. a sicko

But I saw the newborn photo of him 3 days later? 5 weeks premie?
Fat chubby cheeks?

My son was born 2 weeks late... could be on time they give you that 2 week leeway...
At 8lbs 6.5 oz
He was big but THIN at least for the first couple of weeks.. FRAIL looking

Palin lies very blatantly left and right and tries to use people to cover her lies
.. Levi to make her daughter look like holy mother mary about to give birth with her loving husband to be..
and the AIP cover up on the trail..
demanding a staffer cover the lie by sending out some bogus statement about the ballot being too hard for Todd to figure out

Keep on keepin' on.. She loses both ways..
if she is the mom she is one sick lady.. if she isnt .. one sick liar


wv: numbedes (numb heads :) )

Windy City Woman said...

SPINTEST,
Also, as you age, your fingers tend to get fatter. If SP's wedding ring were loose now, it must have fit her thumb 20 years ago.

pearlygirl said...

chi-town mom
C-section vs vaginal is not evidence either way. Each are done for a variety of reasons. C-sections are more common in high risk pregnancies but not required or even considered standard by any means. It's a legitimate question but focusing on such things will only detract from the real issue.

Kajo: meow! I don't like snark but well done cattiness is a very appropriate response in this case. I love that you pointed it out. If you go someplace "to be seen" you don't go during the "off" time. It's like going to the beaches of Rimini on the coast of Italy during in October just to say that you went there. She's such a poser! A "real" down home hockey mom sitting on a porch swing having a cold one has more infinitely more class than her NYC wannabe act.

wayofpeace said...

excerpt from DOWD's NYT op-ed:

It’s also interesting to read the chapter on “Palinmania” and remember how serene Sarah Palin was before she became unhinged by fame and her fixation with her reviews, especially from conspiratorial and gossipy bloggers.

The same McCain advisers who later turned against Palin were impressed with her at first, when she earned adjectives like unruffled, self-confident, tough-minded and self-assured.

From Bill Ayers to Reverend Wright, “Sarahcuda” was ready to bite, telling rallies, “The heels are on, the gloves are off.”

But by the end, after Tina Fey, Katie Couric and the shopping spree, Palin had lost confidence. She became erratic.

“During a campaign trip in October to New Hampshire, she balked at sharing the stage with former congressman Jeb Bradley because they differed on abortion and drilling in the Arctic wilderness,” the authors wrote. “That same day, she was reluctant to join Bradley and Senator John Sununu for conversation aboard her campaign bus and had to be coaxed out of the back of the bus to talk to them, according to a McCain adviser.”

Palin is still obsessed with the blogosphere, which recently lit up with a rumor started by a fellow mavericky Alaskan, who also no longer has his job — that she and Todd were Splitsville. She sarcastically told Mike Allen of Politico that she loved finding out “what’s goin’ on in my life from the news.”...

And, as Talking Points Memo reported on Friday, she put up a demented, fact-free Facebook rant trashing the president’s health care plan: “The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s ‘death panel’ so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their ‘level of productivity in society’ whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil.”

Do we sometimes drive ’em downright crazy? You betcha!

Noah's and Lilah's Dad said...

Audrey,
I really think you should try to begin cross-posting at DailyKos. It's still the "blogosphere" but the audience for that site is widening and it really is time to start hanging out some bait for the MSM to push further into the story.

midnightcajun said...

On the size and cost of Palin's wedding ring: mine of about the same size cost $29 in 1984, so her figure is probably about right. I think it looked loose lately because she has lost so much weight. From the pictures I've seen, she was actually a little fleshy in her twenties for a young woman who supposedly ran a lot. And that's not being catty, it's just a observation. I've never seen pictures of her showing the lean muscle definition of a runner.

indy_girl said...

Silly! Sarah hasn't got time to sue anyone, she's waaaaaay too busy writing on facebook about President Obama's "evil" health care plan...and yammering about her kids in press conferences with the mean ol' gotcha media, even though everyone is supposed to leave her kids alone, dontcha know. Also too she is writing a book with lots of big words and even some ideas maybe there and that is exhausting, I'm sure.

wayofpeace said...

SP got another ghost-written press released via facebook.

about her previous one, the DEATH-PANEL one, YUSEF at SHANNYN's had this comment:

"ADN-online covered Palin’s facebook post on health care. It drew over 550 comments. I read many of them and I didn’t see one comment in support of Palin. Not one. I’ve never seen such an overwhelmingly negative and one sided reaction to anything at ADN.

"Palin is toast."

wayofpeace said...

from ALTERNET: It's so easy right now to look at the melee on the right and discount it as pure political theater of the most absurdly ridiculous kind. It's a freaking puppet show.

These people can't be serious. Sure, they're angry -- but they're also a minority, out of power and reduced to throwing tantrums. Grown-ups need to worry about them about as much as you'd worry about a furious five-year-old threatening to hold her breath until she turned blue.

Unfortunately, all the noise and bluster actually obscures the danger. These people are as serious as a lynch mob, and have already taken the first steps toward becoming one. And they're going to walk taller and louder and prouder now that their bumbling efforts at civil disobedience are being committed with the full sanction and support of the country's most powerful people, who are cynically using them in a last-ditch effort to save their own places of profit and prestige.

http://www.alternet.org/story/141819/

Dangerous said...

Onething wrote:

Is it understandable that I am anxiously awaiting the explanation that there is pictorial evidence that Willow could not be Trig's mother?

I don't want to supersede Audrey's presentation of the picture she shared privately with me, but it is the circumstances of that picture, rather than the picture itself, the support the assertion that Willow was not pregnant when it was taken. You don't get a clear shot of Willow's abdomen.

SP is also in the picture, and she looks a little rotund around the middle -- similar to other photos around that time, but is wearing a coat and in profile so you don't get a clear look at her mid-section, either. It will be eye-of-the-beholder for most people. It won't change their opinion of her.

But it is hard to explain how a somewhat pregnant-looking SP would be in the same photo as Willow with a non-Palin in the home and in the picture, if Willow also appeared pregnant. The point of a hide-and-fake scenario is to hide the real mother from view.

Hence, you wouldn't have an outsider see and be photographed with a pregnant Willow. If the person was an insider (who could be trusted to keep the secret) you wouldn't expect SP to also wear a disguise with a pregnant Willow around.

So the picture's value is circumstantial, not direct and, hence, not conclusive, although I'm sure some people will think so. When Audrey presented it to me, she stated that Willow doesn't look pregnant in the picture. At first I agreed, but then had to modify that conclusion because we her body is obscured. (Any other evaluation is conjecture.)

If the third party in the photo is an insider (who already knew about Willow), and SP simply hadn't removed her disguise from being out and about, then Willow is still a candidate for Trig's mother. But I conclude that that scenario is far less likely given the picture.

My conclusion and this evidence does not in any way increase the chances that Bristol is Trig's mother, however. Concluding so would be a logical fallacy since the picture does not shed any added light on Bristol's circumstances. To the extent it is direct evidence of anything, supporters of SP as Trig's mother could (and probably will) cite the picture as direct evidence that SP was pregnant simple because she "looks" pregnant.

I'm going to leave it to Audrey to describe how she and her researchers acquired this photo. Those circumstances are interesting, and may have some probative value. But to the extent that that is true, the picture becomes less important, not more. To wit, it could have been planted intentionally as evidence of a false premise.

That's why we put so much credence to the "nail-in-the-coffin" picture. We know the premise for it can't be false; the photo, while posed, was taked as a candid shot. It was posted without regard to what people might think about the central issue we are now investigating, and the party posting it could not have a motive to deceive us or others.

That will not be true of the forthcoming photo of Willow. I just wanted to make that clear before people get too excited. Throughout this effort, photos have caused us no end of grief for erroneous conclusions on both sides of the issue.

The case is still circumstantial, and we can't rule out any possibilities until conclusive evidence is proffered. We have assumed that SP's motive for faking was covering for a teen daughter, but we might be wrong about that. I spent this past weekend with very old friends, and when I discussed the case with them they immediately jumped from evidence to motive, as people often do.

An unbiased investigator must consider the possibility that SP is just a loon, and that her family and doctor and the GOP protect her because of her position. That would be a very unsatisfying result for me, but if that's the truth I'd just accept it.

Dan

onething said...

Hi Dan,

"
My conclusion and this evidence does not in any way increase the chances that Bristol is Trig's mother, however. Concluding so would be a logical fallacy since the picture does not shed any added light on Bristol's circumstances."

Well, but it does reduce by one the number of possible candidates, so by indirect logic it probably does.

Heather said...

Reading Shannyn Moore's August 8 post got me thinking about the lineage requirements to be considered a member of Todd's tribe for the sake of medical benefits.

Years ago, I looked into private college scholarships provided by a couple of ethnic heritage groups. In those cases, the applicant had to be at least 1/8 descendant in order to qualify.

Since Todd's grandmother is Native Alaskan, that would make him 1/4 and his children 1/8. His grandchildren would be 1/16.

Is it possible that to be eligible for benefits as member of his tribe, lineage has to be determined to be at least 1/8? Would this be a motive to fake a pregnancy in order get free medical care for a child that will need it for the rest of his life?

Keep up the good work, everyone.

wayofpeace said...

i just watched the video of LEVY being interviewed by KATHY GRIFFIN, and i must say, he held his own in this (obviously in jest) suggestive repartee. he's getting more relaxed and confident.

all of this suggest that he's being coached for the national stage, which cannot be good news for $P.

http://tiny.cc/ccJrH

B said...

Heather said, "Is it possible that to be eligible for benefits as member of his tribe, lineage has to be determined to be at least 1/8? Would this be a motive to fake a pregnancy in order get free medical care for a child that will need it for the rest of his life?"

This was discussed here many months ago. You can find it in the archives. I believe we decided TriG was eligible for the Native American care as Todd's son or grandson. But it could be a motive if his mother were, say, Sarah's sister. We were also told that it is not convenient health care anyone would want to rely on.

B said...

Amy1,
You asked about the article where Sarah and Molly were teasing Levi about his wedding ring (and him) being "stuck." It was Esquire.

Dangerous said...

Onething responded:

Well, but it does reduce by one the number of possible candidates, so by indirect logic it probably does.

Anything multiplied by zero is still zero.

Alex said...

This is totally OT but I can't help it. Somewhere I read a comment that mentioned Eunice Kennedy Shriver's great gift to disabled in comparison to Palin's empty words. I was so grateful to that person for reminding me about the origin of Special Olympics.

How sad that real societal contributions are unknown because they aren't tweets or facebook pages.

EKS came from an era and a family where great weath, education, and privledge often meant greater responsibility to give back. Where did that idea go?

MrsTarquinBiscuitbarrel said...

I've always seen Todd described as one-eighth Yup'ik; one grandmother was half Yu'pik. Any way we can confirm this?

Vaughn said...

Todd Palin's grandmother is 1/2 Yupik.Her father was
a Dutchman.
That makes him 1/8 and his kids 1/16.

http://tinyurl.com/l55rpa

This article will answer your questions about
eligibility for Alaska Native health care.

onething said...

Dan,

Come now! You are actually saying that Bristol's chances of being Trig's mother are zero?

Headtrip Honey said...

Onething, I believe Dan is saying that there is zero *direct* evidence that Bristol is Trig's mother.

What he said was that evidence that Willow is NOT Trig's mother is not, by default, evidence that Bristol is.

Dangerous said...

First, thank you to Headtrip Honey for her (?) concise and accurate input.

As things stand, with the confirmable evidence on record, there is zero chance that Bristol could have given birth to both Trig and Tripp eight months apart. That's why MSM doesn't give this effort any credence.

Many propose scenarios where it is not actually eight months, but have no direct evidence, and only flimsy, conjecture-ridden circumstantial evidence to support those hypotheses. As the saying goes, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

Where was Bristol during the critical time frame? Many claim she was in hiding, but there's no evidence of that, and she was definitely not hiding all the time, as the traffic ticket and appearance at the AHA luncheon indicate. All any of us can say is we don't know where she was. That's not the same as hiding.

If she had Trig months earlier, then the baby was hidden for months, but there's no evidence of that, either. The risk of unstable concealment alone is enough to prevent any rational person from faking a pregnancy after-the-fact. If you then contend SP is irrational, then anything is possible and her motive may not be covering for her daughter.

So I've proposed Willow (and I'm not the only one, if you read the comments to ARCXIX's post DailyKos post), because we have no more on her whereabouts than Bristol. Now Audrey and her researchers have found a picture from the timeframe which indicates on its face that Willow was not in total hiding. But we surmised that, anyway, since we have her travel records. Since people weren't expecting to see a pregnant 14-year-old, her physique, if pregnant, would be easier to hide in plain sight.

But the circumstances of the to-be-presented photo challenge the hide-in-plain-sight theory. Willow isn't hidden well enough if the other person in the photo didn't already know the truth.

Given this picture, the order of possibilities are now:

1) ?x1, Bx1
2) Wx1, Bx1
3) Sx1, Bx1
4) Bx2

Bx2 is still possible, but only under completely bizarre circumstances involving a huge conspiracy and multiple, overlapping deceptions.

Dan

Dreamer said...

OK, on a hunch, I went to http://marriagelicensesearch.net/ and put in Levi Johnston... some 50 Levis came up, but one of them is Levi K. Johnston, from WASILLA... Wonder if that is 'our' Levi? (you have to pay to get more info...)

Dreamer said...

I have wondered something: Can't someone ask for the 'scrubbed' pics on the official Alaska State site? Since they WERE part of the OFFICIAL site, they have to be preserved, since they are OFFICIAL RECORDS. My ponderings come from the fact that all the vile statements of EXgov Palin are still there, but hidden, and according to some statement I read somewhere are there for the asking, at NO cost...

onething said...

Well, someone posted a really good discussion here not long ago on what it means to be born at 35 weeks gestation and with Down's as well. The story that Trig was born on April 17 or 18 just no longer seems plausible to me, and especially with him being discharged just a couple of days after birth and being paraded out in public. I mean, I think we can pretty much say that just didn't happen.

I would not go so far as to call the circumstances in which Trig was born earlier bizarre.

Angry Housewife said...

is there any proof that Levi is indeed Tripp's father? or did he get the cold shoulder from the family 'cause he is NOT the baby daddy?