I Feel A Dance Number Coming On...

8/27/2011

Mercy, I used to have a waistline like this...

Keep on with the current thread if you wish. Or introduce a new topic. Let's try it here and see if the formatting problems from the previous post can get worked out and cleaned up.

In the meantime, may mercy rain down on the East Coast of our country. My thoughts are with everyone back there. Irene, it's time to return to sea where you're wanted.

306 Comments

K.M.R

8/27/2011 08:50:30 am

The formatting looks much better now. Let's continue. It feels like the good old days.

I bet Gryphen does know who the poster is, but I don't think it is him.
My sense is that he is in tune with himself - flaws and all.
Also, too, I think he is discouraged but because he's spent 3 years pointing out Sarah Palin's fakery, I doubt he'd mislead his readers with anything counterfeit.

WakeUpAmerica

8/27/2011 09:09:30 am

No idea what the first poster is talking about. However, the video won't play and the link won't go to YouTube. I'm using an Apple, so maybe it is a compatibility problem, but I doubt it.

lazrgrl

8/27/2011 09:20:20 am

WUA- It plays for me on a MacBook Pro using Safari.

I will say I never had a waist like that.

As for the first comment, it refers to the previous post where formatting was causing comments to run off the page. The topic is a continuation from the previous post as well.

Laura Novak link

8/27/2011 09:36:03 am

Yes, KMR, I thought a new post would go back to normal. Weebly checking on problem with last post. Have only once seen that happen but that was a long time ago.

WakeUpA, as lazgrl says, this is a continuation of the Anon. conversation.

And the You Tube opens just fine for me on different browsers on Mac.

8/27/2011 10:36:41 am

For all the Noreen Malones and Julia O'Malleys and Dave Weigels and others who dismiss Babygate and call us obsessive and want to Make.It.Stop--I ask, would it matter?

Hypothetically, if you were to become convinced that Sarah Palin faked her Trig pregnancy, would it be relevant?

Would you think such a hoax made her unsuitable to make adult decisions for our country, not to mention Alaska or Arizona?

Would you believe there had been a serious problem in the Republican party's vetting and the US news media's investigative journalism?

Would you in your columns recommend that the pro life people stop sending her their hard earned money, wrongly believing she had "walked the walk?"

Would you suggest a psychological evaluation be done by Child Protective Services to see if she is sane enough to have custody of Trig?

If you can honestly say that a faked pregnancy wouldn't matter anyway, I'll give you a pass for refusing to think about it, although I wish you'd just be honest that you don't care rather than asserting with journalistic authority that it is false.

But, if you believe, as I do, that a sitting governor and subsequent VP candidate's faking a pregnancy DOES matter, then aren't we right to find that fact worth investigating, and aren't you wrong to make fun of us?

Thus ends my imaginary conversation with the Babygate deniers.

An interesting post someday, Laura, might be to have commenters contribute reasons "Why Babygate Matters," and then invite Weigel, etc. either to disagree or to prove Palin didn't fake it. If Joe's book or the other Sept. releases make Babygate a hot topic, the non-Faux-MSM should be reminded why it matters.

Liz

8/27/2011 10:53:05 am

The Ketamine comments reminded me of something a friend of mine said. My friend is a highly regarded skin care expert in CA who had been mentioned in a national magazine.I showed her a few photos of Sarah from the time of the 2008 campaign to today. Seeing them together made the change in her appearance quite shocking. My friend said that in her experience the only things that would do that are chemo or drugs, not alcohol which creates different effects.
In Race Of A Lifetime, the authors described Sarah's mental state in terms that might suggest something more than stress alone - http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6984739.ece

8/27/2011 11:02:55 am

Liz your link produces a 404 error

8/27/2011 11:05:40 am

I was once a size 2, too...

but hell age happens...

Susan in MD

8/27/2011 11:17:45 am

Hi All -

Sitting here enjoying Irene :) I left a comment at the end of the last looong blog about why I think all the Anon's ARE the same person (Anon238, Anon438...).
There are a few things the poster consistently does. First, they use exactly three dots ... frequently in the sentences for pauses where most would use a comma or dash, etc. This is quite frequent and consistent in all the posts. Haven't seen anyone else do this. Also, she uses quotation marks a lot and when at the end of a sentence, always makes the mistake of putting the punctuation mark outside of the quotation, "like this". Punctuation marks should always be inside the quotation marks and she gets it right inside the sentence structure but not at the end. I saw this almost ALWAYS consistently.

I myself think that the voice and tone of the writer is consistent, the grammatical skill is consistent, and when you add these little oddities, especially the three dots (which I don't see ANYONE else do), it's pretty obvious its the same writer.

That gives you the profession of the person for sure - a Healthcare worker. And perhaps more. I'm just starting to tie all of the posts together. You guys are way ahead of me :) Awesome sleuthing BTW.

I'm off to see what more I can discover before the power goes off again...lol.

Cheers.

Susan

Liz

8/27/2011 11:42:27 am

I'm sorry about the link. This should work.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6984739.ece

Stay safe everyone !

Liz

8/27/2011 11:49:25 am

I forgot to say that I found the excerpt from Rave of a Lifetime by Googling
" Sarah Palin " +campaign +catatonic. The Times has some kind of a wall around some of their archived articles, but you can access them through Google. Sorry for any problems. It's worth reading .

Viola-alex

8/27/2011 12:05:07 pm

@Susan in MD. You make a good case. Thanks for the studying. You convinced me. @Liz - I agree with you. My 26 yr old son reminds me that erratic behavior = drugs almost every time. @B-- well said. and I think it's no coincidence that a large percentage of the Palin Watchdog commenters and bloggers are women. (I believe Gryph has a feminine sensitivity that serves him quite well.)

K.M.R

8/27/2011 12:33:09 pm

Hi Susan in MD,
Using a set of three dots is called an ellipsis. Using more than three is grammatically incorrect. The period after a quotation mark is also correct depending on where you live. Putting the punctuation outside or a quotation mark is called Queen's English.

Waiting for Irene.

8/27/2011 12:40:27 pm

@K.M.R., Susan's point was both anons use ellipses where other punctuation would be expected. Also, Alaska is supposed to use American English, i.e., punctuation inside quotes, though lots of Americans do it outside. Neither point is decisive, but both are instructive.

Laura Novak link

8/27/2011 01:02:10 pm

My understanding is that the period goes inside the quotes. And with ellipses, a fourth period actually ends the sentence. Three continues the thought, four closes it before a new sentence.

At any rate, as I said on the loonnggggg post before this, I'm going to put things into moderation for the night. Just got home from the men's shelter and I'm dirty and tired.

And I've asked weebly what's going on with the formatting. It's very strange in my editor right now as well.

Good night everyone. I'll approve comments early in the morning.

Be safe all of you in Irene's path. You're in my thoughts.

SunnyVee

8/27/2011 01:03:01 pm

I hate to admit that, when I had that waist, I truly felt that I was fat !!

Secondly, how do you connect the elipises (sp?) related to the medical profession? I have picked them up as a bad habit after too much email and anonymous blog comments...truth be told. (that one was on purpose, but not the coming period)".
No snark intended - just being goofy, sorry.

Otherwise? I hope Irene is gentle to our combined friends/family/community members on the East Coast. Stay safe, everyone !!

Karen

8/27/2011 02:38:01 pm

I was the one who re-posted anon432, but I have to say that no way is he or she the same person as anon238. Their perspectives are totally different, even if their punctuation and general reading comprehension is similar ;)

I really think we would be better served to focus on whether the information they share supports the other rather than who it is in particular who is making the post. In this case, both are pretty clear that the dates of the births are wrong for both children (Trig and Tripp) and that the birth certificate for Trig was a fiasco (names, dates?).

Remember, other bloggers have dropped off because they felt they were being ferreted out.

V ictoria link

8/27/2011 02:46:30 pm

One of the things that has bothered me about the Anon coments is that they're posted by someone infrequently, who says s/he can't appear for another few weeks. And that struck me as odd, because internet is so widespread these days. Then I thought about turning it around - what if they're being posted by someone who wants to hide his/her usual IP address and posts only while traveling? But in that case, why state that SP knows who it is?

I keep chasing my tail on this.

V ictoria link

8/27/2011 03:29:57 pm

I know who had a waist like that - SP, when she was 7 months pregnant with her fifth child!

Heidi3

8/27/2011 07:36:43 pm

I'll bring lilli's comment over from the previous thread:

lilli
Sat, 27 Aug 2011 20:05:06

"Mercede could have identified the picture right..he could have been Tripp before he was Trig. Or this baby was Tripp #1 and then Trig showed up. This came up on IM a long time ago."
- - - - - -

There is a lot of merit to that statement, lilli. We have to think that Playboy's legal dept. would not let a mistake that large get by, so I think Mercede did, in fact, identify the baby as "Tripp", despite what she told Gryphen. I don't like thinking that way about Mercede, but it's a possibility we should consider.

This definitely has been discussed in the past, but it can't hurt, in light of the photo caption, to bring it up again. In my opinion, the photo is another "shot across the bow" directed at Sarah.

Here's my reasoning: Let's assume that Ruffles was Bristol's first live birth, and she named him Tripp. (Born ~2-7-08 [surmising], and per Anon 4:32 Shitfire, "was attended by CBJ, born severely prematurely with an ear deformity". That would make the Playboy caption a correct statement. The Tripp we see today is Bristol's second child (Tripp #2). Remember how Bristol cooed about how "perfect" he was, almost by way of comparing him to another infant (Tripp #1/Ruffles) who was not so perfect.

Difficult to keep straight, but I'll try, and please forgive the reiterations.

Tripp #1, Bristol's original name for him, is Ruffles, seen in the Playboy photo AND in Bailey's book. He has also often been referred to as "Trig #1", because of many reasons, and we know 'Shitfire' called him that. But we know that Ruffles could never have 'turned into' the Trig we see today. He really should not be being called "Trig #1" - he was "Tripp #1" when Bristol birthed him.

BIG PROBLEM HERE: Why did Mercede call him "TriggyBear" in the kitchen photos? I sure hope someone has an idea on that one. Maybe just a spur of the moment cutsie name Mercede made up? Or, on 5-3-08 when the kitchen photos were taken, did Mercede actually think his name was Trig, because that's what she was told at the time?

Trig #2, who is really the one and only original Tri-G (RNC & 'current' Trig) was obtained by what we are now hearing was an unofficial adoption by Sarah, who gave him that unfortunate name.

Tripp #2 is the adorable little towhead boy we're watching grow up. We don't know when he was born, but 'Anon 4:32 Shitfire' said he wasn't born in December 2008, and he wasn't born at Mat-Su. We have photos of Bristol running on ice towards a church in 12-08, pushing out her jacket to feign a pregnancy.

It's absolutely not right to refer to childrens' names as "semantics", but in some ways, that's what this boils down to.

Thanks for reading my ideas, and best wishes to all our friends on the East Coast!

Allyn

8/27/2011 10:34:36 pm

<i>she uses quotation marks a lot and when at the end of a sentence, always makes the mistake of putting the punctuation mark outside of the quotation, "like this".</i>

That's not necessarily a mistake. It's a British style, and more and more Americans are adopting it because it reads better on handheld devices. (See this <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2293056/">Slate</a> article.)

Rationalist

8/28/2011 12:00:55 am

Good morning - FYI, Gryphen is reporting that Sadie believes Anon238 is for real.

8/28/2011 12:03:22 am

Reiterating my own point, there was good indication that anon432 was a health care worker, with fears for her job, and there is every indication that anon238 has a pipeline to someone in the Palin inner circle, probably a family member. Punctuation inside of quotations? Almost nobody, even most "good writers," gets that right.
There was another IM comment some time ago, from someone in the know: I remember the person said she once told Todd they should tattoo "does not compute" on Bristol's forehead, "and he laughed." So if anything, the friend-of-Todd theory makes sense to me for anon238. Someone he met within the past ~2 years? Maybe even a special guy friend ("the old bitch")? But mostly my reaction is, whoever this person is, he/she is very smart, and is telling the truth. Hope he/she comes back.

Molly

8/28/2011 12:17:00 am

"(BTW you can count Sadie as somebody who believes that the anonymous poster on the Nick Broomfield post is on the up and up. It was this comment here that convinced her: "Bristol talks about Sadie 24/7. Like...Constantly. It's the worst case of projection I have ever seen. She is so jealous of Sadie, she has taught Tripp to go "ewwww" and wrinkle his nose if Bristol shows him a photo of Sadie." She said she had been told that before by people who have seen her do it. And people say Mercede is that vindictive one.)"

http://theimmoralminority.blogspot.com/2011/08/bristol-palin-puts-her-son-tripp-to.html

Lends validity to the anon poster at IM.

Laura Novak link

8/28/2011 01:00:28 am

I was just catching up on Gryphen's posts and this is part of a comment from someone on his Sadie post:

Think about it, guys. If Mercede really had put a photo of Sarah's child in a nude magazine...Sarah would have played that victim card until everyone in the free world had heard her screeching about how the Johnstons "put my baby boy in a PORN RAG!!!!!!"

That makes perfect sense to me. Perhaps she wouldn't want to draw attention to the PB shoot, but SP has screamed about everything under the sun. why not correct this - especially since it's "her" child in PB.

Things that make you go Hmmmm.

mxm

8/28/2011 01:10:33 am

Perhaps the 3 week downtime for our new friend, Anon238, is both because she is traveling and her timing for her initial comments were meant to predate the new book releases. Perhaps Anon238 has been a source for one of the authors.

Three weeks takes us almost to the day of the Levi and McGinniss book releases.

The film festival is coming up and that is another opportunity for Anon238 to reveal more.

Now, what is going on with Fred? We had last heard from Gryphen that he was struggling to meet a Sept 1 target.

8/28/2011 01:27:58 am

I am thinking that Heidi3, you have it exactly right. I think that Ruffles (the original Tripp) was introduced to Mercede as "Trig," because SP had already put the plan in place.

The baby introduced at the hospital is the one NOW known as "Trig*," and became available right around April 18. I think they had a bit of baby juggling going on for a couple of months w Ruffles and Trig* (Bailey photo of SP w Ruffles). [side note: Ruffles ear looked a little better in the Bailey photo than in the earlier photos - maybe "ear forms" were used (remember SP's slip of the tongue re earmarks)].

I think that Ruffles had medical issues that precluded him from being used as the Down Syndrome prop, but SP (having gotten a lot of useful feedback) decided to find a heartier replacement.
I think the plan was/is to substitute Ruffles back at some point.

phantomimic link

8/28/2011 02:46:05 am

Thanks for your comment on Irene. We just got back from vacation yesterday driving through the thick of the storm towards Washington. It really was no worse than driving through a regular downpour and there were so few cars on the road that the driving went smooth. When we got back home we did find some items had fallen from the shelves and the portraits on the walls were crooked. But this was not caused by Irene, this was the earthquake. It seems we went on vacation at the right time!

Enlightened

8/28/2011 02:56:41 am

Good morning, All. Hope you East Coasters are dry and safe. What a night! Long time reader, first time poster. Can anyone tell me what became of Audrey from Palin Deceptions? I am hopeful that Anon will rejoin the conversation as able. Let's not speculate too much. The truth, Anon, will indeed set you free.

8/28/2011 04:21:52 am

Enlightened, Audrey stopped posting after she received threats against both her personally and her husband.

Some people just don't want to think about this, dismiss it as too incredible. My husband is a medical professional and has lived through my pregnancies. And yet, when I showed him the recent "nailiest nail" photos he refused to speculate whether Palin was in fact as pregnant as she claims to have been. If I can't convince my own husband to consider the hoax, I despair of convincing anyone.

(And the irony... his Sept. 08 statement to the effect that Palin wasn't what she represented herself to be was what set me down this rabbit hole in the first place.)

Molly

8/28/2011 04:56:27 am

@Up. That is ironic! I'm really hoping that the books and the film that are due to be released in September will open the floodgates. I think politically, Palin is a spent force...she still has some supporters and can do damage, but the GOP has had enough of her. She has moved the party so far to the right that they are basically unelectable. September just might be "the month of the long knives."

Viola-Alex

8/28/2011 04:56:54 am

@Laura, I have to disagree with you about Sarah calling SAdie's bluff on the photo if it were HER child. I think the last thing SP wants to do-- or maybe it's the last thing her handlers will let her do-- is call attention to a rogue photo of Palin, a baby, and a Johnston that has garnered speculation since it appeared. Yes, I think you'd be right, if it were Sadie and a toddler Trig.

To the person who thinks the PB legal would get the ID right, you're in the wrong decade. That kind of fact-checking is over, even at the NYT.
Oh, excuse me, Laura! That kind of fact checking is over except at Laura Novak's blog.

Viola-Alex

8/28/2011 04:59:40 am

@Up - I had thought a good post might be 6 - 10 anonymous pediatricians weighing in on the newborn Trig photo as to his age.

But I'd also love to see one with 6- 10 OB's weighing in on the NailCoffin photos.

Molly

8/28/2011 05:11:55 am

I agree about the photo in PB. Palin does not want to draw any attention to her babies!

Enlightened

8/28/2011 05:22:24 am

Up - Thanks for the confirmation RE: Audrey. I can't imagine what she endured. No convincing me, I've been a truther for years. In fact, I flew from Anchorage to Juneau in late March of '08, and vividly recall admiring how slim a waistline SP had as she strolled the concourse. Long jacket, check. Scarves. Check. Tiny, and I mean trim tiny, waistline. Things that make you go hmm...

Floyd M. Orr link

8/28/2011 05:27:07 am

Up, I suggest you show your hubby the 2/13/08 video. Men respond to the lack of athletic movement shown by a normal pregnant woman, and there is way too much athleticism displayed in this clip! I know because I is one, a man, that is, and this video is the thing that convinced me several years ago. I also know of other men who have been convinced by this video.

http://niafs.blogspot.com/2011/06/perfidy-of-sarah-palin.html

Balzafiar

8/28/2011 05:33:37 am

The use of an ellipsis does not indicate a certain profession. Use of it in text indicates an omission of a word, sentence, paragraph or several paragraphs which contain words not necessary to convey the current thought.

I use it occasionally. More frequently I use an en or em dash which indicates a continuation of a particular thought rather than an omission. It just depends on what I am typesetting.

The en (short) dash, em (long) dash and ellipsis are not interchangeable as they mean two different things.

When a writer on the computer does not have the ability to keystroke an en or em dash, two consecutive hyphens are used instead.

When a text document is imported into a page layout program such as InDesign and the import preferences are set correctly, the double hyphen is converted into a single dash. In today's world this is usually an en dash because except in perhaps the legal world, the use of em dashes has fallen in popularity.

In typography, the choice of either dash can depend upon the typeface being used, too. Sometimes an en dash is just too short.

ginny11

8/28/2011 05:38:55 am

I just thought of something re: Sadie thinking ANon238 is legit. In the past, Sadie has insisted that she is sure Sarah is the birth mother of Trig, and she has insisted that she thinks there is no way Bristol could have been pregnant in fall '07-winter/spring '08. But Anon238 says Bristol is the birth mom of Trig and not Sarah. So, is Sadie trying to tell us something without actually "saying" it, but telling us Anon238 is legit?

Ottoline

8/28/2011 05:48:20 am

Viola-Alex and Laura: I too would love to see a panel of anon pediatricians and another panel of anon ob/gyns -- to answer some simple qu plus offer any comment they like. Upon seeing this, we might be able to get other MDs (like our own! upon special request) to weigh in in the same way.

Once there was a body of anon opinion, some other MDs might want to comment on the record, re whether s/he agrees with this body of anon opinion.

BluedogAK

8/28/2011 06:06:59 am

I'm just catching up on the comments speculating about the identity of IM Anonymous (or, if there is more than one: Anonymii?). Apologies if the speculation is finished and I'm rehashing old material.

FWIW, last summer I had a conversation with a cousin of Ivy Frye's. She said that Ivy was so devoted to Palin that Ivy had cut off her own family, who are mostly liberals. Nobody in the family understood her behavior. This makes me wonder if Ivy really would talk about the Palins in the way that Anonymous's informant does, no matter how frustrated she might be. (Also, would Britta's mother write things like "Screw you!" as well as the other vulgarities? Just doesn't seem like casual usage from a psychology professional who is also married to a pastor.)

Perhaps Anonymous is a friend of Meg Stapleton's. It doesn't seem like Meg has completely separated from the Palins--she recently appeared in "The Undefeated" lauding Sarah's great accomplishments as a governor, for one thing. A friend of Meg's might very well be familiar with "news org" as a figure of speech. Anonymous also specifically referred to Meg fretting over Sarah's pill use--who would Meg tell something like that to if not a close friend? Perhaps Meg was also involved with the photo shoot attempt with Trig and thus knew the inside details.

I also wonder if Anonymous is a friend of Meg's dating back to Meg's television days as a reporter, meaning someone who has some facility with the English language. The incorrect use of grammar and punctuation certainly wouldn't rule out a reporter or producer type. (I once worked with a journalist who asked me how to spell "rabbit.")

Even if Anonymous is a reporter or associated with a news outlet, I don't see him/her pursuing a story that would damage Stapleton and probably not get any traction with the bosses anyway, given the current attitude toward Palin's pregnancy/children by Alaska reporters.

On an unrelated note, Julia O'Malley just gave birth to a boy, as reported in the Anchorage Daily News gossip column, "The Ear." Perhaps her own experiences might cause her to reconsider some of Palin's story--particularly Palin's quick recovery and willingness to drag a premature baby to the office so soon after birth.

Viola-Alex

8/28/2011 06:37:18 am

@BlueDogAK - very interesting about Fry'e family. makes serving Palin sound like a cult.

@Balzafiar - the only people I knew who used an ellipsis were professional dialogue writers for screen and stage. It indicates a trailing thought. But Lynne Truss, the funny grammar writer, spotlighted the ellipsis as a phenom of email and internet writing to mean a shift in content. It's definitely a writer's toy / tool.

crystalwolfakacaligrl

8/28/2011 06:44:22 am

I would like to make a point about "Ketamine"
Have you ever taken your cat to the Vets to have a dental? The cat comes back eyes dilated, acting freaky like it is on on ACID?
That is Ketamine.
For small animal anesthesia it is considered safer b/c it preserves the swallowing reflex thus intubation is not necessary.
Wiki says: "ketamine is still used in human medicine as an anesthetic, however, due to the hallucinations which may be caused by ketamine, it is not typically used as a primary anesthetic, although it is the anaesthetic of choice when reliable ventilation equipment is not available."
I know it is used in topical meds by RX. Neuropathies, joint pain & Complex regional pain syndrome.
Illegally it is called "Special K" "Ketamine makes the user feel disassociated from their body and can cause hallucinations. The user may feel sleepy or sluggish, or confused and clumsy. They may babble, appear drunk..."
I think anons point in bring it up was to let Sarah know she knew about the "Lipo-disolve"and or joint pain brought about by poor nutrition. Also her use of Sarah having bad nutrition could be a nice way of saying:
1)Food issue/anorexia/bulimia
2)drug addiction-amphetamines
3)Achololism

I'll take door #2!
I also think its Britta's Mom. SP hasn't said a word about her Newest granddaughter.
Imagine how that must hurt Britta's mom?

Laura Novak link

8/28/2011 06:48:44 am

Blue Dog and Enlightened...I love it when folks from "up there" tell us local news and remind us of their personal experiences with all things Palin. And I don't mean the trolls who pretend to know the family so well and know how great they are.

And Iove ellipses and I plan to use them until the courts tell me I can't! :-)

Floyd M. Orr link

8/28/2011 06:58:01 am

Put me down for Door #2, too, Caligrl. I think what she does is what we used to call Riding the Roller Coaster. Brad and Laura, on the matter of Sarah's college degree, I don't know if this has already been mentioned here or not, but the story is that UI will call someone with only two years of attendance an alumnus.

Molly

8/28/2011 07:01:46 am

I love the tidbits from Alaska too!

I also love ellipses, but I never knew there was a name for the dots, or that you were supposed to limit them to three or four................. :)

Bob

8/28/2011 07:05:51 am

Would ketamine explain her inability to form a sentence, sometimes, or express a coherent thought? She speaks in word salads more than any other public figure i know--and from what i've seen, she did not used to be quite as bad.

Laura Novak link

8/28/2011 07:16:16 am

Good question, Bob. And that reminds me: Allie RN, I left an email for you. Please phone home ET!!

Bob

8/28/2011 07:21:16 am

And would it increase someone's paranoia??? (is there a name for three question marks in a row???) or hyper-sensitivity???

In her case, paranoia is appropriate, as many of us really do want to see her machinations exposed. And among her own circle, she seems to have made many enemies.

Beaglemom

8/28/2011 07:23:59 am

B from Aug. 27 at 17:36. I agree about msm writers who dismiss bloggers/commenters who have persisted in addressing Sarah Palin's many, many issues. The msm silence with regard to all of the evidence, especially the evidence related to the fake pregnancy, is very troubling.

Lidia17

8/28/2011 07:39:20 am

I would not read too much into the ellipses. I employ them quite a bit, using one key command… [option semi-colon on a Mac]. Guaranteed a perfect set of three dots every time…

mary

8/28/2011 07:41:01 am

Lidia17, that is so cool - I have a mac and did not know that!

Oh, also…!

SunnyVee

8/28/2011 07:46:43 am

Lidia17,
You are my hero of the day :)
cool keyboard tip ! Thanks

FrostyAK

8/28/2011 07:48:23 am

Many illicit drugs could explain the word salad - any of them, all of them. Meth is as easily available as pot in the Wasilla area. As is coke and oxycotin.

I read something about ketamine that said experimentation in rats showed a tongue behavior similar to $P's. Ever wonder what kind of doc or multiple docs would prescribe such a thing over a long period of time?

So many things partially explained, so many left buried for those under the bus to reveal. I wonder how much her monthly payments are to those under the bus who know too much... and how long she will be able to continue such payments.

crystalwolfakacaligrl

8/28/2011 07:50:43 am

@Bob & Laura,
I think her word salad and paranoia from amphetamine use not Ketamine :) Ketamine is like ACID! Eyes are extremely dilated...and the blink reflex is impaired in cats/sm animals we had to put eye ointment in their eyes b/c of that.

crystalwolfakacaligrl

8/28/2011 07:54:42 am

@FrostyinAK,
The tongue think could be amphetamines.( very dry mouth) Ketamine Preserves the swallow reflex so the tongue would be going in and out each swallow. Her tongue thing is different. Maybe from some sort of anti-psych drug?

crystalwolfakacaligrl

8/28/2011 07:58:09 am

@Frosty should be "Thing" tongue thing :)

Balzafiar

8/28/2011 08:02:32 am

There is no name for 3 questions marks in a row, thank goodness. If you want to use something quirky involving question marks, use the interrobang (aka interabang) if you have a font which contains it.

It is a combination question mark/exclamation mark overlaid so they form a single symbol.

Since the interrobang can not possibly be used with proper grammar, it is more of an oddity than anything useful except to people who don't write proper grammar anyway. Sarah would likely love it!

Molly

8/28/2011 08:06:27 am

I just viewed Lydia's film on Floyd's site. She was doing the tongue thing back then.

mxm

8/28/2011 08:28:55 am

I would like to go back to one point - anon238 confirmed that SarahPAC pays for Trig's nannies.

Up until April 2010, Ivy Frye was paid $5000/month by SarahPAC.

We saw Ivy Frye with Bristol Palin during much of the DWTS season (beginning in August 2010). I believe she disappeared before the end of the season though. Trig also had a nanny at the time.

Carol Ryan and Marilyn Lane, both long time Heath and Palin family friends were first paid by the PAC in July of 2010. They started out making $2500/month for clerical support. I suspect since checks were issued in July, they probably started in June 2010. There were other people being paid for clerical support, and she had a scheduler (legit I believe) who was being paid $5400/month.

In 2011, SarahPAC has paid the following to the Wasilla women for clerical work:

Carol Ryan, $5000/month

Marilyn Lane,$2500/month

And she has so much clerical work in AK that she had to bring Marilyn's daughter on board. Tiffany Lane, Anchorage, is paid $2500/month for clerical work.

mxm

8/28/2011 08:31:37 am

I would like to bring over anon238's specific comments on the nannies, payment, etc:

1st comment:

You would be sad at the things Trig "knows". He is friendly with most anyone who is kind and genuine...but he doesn't have the parental attachment to anyone. He pines for Todd, who genuinely loves him. But Sarah uses Trig as a pawn. Todd offered to care for him instead of Sarah paying someone $7500 a month. (and I fully expect Gryphen to post about who "someone" is one of these days as it will NOT stay hidden much longer) And Sarah is CHEAP ASS CHEAP so I thought she would jump at the chance. But once she knew Todd actually WANTED Trig...she said no just because she knew it would hurt him.

2nd comment:

For the person who guessed SPac is footing the bill for Trig's care--yes you are absolutely correct. The way they have things being paid through the PAC is insane. There are made up companies and LLCs, obviously inflated payments--like $10,000 paid for a product or service which only costs $2,500. The difference goes back into Palin pockets...to be spent on cosmetic surgeries, luxury goods, you name it. Trig's care comes from PAC funds and Sarah is such an idiot she ignores all the people who tell her she can use that money for anything she wants as long as she isn't running for office.

Alaskan

8/28/2011 08:37:16 am

Just for fun - it's already been attended to.
An ellipsis is also called a "suspension point".
Punctuation inside or out of quotes? Depends on the style manual.

Boils down to colloquial American usage. I don't know why Americans felt the need to formally change it. I prefer the classic English - end of sentence marks on the outside of the quote (inside the quote when quoting someone's voice), consistent in all British colony countries, Spanish, German, etc.
British use logical quotations and Americans use typesetters' quotations.

Here's the explanation of why: Americans had trouble with typesetting machines. The period on the outside of the quotation mark routinely went missing, got dropped, causing regular and annoying typographical error. So they stuck all the punctuation marks inside the quotation marks to keep track of it. Then it just became the convention and evolved into what is formally taught in American schools.

"The King's English" is a style manual (1906).

Other fun common sources of debate and contention -
Comma usage general rule: commas replace the word 'and' and should not be used WITH the word. Ex: Green, yellow, blue and brown.

Apostrophes: ONLY for contractions and possession. Nothing else. Ever. A terminally common error is using it with numbers - "the 1970's" instead of 1970s.

In the end, it doesn't matter which style you use, as long as you are consistent throughout and don't switch back and forth. So, pick a style and go with it. Uniformly.
When in doubt and it's important, like defending a Ph.D. or submitting to a publishing house, follow directions and use exactly what they tell you.

mxm

8/28/2011 08:41:52 am

I would like to cover another topic: the date Bristol gave birth to Trig/Ruffles.

Anon238 said this:

I'm not sure of the exact date. I know he was already born on Valentine's day 2008, though. I have not actually seen the birth certificate, only heard discussion by family members as to why they can never show it. Sarah is desperate to get a good fake but scared presenting a fake would be her undoing. She has begged CBJ for help with this, but CBJ has definitely had enough with "helping" Sarah and has refused.
________

I would like to suggest that Bristol gave birth earlier - as early as late Dec or early January. Those dates fit with other facts that have been culled from 3 years worth of reporting.

Trig would still have been born before Feb 14th, 2008 and he would have been startling premature.

Balzafiar

8/28/2011 08:46:44 am

Typography 101 is now closed for the day.

Back to more important things – babies! :-)

Molly

8/28/2011 08:49:57 am

8/28/2011 08:52:22 am

@BluedogAK. Maybe O'Malley was pregnant when she wrote Make.It.Stop and was sympathetic to Palin for having her "pregnant" body studied. Would be great if her pregnancy and childbirth experience caused her to recant. But I think she was being told what to write by superiors, so she won't ever correct what she wrote.

Alaskan

8/28/2011 09:17:24 am

ah, bummer, too late for the party. But I was the only one with interesting original thoughts! C'mon.

mxm

8/28/2011 09:30:07 am

on the paci/stroller post there are 2 new comments that seem to reveal more truth

Viola-Alex

8/28/2011 09:57:07 am

Always happy to help a sister watchdog. this was posted on the Bristol-stroller post earlier today.

--

Gryphen, hope you don't mind if I appropriate a comment space.

I have been trying to post this on Laura Novak's blog for half an hour and nothing happens when I hit the post button, so I am posting it here since I think most of the folks who read/post there also read here.

Hey sleuths! I'm amazed at the depth of research you can glean just from writing style! I just wanted to throw my hat in with a few opinions.
I think it's dangerous to assume the two anons are the same simply because of 'three dots'. I remember in high school English, my teacher said if someone used more or less than three, it was a sign they didn't known precise rules of grammar and writing. I myself always use 'no more, no less' (as you say) than three and I am definitely not either anon. I also notice many people put things in quotes for emphasis or other reasons.
I think the only giveaway here is that we can tell both posters are educated. I thought CBJ herself might have been 4:38. The fear in 4:38's voice concerning possible discovery of her identity seemed very genuine.

Whereas 4:38 seemed to have a list of specific things she wanted to get off her chest, 2:38 seemed to enjoy venting about Bristol and suddenly realized venting *more* would not only make her feel better, but really be a thorn in Sarah's wrinkled, scaly claw. 2:38 seemed to be writing in a stream of consciousness style, relaying whatever happened to come to mind. She was funny and her pop culture reference to "it's the bomb" showed someone who does not limit humor just because the topic at hand is serious. 4:38 sounded so terrified, so...broken, I guess is the word...I really can't see her being funny like 2:38 nor can I picture 4:38 using phrases like "jack shit" and "the old bitch".

I think we have two women, one in the healthcare field, one possibly a wife or family member of someone in Sarah's inner sanctum. They are both educated but 4:38 is older than 2:38. 4:38 has children and has mentioned being the breadwinner of the family. 2:38 has not (to my recollection) mentioned or implied having children.
I also think if it were the same person, 2:38 would have waited five minutes to post...because 2:38 and 4:38 are so similar, the connection would be easy to make. I think it was just a coincidence and never would have happened if we had one person trying to sound like two people.
My final point and then I will stop rambling, I swear. Sadie Johnston has verified the story of Bristol teaching Tripp to have a negative reaction to photos of Sadie. That is a very specific, detailed event. I don't think it's possible to just happen to come up with something like that if 2:38 was just spinning yarns. 2:38 is in the know, and I wouldn't be shocked if things are decidedly unpleasant at Chateau Quitter right now.

silver

8/28/2011 10:12:29 am

Has anyone tried running the anon comments through a program such as http://www.hackerfactor.com/GenderGuesser.php#Analyze for gender identity and other clues?

Laura Novak link

8/28/2011 10:14:38 am

Thanks, V-A. Not sure what they are talking about. All comments are coming through just fine. But hey, it's important that people post somewhere, and Gryphen's site is such an important one. So, thanks for sharing so that we will not have missed it. They are welcome to come here and try again!

SunnyVee

8/28/2011 10:39:27 am

In reply to mxm, who said -
"I would like to suggest that Bristol gave birth earlier - as early as late Dec or early January..."

I (V) think we should stick with this option for a while - as one of the troll comments on IM REALLY stuck with me, again, today - and this totally fits their non-denial denial habits, when someone commented, (paraphrased)

"Believe me, Bristol was not even thinking about babies in early 2009."

Secondly, although I am the worst/wildest speculator of all...I agree that we should quit trying to guess the identity of anon238 and work more with the pieces of info we've got.

My 2 cents :)

PS - LAURA, I HAD TO RESUBMIT MY COMMENT SEVERAL TIMES TO GET IT TO POST SUCCESSFULLY.

Karen

8/28/2011 10:46:56 am

Karen

8/28/2011 10:49:18 am

From the Bristol thread at IM, a couple of really interesting comments, such as Bristol introduced Tripp's "paccy" as a toddler by dipping the pacifier in chocolate when he became verbal enough to say something in front of a cameraman that Bristol didn't like. Also, Tripp still sleeps with mom. But this one, below, shows that someone VERY close to this family is on the blogs and starting to boil over:

2:41 PM
Anonymous said...

Sweet baby Jesus in the manger. This thread is literally almost unreadable due to Bristol's dozens of posts.

Oh and Brissie-poo, everyone knows it's you. Everyone. I can't wait until the crew on your "show" starts talking. I heard you keep everyone waiting many times a day because you just have to write "work related" texts. What work, you lazy buffoon?!

Sooner or later the crew will figure out you are replying to posts right here on the IM, not texting. And Kyle has already emailed Les- "I thought I was doing a show with Bristol. Not Bristol on her iPhone 24/7". Kyle also says you let Tripp sit in stinky diapers while you finish "this one thing real quick". You are such a disgusting cow! You post all these comments about Tripp ice skating and wearing regular underwear, meanwhile we all know it's you, NOBODY is convinced of your lies, and poor Tripp gets to sit in his own filth when he should be potty trained.

It bears repeating, I'll do it in Julia O'Malley style:
You. Are. A. Disgusting. Cow. BRISTOL.

notafaux

8/28/2011 11:11:16 am

@mxm. Just this morning I was thinking, "I sure hope mxm starts pulling together those comments about SarahPac that Anon2:38 posted at IM." And here you are! Thank you.

Note to Laura: The SarahPac "clerical" expenditures would be an ideal topic for further investigation in a main post. It might even filter into the MSM, considering the recent push-back against Palin by GOP pundits, and the forthcoming books by Joe McGinniss, Levy Johnston, and the mysterious "Fred." Well, OK, one can at least dream about the MSM part.... [Having been a college English instructor and a professional editor/writer in previous lives, I couldn't resist the (current) accepted use of ellipses and the American quasi-convention of placing a period inside quotation marks:-)]

Laura Novak link

8/28/2011 11:16:20 am

Thanks, Sunny Vee for letting me know. I'll let Weebly know as well. Not sure what's going on. Have not seen that before. Glad you're here now!

8/28/2011 11:22:46 am

Ginny11, from what Gryphen has said, it sounds like Mercede initially believed that Trig was Palin's child -- i.e., she was not part of the insider's club that was privy to the machinations, which presumably means Levi also kept secrets from her (an idea she at first rejected.) G recently said that Mercede had changed her thinking re: Trig, at least to some extent, not because of any insider information, but because of things she'd heard on IM.
I think it's possible that she's known the truth all along but couldn't or wouldn't tell for one of several plausible reasons. Not a slam against her: I also think she has more integrity than the Palin clan put together. But I could imagine there were forces at play that have kept her muzzled at times. Anyway, the main point is that according to Gryphen, her (professed) views on Trig's parentage have changed.

the seeker

8/28/2011 11:36:49 am

Just a heads up - anon has added what appears to be a very recent comment to the original thread at IM.

Bon appetit! Lol

the seeker

8/28/2011 11:47:31 am

Guess I should add a little content while waiting for folks to jump in.

She (presuming a female) is surprised by all the interest, wants to preserve anonymity out of fear of Palin's supporters (NOT Palin herself) and expressly denies being Elizabeth Hansen or anon 432.

In my opinion it only adds to her credibility, but read it for yourself...

notafaux

8/28/2011 11:52:23 am

Oops. "Levy" s/b "Levi" in my previous comment. (Would have circled that one in red on student papers/writers' manuscripts. Blushing a bit reddish here.)

the seeker

8/28/2011 11:57:06 am

... and, in further breaking news, anon has JUST posted a second half of her update.

Go! Now...!!! Lol

Balzafiar

8/28/2011 11:57:17 am

Well, pardon MY French, but after reading that delicious info, I think the shit is about to hit the fan.

Woo-hoo!

mary

8/28/2011 12:13:48 pm

Could someone post the most recent posts by anon? I have looked and haven't seen anything that jumps out at me...

mxm

8/28/2011 12:18:25 pm

latest from anon238 on the Broomfield post:

Anonymous said...
Wow. All I can say is, pardon my French...holy shit. I'm going to split this up in two comments for length.

I can't believe all the speculation over who I am! My honest motivation was just to piss off Sarah and Bristol as I had just reached a breaking point with their lies and manipulations. Getting a little info out to the masses was just an added bonus.

I feel compelled to comment right now for a few reasons. The most obvious is that I do not want others blamed for my words and choices--which were mine alone. I am not Gryphen and was a little shocked people thought I might be. If Gryphen was going to relay that type of apparently "bombshell" information...why wouldn't he put it on his main blog where he'd get tons of traffic? He certainly would not put it in comments on an old post.

As to the speculation about Elizabeth Hansen-- I just don't feel right letting it go on. She's a delightful woman, the polar opposite of Sarah...and her daughter Britta is the polar opposite of Bristol. Both Hansens are bright, articulate, compassionate, and generous. They couldn't be more different from the Palins. I am definitely NOT Elizabeth Hansen.

For all interested in ultimately seeing the fall of Empire Palin, I simply beg of you to concentrate on the information I've provided and not my identity. Uncovering my identity will serve one purpose and one only; I would no longer feel safe posting here and I might even face pushback at home in the valley. Sadie is correct in surmising the majority of locals dislike Palin. But the ones who are still on her side...there is just no explaining how ruthless and vindictive they can be. The person who I care about, the one who has vented so much Palin related frustration to me has said Sarah's hardcore, never say die base reminds them (I'm not using male/female pronouns in attempt to protect their identity) of that old bumper sticker which reads "Dear Lord, Protect Me From Your FOLLOWERS!"

That is why, for the first time, I have taken steps to hide my location. When I'm at home and it shows up as Wasilla, I don't worry because I know only Gryphen can see our IP addresses and the specifics about us. But now that I'm traveling out of state, I am in a small town visiting family and it seems foolhardy to broadcast that location when so many people (undoubtedly some who are Palin supporters and would love to see me mis-step in such a way that reveals my identity and thus the identity of the person within Sarah's inner circle) are trying to figure out who I am.

I really AM pressed for time--I will be visiting seven cities and nine different family/friends in less than three weeks. But I am using travel time to make notes about the (many!) instances over the last two years which have made me think "this woman will NEVER get away with acting like this!" (If only I had been right...)

Provided I still feel my safety is uncompromised, when I return home I will post as much as I can with as much detail as I can. On that note, let me close with the following--first, I'd be remiss in not mentioning the theory that I and "anon 4:32/nurse Shitfire" are the same person. I implore everyone not to read too much into minor style similarities. I believe I know who 4:32 is and I can't say strongly enough--she has a lot to lose if it was discovered she posted that information. I think she definitely IS scared of Sarah, where I myself am scared of her followers but would happily tell Sarah herself to kiss my pasty white ass.
5:03 PM
Anonymous said...
She and I (assuming I know who she is, and I really think I do) are both multi-degreed and I really think the only similarities are the basic correct usage of punctuation and grammar. Even if there were multiple overriding similarities, I still encourage everyone not to waste time on that line of inquiry. My initial motivation was to piss Sarah off when I posted...but I think her motivations were unselfish from the beginning. For me...I admit it gave me a moment of unfettered joy to think of her quaking in her ugly shoes when she realized her ketamine secret was out. BUT--after seeing the reactions of some people, my motivation shifted and I now want to aid in taking out the threat of a Palinized country.

To that end, let me tell you what I know about Trig.
When I say he was born by Valentine's day 2008, I mean he was here by then but I'm not sure at what point prior to that he arrived. I have seen a photo--I saw it in late 2009 but was told it was from the previous year's February...and it showed a tiny, tiny baby in a baby outfit which said "mommy's lil valentine". I wish I had been able to see the ears close up but he was wearing a little hat so I don't recall his ears being visible. The photo I saw was a framed photo on a white wooden shelf and the person I know took a photo of THAT photo with a cell phone. Much of what I have seen is via photos taken by this person. I will just

NSG

8/28/2011 12:18:33 pm

@mary, IMO, they're too long to re-post.

They're the last 2 comments on this thread:
http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=9361564&postID=4190158141129121771

HTH.

@the seeker, thx for the heads-up! Wow!

mxm

8/28/2011 12:19:47 pm

continuing:

I will just say if this person ever wants to make a mint, they could sell just a handful! One of them is Sarah smoking a cigarette and she doesn't look like it's her first puff around the block.

I also have been told by this person that prior to making her pregnancy announcement, Sarah was terrified someone would see Trig. She was going to wait until a certain point in time to "announce" but someone in the family threatened to leak the information. I have seen an email Sarah wrote (not in the email archives, oddly enough) to five people and it said, in regard to the pregnancy "I really think 2 months is the least amount of time we could get away with". She felt if she announced it and was "pregnant", it had to be at least two months between the announcement and the birth. Obviously something happened to shorten that time.

Finally, thank you Sadie for confirming what I'm certain was an immensely painful experience to recount. I'm sure you know there are many instances I did not include, things Bristol has said which are so vile I didn't have the heart to even type them. I am so sorry your family has been victimized by these cruel thugs. Sadie, I know there are things you have had to keep close to the vest. In time we will all be able to shout it from the rooftops, honey.

I'm signing off for the rest of my trip. I will close by saying I've heard Sarah is so pissed she's practically incoherent. Look for her to be way way UP (from the sheer angst over being found out) or way way DOWN (from bring tranquilized like a horse about to undergo surgery) at her 9/3 event. Bristol is "dealing" with these revelations by posting here non stop, apparently. What a dolt.

Have a great week, Bristol and Sarah. I shall have great fun considering what to share upon my return!
5:09 PM

mary

8/28/2011 12:26:32 pm

Thank you, mxm, for posting. I didn't think to look on the old thread! SO interesting. Thanks again.

8/28/2011 12:58:17 pm

wow, just wow....

Sarah is going to have to declare for the media to investigate more closely. The one media outlet which responded to my request for hard reporting on her record said they'd do a story when she is a serious candidate. (Unless McGinniss & Fred's books create enough controversy.)

There are so many politicos and news orgs who will have egg on their faces if this comes out. I'm sure none of them is anxious for that moment. The story generated will have to be too big to ignore.

notafaux

8/28/2011 01:16:12 pm

@Karen. Anon2:41PM says re Bristol: "I heard you keep everyone waiting many times a day because you just have to write 'work related' texts." I'm wondering: Is Bristol being funded by SarahPac--i.e., is one of her "work-related" tasks to post comments at IM and other anti-Pain blogs? As I recall, on Palingates mxm provided a break-down of at least one SarahPac 2010 quarterly filing that listed an LLC, which appeared to be a direct conduit of funds to Bristol. The question is whether that LLC still exists and continues to issue a paycheck to Bristol.

mxm

8/28/2011 01:29:54 pm

notafaux,

Are you recalling the Pie Spy reimbursement to SarahPAC? That is the only item I can remember that caused some consternation. But, Pie Spy is Palin's marketing company (yeah, right) and it reimbursed the PAC for air travel expenses. There were comments speculating that it was a route to funnel money to Bristol.

Sharon_Too_Also

8/28/2011 01:49:15 pm

@mxm Me thinks those nay sayers on the other blog are going to be sorry they missed the boat that anon238 just unmoored.

Rationalist

8/28/2011 01:59:57 pm

Wow. That's all I can say. Assuming all Anon says is true (and my gut feeling is that this person is telling the truth), how can the ruse go on much longer?

I just don't see how it can.

omomma

8/28/2011 02:03:23 pm

The period goes outside the quotation mark if it is the end of the sentence. It goes inside the quotation mark if it was in the quoted material.

Check MLA rules for full explanation.

Laura Novak link

8/28/2011 02:04:22 pm

Holy Shit Balls, Batman. Wow is right. Wow is all I can say too.

Thank you MXM for posting the comments here. I might have missed them.

This is better than the RHNJ any day.

But what a long day it's been. So, I'm logging off for now. Will toss this puppy back into moderation. But please feel free to comment and I'll approve early in the morning.

Once again, just wow. 'Night all, and safe and sound dreams to all of you on the East Coast. You're in my thoughts.

Anonfornow

8/28/2011 02:07:08 pm

I went back through all of IM's Innercircle Anon comments (hope I got them all) and here is a rundown of the information I found:

* She/he is posting to annoy Bristol and Sarah.
*She thinks Bristol is dumb and a terrible mother
*Bristol is Trig's mother; Anon is protecting the ID of the father
*Bristol has delivered three children and had one miscarriage
*Bristol's DWTS baby was a boy; it is being kept hidden
*Todd genuinely loves Trig and wanted to care for him but Sarah refused just to be nasty
*SarahPAC foots the $7,500/month bill for his care
*Sarah never adopted Trig
*Trig needs eye surgery but isn't getting it
*Anon thinks Todd is a "totally God complex dickhead" altho he is gentle and tender with Trig
*Track hates Sarah but directs his anger at Todd
*Willow is acting out for attention
*Bristol is obsessively jealous about Sadie
*Sadie "could take that tramp DOWN" but doesn't because she cares for Tripp
*Anon does not have all the family secrets. Info comes from someone in the inner circle who takes photos with his/her cell phone. These photos alone would be enough to destroy Sarah
*Trig was already born by Valentines Day and very TINY. May have been born earlier than February.
*CBJ wants nothing more to do with Sarah and her lies
*Trig was not born at MSRMC
*Chuck and Sally were photographed holding a ten pound reantababy
*Frank included the photo of Ruffles in his book as a warning to Sarah, as an "insurance policy" against her revenge. Frank knows the truth.
*One of Sarah's sisters doesn't know everything, since when she tentatively asked Sarah about Gryphen's post about the ear deformity, Sarah went ballistic and didn't talk to her for a month
*Sarah has frequently thought the "game was up" but every time the MSM doesn't go after the evidence.
*the leaked RAM tweets were censored--there was something more damaging in them.
*Sarah uses Ketamine ointment for her aching joints and stress
*Sarah "self medicates" with an unspecified substance/s
*Sarah doesn't run and is in terrible shape
*Sarah has "handlers" and they pushed her to take some photos with Trig
*There are both cell phone snaps and videos of an x-rated Bristol in existence; Sarah knows
*Sarah's "inner circle" is shrinking
*Sarah didn't graduate from college
*Anon thinks Sarah's kids are "an ill mannered brood" and Todd is "a narcissistic pseudo spouse."
*Anon's personal interactions with Sarah have been limited; the info comes from someone Anon cares for, someone Sarah has "wrung the life out of"
*Anon likes the Hansons
*Anon seems sympathetic to Sadie
*Sarah smokes cigarettes
*At least five people who worked with Sarah knew about the pregnancy, since she discussed it in an email sent to five, in which she pondered how long she had to pretend to be pregnant
*Sadie knows far more than what she is telling.

Sorry for the length, but I thought it might help to see it all in one place.

I will not speculate on Anon's identity, since we don't want to scare him/her away.

notafaux

8/28/2011 02:52:54 pm

@mxm. Possibly Pie Spy. Though I seem to remember something about "communications," "promoting" certain kinds of events(?). Was the Pie Spy theory finally debunked, or did it become yet another nebulous entity in the grand Palin scam?

V ictoria link

8/28/2011 04:38:10 pm

Why is the MSM not touching this? There's certainly enough evidence to warrant an investigation. Obviously Rove is ready to throw her under the bus.

Is it because there would be egg on too many faces? FOX, obviously, Harper Collins, the religious right, everyone associated with the McCain campaign?

Or are they still terrified of being dan-rathered?

tolkien

8/28/2011 05:34:40 pm

notafaux - I believe you're probably thinking of BSMP, LLC (Bristol Sheeran Marie Palin).

Exp:Nov.05/08

8/28/2011 09:56:49 pm

Thanks to all for keeping the thread going, and for copying and pasting the 'anon' quotes we might miss that become buried.
I am now of the belief that 'anon 2:38' is for real. If not, they're doing an excellent job of bluffing, and either way, the Palins who read (pretty sure Bristol's been all over the boards commenting at IM) any of this are losing it right now and trying to think of ways to 'get ahead' of this information.

They have always known it's only a matter of time before the ticking stops. You can't keep that many people close, holding your secrets, and still keep them at arm's length, scared that they'll tell your secrets.
I find with people like SP, that's when things get really weird - when what you know about them becomes more valuable than what they can offer you to keep quiet. This was bound to happen eventually. The one thing SP can't guarantee is that everyone around her is as screwed-up as she is.
It's one thing for SP to be disordered enough to hold damaging information in order to protect a lie. It's another thing for people around her to be expected - without being asked - to uphold secrets like that to protect her lies. The guilt would eat a normal person alive inside. They'd have to spill their guts to someone.

Enter anon2:38!

It's like Leonard Cohen says -

There is a crack, a crack, in everything
That's how the light gets in :)

Knowing that SP reads here, and at IM, she is no doubt shitting a proverbial brick right now. Who dared bring a cellphone into the compound and take a photo of a photo? How many photos did they take?
What else did they capture?
What else can they prove??
The Palins NEED to try to get ahead of this!

I'd like to shake the hand that took that photo. And I'm willing to bet that there are many more. Someone got some insurance of their own with that action - not unlike Bailey's Palin/baby photo. Unfortunately, when you're playing with people like this, sometimes you have to adapt to their rules.

Even if SP narrows it down to who it could be, when you don't trust anyone, everyone is a suspect. The anon poster seems to know quite a bit about what's gone on within that inner circle. And they seem to know that five people were the recipients of an email discussing how long she could get away with faking the pregnancy.
If that's really the case, then the Alaskan govt. has seen those emails, and redacted them.

As for the (5) email recipients, I nominate:
Frank Bailey
Bill McAllister
Ivy Frye
Meg Stapleton
...not sure who could be the fifth.

SP and co. could never, ever keep something this big under wraps forever. No wonder she has facial tics and can't keep track of her own stories. The woman is unravelling bit by bit. She has been for at least three years now. Thanks to everyone hear for yanking the threads.

Molly

8/28/2011 10:14:22 pm

Well I'm just catching up and I have to chime in as well with...wow, just wow!
Also too, I agree we shouldn't speculate on the identity of the mystery poster anymore. The information is what is explosive.

notafaux

8/28/2011 10:17:26 pm

@tolkein. Yes, that's it: BSMP, LLC (Bristol Sheeran Marie Palin). Thanks.

Heidi3

8/28/2011 10:22:45 pm

Again discussing the date of Trig #1/Ruffles' birth date, Anon 2:38 told us this:

"To that end, let me tell you what I know about Trig.

When I say he was born by Valentine's day 2008, I mean he was here by then but I'm not sure at what point prior to that he arrived. I have seen a photo--I saw it in late 2009 but was told it was from the previous year's February...and it showed a tiny, tiny baby in a baby outfit which said "mommy's lil valentine".
- - - - -

The 'previous year's February' would make it February, 2008, as Anon 2:38 said. As I mentioned here the other day, a commenter on a blog a few months ago - and I'm almost positive it was at IM, and got buried/slid by as many short comments do there - stated that, after his/her extensive research, CBJ's most recent baby delivery (out of only 3) at that time was 2-7-08. I'm still trying to verify that, and would sure appreciate anyone's help towards that effort.

Anon 2:38's saying a "tiny, tiny baby" also matches Anon 4:32 Shitfire's statement that Trig #1 was born severely premature, two months prior to his supposed 4-18-08 'birth' date.

Some here suggest that Trig #1/Ruffles could have been born in December, 2007 or January, 2008. All theories are possible at this point, but I'd like to submit this:

If Trig #1/Ruffles was born in 12-07, why wouldn't the photo Anon 2:38 mentions show a tiny baby wearing a "Mommy's lil Christmas present" outfit? Instead, he was wearing a Valentine's outfit. Likewise, if he was born in 1-08, might not he be wearing a "Mommy's lil New Years Baby" outfit? The mere fact of the "Mommy's lil Valentine" design, plus all of the other clues we've read, lead me to believe almost conclusively, albeit by unsubstantiated comments, that Trig #1/Ruffles was born in early February, 2008.

The tiny, tiny baby wearing the Valentine's duds had to be stable and old enough to even be wearing clothes. So the photo must have been taken at a point in time when he was out of grave danger, yet when the holiday clothes still made a logical statement as to when he was born.

Next question: who has white wooden shelves that this "mommy's" photo would have been displayed on? I KNOW I've seen pictures showing white shelves, but I can't remember where.

8/28/2011 10:33:54 pm

Heidi3,
I am looking everywhere for that photo of Levi, Keith and a baby that was in one of the tabloids (I think)... the one where everyone was analyzing what Levi's shirt said. Are the shelves behind them white?

8/28/2011 10:37:26 pm

Heidi3, I've been on the fence about Trig's birthdate: 2/7 makes a lot of sense, but the other scenario hangs together for me as well. I don't think we can make too much of the photo we've heard about: if Trig was born << 2/14, maybe he was able to leave the NICU shortly before 2/14, when a Valentine's photo was taken? If anything, if he was born 2/7 significantly prematurely, doesn't that argue against him being photographed in clothes, without tubes & wires & such, shortly before Valentine's Day?
Confusing! Also too, the Ruffles vs Trig thing -- there are a couple of theories that seem to hang together.

Exp:Nov.05/08

8/28/2011 10:41:36 pm

@Heidi3 - weren't there white shelves in the background, behind Keith and Levi Johnston, in the photo of the two of them with (who we're led to believe is) Tripp?

I think CBJ's last delivery and the Valentine's baby clothes add up to a pre-Feb. 14th birthdate for Trig. Sarah's early March announcement must have meant the baby could be unstable for at least another eight to ten weeks.

Turned out to only be about 5.

Tremendous work, everyone.

V ictoria link

8/28/2011 10:43:06 pm

@Heidi III - I don't think we can take the clothing as an indication of when Trig was born. Certainly he was born *by* Feb 14, but the fact that he was wearing the "Lil Valentine" simply indicates that he was probably out of danger by then. I could imagine a relieved Bristol buying him a Valentine's Day outfit because he was finally home, not because he had just been born. To me that is not conclusive.

The statement that CBJ delivered a baby on the 7th is what interests me. As is whenever SP started to wear long scarves, which would indicate that the baby had been born and had been discovered to have DS - so couldn't be adopted by others. When did SP start with the silly scarves?

Molly

8/28/2011 10:43:36 pm

Kris Perry would probably be the fifth recipient of the emails.

I agree that Bailey included the picture of Ruffles in his book for insurance purposes. As regards keeping secrets, how must those five people have felt when they saw Trig being waved around at the convention at all hours of the day and night, and presented to the crowds half-clothed on a freezing night during the book tour.
You'd have to think that some of them at least would have a conscience. That was child abuse, pure and simple.

Molly

8/28/2011 10:52:06 pm

@JJ, I have that pic saved and the shelves are not white.

Molly

8/28/2011 10:54:01 pm

Weren't there white shelves in the background at the baby shower?

mary

8/28/2011 11:20:44 pm

@Exp:Nov. 5/2008, you speculate as to the 5 recipients of the email.

"As for the (5) email recipients, I nominate:
Frank Bailey
Bill McAllister
Ivy Frye
Meg Stapleton
...not sure who could be the fifth. "

I don't think Bill McAllister was in on the scam that early, but I don't know for sure. He wasn't hired by the administration until after Trig was born, as I recall. I would definitely add Todd to the list, and Kris Perry.

mary

8/28/2011 11:38:48 pm

Regarding Bill McAllister - I should add, he was there for the Andrea Gusty shoot, so he might have been in on the fraud before he was employed by SP.

8/28/2011 11:40:38 pm

Does anybody else hope/think that Anon238 spoke to Fred of the Babygate book? In my (possible) fantasy, the book will include that Valentine photo.

Ottoline

8/29/2011 12:17:28 am

Molly: can you post a link to the Valentine's photo? Via tinypic.com, perhaps?

Palin was wearing the scarves before her Mar 5 announcement -- notably in that Women's Conference where she sits leaning way forward, legs crossed, admonishing Hillary for thin skin. Not sure how much earlier.

V ictoria: The baby would not have to be home from hospital in order to snap a photo of him in clothes brought from home.

anon238's statement that CBJ helped at first and then would not is VERY interesting. So did CBJ have anything to do with the medical letter? My take is perhaps CBJ wrote it and Palin altered it; OR Palin forged the whole thing.

I've had babies in the NICU, and they aren't always entubated or connected via wires. Not all the time, in some cases, for some of that time.

To me, the exact date of Trig's birth is not as interesting as anon238 unequivocal statement that Trig was not born as stated, on Apr 18. Yesssssss!

My experience is that clothes with sayings (like Val Day) are worn more than on just that day, so anon238's words ("he was here before Val Day"), more than the photo, serve to date the birth way before Apr 18.

V ictoria, re why no MSM coverage: to me, it sure points to a fat-cat, Repub-puppetmaster sort of moratorium in papers they own or influence. If Rupert's British paper could keep the secret of bugging phones for so many years (even after the Royals complained), I no longer feel it is far-fetched to think there's a similar moratorium on PalinHoax stories, mainly because of the collateral damage such stories will do to the enablers, even if they lie to deny.

Molly

8/29/2011 12:22:12 am

Ottoline, I don't have a link to the Valentine photo. I think Anon238 had seen that on a cell phone. I was referring to the photo of Levi, Keith and Tripp and the shelves in the background.

Laura Novak link

8/29/2011 12:23:21 am

Very true that even very tiny preemies get dressed up in NICUs. It's a milestone for moms and a way to try to being living a "normal" life with a baby, doing things you'd otherwise do, like dress them.

And I've said this before and I'll say it again: being in a NICU does NOT mean intubation or that they are tethered with tubes and wires. They make progress and can be "unplugged" for photos etc.

Laura Novak link

8/29/2011 12:25:16 am

More importantly...does anyone remember Blue Tex or Blue Texas or something from IM a few years back. I believe the premise of his/her argument was that FIVE people know the truth. And now Anon is saying five people got the email.

Sources tell me that Bill McA. was as surprised as anyone else about her pregnancy. My guess is that she didn't respect him. She used him. I wouldn't think he's one of them.

Molly

8/29/2011 12:33:23 am

Palin was wearing a scarf at the Governor's conference on Feb. 25th.

http://www.america2050.org/2008/02/governors-recreate-1808-photo.html

She wasn't wearing a scarf on her hike around Juneau and that was supposed to be in late February.

http://palingates.blogspot.com/2010/02/hiking-with-sarah-palin-in-juneau-video.html

V ictoria link

8/29/2011 12:34:56 am

@Ottoline: I agree that a lot of the papers are influenced by the Murdochs, but surely not all of them. Or is it a combination of embarrassment from prior slip-ups? For example, I could imagine that David Gregory feels like a complete idiot for nodding and saying "how cool" (am paraphrasing) instead of "how insane and irresponsible and impossible" when he heard about SP's Wild Ride? But what about Keith at Current TV? Or are all males too afraid to go there? What about the National Enquirer? If not that, what about a rival?

8/29/2011 12:53:46 am

Laura,

Long time reader here, although I've never commented. Please forgive my passion in the following comment.

Wow. So much info to digest and think through. Anon 2:38 seems to be credible, but I will always reserve the right to be a tiny bit skeptical.

But... I will say this (with much regret in agreeing with anything Palin has ever said): I agree that the MSM is "Lame Stream Media." In that they have truly been p*ssies in reporting on Sarah Palin (forgive my vulgarity, but it's the only way I can phrase it).

I can't ever imagine that Woodward and Bernstein would ever have shied away from a story like this simply because Palin is a woman. I am a woman. I have been following the anti-Palin blogs since I watched her speech at the '08 Republican convention. That speech left such a bad taste in my mouth, but that's another story.

I have a challenge for the MSM. Prove you're journalists, for god's sake! We're not talking about Palin's vagina. We're not talking about sexism. If she was a man, you'd be all over this. We're talking about a mentally unstable person who has helped to throw this country into a tailspin with her lunacy. She has helped to make this country mentally unstable. My country. Your country. Ours.

MSM, prove you're worthy of your f*cking credentials and do some actual investigative journalism, rather than hiding behind "we'll be accused of ___ if we actually report on ___."

Find out if Palin actually gave birth to Trig Palin, and if she didn't, who did and why. If she did give birth to him, prove all of us "Trig Truthers" wrong. Don't consider the story "debunked" by hearsay, which is what we've seen so far. Jeebus - do you think that garbage would stand up in a court of law? Get factual evidence, i.e., indisputable proof. When you can do that, then, and only then, will you no longer be considered lame. You (whichever journalist/MSM editor dares to publish the story) will become greater than Woodward/Bernstein and you will go down in history as THE journalists of the 21st century.

We only want the truth. Can you do that?

Are you p*ssies or are you journalists? I guess we'll find out.

Rant over, and thanks for letting me vent.

Molly

8/29/2011 01:02:24 am

February 19th is the earliest I see her wearing a scarf. Thank you Audrey!

http://www.palindeception.com/subpages/premarch.html

NSG

8/29/2011 01:05:30 am

@V ictoria, I agree with you that the issue with the media's non-coverage at this point is bigger than Murdoch-influence.

I think you're right that a lot of MSM "journalists" are now highly UNmotivated to ask questions specifically due to what Andrew Sullivan so eloquently pushes them on. A HUGE hoax was pulled off under their very nosy noses, and they didn't bother to ask a few key questions.

In addition, I think it's complicated by their false equivalence of "Birthers" with "Trig Truthers." The RWNJs did a good job of keeping the birth certificate NON-issue alive, while others of us have been trying to get people to ask questions about a REAL issue of Trig's birth. Therefore, we get painted as nut-jobs ourselves.

The MSM manages to stay busy with hurricanes, J-Lo's divorce, grizzly attacks, Cain-Bachmann-Perry, etc.

It's just too uncomfortable for them now, for soooo many reasons, to ask these questions. They will need a new excuse to start asking. Her entering the race. A "real" smoking gun-type piece of evidence, aka not an Anon poster at IM.

Again, the media's handling of this is the real issue. Not Palin herself. In the meantime, I think it's a good thing that Laura and other bloggers and posters are pushing for more info, because slowly but surely, the picture is coming into focus, which is making the questions better, more specific and stronger. And when the MSM actually does get around to doing their job, the pieces will hopefully fall into place VERY clearly.

Laura Novak link

8/29/2011 01:11:46 am

Welcome, CE, and thanks for posting. It's always good to see a new, and feisty, name among us. That's one of the things that always amazed me. Palin taunted the MSM for being lame to HER, yet calling them lame about OTHER things. I think she has projected onto them as she does every other person and thing. Sort of that "wishing to be caught" syndrome. But then again, I find her a very disturbed woman.

So, how many conversations does she need to have with Todd to figure out if this would be "good for her family."

mistah charley, ph.d.

8/29/2011 01:17:47 am

CE - the people who work for "news" branch of the corporate media are already doing their job, to the full satisfaction of those who sign their paychecks. As Stephen Colbert has pointed out, that job is to tell the public what important people say.

In practice, journalism, like the other branches of corporate media, has the function of providing a product which customers pay for. Some branches of corporate media, like movies and music, make the product which they then sell directly to the public. Other branches, like tv and magazines, only appear to sell their product (tv shows, e.g.) What they are actually selling is the AUDIENCE for their product to the paying customers - i.e., the advertisers. If the product makes the customers (the advertisers) uncomfortable, they won't pay for it. "Lameness", as you call it, is not a flaw - it is a feature.

Anon by choice

8/29/2011 01:21:40 am

Bristol Palin appeared in public on Sunday February 8th, 2009. While she definitely looked as if she might have had a baby "recently," it's hard to imagine her being less than ten days "post partum." So let's assume just for the sake of conversation, that Bristol Palin had actually given birth to Tripp on January 30th.

Why lie about this being her due date? January 30th was still too close to April 18th to allow Bristol to be the mother of both children. If this was her real actual due date there would have been no reason to lie about it.

According to one medical text I consulted, the shortest recorded time between birth and ovulation is 27 days. The mean time is 70 days (so more than two months) for non nursing women and 190 days (more than six months) for nursing moms. However, most texts I looked at agreed anything less than six weeks for a non nursing mom is pretty rare. Just for discussion, let's assume that a baby was born on April 18th, and then the mom ovulated 42 days later. That would have given a due date of Feb 21st. (Yes, there are reports of babies being born much closer than that... but in those cases, the second baby is premature.)

But we know for a fact that Bristol was not pregnant on Feb 7th, and was out and about in public. Furthermore, journalist John Ziegler states he saw Bristol in the Palin home on January 7th and states she was post partum. I believe he would know the difference between "post partum" and nine months pregnant and ready to pop. I also believe that while some journalists have shown themselves willing to not see things or just not ask the right questions, I find it difficult to believe that Ziegler would actually lie about something like that. The consequences of blatantly putting forth an untruth for a journalist would be career-ending. So therefore I tend to believe that John Ziegler did see Bristol on Janaury 7th, and to his eye she was not pregnant at that point.

mary

8/29/2011 01:25:06 am

"So, how many conversations does she need to have with Todd to figure out if this would be "good for her family."

Really. Or how long does it take for her to feel that one of the people running has enough "common sense"?

Although I'd much rather Palin be shamed into obscurity without having to run for President, I'm starting to think that she won't come under scrutiny UNLESS she runs. I guess we'll see!

Ottoline

8/29/2011 01:34:39 am

Laura -- I DO remember Blue Tx, but no more than the name. I guess we should search Audrey's comments sections, but I'm not able to today. Maybe BTx will post again to update all.

V ictoria -- You are right, this MSM fail is a huge puzzle. And yes, why not Keith? Or Tina Brown? My sense that there is a mgmt moratorium on this story is based on this: early on, we kept berating today's journalists, but I'm thinking that the quality/dedication of people in a profession is largely a constant over time. I admit the resources for investigative journalism are at an astonishing new low. But still there must be the Woodsteins out there. Remember that Woodstein were chomping at the bit for some time before Ben Bradlee would let them publish. The NYT had the story too but would not publish (and did not until after the WashPo broke it). When Graham/Bradlee said "Go!"(finally) they were brave, taking the risk that the NYT had not taken. Going back to Murdoch: do you think in the gossipy British journalism world it was not known, all these years, by SOME journalists? Why did they not publish? Mgmt moratorium sounds more credible all the time. Of course they will deny it, like Murdoch denied knowing about phone tapping. Does he think we believe that he does not read his own papers and put 2+2 together?

Molly: Seems like Palin started the scarf get-up (so we can guess she had the hoax in the planning stage), then was ambivalent about it, but committed to it upon announcing her preg on Mar 5, the day after McCain was picked as GOP candidate.

CE: I agree that the usual excuses are not the real reasons. Woman's issue, yucky pregnancy, invades privacy -- all those are just excuses for "we don't want to because the paper won't print it, and I'll get fired if I push." and "I wanto to feed my family more than I care abut the Palin Hoax."

It would be soooooooo terrific if someone had a copy of that email with the 5 recipients. And sent it to one of the blogs to put online.

Viola-alex

8/29/2011 01:47:43 am

Forget the MSM. They're on to the next shiny thing. Didn't you read Joe McG's post on Palin obsessives? That's what we are.

My NYC journalist friend Bill rails at me: Move on, V-A! Get over Palin! She's done, finished, dust! There are nastier fish to fry, like Bachmann!"

The job of exposing Palin must be done by us. By keeping Anon's comments in constant discussion, by reading and commenting on this blog and G's, Regina's, and yes, even Pogate-- we continue the battering of the Palin stronghold.

Our BUZZ is the only weapon left, until the books come out.

mxm

8/29/2011 01:51:10 am

Anon by choice,

I believe the John Ziegler comment is dated to January 2009, and Bristol had delivered Tripp late Dec 2008, so she was post-partum.

Rationalist

8/29/2011 01:56:40 am

I used to think Palin may have begun the pregnancy deception to deflect attention from a pregnant Bristol.

But Anon claims that nearly immediately after Trig's birth is when the deception started. This makes a lot more sense to me, given Sarah's reactive personality.

This makes me incredibly sad for Bristol. Yes, she's become a vindictive person now. But once she was a teenager trying to lead a normal life.

Because: my god. How much of her life has Bristol spent locked in a condo somewhere hiding a pregnancy or a baby, as well as all the mothering she had to do to her siblings, let alone the weight of carrying such a huge series of family secrets. She had about as much freedom in her teen years as an Afghani girl under the Taliban. No wonder she went so overboard with the alcohol and promiscuity.

So now she goes on a TV show about her book with her mutilated face and says that her biggest regret about Levi is that she "betrayed her family" and she's so glad that now she has her "head on straight." It's chilling how robotic she's become. Despite her contemptible attitude, I cannot help but still feel truly sorry for her.

I think back to the pictures of her in Dayton (I think it was Dayton) when Palin was presented by McCain. She's standing there with Trig and a baby blanket covering her belly and she looks pretty and young and just absolutely terrified in every picture. I shudder to imagine Sarah backstage, telling Bristol to just put a blanket on her belly and shut up because it was time to go out.

After that, everything changed and Bristol got used to her new crazy life. But on that day, she still looked like a normal kid in a deeply scary situation.

Bristol - if you do indeed read these comments - I just want to put it out there that the life you've been forced into is crazy. It's not the way it's supposed to be. I hope that someday, somehow, you are able to find your way out, kind of like Frank Schaeffer did.

8/29/2011 01:57:22 am

@CE.

As I wrote way back toward the top of this thread, I wish we could change the conversation by asking "journalists" not IF Sarah faked a pregnancy but instead WOULD IT MATTER if Sarah faked a pregnancy.

At least a few would have to admit that, yeah, well, if she did, that would be relevant to her as a candidate, blah, blah, blah. Then they would need to stop making fun of the people seeking truth about something relevant.

As it is now, they act like it isn't relevant but instead of saying, "I'm not investigating the truth because it's not relevant," they say, "It's not true."

Rationalist

8/29/2011 02:00:36 am

P.S. like Frank Schaeffer did and, apparently, like Track is trying hard to do.

mxm

8/29/2011 02:02:16 am

I have maintained a chrono for some time, and would like to share it with you all. The * highlighted items * are my assumptions. There is nothing here that conflicts with what our new friend Anon238 has shared:

Dec 2005 - Wasilla bus vandalism, minor boys not identified, widely believed that Track Palin was involved, age 16 years 8 mos

April 2006 – Bristol goes to prom with ‘J’

Aug 2006 - March 2007 - some part of his senior year Track goes to Michigan to play hockey, age 17+

Nov 2006 - Palin elected governor

March 2007 - Track retns from Michigan to Wasilla to graduate, ? some reports of injury, age 17 years 11 months

*Late April or early May 2007* – Bristol becomes pregnant

May 14, 2007 - Bristol Palin wrote in the MySpace comments on Johnny Chandler's page: "haha, my mom was asking me who i was on the phone with last night, and she said she heard everything i was saying...now she thinks im pregnant.”

Apparently as a direct consequence of this conversation with Johnny Chandler, Bristol had her phone taken away by Sarah Palin, because Bristol wrote two days later, on May 16, 2007, to Johnny Chandler:

"its fine, I got my phone taken away anyways. but i didn't do anything, ive been packing all my stuff, which is taking forever..what have you been doing? tomorrow im going squirle hunting! call me tonight, i might have my phone. (heart symbol)"

One day later, on May 17, 2007, in another message to Johnny Chandler, Bristol addressed the issue again:

"haha, sorry i still had my phone taken away, but i got it back today, so you can call whenever..(heart symbol)"

May 2007 - Track "graduates" from Wasilla High School, age 18 years 2 mos.

June 18, 2007 - the first group disembarked in Juneau from the Holland America Line’s M.S. Oosterdam, and went to the governor’s mansion, a white wooden Colonial house with six two-story columns, for lunch. The contingent featured three of The Weekly Standard ’s top writers: William Kristol, the magazine’s Washington based editor, who is also an Op-Ed columnist for the Times and a regular commentator on “Fox News Sunday”; Fred Barnes, the magazine’s executive editor and the co-host of “The Beltway Boys,” a political talk show on Fox News; and Michael Gerson, the former chief speechwriter for President Bush and a Washington Post columnist.

Read more http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/10/27/081027fa_fact_mayer?currentPage=all#ixzz0z3hwUyNk

June 25, 2007 – Bristol is now "a mother duck for that baby."

July, 2007 - Barnes wrote the first major national article spotlighting Palin, titled “The Most Popular Governor,” for The Weekly Standard. Simpson said, “That first article was the result of having lunch.” Bitney agreed: “I don’t think she realized the significance until after it was all over. It got the ball rolling.”

Read more http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/10/27/081027fa_fact_mayer?currentPage=all#ixzz0z3ieIGNm

Sept 2007 - Track enlists in Army, age 18 years 5 mos

Sept 2007 – Palin family Christmas photo taken

Oct 2007 – Sarah and Bristol travel to NYC to a leadership conference, Bristol goes to a MTV show Oct 8

Fall 2007 – Bristol disappears and endures a 5 month long case of mono. Heather Bruce confirmed (in the book Trailblazer by Lorenzo Benet, p. 182, 183) that Bristol lived with her while going to Anchorage West HS.

Late 2007 - Bristol’s friends were aware of the pregnancy rumors (Bristol), as was Alaska State Senator, Lyda Green.

*Dec 2007 or Jan 2008* – Bristol delivers Ruffles and/or Trig

Jan – Feb 2008 - Bristol reappears and attends classes in Anchorage (emails of Feb 4 and Feb 6 suggest she is in school in Anchorage)

Feb 2008 - Sarah herself tried to dispel the rumors that Bristol was pregnant, in a conversation with Bill McAllister.

Feb 7, 2008 - Associated Press
WASHINGTON — John McCain effectively sealed the Republican presidential nomination on Thursday as chief rival Mitt Romney suspended his faltering presidential campaign. “I must now stand aside, for our party and our country,” Romney told conservatives.

Feb 8, 2008 – Bristol involved in minor traffic accident in Wasilla, the driver in second vehicle does not notice that Bristol is pregnant

February, 2008 - the chorus of conservative pundits for Palin was loud enough for the mainstream media to take note. Chris Cillizza, reporting for the Web site of the Washington Post, interviewed Palin and asked her if she’d accept an offer to be McCain’s running mate. Though she dismissed the notion as a virtual “impossibility this go-round,” Palin, who had been in office for only fourteen months, said, “Is it generally something that I would want to consider? Yes.”

Read more http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/10/27/081027fa_fact_mayer?currentPage=al

Viola-Alex

8/29/2011 02:04:06 am

For what it's worth, the BlueTX comments on Pogates are here:

http://palingates.blogspot.com/2009/11/levi-johnston-talks-about-parentage-of.html

The BlueTx comments on PD were deleted by author. Did anyone save them?

The only thing I remember BlueTx writing was that Keith Johnston was Bristol's bio-dad, so that Sarah had to stop the Levi/Bristol romance. That made everybody go "ew." But hey! Would anything surprise you about this story?

mxm

8/29/2011 02:05:12 am

Continuing:

March 2008 – beginning of March 2008, Bristol “vanished” again. (does she bring her baby home, is she spending all her time at the hospital learning how to care for the baby)

March 4, 2008 – McCain secures the nomination

March 5, 2008 – Sarah announces she is 7 months pregnant, Bristol reported to be furious

*April 5, 2008* – Bristol conceives Tripp

April 17, 2008 – the wild ride from TX to AK for Sarah (35 weeks pregnant per CBJ letter) and Todd.

April 18, 2008 – Trig born 5 weeks premature, 6+ pounds, with DS, jaundice and heart problem. Grandparents presented Trig to reporters in Wasilla hospital

April 19, 2008 – Palin family leaves Wasilla hospital through the back door with Trig

April 19, 2008 – Bristol photographed with Mercede as Mercede goes to prom
April 23, 2008 – Sarah takes Trig to work

May 3, 2008 - Triggybear photographs snapped by Levi’s mother, Sherry Johnston, a significant date because it was the day of Levi’s 18th birthday. Johnston family celebrates Levi’s birthday at the Palin home, photographs taken, frail infant with ruffled right ear in photographs

May 4, 2008 - Kristan Cole hosts baby shower for Sarah and Trig, magazine cover shoot done. Infant Trig has ruffled right ear

August 28, 2008 – McCain selects Palin as VP candidate

Sept 2008 – Track deployed to Iraq, reports of safe duty assignment, REMF

Sept 13, 2008 – David Kernell hacks into Palin email

Dec 2008 – Track makes a surprise trip home for Christmas

Dec 2008 – Johnny goes to rehab in CA

Dec 12, 2008 – arson fire at Wasilla church

Dec 18, 2008 - Sherry L. Johnston was arrested by Alaska State Troopers at her Wasilla home Thursday and charged with six felony counts

Dec 2008 – Todd interviewed by Esquire, http://www.esquire.com/features/todd-palin-bio-0509

The reporter describes Bristol’s presence in the home, her report of her visit with her obstetrician, she is dilating and could have her baby anyday.

Dec 27, 2008 – Tripp is born

Dec 28, 2008 – Tripp’s birthdate corrected

Jan 9, 2009 - Firefighters found the 54-year-old Miller unconscious and badly burned, but still alive in her Wasilla home Jan. 5. Though a cause has yet to be established, the long-smoldering fire apparently started near a bed on the first floor, burning so hot it charred beams and melted pictures on the wall. Miller's two dogs died next to her.

She was flown to Harborview Medical Center in Seattle for burn treatment, but she died the next day.

Feb 17, 2009 – GVS interviews Bristol, Sarah interrupts and brings in Tripp

mxm

8/29/2011 02:08:05 am

continuing with more:

April 2, 2009 - Diana Palin, Todd Palin’s half-sister was arrested after police say she broke into a Wasilla home for the second time in a week to steal money

May 2009 – Bristol receives diploma, does magazine photo shoot

May 5-6 – Bristol does morning show with Tripp motionless, Todd. Candies photo shoot

July 3, 2009 – Palin quits

Sept 2009 - Sarah greets the returning Stryker brigade, she sits in a gym on bleachers and is a recognized guest, Track not participating, he was already home

Nov 2009 – book tour begins

Dec 13, 2009 - Wasilla homeowner discovered that the home they had for sale, but were no longer living in, had been broken into and vandalized. Willow reported to be involved.

Dec 16-18 – Sarah, Todd, Piper, Trig vacation in Hawaii

Dec 19 – Palin family leaves Hawaii early due to press annoyance and disruption

Jan 2010 - Track discharged (source VF)
January 22, 2010 – Bristol and Sarah on Oprah, promotes abstinence

Feb 2010 – Bristol purchases Anchorage condo

Feb 22, 2010 – IM posts on ear deformity – Trig goes into hiding

March 5, 2010 – Sarah, Willow, Bristol, Piper go to Hollywood for swag grab, parties, filming

March – Willow, Bristol and Tripp appear in the Harpers let them eat cake video and photo shoot that was filmed in Bristol’s Anchorage condo

April 2010 – Sarah and Bristol testify in David Kernell trial

May 5-6 - Bristol appears for Candies annual promotion

May 21, 2010 – Trig shows up in Boise, ID airport, caught by surprise, Sarah attempts to smooth his hair down over his ears

May 22 – Bristol in Orlando at Heartbeat Intl conference as a seated speaker; Bristol and Tripp captured in photo at Disney in Orlando

June 12, 2010 – PG reports on the Anchorage condo and Levi’s overnight visits

http://tiny.cc/w3sro

July 2, 2010 – Bristol cancels appearance on The View

July 13, 2010 – Bristol and Levi announce engagement in US Weekly

Aug 3, 2010 – Bristol announces break up

Aug 13, 2010 – Bristol and Levi reach custody agreement

Aug 19, 2010 – Piper starts 4th grade, Willow travels with Sarah and is not attending school

Aug 26, 2010 – DWTS cast announced, Bristol will be a dancing celebrity star

Ivyfree

8/29/2011 02:20:47 am

MXM, there's one thing I have to question: "April 18, 2008 – Trig born 5 weeks premature, 6+ pounds, with DS, jaundice and heart problem."

I agree this is the official story, but we have no verification of any of this, and at this point, no way to verify it.

Otherwise it is a fabulous timeline.

For those who would say that Trig certainly DOES have Down syndrome, I agree the child being presented as Trig definitely looks it... but we don't know if he was the baby involved in the birth event that Sarah staged on April 18, 2008.

The "hole in the heart" and "jaundice" could easily just be Sarah being dramatic because she never does anything the ordinary way, being so special and all.

mxm

8/29/2011 02:22:48 am

Perhaps we can date the photo of Ruffles in Frank Bailey's book.

Ottoline

8/29/2011 02:36:14 am

Viola-Alex -- Okay, BUZZ it is. Here's something I've been meaning to post:

This comment by midnightcajun should not get lost:

http://palingates.blogspot.com/2011/08/open-thread-tuesday_23.html#comment-294275002

It is surprising to me that McG would be surprised by the existence and content of the Bailey book upon receiving the draft. My recollection is that bloggers were well aware of it in broad strokes. This tells us that McG is not aware of what the bloggers have identified. So it makes me expect less from his book.

Quite apart from the issue of McG sabotaging another writer's book. Hard to believe, but midnightcajun has proved to be a strong and credible commenter over the 3 yrs.

Viola-Alex

8/29/2011 02:37:15 am

great timeline, mxm. I would add to Bristol's spring 2007 period, that she spends a chunk of her book building a fictional Juneau HS period and naming by first name friends and a boyfriend she had. It reads like fiction to hide something and has more detail than most of the other periods of her life. I had forgotten that that was the period of the MySpace comments.

mxm

8/29/2011 02:42:29 am

there is a third comment with chrono up to the DWTS time period that went into moderation

I haven't read her book, so the comment from Viola-Alex is interesting

Ottoline

8/29/2011 02:55:47 am

Rationalist: Before I lost interest in Bristol, I remember putting myself in her place in assuming she gave birth to Trig. Whatever her reasons for intense partying, she faced the disaster of pregnancy, and with an unacceptable bioDad. Her mother was angry. Her future was altered. After giving birth, her baby was snatched away. But she had to become its nanny, at least in public, for awhile. Even worse if she agreed to it, in terms of Bristol's guilt about cooperating. Then post-partum depression. Then enough anger to get pregnant again. Then international exposure at the RNC and press. It really is more than most people would be able to bear. That's why I hate to criticize her: I would never have survived this, and she did. She is undoubtedly doing the best she can.

It is SP and her unprecedented election hoax that concerns us. Plus its enablers and the MSM who did not cover it. (Sorry I'm a broken record.)

Ottoline

8/29/2011 02:58:00 am

B: Yes! Would it matter if there was an unacknowledged, unprecedented election hoax? That MSM stubbornly fails to report on.

Ottoline

8/29/2011 03:10:15 am

mxm: Great timeline. I'm copying it. I'll add to mine the three key photos: Mar 14, Mar 26 (the two sets of those), Apr 13 (Gusty), and I keep wanting to add one of the post-Apr-13 flatter photos that precede Apr 18.

Ivyfree

8/29/2011 03:11:39 am

I tend to like the February 7, 2008 date of birth for Bristol's first baby. It was only a couple of days after that... for some reason February 10 is sticking in my mind... when Sarah called Bill McAllister and told him Bristol wasn't pregnant. I've said all along that's the kind of lie Sarah likes to tell: it's the truth, but it's deceptive, and it makes her feel like she's getting away with something. Sarah loves to smirk at other people.

I think Bill McAllister fell for Sarah's story hook, line and sinker,because he was flattered by the possibility of being her press liaison, and later became suspicious. Sarah's aberrant behavior would rouse suspicions in most people who worked with her closely, IMO. It arouses suspicions in us and most of us have never been near her!

I think when Professor Scharlott wrote his article about the cone of silence, McAllister had to decide which side of the issue he supported, and for whatever reason, felt that he couldn't support Brad. (My belief is that he wasn't capable of acknowledging himself the victim of a fraud that had been so widely talked about for so long. Face it: it makes him look stupid.) Accepting a lie with a big undercurrant of hey-you've-been-an-idiot is going to cause one to feel pissed off, and his response to Professor Scharlott, talking about slapping him and challenging him to a duel in another era, that's just crazy talk.

If McAllister honestly didn't know about the fraud, then the rational thing to do would be to email Prof. Scharlott and say, "I think you are mistaken, I worked with her regularly and frequently, I didn't see anything that made me feel she wasn't pregnant, I believe her story- I don't believe in any fraud, but if there was fraud even possible, I sure wasn't involved in it, and I'd appreciate it if you could rephrase that one sentence because I think it implies that I was."

That would actually be a reasonable response, if a person honestly didn't believe in the fraud. Why would a person get hysterical? Specifically, why would Sarah Palin's press liaison become hysterical over the perceived implication that he was involved in a hoax?

And then I go to: the hoax was not illegal, so far as I can tell. It's not illegal to pretend to be pregnant. It's not illegal to raise your daughter's baby as your own. We have no idea what, if anything, the insurance companies were told, but if the baby was eligible for health care under Native Services, that would have been the case regardless of whether Sarah or Bristol birthed him, so there's no evidence of fraud, either.

It would be fraud if the State of Alaska health insurance coverage paid for his care in the mistaken belief that the baby was Sarah's, but we have no proof of that.

It was crazy. It was deceptive, and personally dishonest, and manipulative, but it wasn't illegal. I don't think it was even illegal to lie about it for votes. It's absolutely contemptible behavior to utilize a special needs infant for such a purpose, but I've never been impressed with the integrity of prolifers anyway.

To me, what is ultimately wrong with the whole thing is that the child with Down syndrome currently known as Trig may never have the capability of understanding how he was used. Most kids would, as adults, be able to laugh and say, "Yeah, there are lots of old pictures of me online, Mom carried me around to speaking engagements when she ran for VP." Will Trig even know that about himself? Sarah deliberately used a baby with special needs to con people for votes. It's vile.

mxm

8/29/2011 03:15:47 am

Ivyfree,

Your date fits with what Anon238 and Anon432 have shared with us. To refresh 432's comments:

Posted June 2, 2011 by an anon commenter at IM at 4:32 pm
http://theimmoralminority.blogspot.com/2011/06/i-am-no-expert-on-pregnancy-but-is-it.html

Anonymous said...
Shitfire, I've held my tongue long enough. I'm going to share a few details I have been keeping under my hat because I thought even if I posted "Anonymous", it could still be traced back to me. I have done a bit of research and decided it's worth the risk if these little tidbits of information aid in the investigation for any bloggers, authors, et al.

First of all, I am NOT part of the Palin family. I work in the healthcare field and that is how I know what I'm about to share. Please respect my severe anxiety and trepidation about posting and do not ask where I work, my exact position, or other questions whose answers would only serve to immediately identify me.

This is what I know- you can take it or leave it, believe it or write it off. I'm only sharing at this point because I simply cannot believe this ridiculous farce is still...well, a ridiculous farce.

1. Trig was born two months earlier than stated by the Palins. He was NOT born at Mat Su. Keep in mind the only way I could state certainly where he was NOT born...is to know where he WAS born.

2. Trig was not hurriedly released from hospital care, necessitating what is often called "the wild ride". I believe (this is just my perception, not a "fact") Sarah Palin planned the Wild Ride well in advance as it served two purposes: she didn't have to worry about trying to look pregnant in formal attire at the evening function that night in Texas, and it allowed her the perfect cover story here in Alaska- everyone wakes up and voila, the governor's had her baby.

3. Trig that was born AS Trig (meaning the "first" Trig) did indeed have an ear deformity. In my professional opinion, it is highly unlikely the infant presented at the Republican National Convention was the "original" Trig.

4. Cathy Baldwin Johnson WAS present at the delivery of Trig in February 2008. Sarah Palin was NOT present.

5. Tripp Johnston was also NOT born at Mat Su.

6. Tripp Johnston was not born until five weeks after his announced birth.

7. IF Mercede and Levi Johnston visited Bristol and an infant at Mat Su in December...it was 100% staged. I do not feel this was the case- I (again, this is just my opinion) feel the Johnstons were strong-armed by the Palins. I believe Mercede and Levi both signed nondisclosure agreements and possibly took payoffs.

Comment too long for blogger, will post remainder in next comment.
4:32 PM

1Doubter

8/29/2011 03:37:40 am

Anon by choice, Mon, 29 Aug 2011 08:21:40 :

Yes, Ziegler might have seen SOMEone on Jan 7 being non-pregnant (or 'postpartum') - but remember: The Palins have successfully used family doubles for Bri$tol before - I don't remember who the girl was (Lauden?), but she looks/looked very much like her (different chin/nose, I believe), and it would not surprise me at all that they would have used her at that point in time. (She only made a quick cameo appearance to Ziegler, if I remember correctly)

Ottoline

8/29/2011 04:00:43 am

So I guess part 2 of anon432's comments is in moderation, so I went to IM to read them. I had never before seen them. They sound so credible to me:

--The CBJ involvement
--The Dar link
--The church fire that burned adoption records
--Bailey knowing but not telling
--SP's 2002 procedure that makes pregnancy impossible

So things that would constitute PROOF seem to me to be:

--a copy of the email to the 5 re length of fake pregnancy
--travel records that show there was NO change in flights to get home earlier from TX on Wild Ride (in spite of SP saying there was)
--phone records from TX that show there were NO phone calls between CBJ and SP as claimed
--I still think that if we got an ACTUAL recording of the full 5pm TV broadcast on Apr 13, when Gusty pics were supposedly shot, it would show that SP is not wearing the Gusty belly or clothes in that newscast.
--If there is any existing photo of Palin at work on Apr 13, I am sure it would show her way flatter than in her Gusty get-up.
--Too much to hope for: CBJ comments; Levi's book gives real info; Dar's partner has something to add; someone central talks (family member; campaign staff; HIPAA info leaks)
--Let's hope some surprising other item is out there and will get thrown into the public arena.

Oh, geez, I've been wrong about details so many times before (and thank goodness corrected by this great blogger community), but we've been right in the basic broad strokes on all this, incl the unacceptable bioDad of what could otherwise have been presented as just a typical teen pregnancy. I think that was the initial motive for the hoax, and then the perfect fit of a DS baby into the political issues emerged, and then it was lots of lying by a skilled liar. WITH the enabling of McCain and staff.

Jo C

8/29/2011 04:10:12 am

This is just fascinating info. I find myself refreshing the blog constantly to read new comments. I must be one of those "obsessives"! As a comment that is off topic but I feel is somehow relevant to the whole scenario, I find it totally puzzling that Sarah has not said one word about the birth of her new granddaughter, not one word that I can find. This surely has some meaning, but I just haven't figured it out!

8/29/2011 04:19:05 am

@Jo C~
Maybe Track is so livid at SP that he has threatened her with divulging the truth if she mentions ANYthing at all about him and his new family

Laura Novak link

8/29/2011 04:22:19 am

Sorry if a comment got thrown into moderation. It's a random thing that Weebly does. It even does it to MY comments once in a while. And it's rare, but I'll approve asap.

Thanks for posting these timelines, which are fabulous, and for reposting the Anon comments from IM. It's a lot of information for everyone to devour and putting them here helps.

Sharon_Too_Also

8/29/2011 04:26:20 am

The idea of Frank Bailey being being part of the 'gang of five' who received the incriminating email just adds to the audacity of this whole hoax.

Think about it, he decides to write a tell all book - and then leaves out the biggest tell of all! Not only that, he involves two more people - an original anti-Palin blogger and a published author. What the hell were those two thinking? Let's write a book about exposing Palin - but leave out the most important part? The intrigue just goes on.

Lidia17

8/29/2011 04:31:27 am

Great comments, everyone… I agree with B about how the media should be pressed on this to the extent humanly possible. Ivyfree's remarks about McAllister sound right to me.

Whoever is bringing Ziegler into this: Ziegler is a Palin fanboy… Like with Bailey, I would regard what he says with extreme suspicion. Add to this our experience that men seem to be generally unreliable witnesses as far as pregnant women are concerned.

myrna nichols

8/29/2011 05:36:38 am

I wanted to make sure that Feb.8 was the date of Bristol's traffic accident. Here was one article that I never saw before: http://www.halfsigma.com/2008/08/bristol-palin-in-a-car-accident-on-february-8th.html

The last comment is eye-catching:
Consider for a moment that perhaps Bristol had her "accident" in an attempt to spontaneously miscarry. The accident was her fault. That's how choice is carried out in a pro-life world. She's lucky she wasn't killed. Young girls made to feel such shame will take even more desparate measures to avoid having their choice taken from them. Had Bristol been killed in that accident, and it came to light that she was simply trying to eliminate her pregnancy, not to die, it would have left her pro-life parents with the burden of loss of two precious lives. A firm and unshakeable pro-life stance may not come cheaply.

Posted by: Rick Calvert | September 05, 2008 at 02:42 PM

Thanks to MXM for taking the time to create that timeline. So many things about Sarah Palin's image are fake. She called herself a Hockey Mom at the 2008 convention, with Track already in the army. He hadn't played hockey for a year or two.

lilly lily

8/29/2011 05:39:29 am

My eyes hurt, my head is spinning with all the info. Will have to return later after getting some sustanence.

How Palin can function with only Red Bull, coffee and a bite or two of steak, plus a rare crunch wrap supreme, is beyond me.

No wonder she is such a ditz.

Plus, having to keep all her ducks in a row? Plus reading all that stuff on Faux off her teleprompter with her wonky eye? And not sleeping more than 3 hours a night.

I agree anon isn't afraid of Palin, but of her more boorish, dangerous local admirering bots.

Pleased that she clarified that she is not Elizabeth Hanson or Gryphen.

mary

8/29/2011 05:47:23 am

@sharon-too-also, I'm not surprised that Bailey and Devon would produce a book that poo-pooed babygate. Jeanne Devon gets pissed off at the mere mention of it. She is NOT open to people speculating about it. If Joe McGinniss thinks we're "obsessives", she thinks we should be fitted for straitjackets!

mary

8/29/2011 06:08:15 am

From anon 4:32's comment (this is the part that really ticks me off because it didn't happen until Dec. of 2008):

"I can state with absolute certainty that virtually the only thing completely destroyed beyond repair in the arson fire at the church was several file cabinets filled with files related to births, adoptions, and foster care placements. Considering these were metal file cabinets, the arsonist must have opened the drawers and poured or placed an accelerant IN them.

As with the fire that claimed Dar Miller's life, any attempt to obtain evidentiary reports or investigative statements on this incident are met with complete and volatile obfuscation."
------------
If only someone had tried to access those records before they were able to have them destroyed! I wonder at the timing. Was someone threatening to reveal the records? Someone knows.

Smirnonn

8/29/2011 06:08:33 am

Long time reader, first time posting. Great blog, Laura :)

What an interesting couple of days! I'm so glad to see SP's house of cards and lies finally starting to collapse. I, too, feel that Anon238 and Anon432 are on the level. It was only a matter of time before someone with insider information had enough of the lies and manipulations of SP and spoke out. I can't wait to hear what's coming next :)

Insofar as the media is concerned, I don't harbor much hope that a true journalistic investigation of SP along the lines of Watergate will ever happen. True journalism is all but dead these days (with a few notable exceptions, like Matt Taibbi). But, what about a private investigation? Isn't there a well heeled, anti-SP individual (or group of individuals) who could fund a private investigation? Hire a bunch of PI's to sleuth around and dig up the dirt? If proven true SP's deceptions would be one of the biggest political aberrations in the history of the US and would not only implicate her but McCain and the gop as well. I would think there's someone who would want to "disembowel" the SP brand and point out the usual hypocrisy of the gop.

Btw, loving the punctuation discussions here. Deliciously nerdy in a good way :)

Laura Novak link

8/29/2011 06:27:11 am

Welcome Smirnonn,

Always love new names/people (can't say faces!) and I love the feisty spirit everyone brings to the table.

Thank you for joining us and commenting!

mxm

8/29/2011 06:31:56 am

I did not post the second part of Anon432's comment, so here it is:

Anonymous said...

I am 100% certain Mercede nor Levi could have been present at Tripp Johnston's birth in "December"...because Tripp Johnston was **NOT** born on any day in December.

I can state with certainty that Dr. Cathy Baldwin Johnson was initially duped into this hoax and then blackmailed to continue it. She remains conflicted and torn about whom she is best serving by keeping quiet.

I can state with certainty that Dar Miller, the sweet and lovely woman who perished in a suspicious house fire in 2008 was ASKED to assist in caring for Trig. I do not know whether she ever considered or accepted the job. I cannot stand to think that her death was the result of a purposeful act. However, I find it extremely suspicious that any attempt to access records or evidence of the house fire (which should be public record if the case was ruled accidental death and closed) are met with what I can only describe as inappropriately aggressive stonewalling.

I can state with absolute certainty that virtually the only thing completely destroyed beyond repair in the arson fire at the church was several file cabinets filled with files related to births, adoptions, and foster care placements. Considering these were metal file cabinets, the arsonist must have opened the drawers and poured or placed an accelerant IN them.

As with the fire that claimed Dar Miller's life, any attempt to obtain evidentiary reports or investigative statements on this incident are met with complete and volatile obfuscation.

Lastly, I know it to be medically impossible for Sarah Palin to have become pregnant after 2002. The procedure she had made it impossible for a reversal to be performed. I have seen several pages relating to these medical records including an anesthesiologist's report and a perfusionist's stand-by report. (indicating his services were not needed)

I find it frustratingly impossible that so few people recognize something is wrong with this narrative as the Palins tell it. Why "out" Bristol rather than just showing Trig's birth certificate? I of course know Sarah can't show what she does not have, but why don't MORE people recognize this?

The above statements are the sum total of what I know. Please do not tell me it's my "duty" to Alaska or America to "go public". As much as I would like to say "screw it" and purge my soul to Gryphen...the image of Dar Miller's sweet smile makes itself seen in my head. And I think...it's too awful to even consider...but WHAT IF...what IF that is what happens to people who "know too much" about the pregnancies and babies claimed by the Palin family? WHAT if?

So I apologize for not being "public"...and I know there will certainly be many of you who don't believe me. I don't fault you for it, after all the red herrings Sarah herself has pitched out. But to ease my own burden, I'm putting this out here...in hopes an author or researcher can put it together with what THEY know...and perhaps shut down this disgusting lie machine Sarah Palin...once and for all.

One final detail I neglected to mention- Frank KNOWS the absolute truth. He pulled many strings and made many inquiries near the time of Trig's ACTUAL birth. I of course can't day exactly what he knows, but I know he's 100% aware that Sarah Palin did NOT give birth to anything in April of 2008...except for a hundred pound LIE.
4:32 PM

mxm

8/29/2011 06:37:46 am

And there was one last comment I captured from Anon432:

Thank you all so much for the amazing reception to my massive mind-fart. I really did just feel like I would burst if I didn't get some things in the open. For the people who asked "who are the parents"...due to my job, there are certain medical specificities which I
don't feel comfortable speaking about. What I feel VERY free to speak of: anyone who is NOT the parents.

And I know at this point nobody even
needs to hear it...but Sarah Palin did not give birth to ANY child in
2008. I have seen hard copies of documents which leave absolutely NO
room to even consider that Sarah was pregnant at any time after 2002.

For the person who asked about Trig's state at birth: I can tell you with absolute certainty that Trig was NOT diagnosed with Down syndrome pre-natally. Period. In fact his condition wasn't known for a few weeks due to his startling prematurity. At the time of his birth, they were told that he could be blind, deaf, have cerebral palsy, and a host of other issues. I believe once his survival wasn't so precarious, he was tested more definitively for a number of syndromes.

I cannot say whether babies were switched or swapped...although I
certainly have my suspicions...but the "original" Trig did have Down
syndrome. I know when it was time for Trig's birth certificate to be
issued...there was a skirmish over whose name(s) would be on it. Wish I
could elaborate more but I just don't know enough of the details
firsthand.

ProChoiceGrandma, I have always meant to tell you how your amazing levelheaded and logical commentary is so refreshing and I just love it. . I have lost many hours of sleep over Dar. I just always come back to "please God, it just CAN'T be". But like you, I
also have to recognize that, as you say, people have done much worse...for much smaller "goldmines".

For the person asking if I'd contact Joe McGuinnis and share what I know. Short answer? No, I won't. He has not provided a "black and white" stance on what he believes about Trig's parentage and birth. He has dropped some clues,
yes...but not the booming declaration I've hoped for. Truthfully, if I was going to "spill"... It would be to Gryphen. But I simply don't feel confident about that yet.

ProChoiceGrandma: one more thing...Dr. Baldwin Johnson has never claimed authorship of the cobbled together election-eve letter. That is really all I can say, but it's enough to make the point, I think.

8:45 PM

FrostyAK

8/29/2011 06:40:48 am

Excellent commentary and timelines. Thanks. Would be good to have a website with all of that info posted, so that it would not be hidden in comments. A website would also allow for new info to be inserted as it came to light.

On the point of Jeanne Devon and her association with the Baily book. We need to ask ourselves WHY she has been so adamant about never mentioning Babygate. Was a deal with Bailey in the works for a long time before the announcement? Was there an iron clad non-disclosure agreement with that deal? Inquiring minds want to know. Mudflats USED to be one of my favorite blogs...

mxm

8/29/2011 06:56:22 am

I once again suggest that you all go back and read Doc's interview here with Laura and The Tale of Two babies over at IM.

Doc shared his opinion that Ruffles likely had DS.

According to Anon432, the original Trig, born 2 months earlier than claimed and startlingly premature had DS and a significant ear deformity.

According to Anon238, Trig is Bristol's child and was born prior to Valentine's Day 2008.

According to Anon238, Sarah goes bonkers at the mention of an infant with an ear deformity.

An infant with an ear deformity was in in the Palin kitchen on May 3, 2008. He was called "Triggybear" and identified as Trig. Sarah took an infant with an ear deformity to a shower on May 4, was on a magazine cover with an infant with an ear deformity and took an infant with an ear deformity to the office in May. This infant was always called Trig.

Anon432 informs us that the RNC Trig could not have been the infant Trig born to Bristol.

Gryphen's experts in A Tale of Two Babies informed us the ear deformity was significant and could not be corrected until the child was older. These same experts, when looking at pictures of the RNC Trig all stated it was not possible that it could be the same baby.

Local church managed adoption records have been destroyed in a suspicious fire. Authorities refuse to comment or release records.

A local nurse who was asked to care for infant Trig was killed in a suspicious fire. Authorities refuse to comment or release records.

Karen

8/29/2011 07:03:33 am

Like Lily lily, my eyes hurt considering all the different scenarios, but I wanted to see if anyone can make sense of this, referenced above, BlueTx who had a blog called PD2 which appeared to have been in a pissing match with the other Palin bloggers, and Katherine and Patrick in particular.
Anyway, he makes very clear that he believes the story is "much worse" (which I think Gryphen also has suggested) and that finding out would hurt not the Palins but another family. Mainly, his contention is that Trig#1 is not the birth child of Sarah or Bristol at all.

He also says that Gryphen is closest to the truth and references a post by him that suggests Sarah announces she is 7 months pregnant and then Bristol miscarries and a replacement baby must be found PDQ!

For your edification: http://palingates.blogspot.com/2009/11/levi-johnston-talks-about-parentage-of.html

V ictoria link

8/29/2011 07:07:15 am

All we need is evidence of the tubal ligation. We don't have to worry about who the parents were...

Although I admit I'd enjoy knowing everything!

lilly lily

8/29/2011 07:11:23 am

Well, well, well.

If the investigative reporters in major news organs don't take note and start with all this data available, admittedly anon, they should be kicked in the derriere.

Crazy thing is, most of us thought through all this scenario all along, and have been keeping it alive. Obsessives that we are. I'm glad I stuck around this long, Palin fatigue is always with us.

Hurrah for us.

I only hope it goes to national news before Palin does any more damage.

Viola-Alex

8/29/2011 07:12:17 am

Love you all. Great recent comments re: Ruffles, premature birth, church fire, Dar.

Does anyone know or have a guess about the length of time between Ruffles last photo and Who-We-Know-As-Trig's first photo? If Ruffles was Bristol's and W.W.K.A.T. is a rentababy?

mxm

8/29/2011 07:17:51 am

I clearly recall that Blue Tx was discredited and banned from Palingates. I would personally not consider anything he posted as reliable.

However, there is a missing baby, a dead woman and 2 dead dogs. There is tragedy aplenty.

lilly lily

8/29/2011 07:21:20 am

Hell Mudflats started out great. Then she got big ideas in politics. I never was deleted but I got the gist of the muffled don't talk about certain things from other bloggers. I did so like Brian.

Problem is to stay pure and not get sucked in to grandiosity.

Mr. McG is now onto Bristol and Tripp stuff when he gave posters hell for mentioning Bristol. He has his book to flog, and I hope it helps bring Palin down.

Everyone has their own idea of how to bring her down. I say if there is proof of her being essentially sterilized and rendered incapable of conceiving in 2002, that is enough. It will all jell. This jello will stick to the wall.

mary

8/29/2011 07:23:15 am

Regarding the picture of Sarah Palin and "Trig" that was used as the cover photo of People magazine shortly after Palin was nominated as McCain's VP - that picture was taken at the shower given by Kristen Cole on May 3, 2008 (as noted above). I wonder who gave that picture to People. Anon 2:38 says that SP is highly paranoid about Trig's ears and I believe it. I doubt that she (SP) would have ok'd that picture for People's cover. I'd bet that somebody caught some serious shit for that one.

mary

8/29/2011 07:24:02 am

Oops, shower was 5/4, not 5/3.

Molly

8/29/2011 07:26:30 am

@V-A There are very few photos of Trig over that summer. The first one I have seen of WWKAT is Willow holding him at the Alaska State Fair which I believe was at the end of August.

lilly lily

8/29/2011 07:28:02 am

I'm glad I made a big effort to get out. Our county is a bit of a mess, but it is the usual towns and roads that flood badly. No suprise there. Though it is the worse I have ever seen. One lake is brown with mud, Huge treetrucks drifting by. Had to make so many detours that getting back home before dark is necessary.

Reading all the anons in one place is very helpfull.

Reading about the flooding up North. Catskills, New England. Horrific. Know bloggers up in that area and from what they are writing their towns may never recover.

search4more

8/29/2011 07:28:34 am

Jo C,

I seem to remember she touched on the new birth in her last interview with Hannity. The one done in Iowa. Hannity asked her about it. It was a brief moment and not very interesting, but the point is that I'm not sure your right to say "Sarah has not said one word about the birth of her new granddaughter".

I think there was a press release or a short comment to the media too wasn't there? ...My memory is poor I'm afraid.

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

Births (2008)
-----------------
Alaska Births 11,438
Teen (15-17) Births 301
Teen (18-19) Births 833
Teen (15-19) Births 1,134

source: http://hss.state.ak.us/dph/bvs/birth_statistics/Birth_Rates_Census/body.html

I have no great revelation to share, I was just doing a little bit of back of the envelope maths I might as well share.

If Bristol gave birth in 2008 (in Alaska) she was one of only 301 people. There are 365 days in the year so that's 0.83 births a day on average.

if you take the 11,438 births a year number and divide by the number of days in the year you get 31.3 births a day.

...Hm. So I don't know what I learned other than Alaska is a pretty small place. Small enough for things to stand out and people to remember stuff out of the ordinary.

mary

8/29/2011 07:29:35 am

"All we need is evidence of the tubal ligation. We don't have to worry about who the parents were..."

I don't know about that. I know of someone who had a tubal ligation and got pregnant 15 years later. It's very rare but I'm sure that Sarah would be one of those rare cases, conveniently.

1Doubter

8/29/2011 07:33:23 am

Search4more: LOL! 30 births/day in all of Alaska... That is pretty much what we have in our local hospital IN ONE DAY!!!

anonymous

8/29/2011 07:44:44 am

It's Shailey Tripp.

Sharon_Too_Also

8/29/2011 07:44:50 am

@FrostyAK

The whole Bailey book scenario is probably irrelevant to the bigger picture but I just can't help wondering what went through the heads of the people involved in it. We know Bailey was looking for some kind of personal redemption (yah, good luck with that) but what did Jeanne have to gain by producing a half-assed Palin chronicle? Once all the Alaskan beans are spilled - all the Bailey group will end up with is egg on their faces for subverting the truth. {{{shaking head}}}

Lucy

8/29/2011 07:45:39 am

I have been following this whole mess pretty darn closely via all available blogs since the 2008 Republican convention and the early days of Palin's Deceptions. But I am a very infrequent commenter (& I believe this is my first comment here).

mxm, I really just wanted to shout out a BIG thank you to you for your very concise summaries of relevant info posted on this thread. It is so helpful to have so many of the important details threaded together like this.

Regarding (lack of) attention from the main stream press: I think one of the reasons I have been unable to tear myself away from this soap opera is that it seems to encapsulate so many of the problems we're facing, especially the degree of political corruption and the disproportionate role of social issues/identity politics in elections. The whole situation reveals the depths to which we've fallen, as it were. THAT is why it matters, regardless of how close she may or may not be to winning another political office - although the details are endlessly intriguing, it's the bigger picture that is of greater significance, imo.

Carry on with the great work, all!

mary

8/29/2011 07:48:47 am

anon 14:44, do you mean to say that anon 4:32 is Shailey Tripp? I don't think so. Shailey is not so well-written.

Molly

8/29/2011 07:52:42 am

This is a video of Palin with Trig. She is giving a speech in a church in June 2008. At one stage she lifts his hat up over his ear but I can't make out any detail. I'm just throwing it in here for what it's worth.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQIa3KGmlm0

lilly lily

8/29/2011 07:53:33 am

A. Tubal. In 2002.

B. 47 years old. Possibly menapausal to boot if not already past it.

C. Husband and she sleep apart and don't really get along. He has sexual replacements for his needs. For ex. Shaily Tripp.

D. She is on a power trip for all her needs, and would never birth a baby, no matter what she says. All that blather about should she think about an abortion in New Orleans, and her smarmy Letter from God.

eeewh..

A family of hypocrites, locked together in lies.

Rationalist

8/29/2011 07:59:09 am

to the poster who asked how long between ruffles & trig, the answer is zero. They were around concurrently. Heaths show off chubby cheeked baby on 4/18, ruffles photographed around may 3-5, then gone.

mary

8/29/2011 08:01:02 am

@lilly lilly, Palin was 44 when she "gave birth" to Trig, she is 47 now.

anon

8/29/2011 08:06:11 am

Yeah, it is Shailey.

Ottoline

8/29/2011 08:06:36 am

mxm -- You are posting such good info. I had not seen the third anon432 comment, either. Your last comment is good too.

I am SO grateful that anon238 came forward, and that anon432's comments have been repeated. Thank you again to both of you. I'm esp grateful because I'm losing hope in McG's book: his Trignostic stance has never bothered me more than now. The ridiculous kerfuffle on his site right now has zero to do with the election hoax that Palin perpetrated upon us and prob everything to do with a cheap shot at book promo. The unanswered questions re McG's releasing Bailey's draft ms also make me skeptical, not least because McG's lack of awareness of the Bailey book shows him to be unaware of the key facts the various blogs were spoon-feeding him. Bailey's knowing about the hoax and leaving it out of his book disappoints me hugely, and I don't see how AKM could feel justified in being part of such a partial tell all. The AKM cutting-room floor data that is said to be new to us is not showing up. All of this is very disappointing.

The only bright lights are our two anon commenters.

Bringing Dar Miller back into consideration: I thought it was just me and my tinfoil hat, but anon432 connects her to the hoax also. A quick web search shows that Malia Litmann talked about contacting Dar's partner, but it looks like that never happened, or at least has not been reported.

At least we are on the right subjects, unlike Joe and his child abuse hyperbole.

I keep hoping someone out there has one more photo, one more item, that they can contribute in some safe way.

Here is the Levi, Keith, Tripp photo:

http://i53.tinypic.com/x28j9w.jpg

lilly lily

8/29/2011 08:16:45 am

anon insists it is Shailey Tripp. Why?

She has her own blog. Why be an anon on Gryphens blog?

Viola-Alex

8/29/2011 08:20:23 am

Thanks, Molly! For that video I'd never seen and for the info on Ruffles Vs Trig photos over that summer.

Floyd M. Orr link

8/29/2011 08:22:56 am

Lucy, I hope you have read Paradigm Shift because that is EXACTLY what it is about: The Big Picture, including the history, the special circumstances, and the complete story of Babygate as we know it. Palin has succeeded in further dividing our nation because we were already dividing ourselves before she got here!

lilly lily

8/29/2011 08:23:37 am

why not take another name other than anon?

Gryphens posters all prefer Anon. Are you one of Gryphens regulars?

I thought most of us decided to not speculate about her identity since anon 236 while unafraid of Sarah Palin doesn't trust her hell hounds in Wasilla and elsewhere.

Shailey no longer lives in that town or area, and anon 236 does.

mary

8/29/2011 08:30:19 am

Ottoline, I really enjoy your comments. I've become a bit jaded regarding Joe McG lately, not least because he's been very insulting to "obsessives" like me ;). I don't visit his blog anymore (and wonder why he doesn't go ahead and disable comments now, as he finds many of them so distasteful). Is he alleging that Bristol abuses Tripp? I thought he had NO interest in Bristol!

I have to wonder if he started writing his book about Palin, expecting it to be along the lines of his piece in Portfolio about the pipeline, only to find that the story of Sarah Palin is WAY more sordid than he realized. I sense that he doesn't like being associated with such a wacked-out story. I honestly think he was more comfortable writing about a murderer than he is about a raving lunatic who faked a pregnancy.

Smirnonn

8/29/2011 08:40:17 am

I'm not all that confident about the Shailey Tripp assertions. I've read her blog and she's not as eloquent as either of the anon posters. However, I do believe Gryphen's claim that she has a lot of damning info that she hasn't disclosed yet. Hopefully between all of these sources we can weave together the entire tapestry of lies and deceit of SP.

Sharon_Too-Also

8/29/2011 08:53:03 am

Mary & Ottoline,

Re: Joe McG

Joe McG is a duck out of water on a blog. He's spent his life being literary - not immediate - like blogging requires. He's been caught in duplicity more than once and I'll bet he's unused to being called out. In his defense, he spent a lot of time and energy on this book and now he has to protect his investment. I also believe that he had no idea, when he first started this project, how much factual information was already out there in the blogosphere on his chosen subject.

I also think it is too early for a book - too much is still widely unknown and it is doubtful that his revelations will be all that shocking. It's going to be a character study - he will focus on her personality flaws but without the 'big bang' he won't be telling the world anything that most of them don't already know anyway. What he will get - because of his literary reputation - is wider mass media exposure and thus more of her bots screeching to her defense. It should be a bit of a media circus and fun to watch. My biggest hope is that it opens the door wide enough for the people who really do know the story to find their voice and get an audience.

Ottoline

8/29/2011 08:57:57 am

Karen's link and this comment

http://palingates.blogspot.com/2009/11/levi-johnston-talks-about-parentage-of.html#comment-24876404

make me think once again about the too-early amnio. But Sarah gave a date for the amnio, no? And it was we who decided it was in week 12 or something like that. Is that correct? I cant remember now. And how does that fit the altered date of birth and the two babies? Anyway, the Keith involvement, whatever it is, is far from clear. But if it's there, that connects for me to amnio and geneticist. Where did geneticist first get mentioned?

My thought re the amnio was that it was to determine if the bad news Bristol brought SP re the bioDad could really be true, because there was some reason to decide among candidates. And the geneticist could fall into that category of research.

The amnio is esp puzzling if the DS was not known until birth. Maybe they don't check for the usual amnio issues if the amnio is to get dna for paternity testing. Does anyone know?

And then the reason for the hoax was that the testing confirmed the unsuitability of the bioDad, so it could not be treated like a regular teen pregnancy. Even among Palin's community, it could not be. That's when thoughts of the hoax might have started, in the same timeframe as the movie Juno and the fake Bree pregnancy. And then because Palin's suitability to be picked by the McCain team had not so far been damaged by this smoldering scandal, it evolved somehow into the hoax, with more than one baby.

The phrase I heard someone report Keith saying to Mercede, "Just get on with your life" immed struck me as meaning: yes, some hideous things that prob can't be forgiven have happened, and we can't undo them, so let's just get on with our lives. Pure speculation.

Laura Novak link

8/29/2011 09:06:28 am

FWIW: In my experience blood is drawn immediately in the NICU and they test for all sorts of things. I don't see why they would have to wait to test for Ds. That comment makes no sense to me from the earlier Anon.

Where did that Keith comment come from?

And yes, geneticists do the testing for Ds in NICUs, or at least consult on them.

Love having so many new visitors today. So many smart people (who use subjects, verbs and ellipses) to keep the convo going! Thanks everyone!!

FrostyAK

8/29/2011 09:06:29 am

On the number of births in the AK info - it actually is quite significant.

Teen (15-17) Births 301 - That comes to a bit less than one birth per day from the younger teen group. With the rate of rape\sexual abuse in this state and the talibangelical bent to religion, one has to wonder how many of them were from the abuse category.

You must remember that the ENTIRE population of the state is that of a medium sized city in the lower 48 - 700,000.

kate

8/29/2011 09:13:04 am

"Frank KNOWS the absolute truth" - only his wife could make this statement. IMO, of course.

mary

8/29/2011 09:19:36 am

Sharon_Too-Also, I agree that Joe is not in his element on a blog. Well-said. Nevertheless, I wish he wouldn't have been so bitchy sometimes! LOL. I'm curious to see how he does in the various interviews that his publisher has lined up for him. He seems to fly off the handle fairly easily and, as we all know, the MSM seems to have a bizarre need to protect Sarah Palin.

mxm

8/29/2011 09:32:34 am

Laura,

I wonder if the docs did diagnosis the DS immediately and just did not share this with the teen mom right away. She was recognized to be a bit dull (this can't be missed), post-partum, without any meaningful and reliable support so they didn't share right away. Once it was clear the infant Ruffles would survive, the mom was told. Also, if the outcome for Ruffles had been different, they would have told her as well.

I picture little Ruffles didn't have many visitors. His teen mom was herself largely abandoned to face this alone and the staff tried to care for both mom and the startlingly premature infant whose granny was the governor. Surely, the staff became surrogate parents to both Bristol and the baby.

I can picture the docs not sharing the diagnosis of DS immediately. That makes sense to me.

Rationalist

8/29/2011 09:32:58 am

MXM - wonderful timeline.

Ottoline - great list of evidence that would light this candle once and for all. To the "too much to hope for" category I would add a breakdown/confession by Sarah herself.

But I would subtract any further photo evidence. If the MSM can ignore the photo evidence so far, then photo evidence is never going to convince.

My gut feeling is that someone with credible knowledge is going to have to go out on a limb and make a public statement to go with whatever evidence they have. That may happen, as it does in any dictatorship - when it becomes clear that the support for the dictator has faltered enough that the risk is acceptable. I think we might be getting there.

As to the MSM: as we are too aware, many major outlets have put themselves on the line denying the hoax. But it bears remembering that there are also many outlets that have taken a strictly "Trignostic" approach, so they have nothing to lose if some evidence comes to light. That might put Palin in the position of confirming or denying it.

I watched an old Colbert recently, and he was responding to criticism that he hadn't run earlier with the John Edwards story. He mocked the criticism along these lines: "oh, right, why didn't we get in line behind the National Enquirer, that font of truth?" The fact that they were in touch with Brad Scharlott at all proves that the story is on their radar. The story is on the radar of a lot of media. I do not doubt that if there's something bigger than another deniable photo, someone will bite.

Sharon_Too_Also

8/29/2011 09:35:07 am

@mary Re: Joe

He'll get some respect - at least from interviewers who know his previous works. But there are some real ditzes (male and female) on TV these days so who knows, there might be some push back. Although I imagine his publisher has taken many pains to make sure he is interviewed by the right talking heads and given his due respect. Unlike Sarahs' Walmart walk throughs, this is a professional book tour - and much of what we see will be print interviews so less chance for unexpected fireworks. Pity.

Rationalist

8/29/2011 09:44:32 am

Two more random thoughts, since I'm killing time in a Starbucks...

Ellipsis, see? I love the comment above about the grammar discussion being nerdy in a cool way. This is a great group of smart people, most - if not not all - of whom I will never know by name. Just want to acknowledge my appreciation of the nerdy coolness evident here.

On another unrelated topic, regarding Joe McGinnis: I'm sorry, but I do find it extremely aggressive that he moved next door to Sarah Palin and disingenuous when he is shocked that anyone criticized him for it. Setting aside the usual overly sexualized Palin response, how would any of us feel if the author of a highly critical book moved right next door?

It was funny when he tried to buy the dinner with her. It was creepy and aggressive when he moved next door. I'd build a fence too.

mxm

8/29/2011 09:45:20 am

I read most of Joe McGinniss' works years ago and found his approach to subjects to be incredibly thorough. I enjoyed his style and subject matter, which is why I went back for more.

I have very high hopes that Joe has uncovered many dark matters in Palin's orbit that will shut her down once and for all. We are close to uncovering for ourselves and with the help of brave annons what did and did not happen. It matters little that Joe will not pronounce babygate solved. Others are on the job and it will also too be revealed soon, of that I am confident. We will come to understand what happened to all the babes who have come into the Palin compound in recent years.

Now, I really don't like Joe's condescending manner and arrogance. But I have his book on order; with great anticipation I will watch for the brown truck on 9/20.

Sharon_Too_Also

8/29/2011 09:46:05 am

@Rationalist Re: on the medias' radar

Very good point. God, I hope she tries to run! Because that would be just the thing to cause this powder keg with the lit fuse to blow it's lid. It's also why I think she knows she can't do it. Bummer.

eclecticsandra

8/29/2011 09:47:10 am

I would think if there was amnio testing for paternity, it would be obvious that there was an extra chromosome. I don't know what markers would be used, but probably several chromosomes are tested.

If the diagnosis of DS wasn't made until after birth, they would have focused on the physical problems first. But wouldn't you think that other decisions would be made in light of the DS diagnosis? Maybe all this resulted in SP's letter from God. Somehow they had to cope with this diagnosis.

Was Piper completely out of this shifting of babies? She was interviewed by reporters on the phone and in person.
I

Rationalist

8/29/2011 09:49:34 am

Oh yeah - re: amnio - if Palin is the only one who says there was an amnio test then I would throw out that piece of evidence entirely. It's like the "wild ride" - it likely doesn't exist at all.

Ottoline

8/29/2011 09:53:13 am

kate, we are avoiding speculating on sources in order to keep their identity as secure and protected as possible.

But even **I** was pretty sure Frank knew the truth, from thousands of miles away, sitting in my mom's basement in my jammies. So I would say such a statement points to anyone who can see, hear, and read.

I originally thought that Bailey had not included it in his book because he was late in emerging from his denial fog on this issue. He had emerged from it slowly re the issues he writes about. The book is about one situation after another where he drinks SP's koolaid, and only later realizes it.

But after thinking about it, I can't imagine that Frank has not read some of the blogs about the hoax. He must have seen the Mar 14 flat-as-a-board photo. He must have revisited the times he got the impression Palin was pregnant. And if he saw the memo from Palin about "how long does the pregnancy have to be," he surely would have added 2+2. Talked to a colleague. Surely there are other incriminating memos that were deleted. But Bailey chose to preserve his deniability.

Others have suggested he kept the babyhoax revelation in reserve as insurance. Another reason was to keep from being branded a tinfoil hat person, because this hoax is so incredible.

And insofar as there are the darker parts to this story, and people around Palin sense that, I think it would be natural to turn a blind eye to avoid getting sucked into such a sticky icky morass.

I do think we will never know all the details, until 30 yrs from now, when one of the children has survived therapy and writes a tell-all, which few will believe. It's like Clarence Thomas's behavior to Anita Hill: decent men I know just didn't think anyone of CT's professional stature could be so vile and vulgar, so they didn't believe Anita.

So it's in part because this gets so convoluted so fast that I keep bleating that we should stick to proving the hoax. Not identifying parentage of Trig, not involving Palin's family. Just documenting that she was not pregnant and hoaxed the electorate, used an innocent disabled child for political advantage. An unprecedented election hoax, enabled by McCain and staff, unacknowledged by the MSM.

8/29/2011 09:53:41 am

Slightly off topic, but everyone has been wondering where Trig is, and theorizing that his usefulness as a prop is waning as he becomes less manageable and cute. I wonder if a secondary (primary?) reason is to have enough time elapse so that they can substitute the original Ruffles back? Maybe his health has stabilized and his ear has been operated on?

BluedogAK

8/29/2011 09:56:48 am

Regarding speculation about whether Bill McAllister was in on the hoax or not:

I know someone who considers herself to be a good friend of McAllister's and who also thinks Palin faked the pregnancy (and she has some street cred as a mother of four who is a runner). She's told me that McAllister said to her that he had no idea that Palin was pregnant until she announced it.

Who knows why his response to Scharlott was so bizarrely belligerent, but I can imagine other explanations for it aside from covering up for Palin.

Sharon_Too_Also

8/29/2011 10:02:34 am

mxm & Rationalist Re: Joe, ctd.

The whole moving in next door thing got my certainly got my attention and I would assume that was the point. . . (lovin' our ellipses) put Sarah on notice and off guard. Not saying it was right but looks like it was mighty effective.

Rationalist

8/29/2011 10:05:21 am

re: Joe - agree, Sharon_Too_Also. It's the disingenuousness that bugs me. Gryphen is straightforward about where he's comIng from, in contrast.

mxm

8/29/2011 10:11:13 am

I have been prolific here today, sorry if there is too much old stuff posted.

Re: Tripp's birthdate.

Anon 432 claims he was born 5 weeks later than claimed.

Announced birthdate is 12/27/2008

+ 5 weeks = week of 01/26/2009

2/17/2009 was the public viewing during the GVS interview, when Sarah brought him in to hand him to Bristol. According to the Palins' date he would have been 7+ weeks old.

Doc looked at photos from the interview and gave his opinion that infant Tripp was 6-7 weeks old. That's a match.

Anon432 told us the following:

Tripp Johnston was also NOT born at Mat Su.

Tripp Johnston was not born until five weeks after his announced birth.

IF Mercede and Levi Johnston visited Bristol and an infant at Mat Su in December...it was 100% staged. I do not feel this was the case- I (again, this is just my opinion) feel the Johnstons were strong-armed by the Palins. I believe Mercede and Levi both signed nondisclosure agreements and possibly took payoffs.

I am 100% certain Mercede nor Levi could have been present at Tripp Johnston's birth in "December"...because Tripp Johnston was **NOT** born on any day in December.

_______________

We have to recognize what our valued anons are reporting that doesn't fit with other information and ask questions. So, my question is --- how can this discrepancy be explained?

________________

mxm

8/29/2011 10:11:57 am

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnBPZWX_oIc

this is just the interrupted portion of the GVS interview where Tripp was introduced by his granny

and here is a transcript of another part of that interview where Bristol herself tells the birthdate of Tripp

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,494205,00.html

"VAN SUSTEREN: Bristol, thank you for sitting down and talking with us.

BRISTOL PALIN, SARAH PALIN'S DAUGHTER: Thanks for letting me be here.

VAN SUSTEREN: Your life has changed rather significantly. Actually, starting last August was a big event in your family's life, and now you're a new mother.

BRISTOL: Yes. It was chaotic in August, but I'm excited to be a mom.

VAN SUSTEREN: When was your son born?

BRISTOL: He was born December 27.

VAN SUSTEREN: How is he?

BRISTOL: He is awesome. He's very, very, very cute."

SLQ

8/29/2011 10:27:06 am

Kate,

"'Frank KNOWS the absolute truth' - only his wife could make this statement. IMO, of course."

I would agree with you if that was all Anon432 said. But he/she also said, "He pulled many strings and made many inquiries near the time of Trig's ACTUAL birth. I of course can't day exactly what he knows, but I know he's 100% aware that Sarah Palin did NOT give birth to anything in April of 2008."

So, I think Anon432 gave his/her reasons for stating that Frank knows, which are based on his actions at the time.

I agree with what others have stated above, which is that it's not productive to try to figure out who these people, but to focus on the information.

What strikes me about this is how many people, besides Frank, would know, if he did what Anon432 claims? I assume the strings pulled mean somehow providing for health care for Trig and his birth mother (Bristol?), as well as ensuring it remained strictly confidential (sneaking into hospitals?, limiting access to the room(s)?, requiring staff sign extra confidentiality agreements?, moving the patients to a different facility? . . .) What other things can people think of that Frank or others might have done at the time of the birth to allow this high risk birth and very premature, sick child to remain a secret?

LTA

8/29/2011 10:28:35 am

Wow. Just, WOW!!

Mxm, you are fabulous! And this is kind of ironic in the ha-ha way- the auto correct on my iPad tries to turn MXM into "MSM". If only! Anyway your timelines are great, it helps the perspective so much.

To the person who thinks the DS may have been diagnosed right away but not disclosed until later, I was thinking the exact same thing. Say it WAS a scared 16 year old Bristol who was doing the NICU journey pretty much alone. I can definitely see the neonatal specialists agreeing to wait until the baby was more stable physically and Bristol was more stable emotionally.

I too have wondered, WHAT!!!!! will make the MSM finally do their job? It's not as if by massive coincidence none of the big reporters (in tv and print) have ever heard about this. How many here have sent photos and evidentiary statements to tv stations and magazines?

It really is mind boggling, the total media blackout here. It will continue no matter what evidence is produced, until some reporter is willing to put his tail between his legs and admit the biggest journalistic screwup since awarding Sarah Heath a journalism degree! (if that actually happened!)

I need to hop on the dinner train but I wanted to share my theory about McAllister first. Here is what I think may have caused his reaction to both the initial pregnancy announcement and Brad's article.

We know Sarah uses her "wiles" to get what she wants. I think she likely flirted shamelessly with McAllister to the point where he had more than just a schoolboy crush. It was only to exploit his press influence but he probably thought they really had something special. Sarah might have even told Bill oh, you don't have to be jealous of Taaaahd, we haven't even shared a bed in years!

So he thinks Sarah is his special little lady. Then out of the blue clear sky, Sarah announces she is with child, TODD'S child. And being reminded of how badly he was played by Sarah is why he reacted in an almost unbelievably inappropriate way when Brad politely asked him about it.
Thoughts?

Banyan

8/29/2011 10:29:25 am

As we discuss timelines, please remember this:

--In "early" 2006, Sarah Palin approached Frank Bailey and askedBailey what Alaskans would think of a pregnant governor. (And this after a tubal ligation years earlier.)

SLQ

8/29/2011 10:44:00 am

Oh, I just had a thought. One of the things might be to have a private nurse care for mom and baby, rather than the hospital staff.

I was keeping up with the Huguette Clark (elderly, reclusive, eccentric heiress who chose to live in a hospital during her last 20 or so years of life) story earlier this year, and that was exactly her arrangement, and she was able to keep it secret for decades.

It's possible that if Dar Miller came into the picture, it might have been very early on, to prevent nursing staff from knowing the identity of the patient. However . . . although CBJ could have attended to the mother's needs, other doctors would have been needed to assess and treat the baby. How did they handle that? HIPAA, yes, but . . .

Viola-Alex

8/29/2011 10:46:02 am

A huge thank you to MXM (our MSM) for the timelines. I tried to put these dates in a table to see if any patterns emerged. A few do-- the conception dates are interesting. I have no idea how legible this "table" will be via the comment box, but here it is. Also, it would be interesting to revisit the Bristol photos (green sweater etc) based on these new dates from 432 and 238)

This is all MXM with a few of my fave bits thrown in.

10/18/2005 Palin announces run for Governor; Bristol’s 15th birthday
11/07/2006 Palin elected AK governor; in 2006 asks Bailey what he thinks of pregnant governor
01/01/2007 Palin family moves to Juneau approx.; Bristol at Juneau HS (her book)
5/17/ 2007 approx Trig1 conceived (based on birth date 432,238)
05/14/2007 Bristol’s MySpace comments (re: pregnant)
06/25/2007 Bristol MySpace: “Mother Duck”
09/01/2007 Bristol homeschooled (Levi); mono @Heather’s (official); Christmas photo with Bristol showing
10/01/2007 Bristol, Palin to NYC
02/01 – 02/13/2008 Trig1 born (238); severely premature (432); in Feb (432); before Valentine’s (238); delivered by CBJ (432); many health issues (432); diagnosed DS at birth
02/07/2008 CBJ’s last baby delivery (unverified)
02/08/2008 Bristol in car wreck; doesn’t appear pregnant
02/25/2008 Palin wears scarf to Gov. Convention
03/07/2008 Palin announces pregnancy
04/18/2008 False birth of Trig (432,238)
05/03/2008 Sadie MySpace photo
05/03-10/2008 Tripp’s conception (based on birthdate A432)
05/04/2008 Ruffles at baby shower; last Ruffles photo
06/01/2008 Palin speaks at church w/Trig in sling
09/01/2008 McCain campaign announces Bristol 5 mo pregnant - she is 3 mo pregnant (based on 432 birthdate)
09/02/2008 Sherry Johnston speaks to AP, UK Tabloid. Has photo taken for tabloid.
12/12/2008 Arson at Church; adoption records burned (432)
12/18/2008 Sherry arrested
12/27/2008 Tripp’s official birthdate; jives with Bristol being 5 mo pregnant at RNC
01/05/2009 Dar Miller Fire; Miller had been asked to care for Trig (432)
01/31/2009 Tripp born; not at Mat Su; (432)
02/17/2009 Greta interview with Bristol, Tripp; Laura’s doc spots t’s age as 6-7 wks which matches official birthdate
08/19/2009 Audrey’s last post
02/22/2010 IM post on Ruffles

LTA

8/29/2011 11:00:26 am

@Mxm

I too noticed that discrepancy. At first it was cause for me to write off 4:32 completely. Not necessarily as a liar or pot-stirrer, just perhaps as someone who didn't have as good a "source" as she thought. I forgave Gryphen for telling us Levi and Bristol weren't Trig's bio parents though, even though he presented it as gospel truth, because his source while believing she was honest later found cause to realize maybe she didn't know as much as she thought. (I'm going on the assumption the source was Sadie, something I think most everyone believes)
So I figured 4:32 might have been told the wrong thing and hadn't realized it. I really think it's possible 4:32 was told by a source trusted to her that there was a 5 week "discrepancy" in Tripp's actual birth date and the one reported by the Palins. She may have assumed he was born 5 weeks later when in fact it was 5 weeks earlier.

OR the person/document she got that info from could just be flat out wrong.

Things which cloud the Tripp birth date issue-
~despite Tripp being born in late December being what SP needs to "prove" Bristol isn't Trig's bio mom, nobody sees the baby for almost 2 months. Knowing SP like we unfortunately do, she would have gotten that kid in front of media before the cord was cut. IF he was indeed born.

~on GVS, that baby really could be anywhere from a few weeks to a few months old

~in the Matt Lauer cup, Tripp looks positively giant (and drugged)

~WHERE WAS LEVI? Now Bristol and SP are saying Levi wasn't there for Tripp's birth. But at the time, they said he WAS there. SP said to People mag (in response to the "dropout" rumors) that L&B were "working their butts off to parent". The very same statement, made less than 2 weeks after Tripp's birth, is used by the company Levi works for to fire him since he doesn't meet the requirement for the apprenticeship, having a HS diploma. People on the slope say Levi has been there for 2 weeks. So he could not have been at mat su on 12/28.

~Bristol claims lots of girlfriends were with her in the hospital. In this day and age where media will seek out statements from even the most far removed entity, with a whole posse of paparrazi/media literally camping outside mat su, not ONE peep has ever, ever been heard from these "lots" of girlfriends?

~Even Mercede, who seems prone to photograph and share even the most mundane things, does not share any hospital photos of Tripp. Think about it, Bristol has sold every type of photo of Tripp- posed, candid, you name it. Why is there NO hospital photo of Tripp, none of proud aunt Sadie holding him, none of the new family together, none of these many girlfriends holding their close friend's new baby? Either the photos would show a different hospital or the photos don't exist.

Keep in mind Mercede just conveyed to Gryphen anon 2 was legit. And anon 2 specifically said Mercede/the Johnstons know much more than they've said. I think this may have been Mercede's way of confirming for us that Tripp was indeed born on a different day, 5weeks prior, 5 weeks after, neither? But definitely not when the Palins said it happened. (imagine that)

Ivyfree

8/29/2011 11:12:19 am

"I'm sorry, but I do find it extremely aggressive that he moved next door to Sarah Palin and disingenuous when he is shocked that anyone criticized him for it. Setting aside the usual overly sexualized Palin response, how would any of us feel if the author of a highly critical book moved right next door?"

It really doesn't matter how Sarah felt about it- what matters is how irrational her response was. Assuming she knew it was going to be a "highly critical" book- I do think it's safe to assume she knew that, it's not like there's anything to praise her for- what is a rational response? Regardless of how she felt, he is a well-known, award-winning journalist and author. Her reaction was stupid. She had the bravado choice of actually baking that damn blueberry pie- assuming she knows how to bake, which I doubt- going over and welcoming him to the neighborhood. That would have presented her in a better light. She had the reasonable choice of ignoring him entirely, which gives him absolutely nothing to say about her reactions whatever. Or she can freak out, tweet or facebook a response accusing him of inappropriate interest in her very young daughter, and order her incompetent-carpenter husband to build an absurdly high fence extension which actually presented a danger to her kids, since it was obviously way too high for its foundations- and on top of that, she sends her son out to take an intrusive picture of him reading on the deck he'd rented AND talked about him on the reality program they were filming. And she was stupid enough to suggest drilling a hole in the fence she'd insisted on them building so that SHE could spy on him.

I've said it all along. People ask what McGinniss could have learned by renting that house? He obviously learned how stupid and crazy Sarah Palin is because she's wayyy too stupid and crazy to keep it low-key and play it cool.

Incidentally, people were advising Joe McGinniss to sue Sarah for her comments. It was actually Mr. McGinniss who stayed calm throughout the whole thing, and Sarah whose craziness became obvious. He wasn't aggressive at all. Nor do I recall him being disingenuous. The house was available for rent. It was close to the Palins because they built their house too close to it, but this didn't bother them when it was a halfway house for druggies. But a journalist? No, that's just too terrifying!

"I wonder if the docs did diagnosis the DS immediately and just did not share this with the teen mom right away. She was recognized to be a bit dull (this can't be missed), post-partum, without any meaningful and reliable support so they didn't share right away. Once it was clear the infant Ruffles would survive, the mom was told...I can picture the docs not sharing the diagnosis of DS immediately. That makes sense to me."

It doesn't make sense to me. I think that IF IN FACT the infant with Down syndrome currently known as Trig was born very prematurely, it's possible that the Down syndrome was not immediately recognized and possibly not even suspected until later.

Laura, you said that blood tests are drawn immediately. I'm sure they are, but would they be chromosomal studies? It seems to me the only reason to do DNA testing would be if they suspect a genetic disorder.

Regardless of when the staff recognized the Down syndrome, they would have told the mother, whoever she was. If they didn't know how she could handle it, if there was no support around, they would have gotten in a social worker and/or a chaplain to provide support and then told her. Failing to tell the mother of something like Down syndrome, or deliberately stalling on telling her, would be unethical.

If the diagnosis was made immediately, then the mother would have been told immediately. "This is what's going on with his lungs, which is hugely important because the lungs are so immature that we worry he won't breathe effectively. This is what's going on with his heart. This is what's going on with his GI tract, and that's important because he can't grow if he can't absorb nutrients, and he has to grow and continue to mature. And underlying all this, there is THIS issue, which will effect the whole rest of his life. This is Down syndrome, it's a genetic disorder, these are the symptoms, this is what it means in the long run. Now, first we get him past these next few days. Then we see how he does in the growing/maturing department. We don't have to worry about the Down syndrome for a while."

Failure to tell the parent something like that, even if the infant dies, in fact ESPECIALLY if the infant dies, is like inviting a lawsuit. The parent is the one making the decisions on how extreme the care is. She has to have all the information in order to make those decisions.

I just can't see any doctor not telling the mother, no matter how stupid she seems. I can see them having this conference, explaining it to her, and going out wondering how much she actually understood. But in that cas

mxm

8/29/2011 11:14:48 am

LTA,

Did you watch the CVS interview? Tripp developmentally looks around 2 months old. Doc is a neonatal specialist and he aged the baby by the GVS video at 6-7 weeks.

He may not have been born precisely on the 27th, but it had to be close to that date based on his development. So, to fudge just a couple days or a week, why bother unless you want to qualify for the AK fund payout.

Sharon_Too_Also

8/29/2011 11:15:14 am

@LTA & MXM Re: Mercede

Not trying to be mean - because I think she has been through a lot and is an innocent by stander - but, damn. why can't that girl just give a straight answer to a question?

Ivyfree

8/29/2011 11:17:18 am

finishing previous post:

If the doctors felt that the mother did not understand the diagnosis of Down syndrome, they'd keep the social worker on the job, having them check in with the mother regularly, and the social worker would be discussing it with the nurses and asking them to be on the lookout for comments that indicate that the mother didn't understand. But withhold the information until later? No, I can't see that happening.

DiOR

8/29/2011 11:18:50 am

I haven't had a chance to look at all the comments, but I did want to insert a little info about testing for Down Syndrome vs other kinds of genetic testing. Down Syndrome diagnosis requires a karyotype, which allows visualization of the chromosomes. Other kinds of DNA testing (e.g., paternity test) will not reveal Downs Syndrome. Therefore, an amnio done to test paternity will not reveal anything about DS unless the karyotype test for DS is done.

The karyotype requires at least a few days, so those results would not be known immediately after birth, even if the test were started right away. I don't know anything about whether a DS test is routine in the event of a premature birth or whether DS would be suspected based on appearance even in a very premature infant. Also, I don't know what types of cells are used for the test post-natally, so I don't know if the test is ever precluded for fragile/small infants.

But, as I think someone already said, there is no reason to think that a prenatal amnio was done to test for DS if Bristol was the mother. I think that info could easily have been an embellishment because it's important for Sarah's story to show that she chose life knowing her baby had DS.

mxm

8/29/2011 11:20:16 am

I thought I posted this already, but it seems lost. A couple more interesting dates. Some really bad things happened to the Johnston family in Dec 08/Jan 09. Wonder who told Dan Fagan that Levi wasn't qualified to be an apprentice? One is tempted to think there was a vendetta out for anyone named Johnston. Hmmmmm...

June 23, 2008 - Sarah Palin writes letter of recommendation for Levi for a position on the North Slope: "I have known Levi and his family for many years and am most impressed with Levi's work ethic. Levi is organized, efficient, extremely competent, and will prove to be an excellent employee. Also, Levi's physical strength and determination are assets that will be useful to your company."

Jan 6, 2009 - Levi quits job as electrician's apprentice on the North Slope after Dan Fagan 'outs' him for being unqualified due to his not having his high school diploma

March 11, 2009 - public announcement that Bristol and Levi have broken off their engagement

Jul 3, 2009 - Palin quits

Sep 2, 2009 - Levi Johnston interview "Me and Mrs. Palin" in Vanity Fair

8/29/2011 11:22:43 am

Re: Frank Bailey...in his book he comes across as genuinely religious, and principled, but not the sharpest tool in the shed. And reading his book one is struck by the number of times that Palin pulled some jaw-dropping stunt and Baily still suck by her. (Infatuated much?)
All of that notwithstanding, I do wonder if he didn't pull his punches with Trig for concern over the "innocents" involved. For ages people who sound like they're in the know have been saying this is one reason the full story doesn't come out. It's not like one can tell who is telling the truth and who isn't, but this impresses me as the most plausible reason why someone in the know hasn't spilled the beans already.

Ottoline

8/29/2011 11:52:52 am

OMG Molly, the video you listed

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQIa3KGmlm0

is the one that was discussed extensively re the possibility that the Trig shown here is one of those v lifelike dolls. Here were the reasons, as I recall them:

1. baby seems so lifeless
2. both the minister's and Piper's odd expressions, as if they know/suspect it's not a real baby
3. at 1:47, Palin squishes his head! You can see her fingers depress into the head, as if it was a rubber doll head. The squishing would not be possible on a real baby, but on a doll it might serve to animate the face as she shows it off for that short moment. It could be her fingers moving the thick hat, but it looks like she's squishing a tennis ball.
4. the position of the baby's sleeping face seems like he could not breathe!
5. at 2:45 she takes her hand away from supporting his head, and he remains upright. Not my experience with tiny babies.

FWIW.

Whether she used a doll for public appearance might be irrelevant to our goals, but I mention it because it was quite the discussion some time ago, I forget on which blog.

OzMud link

8/29/2011 12:11:41 pm

9:13AM Anon:
"...Twenty years old, "engaged" twice, pregnant four times, a mother thrice over and a miscarriage. How ARE you going to unveil your youngest? You can't keep him hidden in that LA condo forever. Sooner or later Tripp is going to say "my brother" to the wrong person."

2:38PM Anon:
"...I don't know how she will deal with the Trig issue if she runs. She has a birth certificate with February instead of April, and it does not have the "right" names. There was never a formal adoption or even custody agreement. Trig's birth parents COULD just take him and Sarah would have jack shit for recourse."

* * *
When I first read these anonymous posts at IM these two thoughts appeared to be in conflict. Then the penny dropped and I saw the writer's intent - that there is one child allegedly hidden in an LA condo, purportedly Bristol's bub born somewhere between Dec 2007 and Feb 2008, undoubtedly the premature-looking baby Gryphen has nicknamed Ruffles - and a second bub named Trig who is taken out of Sarah's Prop Closet only on occasion and only long enough to show the world at large he's still actually alive.

I have read and re-read the posts and they appear genuine enough - they appear sincerely concerned for the bubs and angry at the adults who (if this is all true) should know better.than to treat their children as merchandisable chattle.

Where I have trouble separating fact from fiction is in knowing that if any one of Sarah's family/friends/inner circle chair holders chose to flee the scene they could do so quite easily through a magazine like the Rolling Stones and make more money at the end of the day than Sarah could ever dare dream. So if Todd or Bristol or - anyone in the know - including this anonymous writer - really, sincerely, genuinely cared for these babies, fear of Sarah is the last thing they need lean on as an excuse to not step forward. An entire country would be grateful. Safe havens would abound. Book sales, magazine interviews, movie deals, the sky would be the limit and Sarah would be powerless to stop them.

So why the loyal silence?

* * *
BTW many of us use ellipses (...). In front of a quote it means the quote was snipped from other text. At the end of a quote it means there was more text following. Inside text it forces the reader to pause... like that. I once wrote a series of poems that each began and ended with ellipses to show that there was something that needed to be read before and after the poem displayed. It's way too common a punctuation mark to use in identifying a writer, especially on these comment threads. (IMHO)

Oz,

8/29/2011 12:15:44 pm

Ottoline

8/29/2011 12:24:41 pm

Re amnio: Only source for that is SP, so it could well be a fantasy.

Re McG: Where he lost me was when someone commented about the recent comments dust-up: "Joe you have stirred up a hornet's nest, whether by design or unwittingly" and Joe responded: "wittingly." So it's some blog group dynamics manipulation/experiment. To increase hits? For something to talk about in his interviews? I don't care, and count me out.

Re Dar: So if we assume arson, then it must be because Dar was about to do something SP did not want. Like talk. If so, Dar would surely have confided her intention in someone. I wish that person would find a way to tell us. In confidence. Anonymously. In memory of Dar.

conscious at last!

8/29/2011 12:31:28 pm

@ LTA --- YES, exactly! There is something very suspicious about Tripp's whole story as well. Just look at the date line up provided by Viola-Alex(w/ MXM)-- particularly the events at the end of '08 and early '09.

I hate to say this, but I will. Perhaps, there is media black out because the puppet masters understand that there may have been arson and murder involved. Faking a pregnancy is not a crime, but I am pretty sure that arson and murder are illegal.

Laura Novak link

8/29/2011 12:46:25 pm

You guys are amazing. I hereby pronounce us the Ellipses Queens (and Kings.) Did that period go inside or should I have put it outside? I'm suddenly confused.

Ivyfree: They can do blood tests to r/o Ds or other genetic conditions for many reasons. They don't have to suspect one in order to do a test.

And I doubt that the staff keeps any information from the families. Social workers, clinical nurse practitioners, case managers...they are all there to help. With the number of shifts, the number of nurses involved in care, respiratory therapists, other specialists...it would be difficult - and indeed unethical - to withhold information. As far as I could tell, from my experience as a mom and as a volunteer in a NICU, the information is delivered no matter how young, single, or ignorant (and I mean that in a clinical, not judgmental way) the mom and/or dad is. Or how mentally ill the mom is. I'll see if Doc can weigh in on this.

Sharon_Too_Also

8/29/2011 12:56:01 pm

@OzMud Re: Bristols' confusing baby issues

Somebody please correct me if I read it wrong; anon238s' referral to the "baby hidden in the condo" was the DWTS baby that she would have had sometime after her stint on that show ended.

bees-wax

8/29/2011 01:09:45 pm

OzMud, I respectfully disagree about the identity of the child who cannot be hidden in that LA condo forever. That sweet bub (TCWCBHITLACF, perhaps?) is specifically referred to as "your youngest," meaning younger than his siblings, so he can't be Ruffles.

Muddy, murky, swirling waters of Palin-ness.

anonfornow

8/29/2011 01:29:57 pm

Ozmud, the youngest baby hidden in Bristol's condo is presumably the result of the pregnancy we saw blooming every week on DWTS. Her third son. I think someone said he was called Tristan but I can't find where I read that.

curiouser

8/29/2011 01:32:10 pm

mxm - Sarah's 12/31/07 media rant outed Levi's ineligibility for the slope apprenticeship by making it known he didn't meet the education requirement. She called and/or emailed no less than three news orgs to complain about stories calling 'her kids' drop-outs. I suspect she was really angry at Levi.

"Gov. Palin told PEOPLE at the time that she hoped Levi would eventually earn a GED, adding, "I respect that Levi is out there working hard.""
http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20249804,00.html

Sarah outed Levi. Dan Fagan made a stink about her revelation.

About quotes and commas and periods: I prefer the logical English convention over the American convention which apparently originated as a way around temperamental typesetting equipment.
http://grammartips.homestead.com/inside.html

OzMud link

8/29/2011 01:34:14 pm

@ Ottoline - that is the most bizarre thing I think I've ever seen! She literally squeezed the baby's head before turning him sideways to face the camera...

Who does that?

molly malone

8/29/2011 01:36:25 pm

From what I've read and seen of Palin, I believe she is a simple person. Not a stupid person, mind you, but a shallow thinker who skims along the surface of things, completely oblivious to the unintended consequences that can rise up from the depths to bite her in the butt.

I truly believe the answer to all of this is very simple. Not pretty, perhaps. Maybe even really ugly. But nonetheless, it must be simple because Sarah cannot do complexity. In fact, as evidenced by her clumsy "pregnancy", she doesn't even do simplicity very well.

This really gnaws on me. How do we think simple enough to make sense of all this?

Ivyfree

8/29/2011 01:50:09 pm

"Ivyfree: They can do blood tests to r/o Ds or other genetic conditions for many reasons. They don't have to suspect one in order to do a test."

Of course they don't HAVE to suspect a genetic disorder to do a test, but why would they?

It's a question I deal with literally every day on my job, when I have patients sign a consent, and point out that they are authorizing us to test them for AIDS and hepatitis if there is an accidental blood exposure. At least once a day, somebody says, "they should test everyone anyway" and I explain that most people test negative, and why do thousands of dollars worth of tests that are mostly going to be negative if there's no reason? Insurance wouldn't cover it.

So my question is: is there actually some reason for them to do genetic testing on all premature infants? If not, would they spend hundreds of dollars per infant doing a DNA screen? What would they be looking for? What is the point? Since, thank the gods, I never worked with neonates after nursing school, I honestly don't know the answer.

I just know that insurance companies do not pay for testing that has no reason. They just won't. Every test you do has to have a reason or it's not covered.

So while I'm happy to be educated further in the matter, are they really doing DNA testing on all premature infants without suspecting a genetic disorder? If they are, I wonder who pays for it? It's not cheap.

8/29/2011 01:50:28 pm

I've been wondering lately if Trig and Tripp weren't born at the hospital because they were born at home. That would eliminate many people from the information loop. There is a midwifery practice in Wasilla that delivers many babies. (I found out @ the midwifery via the Frontiersman birth announcements.). Bristol could have given birth in Anchorage in 2008 if she was living there with her aunt, but why trek 1+ hours from Wasilla in midwinter to give birth to Tripp?

Olivia

8/29/2011 01:58:09 pm

Unfortunately, most super genuinely religious principled people are not the sharpest tools in the shed, which is why they have glommed onto the religion thing. They are so focused on the religion that they totally forget humanity. It is like they are a primitive form of life and I say this as a believer in God. When will the American people EVER start seeing this?

Ivyfree

8/29/2011 02:04:17 pm

"I saw the writer's intent - that there is one child allegedly hidden in an LA condo, purportedly Bristol's bub born somewhere between Dec 2007 and Feb 2008, undoubtedly the premature-looking baby Gryphen has nicknamed Ruffles - and a second bub named Trig who is taken out of Sarah's Prop Closet only on occasion and only long enough to show the world at large he's still actually alive."

I took "a mother thrice over..." and "sooner or later he will say, "my brother""... to mean that Bristol gave birth to the child known as Trig, to Tripp, and to a third child a couple of months after DWTS. The gods alone know when she had a miscarriage- I wonder if it was a white-out miscarriage?- but maybe with the engagement that she was trying to sell to reality TV in May of 10. I swear, that engagement picture in People with Tripp parked where her hip should be and hiding her belly? If you looked at faces, it was fine. If you looked where Tripp's legs were, you saw Bristol's rounded belly.

8/29/2011 02:06:32 pm

Regarding Palin's story about amniotic, she does not give a date. On p. 174 of Going Rogue she says she sees CBJ at 12 weeks, has a sonogram that day indicating a thick neck and possibly DS. CBJ calls the next day to tell her to get an amniocentesis. She talks about the appt but gives no date.

In my experience 12 weeks is early to make out a fetus's neck.

anonfornow

8/29/2011 02:11:23 pm

I have always believed Tripp was born earlier than December 27, so I like the suggestion that our anon knew the birthdate was off but didn't know by how much or in which direction.

Having seen photos of Tripp taken with Bristol and Levi as a wee babe, I honestly think that baby was very premature, too. Watching Bristol's Greta interview with a "7 week old" Tripp, I thought she was holding someone else's baby. She just wasn't cuddling him the way a mother would, but was holding him awkwardly away from her body. However, I will admit that baby does look like Tripp.

I would like to know why Bristol has trouble carrying babies--Trig born very early, Tripp probably born early, another baby miscarried. Why?

I am one of the few who thinks the RNC Trig is Sarah's grandchild. Sarah has a strange ear, and the RNC Trig has it, too--and still has it. Their concha goes all the way across and is very noticeable.

And Laura, can I thank you for allowing all this wild speculation on your blog? Funny how we're the only ones regularly commenting on these wonderful new revelations. Gryphen is hardly posting about Sarah at all these days. Is it because "Fred's" book is about to launch? I like the idea that Fred may be Audrey. I find it hard to believe she just dropped it all and walked away.

Rationalist

8/29/2011 02:19:27 pm

ottoline - I can't believe that video. I've never seen it. That has got to be a doll.

What the HELL? what are the logistics of all this? What does life look like to Piper? My god.

Anonymoose

8/29/2011 02:28:42 pm

My theory is that Trig was born on Feb 2. Fits the anonymous commenters' timelines (feb, before valentine's day) and when I looked at Palin's emails, the only suspicious looking one I found was this one. Where was Sarah? Why did she miss the opportunity to make a nationwide ad and meet Janet Huckabee? Sounds like she was attending a birth to me!

From : gov.sarah@yahoo. com
To: Frank Bailey ; Perry, Kristina Y (GOV); Frye, Ivy J (DOA)
Sent : Sat Feb 02 18 : 39:33 2008
Subject : Re: New Ad for Heartbeat w/ Janet Huckabee
Pls let whomever know that I was booked until late last night , all day today, and am
headed back to Juneau now.
Sent from my BlackBerry ' device from Cellular one

http://palinemail.msnbc.msn.com/palin2011/pdf/11784.pdf

Sue

8/29/2011 02:32:17 pm

OZ Mud: anon mentions three births. I'd assume the oldest would be "Ruffles", the second would be Tripp, and the youngest, hidden in the LA condo, would be the mysterious DWTS baby. Bristol explained her weight gain, despite the rigorous schedule, to being more active or athletic than other contestants (who include Olympians, pro football players, etc.), so her metabolism wasn't affected.

MXM: thanks for the excellent timeline. It would be interesting to see where Keith Johnston fits in. The way he abandoned his family after being unfaithful to his wife was despicable. There was some speculation about him being blackmailed in the comments on this post:
http://theimmoralminority.blogspot.com/2010/03/levi-johnston-ordered-to-pay-1750-month.html

V ictoria link

8/29/2011 03:07:12 pm

@Ottoline - thanks for sharing that video of SP in the church. I agree that the baby is a doll. It did not move on its own, she would have smothered it, it could have never sat up the way it did - and she squished its head.

I also find it amusing that one reason that SP left TX early was to avoid having to appear pregnant in formal clothing. Not only would that have been expensive, but it might have been very hard to hide the empathy belly under a formal dress. The front might have looked OK, but those shoulder pads in the back?

physicsmom

8/29/2011 03:18:54 pm

@OzMud - I think you have the wrong interpretation of the three alleged Bristol babies. Baby #1 is Trig (probably Ruffles). He is out of the picture somewhere (or worse, deceased) and has been replaced by rentababy. Baby #2 is Tripp, the current prop. Baby #3 is the newest one, born after Dancing with the Stars and being held quietly in LA until Bristol or her Mom decide what to do with him/her (speculation is another "him"). I'm not sure where the miscarriage comes in. All of this is supposition. I'm not saying I buy it, but I believe this is the scenario Anon was describing.

LTA

8/29/2011 03:38:28 pm

@Oz In this case, I wouldn't call it "loyal silence".

I'd call it, more like, "realizing that many people who cross the Palins end up burned to death, crashed into the side of a mountain, incarcerated via a put-up job, or complete and total pariah from their society, kind of silence"

I really do think we are getting to a point where we may dare to hope the hoax is unravelling. Anon 2:38 has seemed to inspire a couple other "insiders" to speak up, not with any major stuff but with enough detail to seem believable and I think they are likely being truthful because Bristol is going ape doo-doo over the revelations in the IM comments.

Soon maybe one more person might speak up. And then one more. And soon more are talking than keeping quiet. That's my prayer!

Palinoia

8/29/2011 04:42:57 pm

Hi All, great comments, and finally we have arrived again at two things many of us have suspected, courtesy of our Anon's and the other great posters here: namely SP DID NOT give birth to Trig and Trig was born prematurely and much earlier than stated (hence no birth certificate forthcoming from SP).

MXM - I think it is very important to add the creation of the various legal defense funds in your time line (which is excellent, BTW). I'll outline why in my post.

I have personally always believed that Trig was born prematurely, probably late Jan or early Feb 2008, and very likely to Bristol. I believe strongly if she is the mother, then Trig was medically uninsured, at least initially. Because of the potential (probable) lack of health insurance for him, I do not believe the legal defense fund was created solely for the purpose of legal bills, but rather as a convenient laundering system to pay medical bills for Trig. These bills would have been costly if he spent even minimal time in the NICU, and would have resulted in huge bills if he was there for awhile. We also know that Kristan Cole had vast latitude as the AFT's "trustee" regarding disbursements as well as SP and family being able to use it as an ATM.

The first "illegal" fund was created early April 2009 in response to SP's legal bill complaints. The Alaska Fund Trust (AFT) was created later that same month in 2009, and ultimately frozen with orders to return approx. $386,000 to the donors within 90 days of approx. June 25th, 2010.

Low and behold (I must have completely missed this!), yet another legal defense fund was created to supposedly "pay off" all the monies that were supposed to be returned to the AFT donors, and raise some more money for SP's legal costs. I believe they created this fund some time after the refunding was ordered from the AFT, but I'm not sure when as I don't remember any one covering this new grifting fund to cover the old grifting fund. This newest fund is still up and active today; pay particular attention to why this fund was set up as explained on the FAQ page:

http://www.sarahpalinlegaldefensefund.org/faq.php

Here is a look at the original AFT via the WayBack Machine, as it looked for many, many months AFTER it was supposedly frozen. Remember how we were all incredulous that it was still active with a "donate" button even after the ethics complaint was filed?

http://web.archive.org/web/20090426141056/http://www.thealaskafundtrust.com/

Here is what the AFT website looks like as of today, with direction to visit the sarahpalinlegaldefensefund.org above:

http://www.thealaskafundtrust.com/

To be continued next post.

Palinoia

8/29/2011 04:53:36 pm

Part 2 - Alaska Fund Trust being added to MXM's time line.

Timing wise, SP's very loud complaining specifically about legal bills started March of 2009 which coincides with the time frame I think medical providers would have really started leaning heavily for payment and/or a significant payment plan for uninsured medical bills left unpaid from Jan-Feb-Mar of 2008. I can certainly see medical providers pressuring her much more heavily to pay up once the 12 month mark of the bills was reached. Let's ask ourselves as well, how much would a monthly payment plan BE on Half a Mil in medical bills? Just sayin'. Medical providers often will let bills ride much longer than say, the electric company for example, but eventually they still have to be paid, even by the WGE.

It is unlikely that any hospital in the state of Alaska would turn SP over to collections due to the horrible publicity it would cause her, especially if it would result in a personal bankruptcy for her. Then there is the high probability of inciting her wrath, ie, withholding of state funds and/or state contracts if she could get away with it, much like the ADN being beholden to the state for advertising dollars. All public hospitals rely on state and federal funds as part of their income through Medicaid and other state funded health programs.

Why do I even think Trig was uninsured, resulting in potentially huge medical bills? I wrote a long summary for Patrick over a year ago when he was still at Palingates regarding the language in Sarah Palin's state health plan coverage and other possible insurance coverage he could have had (including Medicaid, IHS, and Todd's Union plan) that leads me to believe (with almost absolute certainty) Trig was not insured, and I can further surmise what happened with the now famous "benefits dept email" requesting Trig's birth certificate. Patrick confirmed at the time I sent him my research via email that he had very reliable/credible sources that stated Trig was uninsured and there were large medical bills as a result.

And as usual, the truth did not align with the various things SP said regarding her said legal debts. This is especially true after it was revealed that SP's legal costs were not nearly as big as she stated, and that the RNC and the state covered or offered to cover part/all of the legal cost, at least where Troopergate was concerned (correct me if I am not remembering this as it happened, so many details to try and keep straight).

Thanks for listening.....and Laura, if you want copies of my insurance research, I am happy to email it to you, or I am within 30 miles of you if you want them in person over lunch, on me of course! I really appreciate you writing and maintaining your blog, and maybe most of all, for scaring the bejeezus out of the fraudulent grifting hoaxter herself that her time is just about up.

OzMud link

8/29/2011 06:38:10 pm

Of course there *is* another rather uncomfortable but just as possible an explanation regarding the identity of Anon 9:14...

It's possible this is one of the authors of the books/movies due to emerge on the horizon in the next month or so and he/she is feeding us tidbits to either stoke the fires to keep interest alive or we're being used in some benign psychology experiment about blog commenters to be exposed in an epilogue or sequel.

It's no secret that a couple of them hold most of us in contempt for having the audacity to never give up chasing the truth about Trig Palin, labeling their efforts as stalwart and professional while calling us tinfoil hat wearers who obsessively traipse after Sarah without even getting paid...

So forgive me if I remain skeptical of the anonymous comments, no matter how tempting it may be to hope they are signs of impending truth.

ginny11

8/29/2011 08:42:26 pm

Ottoline, Joe's "wittingly" response was not indicating he was simply tryting to stir up emotions for blog hits. It was referring to the fact that he was trying to "smoke out" some of the "extremist" anti-Palin commenters, so to speak. You may want to go back an re-read the comment Joe was responding to.
Joe may be a little rough around the edges and he is indeed very blunt and calls things just as he sees them with no sugar-coating. And certainly people, if people don't like his personality, can choose to stay away from his blog, his books, or whatever. But I have never seen an example of disingenuity, or anything but brutal honesty for that matter, from Joe. He has never pretended that his blog was for any purpose other than to promote his book.
Joe called out those so-called "blog-moms" (or whatever you want to call them), those who think they have the right to deem anyone who goes against the "party-line" as a troll. I have been accused of being a troll more than once by a few of these people. When Joe compared them to some of those "bots" over at C4P, he hit a bit too close to home and they responded with aggressive defensiveness. But you know what? I've been on these Palin blogs for well over 2 years now, and I have thought the same thing that Joe said on more than one occasion. There are a few people for whom no theory is too "out there" evidence be damned, no blood relative of Sarah Palin is off-limits, and no dissent is allowed. I've seen this getting worse and worse lately, and it is sad when healthy debate is shut down by a few people, and the commenting on some once-great blogs becomes nothing more than an echo-chamber.
When Joe said he "wittingly" stirred things up, I believe he did it to make a few people show their true colors and start up healthy debate once again.
And Joe has every right to put certain topics or people off-limits, such as Track/Britta, or "who is Track's real dad" or "Sarah murdered Dar/Curtis" etc.

Freddy el Desfibradddor

8/29/2011 09:00:20 pm

Joe McGinniss's recent blog post, raising the "serious question" of whether Bristol is "guilty of child abuse" by including Tripp in the tv show she's taping, is absolutely a reversal of what he said in June - that he was NOT interested in Bristol. People speak of Palin decompensating under stress - but perhaps McGinniss is also feeling stress and getting sloppier at self-control. Palin is a faker, a narcissist and a big fat liar, but McGinniss is rather too obvious here in his own insincerity.

Molly

8/29/2011 09:11:40 pm

I was thinking about the possibility of Tripp being born either five weeks earlier than stated or five weeks later than stated. If it were me, I would be afraid to say that a baby had been born before the blessed event in case something went wrong (still birth or very sick child). However, if the baby had already been born then I would be more comfortable (in a Palin sort of way) of announcing the birth. Afterall, isn't this what they did with Trig.

Looking back at Palin's Deceptions, the different versions of events around the time of Tripp's birth in December and January given by the key characters varies enormously. Apparently in one version Levi is on the slope working, and in another version he was in Wasilla for weeks parenting with Bristol.

http://palindeception.blogspot.com/search?q=my+space+florida

Nothing makes sense!

I recall Sadie writing a blog post saying she was allowed to spend five minutes with Tripp the day he was born. I can't remember if she mentioned Sherry, but in the link provided above, Sherry states that she saw Tripp the day he was born as well. I can't find that particular blog post on Sadie's site. Does anyone else remember this?

Ivyfree

8/29/2011 09:48:31 pm

The question has been nagging me all night. Of course they don't need a medical reason to do any DNA studies. They need a medical reason to get the test paid for, though. Unless there's a medical need, the parents will get billed for it, and it's not cheap. With medical care, the question of how the bill will get paid is always an issue. The test has to be ordered by a doctor to get paid for, and the insurance company has to be able to see the medical need for the testing.

I just can't see them doing any genetic testing without a reason, unless they've gotten permission to bill the parents of a premie. Somebody has to pay the bill. I'm going to see if I can squeeze time in to call our NICU today at work, and ask about genetic testing. Maybe I'm completely off the mark, but I don't see DNA testing being ordered right away unless there is a severe issue. A significantly deformed ear might be the reason.

Susan in MD

8/29/2011 10:45:33 pm

I am amused that I zoned in on Anon's dot dot dot usage (ellipses) just for providing so much for everyone to discuss, nerdy asides included. Fact is, a great many blog readers here and elsewhere were trying to figure out WHO Anon was. I was not.

It was not my intention to OUT Anon. The only intention was a curiosity as to whether or not the Anons were the SAME person, because someone had asked the question. That is all.

Karen

8/29/2011 10:53:12 pm

Can someone explain what they think Bristol's statement "I'm a mother duck to that baby" refers to?

Ottoline

8/29/2011 11:58:15 pm

Matsu Minor: You said "People believe Sherry was set up to get back at Sarah."

All along, I was thinking it was the Palin crew who set up Sherry to warn her against saying anything, or Mercede saying anything, that strayed from the party line.

But you say that busting Sherry was to get back at Palin? I never thought of that. Can you tell us any more? Do people think Shery's arrest was a set-up? Do they think she got good legal representation? (I thought the sentence was too harsh. Esp if she was set up.)

lilly lily

8/30/2011 12:13:06 am

Mercede said she was only allowed about 5 minutes. Bristol said Mercede was antsy and wanted to leave almost immediatly, had things to do, places to go or something of that order. As usual opposite sides of the coin, two versions.

I take what either says with a grain of salt.

Freddy el Desfibradddor

8/30/2011 12:23:54 am

@Palinoia - You state "I have personally always believed that Trig was born prematurely, probably late Jan or early Feb 2008, and very likely to Bristol. I believe strongly if she is the mother, then Trig was medically uninsured, at least initially." I'm not an Alaskan, and I may be wrong - but based on my reading on blogs like this, it is my impression that all Alaskans with Native blood have insurance/are eligible for free medical care at designated facilities [I don't know how they work it] - that Bristol has Native blood, through Todd, and so her child also is covered through this.

Viola-Alex

8/30/2011 12:39:18 am

So help me out here. Bristol has Ruffles, who was premature and had many health problems. The baby is in hospital somewhere or cared for by a trained nurse. Sarah cooks up her scheme. Introduces a different baby at Mat Su. Then shows off Ruffles at the shower, in the kitchen photos. Ruffles doesn't work, for whatever reason and vanishes. A doll is used in June. (the same doll as at Mat Su?) Rentababy Trig appears in August, just in time for the nomination.

So far so good? Really, that's pretty simple.

Now, if Sarah says Bristol is 5mo pregnant, we KNOW she's not, because Sarah never tells the truth. So what is served by the lie if Bristol is 5+ mo? What is served if she's less than 5 mo is obvious.

PS. Those dolls are VERY creepy. I checked'm out. Only thing is they are also VERY expensive. Would Sarah spend that much?

NSG

8/30/2011 12:40:39 am

Just watched that video of SP, Piper & "Trig" at church.

Wow that was weird!

I've not been around DS infants or babies, and I understand there are definite differences in their muscle tone, etc.

But I've been around a LOT of non-DS babies in baby slings, and I've never seen any of 'em, all of 'em sit up like that! Esp when asleep, they're nestled down, very rounded on the bottom -- that's the whole point, isn't it? According to the video and SP's version, Trig would have been abt 2 mos at that point, but only about 4ish weeks past his due date. I can't imagine an actual baby sitting up like that in a sling. Or if he was, surely the mom would never have let a hand off him, esp his head.

Once again, SP's actions within the framework of her own version of events are even more bizarre than the hoax itself!

Viola-Alex

8/30/2011 12:41:00 am

One reason to lie about Bristol's pregnancy due date was if it were to fall too close to the election. Imagine how that would screw up things. All media attention would be on the bastard child and not the political process. . .

anonfornow

8/30/2011 12:49:34 am

I've always believed that Sarah didn't know about the DS until shortly before Trig's presentation in April, otherwise she'd have made it part of her 5 March announcement and milked it for all it was worth.

I read or saw somewhere (anyone help me out here?) Sarah talking about someone noticing Trig's palm shortly after his birth. I didn't remark it at the time because that was before someone posted the photos of Trig showing that he actually has a normal palm (as do a surprising number of DS children, something I did not know). How did she not know what the hands of this child she claimed as her own looked like?

And Ginny 11, McG is a very clever man, which is why the examples of his disingenuity and dishonesty are not so glaring. But he showed his true colors when he freely admitted to sending out copies of Devon and Bailey's book to both media outlets and contacts in Alaska. His stated reason for doing so? He was hoping to jolt some of his contacts into talking more. His reason for sending it to the media outlets--which he knew would publish the juiciest tidbits--was obvious if unstated: to spike the publication of the book. His excuse--"they sent it all over NY" doesn't hold water since that's what agents do; they send manuscripts to editors. Joe's copy was slipped to him under the table by his own editor, who received it as a submission. It was all unethical and disingenuous, and dishonest, and told us everything we need to know about Joe. And for the record, I only commented on Joe's blog myself a couple of times, and he was never anything but courteous to me. That didn't stop me from taking offense at his condescending, supercilious attitudes.

I got a good laugh at his proud distinction between himself--a professional who does what he does for money--and those motivated solely by passion. In my experience, there's a word for that, and it ain't flattering.

comeonpeople

8/30/2011 12:52:17 am

I want to weigh in on the comments about what is told to parents and when regarding sick children. Practitioners definitely amend their styles in providing information to parents, depending on parents developmental level and education level. To less educated or very overwhelmed parents we may say "We have concerns for thus and such, we will test for thus and such and discuss results and what they mean when we know it". For some, this is enough. I can defintely see Bristle being alone and being told because of the malformed ears we have concerns and are doing genetic testing. And that's it until results come in. Never ever do we withhold information from a parent for VERY LONG. By this I mean as example: I may get blood results back that show me a child's leukemia has relapsed. We have about an hour to mobilize our support team: DRs, nurses, social worker, parent support and sit down and tell them. I can tell you that that hour, when WE know the child has relapsed and the parents do not yet know...is HELL and one of the most distressing aspects of my job. Poker faces? VERY hard to do. So, i think this is universal and as a whole practitioners do not wait long to get the word out once support is mobilized.

Also, loving all this talk about proper formatting. I use the OWL at PURDUE (online writing lab) for all my APA guidelines for grad school papers lol. It's on my favorites links.

I was thinknig this am over coffee and hoping that Sarah is squirming about the impending fall from grace re: babygate. I have visions in my head of all her speeches to the "Women of Joy" and DS groups where she says she "chose life". She should have chosen to shut up about it and not cash in, but she didn't. She made the whole thing up. And the jig is soon up Sarah. You are nothing but a grifter.

Ottoline

8/30/2011 01:14:46 am

Ivyfree and Up: Not only would insurance not pay, but isn't it the case that MDs are careful to tell you not to do testing unless you will use the results of that test (esp not invasive testing like an amnio). And SP's anti-choice stance would prevent her from aborting, so why do an amnio? If the amnio was testing on Bristol, ditto; plus amnio is not done that often on young women. So the amnio must have been for some other reason, if it even ever happened. And 12 wks is too early for an amnio. Glad you offered the info on 12 wks and sonograms.

anonfornow: I would be THRILLED if Fred was Audrey! What a great idea. If not, I sure hope Fred connected with her for insight. Yes, thank you to Laura for allowing a discussion in which we touch on these darker issues -- although I guess we all know better than to dwell on them.

conscious at last 19:31:28: I had never thought about that. So chillingly put. If true. This is such a huge question mark.

OzMud: It has to be a doll. I don't mind if it is (although that makes it yet another variation on the hoax). But I don't mind that at all compared to everything else because at least a baby isn't being hauled around. I bet the explanation to Piper was "we'll let Trig rest at home." Of course, a non-insane person would leave the baby at home, or in someone's arms in the audience.

I don't think Jesse would mind if I claimed the naming of the littlest baby as Ruffles for mrsgunka -- I recall her being the first.

LTA: you forgot "lose-your-job kind of silence." I bet there are more than Wooten in that category.

Palinola: LOL!! Old grifting fund and new grifting fund. Hahaha. Very good. Esp your discussion connecting all to the funds. My pet theory is that the book deal and the $7M? advance was another form of payoff -- almost money laundering in that at the time of the deal, no one thought that book would sell, and my thinking was that Rupert laughed and said "Give the little lady her $7M and let's see her run with it." Which proved to be a very good bet for Rupert and his pals in terms of the ole "energizing the base" goal. Plus I bet SP complained about those medical bills to Rupert, saying the Repub fat cats owed her for it. And Rupert laughed and said ok. Speculation, of course.

ginny11: I do agree with you. I too hate the shrill ad hominem insults directed at dissenters, trolls, and Palin herself. It serves no purpose, offers no info, and clutters up the airwaves with rudeness. I was just not liking Joe that much after reading his book on Ted Kennedy, although I admit Joe is a great story-teller. I wanted more sourcing and attribution, but of course there can be none when McG says Ted thought, wondered, decided, etc. And the plagiarism charge re the TK book, plus the sending of Bailey's ms to the media got to me. I know there might be a whole other side to the story, so I guess we wait and see.

Ivyfree -- When you phone around re genetic testing, please ask about amnio done for identifying paternity. I think in the panic to confirm/deny the inappropriate possible bioDad, SP would have said she'd pay. Didn't we think the amnio might have happened on a trip she and Bristol made to NYC? So with travel costs, it becomes a pricey amnio, but all part of the cost of doing business if you want to stay on the list of potential VP picks. IMO.

Ivyfree

8/30/2011 01:16:32 am

On break at work. Called our Level III NICU and spoke with one of the nurse practitioners there about DNA testing, specifically for Down syndrome but also generally. She said, one, it's definitely possible for an infant to have Down syndrome and not look it until the baby grew a bit. In that case, they would confirm it with DNA testing when they suspected it. Two, they do not do DNA testing unless they're either trying to figure out why somebody is having multiple miscarriages/severely premature births, OR unless they suspect the infant has a genetic disorder... what the nurse practitioner called a "funny-looking kid." (FLK used to be a term that was used to describe children that just didn't look right, but it was hard to define why- maybe hair growth pattern, positioning of ears, proportion of features or all-over body proportion, something like that. FLK use was discontinued as it was rightly considered to be rather derogatory.)

IOW, they have to have a medically valid reason to do DNA testing or the insurance won't pay for it. They won't do it "just because."

If a parent were to insist on it and were willing to pay for it, then it could be done, but I'm betting the lab would want a valid credit card number before they did it.

Rationalist

8/30/2011 01:52:11 am

good morning!

I bet Sarah somehow borrowed the doll from a pro-life center instead of buying it. Don't they have dolls to teach girls to bond with their fetuses instead of aborting them?

If this story ever finally breaks, this video, as well as sarah's tears at the women of joy speech, are exhibits a and b of the proof that she's a psychopath.

It's like the gusty video. She looks really sane, until you realize she has a fake belly on live tv.

Conscious at last!

8/30/2011 01:54:53 am

@ Palinoia and others- Wow! that's really brilliant - making the connection(s) between SP's "Legal Defense Funds" and the need to pay for Trig(s) medical treatment.
This is a terrific opening, perhaps, for a possible "Lame-Stream Media" investigation.

We are a wonderful community. It tickles me when I think about all the implications of what we've been working on together for the last three years.
Our host bloggers are still "THE BOMB!"

Yes, we are all looking forward to a breakthrough in the media --- but the fact IS that the truth is already known by many. Sarah Palin did not birth any baby in April, 2008.

It is my hope that the various "insiders" can get together, protect themselves legally and otherwise, and crack this thing wide open. I believe that this is possible and I send them my prayers, respect and good wishes. I'm sure that we all do.

Viola-Alex

8/30/2011 01:56:23 am

Big H/T to mrsgunka for giving Ruffles a name, which made him/her real.

Laura Novak link

8/30/2011 01:58:52 am

You are all amazing with your research and ability to look at the problem before us.

And as for the ellipses, hey, it's a fun and academic question. One that I'm sure Sarah has struggled with mightily over the years. We are nerds at heart, and we can multitask: babies? punctuation? Hmmmm.

And I also, too, like OWL from Purdue and used it for my novel for all sorts of problems.

I reread Fatal Vision this summer and found it as gripping then as I did 30 years ago. It was an amazing piece of writing by a phenomenal author. I look forward to Joe's new book, as well as that of Fred...and I guess Levi. Though I don't hold out much hope for that one.

The true trolls are out in force, but I don't let them through for a reason. They post their garbage on other sites - it's evident from their writing styles. And if in true troll style, they serve only to confuse or obfuscate, then I don't have time for that.

That is different from someone pressing us to press harder, prove more or consider an alternative. Those are people who might see the problem in a different light.

And I believe everyone here is capable of decency, polite disagreement, and respect. (yes, I used serial commas throughout my novel!!!)

You're all awesome, as Sarah would say in her best 7th grade manner.

Oh, and Palinoia, sounds like a great post you've got there. Wanna put it all together for everyone?

ginny11

8/30/2011 02:15:35 am

Freddy el Desfibradddor:
In this post:
http://www.joemcginniss.net/please-go-elsewhere-with-bristol-levi-comments/Joe%20McGinniss
Joe is clearly talking about Levit/Bristol relationship/gossip etc. He is not talking about Bristol in terms of her celebrity, her book, her mother, etc. he posts about Bristol at least two more times after that, (before the recent post from a day or so ago):
http://www.joemcginniss.net/sarah-sinks-ever-lower-will-sign-books-with-bristol-at-minnesota-mall/Joe%20McGinniss
http://www.joemcginniss.net/is-bristol-as-bonkers-as-her-mom-with-god-on-their-side/Joe%20McGinniss

So, I still don't see any hypocrisy or duplicity.

Marie

8/30/2011 02:16:25 am

Someone mentioned the possibility of a home birth with a midwife for one or more of Bristol's babies.
Both of my babies were born outside the hospital with certified nurse midwives: one at home, one in a freestanding birthing center. I also know mothers who have delivered at home with lay midwives (legally or otherwise).
Because of the potential for lawsuits, home birth midwives tend to do a LOT of screening for high risk factors during
the pregnancy and labor. While there is some honest disagreement over what constitutes high risk, I have never ever heard of a midwife who did home births with a premature labor. Every mother I know whose baby came earlier than 37 weeks has been sent to the hospital, with no exceptions. I doubt it's terribly different in Alaska.

Re the church video, that is a rather unusual position for a supposed 2 month old in a sling. As mentioned earlier, most babies of that age would be in a horizontal position. One of my babies did need to be in a vertical position in the sling at that age (due to reflux), but I recall this required a somewhat different way of using the sling than what is in the video. (Plus my baby had unusually good head control at an early age---something that a Downs baby simply would not have.)

What really struck me about the video was how skinny Palin looked at what was supposedly 2 months postpartum. Postpartum moms just aren't that skinny, even 2 months out.

V ictoria link

8/30/2011 02:19:21 am

@Ottoline - I do mind that it's a doll. The fact that it's a doll perfectly underscores that Sarah views babies as props. Yes, it's better for Trig, but it also gives the idea that you can go and give a speech while lugging around a live baby.

Laura Novak link

8/30/2011 02:25:04 am

Okay, I'm going to put up a new post written by our own Viola-Alex. Feel free to continue to discuss Palin and the baby mysteries over there....

jame

8/30/2011 02:38:05 am

Question for medical people: After 'Trig's' birth, if DNA testing were performed to determine down syndrome, would it be standard protocol for the doctors/labs initiating the testing to require information about the baby's paternity, and then possibly test the baby's father (to see whether certain defects 'ran in the family')?

Question for legal and media people: One all the facts become known, won't both Sarah and Bristol have to repay all the money they received (as well as pay attorneys' fees and costs in the event of any litigation) to both their book publishers, Candies, and others for perpetrating a fraud in their names? That is, wouldn't having NO births (but lying about it) be a fraud perpetrated by Sarah against both her publishers, promotors, speaking engagement firms, television studios, and religious audiences, and wouldn't having MULTIPLE births (but lying about it) be a fraud perpetrated by Bristol against the same groups?

Thank you. I await your replies.

Sharon_Too_Also

8/30/2011 03:02:15 am

@Palinoia Re: Legal Defense Funds

"Follow the money" and boy, did you ever! With my fingers crossed, I'm asking, "does this put it in John Edwards territory?"

In other words, would an investigation into the distribution of the funds show illegal and improper use? A gotcha'?

mary

8/30/2011 03:03:11 am

anonfornow said: " I like the idea that Fred may be Audrey. I find it hard to believe she just dropped it all and walked away."

Audrey Hepburn starred in Funny Face with Fred Astaire....Just a thought!

bees-wax

8/30/2011 03:39:15 am

I don't want to hijack the comments over at V-A's post. It should have its own discussion about her topics, I feel, so I will make a brief observation about the SP church video here.

That wee one does look like a doll, and I agree that the way it stays put when she moves her hand away contradicts what is known about the muscle tone of Ds babies. The head-squishing/hat-moving moment also gives pause. But there is one thing I can't reconcile. At the beginning of the video, the little one's right hand is outside of the sling. It looks very doll-like. However, shortly thereafter, the hand is inside the sling. I watched that stretch of video over and over (with the sound off -- more pleasant) to see when SP put that little hand inside, but I don't think she did.

Was the video pieced together? I don't think so, but I could be wrong. Did the doll-baby put his own hand inside? Perhaps. You can look at the big screen above the stage as it pans out between hand-out moments and hand-in and see what could be voluntary doll-baby arm motion. I don't know. It's too hard to tell, but it does give me pause.

Does anyone else have thoughts about that?

Ottoline

8/30/2011 04:07:59 am

bees-wax: Yes, I puzzled over that too and decided that SP tucked it in in one of those video moments where we can't see that part of her body. I was first struck by it hanging out there, and tried to remember if I had ever seen a baby sleep with an arm hanging out in air. My sense was no, and also that babies hold their limbs with a certain angle to them, not straight.

SLQ

8/30/2011 04:14:24 am

bees-wax, I see what you pointed out. It's possible the baby did move. I also think I see him scrunch up his face when she turns his head. But that part could be the realistic doll thing.

The thing that bothers me the most is using him as a baby prop, whether this one is real or not. Obviously, seeing her at the RNC, she doesn't HAVE to appear onstage with him in a sling. She could bring him up, wrapped in a blanket, cuddling him as a normal mother would, show him to the congregation, then have someone (a sister, daughter, etc.) take him offstage while she gives her speech. For the same reason, why is Piper there? Why not the whole fam-damily? Answer: as another prop.

We all know it would be difficult to time a soundly sleeping 2-month-old baby with a speech. With him in a cloth carrier, it would be difficult for someone to take him if he started fussing. The whole thing if fishy and weird.

anony

8/30/2011 04:49:03 am

Another thing I've wondered about is Anon432 started her first message 7/23/11 scolding Bristol with "By the way...it's been nearly a hundred days since you or your mother has clapped eyes on Trig..." That would be approx. May 16th since either of them had seen Trig or about 10 days before the Rolling thunder attention hijack.

I thought that both had been reported being back in Alaska off and on all summer. So they didn't see Trig even then? So he's not in the Wasilla compound? Or he lives in one the three houses alone with nannies and neither Bristol or Sarah stopped by to visit?

Or am I reading too much into this?

FrostyAK

8/30/2011 04:59:17 am

On the life-like baby doll which $P seems to be using in that video - wouldn't CBJ be able to obtain such a thing on short notice? Or with her sexual abuse practice, might she have one on hand? She being a Talibangelical and all...

There are 30 listings for midwives/birthing centers in the current Wasilla phone book.

lilly lily

8/30/2011 05:12:46 am

Bree Palin had a long section on the baby doll question. I had no idea they were so realistic or so expensive.

Sarah Palin would never pay for one.

Bree shut her site down shortly after that. She had other fish to fry.

beandubh

8/30/2011 06:41:10 am

@ginny11. Actually, Joe McGinniss wrote: "It was not unwitting." I posted "the comment Joe was responding to," and I was amused to see someone call me "RAM-like"...as in troll (love those ellipses)...on a prominent anti-Palin blog. Which was a misreading of the my point, and which of course proved my point!

I'm a dyed-in-the-wool Palin "obsessive" who's been hanging out in this neighborhood on the blogosphere for almost three years now. OK, I'm what's dismissively called a lurker, but I consider myself to be totally involved in efforts to expose Sarah Palin as a grifter and fraud. I have to say I'm disgusted with the invective being hurled at McGinniss. These attempts to test loyalties--to flush out trolls, to make sure everybody's on the same page, to gain the upper hand--have just got to stop.

curiouser

8/30/2011 06:51:52 am

bees-wax - I'm hesitant about many aspects of babygate but I'm 100% certain that Sarah has real baby Trig tucked in the sling. If she moved his arm...and I don't see any indication from her arm position that she did...she was moving a real baby's arm.

SLQ - He does scrunch up his face and he moves his head. I'm creeped out by the tension in her arm and in her hand that holds his head and pinches his cap so his face is more visible. I'm further creeped out by her words:

“And...let me just say this about Trig...I would hope that all of you could think of Trig and use him as your reminder that your plans aren’t God’s plans.”

Her hoax is despicable to me because she used Trig as a prop to establish her credentials as heroine and to advance her career and the anti-choice agenda.

bees-wax

8/30/2011 07:26:25 am

Yes, curiouser, I agree. I also think that sling holds a real boy, and I am also creeped out by the things she says in that little clip.

Isn't it interesting that she would actually have us believe that her will and God's will are the very same? She is no prophet.

I found it odd that she didn't even acknowledge young Piper standing next to her. That made me sad for Piper, who probably regularly receives the message that she is not as cute as Trig but must still do stage-duty for the cause.

And yes, the big deal to me is that she will use whatever she fancies to reach her goals. To her, the end justifies the means -- whatever it takes -- including using children as stage props instead of sending them to school, lying about whatever topic is at hand, revising history to suit how you told it, name-calling, hijacking public events, and preying on those of faith by posing as the patron saint of maternity, liberty, and hard-working (white) people.

Bad form, crazy lady. Bad form.

bees-wax

8/30/2011 07:36:11 am

I should say -- that sling holds a real boy who is still, sadly, the puppet.

Ivyfree

8/30/2011 07:46:18 am

"Question for medical people: After 'Trig's' birth, if DNA testing were performed to determine down syndrome, would it be standard protocol for the doctors/labs initiating the testing to require information about the baby's paternity, and then possibly test the baby's father (to see whether certain defects 'ran in the family')?"

Not necessarily. If something showed up that was known to be hereditary, the family would be told. Further testing would be optional. You can't require anybody to be tested for anything legally unless it is a contagious illness, and there are all kinds of legal hoops to jump through for that.

"Question for legal and media people: One all the facts become known, won't both Sarah and Bristol have to repay all the money they received (as well as pay attorneys' fees and costs in the event of any litigation) to both their book publishers, Candies, and others for perpetrating a fraud in their names?"

Good question. I suspect that it would depends on whether legal fraud was committed, and if it was, they'd be tried, but probably wouldn't have to pay it back unless they were found guilty. In which case they might be liable for jail time.

search4more

8/30/2011 07:50:16 am

bees-wax,

If the arm was outside at the beginning, Palin didn't touch it, but then it was inside the sling later, then the logical conclusion I'm afraid is that the baby was real and moved his arm. ...Of course Plain could have moved the arm whilst the camera concentrated on her face or something.

I saw this video a few weeks ago when I was searching for photos and video of Palin from just before and after the birth. It is slightly alarming the way she bounds up the stairs with the arm of the baby swinging around. It seems pretty unlikely to me though that the baby isn't real. That's too much of a stretch.

People love babies and like to pay them attention. She is in a big room of people. Tens of people will have come up to her to look at the baby. Real live things are very warm and move but inanimate objects are cold and don't move. It would have to be some kind of heated Hollywood anamatronic doll to fool anyone and come on how likely is that? Also Piper would have had to be in on it, or else if she could tell then be not very bright. My feeling is that Piper might be smarter than Palin. ;-)

Ivyfree

8/30/2011 07:52:33 am

"Ivyfree and Up: Not only would insurance not pay, but isn't it the case that MDs are careful to tell you not to do testing unless you will use the results of that test (esp not invasive testing like an amnio). And SP's anti-choice stance would prevent her from aborting, so why do an amnio?"

Sarah is a liar. She has to claim an amnio was done so she "knew" the baby had Down syndrome and "chose life."

Obviously it makes no sense for her to have had an amnio, since she would not have chosen abortion where anybody could see her, and she didn't use the information to learn about Down syndrome and connect with a support group. (Remember, when they met someone who had a child with Down syndrome, they wanted to know if the kid could play sport? That actually wouldn't have been top of MY list of things to find out about.)

And we know she didn't have an amnio because it was obvious she didn't know how one would have been done and the aftercare required.

Marie

8/30/2011 07:56:21 am

Back when my kids were little (in the 90s), I hung out in attachment parenting circles where it was considered quite normal to attend gatherings with a baby in a sling. I certainly attended many meetings and even conferences where the speaker gave her talk while wearing a sling (and baby). These babies were generally very well behaved. In fact, many of us found that our "fussy" babies were far less fussy in the sling with mom than outside the sling with other caregivers. So I wouldn't fault Sarah Palin on those grounds.

Of course, if the "baby" is actually a doll, then that's another matter!

Molly

8/30/2011 08:24:44 am

I think the baby in the sling is real. What I didn't like was the complete lack of any maternal response from Palin towards either of these children. She seemed to claw Trig's head, almost pinching off his hat in an endeavour to present him as a little symbol of God's plans. And that she dared to speak of 'the authority she had' simply chilled me to the bone.

I posted this video yesterday and I hadn't seen it for a long time. It convinces me more than ever that there was a method to Palin's madness. She wanted the VP slot and she was going to reel in the religous extremists with the
help of Trig!

Marie

8/30/2011 09:48:33 am

Reading all this made me recall a conversation with a dear friend back in August 2008 when Palin was first presented as a VP candidate.

My friend is everything Palin pretends to be--a loving wife and mother of five, strong in her faith with strong family values. She breastfed all her kids and carried them around in slings when they were little. My friend also happens to be a liberal Democrat. (Yes, there really are people like her---more than you might think.)

My friend felt very conflicted about Palin's candidacy back in August 2008. On the one hand, she disagreed with Palin on almost every issue. On the other hand, she loved the idea that the first woman Vice President (or even President) could be someone who shared her values and had parented her children just the way she had. Seeing the baby in the sling and hearing Palin talk about breastfeeding and bringing her baby to work was icing on the cake.

Of course, we now know that this was all a fraud---even the breastfeeding! But it sure seemed genuine to many at the time, and if Palin had been just a little savvier, she might have fooled my friend and a lot of other people into voting Republican that November.

We're used to male politicians running for office, and we know all the lies they can tell to win the hearts and minds of voters. But we are not so used to female politicians and their lies. Perhaps Sarah did our country a big favor by presenting all these lies to us at once, so we will be more vigilant in the future.

Banyan

8/30/2011 10:46:31 am

Most Down Syndrome is diagnosed prenatally, first through a triple-screen blood test -- now a routine part of prenatal care.

This test is now offered to pregnant women of all ages. Although this blood test is not definitive for DS, it is indicative of a troubled pregnancy and a problem with the fetus, that then leads to further testing.

It is hard for me to imagine that either Bristol (or whoever was the mother of Ruffles) did not have some prenatal knowledge that all was not well with the baby. I really doubt that the first indication of Down Syndrome could have come in the NICU.

I also doubt that insurance would not cover chromosomal testing for DS in the NICU -- it is critical for proper treatment decisions to know from birth whether DS (or other common genetic disorders) are present.

I particularly cannot imagine that a premature baby with signs of possible genetic problems (the deformed ear, possible congenital heart defect, etc.) would not be immediately worked up for DS (a test may take 3 days to be definitive), in tandem with other routine blood testing.

I have previously quoted here from a neonatal textbook showing the importance of identifying Down Syndrome in the NICU in prematurely-born infants at the outset.

I hope Laura will ask her neonatologist friend about what is done at his hospital. But there is no health reason or insurance problem I am aware of -- and I work in perinatal healthcare -- that would prevent such testing, and there are many good medical reasons to carry out such testing ASAP.

guest

8/30/2011 11:44:24 am

Marie - that's EXACTLY what happened with Alaska. That's it.
It didn't last long, though. When McCain tapped her, Alaskans were concerned, shocked, wary. Contrary to popular blog sentiment, Alaskans are not stupider, more loyal to corruption, etc etc. The "approval rating" that continues to get such attention was a myth; a misinterpreted very minor poll of 400 people.
She was already in trouble. Already had ethics investigations. Had already spent more time in Wasilla than in the seat of government. It was beautiful timing for her! If that hadn't happened, there's a strong possibility that she would have been recalled.

Sillywhabbit link

8/30/2011 01:03:08 pm

Hi there...first time poster here.
I started as a die-hard mudflats reader.
Then something really frightening happened: Jean's readers started channeling that crazy gash from Wasilla. At first it was cute, but then I couldn't even go there and read without wanting to just yarf all over the place. It stopped being cute, I now have a gag reflex to the words also and too. When I see them used in print, together, by "smart" people I'm sickened. They became what they hated, and sounded twice as stupid as the gash.
I found myself more frequently going to IM. I will never believe Jesse would compromise himself in the manner suggested, just because a couple of anon posters are fed-up, sounded credible, and we are all tired of waiting for that gash to get seriously BUSTED!
I have enjoyed reading your blog Laura, thank you for the time it takes to produce posts.

FrostyAK

8/30/2011 01:55:24 pm

Exactly Guest. Many had been calling for recall for a long time when McC made his fatal error. Even back then the nasty remarks that people filing ethics complaints were just jealous of her 'beauty' were floating about. I wonder who ordered those remarks...

When the core is rotten, the rot shines through to those who will see.

Luddy

8/30/2011 03:16:05 pm

this thread has moved into an area where I think I have a bit to contribute as I work in high risk OB care, so here goes: (Mind you, I don't think S. Palin was pregnant in 2007-08 and so of course never had the amniocentesis of which she speaks)

Where I work, quite a few babies show up in the delivery room with Down syndrome. Teen and other young moms, older moms with religious background who decline 1st or 2nd trimester screening options. These screening protocols are not perfect--false negatives are possible.

I used to work with an OB doc who had worked in Alaska. Hard work for those professionals there---"thin on the ground" as he put it. I don't recall where we were introduced to a "genetics specialist" involved. There are currently only 2 genetics counselors (masters degree) and only one ABMG (amer. board of medical genetics) physician registered in Alaska (all in Anchorage). Much larger nose count in Washington state. Perhaps someone can jump in refresh me on what we "know" about that?

There is a test called chorionic villus sampling done at 10-13 weeks. Palin would be dull enough to believe this was an "amnio".

I find trained OB sonographers to be exacting about their work. Most would indeed look at the nuchal tranlucency (neck measurement) at 12 weeks (in fact, the best time to gauge if it is large).

There are doctors who will perform genetic amnio as early as 12-14 weeks. Mostly older doctors, accustomed to practice 10-15 years ago when the data about increased risk for complications was not as well defined as it is today. Used to give the lab personnel kittens as the sample obtained is much smaller and slower to get results.

There are women who have amnio "because my doctor told me to" without thinking through all the implications.

Routine testing is chromosomes with an amnio and not much else. I have had limited involvement with paternity testing. At my center, we have at times not insisted on chromosome testing when paternity testing was the focus, so that is possible.

Very preemie babies with Down syndrome look very different from full term babies with Down syndrome. NICU testing is sometimes not done immediately. Usually testing is with blood (very little is needed). A skin sample (as from circumcision) could also be used.

I have never known a doctor to withhold a diagnosis from parents even when youth, education, language barrier, etc. is a factor.

Luddy

8/30/2011 03:20:50 pm

2 of 2 (forgot to add)

In my state, qualification for Native American health benefits is a somewhat complicated algorithm that comes up with a percent Native heritage. One must be above a threshold percentage (25% here, I think?) to qualify. Does anyone know how that works in Alaska? Perhaps a Bristol baby would not qualify for benefits at birth?

8/30/2011 09:33:00 pm

Is it possible Medicaid paid for Trig's neonatal care? (Wouldn't that revelation be too delicious?)

Two parents with no source of income would certainly be able to apply on behalf of their child. And who would connect the application of Little Hockeystick Johnson, born 2-2-2008 to either Marie Palin or Bristol Johnson in Anchorage, with Governor's son Trig Paxon Von Palin in Wasilla on 4-18-08?

I don't know the Alaska Medicaid rules about unemancipated teens. Would the hospital be able to collect from the teen's parent for the teen's baby's care?

The other option is that Bristol's babies were born at whichever location the native health service delivers babies. She had no source of income when Tripp was born, and no employer-sponsored health insurance when the DWTS baby was born. (unless she purchased some thru her LLP.)

Re:the Feb 08 car accident... I know the doc at that location was not CBJ. Did Arc XIX mention Bristol going to or from the doc's during that accident? It was in the second post, 8/31/2008. I couldn't find the post last night. I don't recall whether the post mentioned CBJ at that location.

Finally, what is the evidence that Ruffles was the child Bristol gave birth to? The hospital photo with Levi? I ask because I've been wondering whether Ruffles was a Rent-a-baby. The current Trig's double bridge ear just has to be a Heath. Too coincidental for Franklin Graham to come up with a child up for adoption with DS and the same rare ear malformation as Sarah.

comeonpeople

8/30/2011 09:56:51 pm

Banyon,
It could very well be that Bristle had very little prenatal care with Ruffles. She may have hid that pregnancy well into the second trimester. In that case, there may have been little prenatal care or testing done.

Lidia17

8/30/2011 10:38:33 pm

@Viola-Alex, it’s good to hear how you came through to the other side from a very dark place. I agree about comparisons to other atrocities: this kind of abuse is of a different quality because it is inflicted by someone who is supposed to love you and keep you from harm. It’s right that you finally brought the situation to the eyes of your family, even if they did not want to see.

@anonfornow, couldn’t agree more

@mary, I don’t see any bump either.

@Ottoline, yes, and that’s part and parcel with the stuff Greenwald was discussing, isn’t it? It’s like Americans are now just so INURED to theft and corruption and now even torture, that they just roll their eyes and go back to either playing, or worrying about more personal issues. And financial crimes are apparently just too “boring” and “complicated” for a society which measures itself in Tweets, or maybe they are so common that a general rejection of morality and ethics has become endemic. So, yeah… babygate breaking does have the best possibility of cutting through that complacency, just because it is so bizarre.

@jeff, isn’t it amazing that Cheney is doubling-down on all his lies and crimes? Even his recent brushes with mortality haven’t softened him a bit, nor given him an iota of humility. If anything, he’s coming across as more aggressive than before!

Ivyfree

8/30/2011 11:38:14 pm

"But there is no health reason or insurance problem I am aware of -- and I work in perinatal healthcare -- that would prevent such testing, and there are many good medical reasons to carry out such testing ASAP."

As I said. There has to be a reason. It wouldn't just be done.

1Doubter

8/31/2011 01:06:36 pm

O/T: Check out IM and Mudflats - both have some doozies!

Banyan

9/1/2011 04:42:25 am

@ Ivyfree

The ear defect -- in any baby, preterm or fullterm -- would immediately be a reason to search for underlying genetic/chromosomal problems.

Prematurity in and of itself is supposed to be enough of a reason to test for DS and other common genetic/chromosomal disorders according to the neonatal text (Gardner and Merenstain) I consulted and quoted from in a post on a previous thread on this blog.

How widespread actual DS testing is in all NICUs (where "standards of practice" are largely spoken of in jest) is something I can't say.

But most preemies are worked up routinely for conditions that are far more rare than DS, and without any cause other than premature birth -- look up TORCH syndrome tests.

Neonatal units are huge money makers for the hospitals that have them and a lot of procedures are done without any evidence-based "reason" whatsoever. They do generate revenues for the hospitals, though.

Knowing whether or not an extremely or moderately preterm baby has DS is important, however, for treatment decisions. So there is a reason.

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.

I Feel A Dance Number Coming On...

Leave a Reply.

Laura Novak

Blogs I Read

Categories

Archives