What a 5-Week Preemie Really Looks Like

Sarah's "gone dark." Her devotees are experiencing withdrawals. Her lawyer is sending out unprofessional attack letters with demands—via e-mail, for chrissakes!

It's time to re-visit a certain time and certain images many in the media took for granted.

According to popular myth, Trig Paxson Van Palin was born on April 18, 2008. He was also reportedly born with jaundice, a hole in his heart, and with trisomy 21, otherwise known as Down syndrome.

Not only that, he was also reportedly born at 35 weeks, which would make him 5 weeks premature.

This little fact has never been examined much, as far as I know, so I did some reading on premature babies. Even those who are NOT already genetically challenged and are born this far in advance of their due dates normally undergo a week or two in a NICU, or a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit.

Why?

Because infants born before they achieve 37 weeks gestation have difficulty breathing and eating. Additionally, even without the Down syndrome complication, premature babies require temperature control because they simply do not have the capacity to warm themselves... thus they need a special environment in which to spend their first several days. They normally have to be fed by a nasal tube because their ability to suck a bottle or a breast is undeveloped. They also frequently need additional oxygen because their lungs are not developed enough to take in sufficient air. Another very common complication is jaundice, as a result of the fact that the infant's liver is simply not mature enough to process the bile before it builds up. If you doubt anything I'm saying here, please check yourself.

Here are three pictures of premature infants. These images were found searching '5 week premature infants' on Google's "image" search page. After reading the stories that came with each picture, I have every reason to believe that they represent actual pictures of newborn babies who were 5 weeks premature.

4-day old infant born 5 weeks prematurely, with feeding tube, in NICU

Infant born 5-6 weeks prematurely with jaundice

Newborn, 5 weeks premature, with jaundice and feeding tube

Now, here is Trig Paxson Van Palin right after he was born on April 18, 2008.

Trig Palin, shown here on the day of his birth, supposedly 5-weeks premature

Please recall that Trig and his "mother" were supposedly released from the hospital the day after the birth—a Saturday—and that his "mother" took him to work the following Monday for show and tell with the media.

Re-think this. The facility in which this premature infant was supposedly born didn't even have a NICU. So whatever early intervention may have been required was not even possible. If you knew you were having a special needs child, five weeks too soon, with the great likelihood that special equipment or treatment would be needed to preserve the life, would you intentionally go to a local clinic without the facilities, staff or know-how to help?

Re-think this. This 5-week premature infant with jaundice (what jaundice?) and a hole in his heart and Down syndrome, all conditions which require, anywhere else in the world, careful treatment and monitoring in a facility specially equipped to handle it, was taken to work a couple days after birth and presented as proof of the crazy ex-governor lady's religious pro-birth credentials.

As the crazy ex-governor lady would have us believe, not only was she pregnant for just a month, her miracle baby managed to be born and survive without any of the customary clinicians or neonatal equipment that any of us would have insisted upon, in spite of his early arrival and challenging circumstances.

Yeah, right. And I've got a bridge to nowhere for sale. Any bidders?

Bauer and Allot Have It SO Wrong

Politico published an article three days ago titled "Trig Palin has divided America," by Gary Bauer (yes, that Gary Bauer) and Daniel Allot.  It starts out like this:

A year ago, Palin gave birth to her youngest son, Trig, who has Down syndrome. Since then, mother and son have become objects of the left’s unrelenting scorn and the right’s unflinching fidelity.

There's so much wrong with this article it is hard to know where to start.  First of all, it is not possible that Sarah Palin gave birth to Trig.  There's no evidence to support this birth and a whole lot of evidence to the contrary (<-- read some of the older posts on this blog). If you have not thought to challenge the story yet, you have quite a ride ahead of you.  If you are a blue pill sort of person, you may as well just go back to sleep.  If you are inquisitive and seek truth, take the red pill and use the brain you were born with.  Or just read back through my posts on this topic.

The authors of the aforementioned article go on to assert that:

Palin is controversial, in part, because America is divided over disability. We’ve established laws and institutions that protect people with disabilities. But we also do everything we can to make sure they don’t see the light of day.

According to Bauer and Allot, Palin stands opposed to "powerful trends," the thrust of which would just as soon eliminate "an entire class of people," the disabled.  The 'Right to Birth' crowd and the families that include a person with a disability (400,000 of them?) flock to Palin because of the courage of her choice. Somehow this means that others who have no idea what this choice entails have a hatred for Palin because of her choice.

What Bauer and Allot don't touch is the fact that whoever birthed Trig presumably had a choice, a choice that Sarah Palin would do her best to deny to you and me. 

Whether or not you have a family member with a serious disability, you can probably imagine that caring for that dear one requires educating oneself about the condition, plus spending lots of time and probably lots of money getting professional assistance to help that dear one live the best life he or she can under the circumstances.

The image above shows just one instance of many when Sarah was on the campaign trail.  She held Trig up as her certificate of passage into the club of the real-life pro-birthers.  This baby is staring up at thousands of watts of spotlights, and the noise from the cheering Sarasites at the Republican National Convention is no doubt deafening—at least to a baby that can hear.  To this day we have heard nothing but platitudes from Trig's assumed mother about supporting children with birth defects.  We see Sarah in Running World magazine talking about how great it feels to burn, to get hot, when she runs.  We see Sarah in Twitter decrying an Alaskan blogger who posted an image for a day that replaced Trig's face with that of a talk show host with whom Sarah has a very cozy relationship.  We see six- or seven-year-old Piper struggling to lug Trig around, sometimes while she is precariously perched in high heels.

But what we don't see is the kind of care Trig is getting, the sacrifices that any mother with a Down syndrome baby would have to make to get frequent checkups and special therapy.  We also don't see Sarah as Governor making positive steps toward funding for special services, or promoting the kinds of organizations in her own state that are instrumental in providing for and helping families with disabled members.

Here's what we do see.  Sarah signing autographs on the body of a child who is not enjoying the spectacle:

For a closer look, I rotated and cropped the image.  You tell me if this young one appreciates this particular photo-op:

Bauer and Allot have it so wrong.  Those of us who see Sarah Palin for who she is (and who she isn't) do not despise people who are born with disabilities.  We may want to retain the option to choose whether or not we take on a lifetime of effort and expense to take care of a mal-formed or severely disabled child.  But we do not "hate" Sarah Palin because she claims Trig is her burden, or her joy, from her god.  More power to those who have the resources and the time to nurture and care for those disabled from birth.

But a pox on those who claim that mantle, that halo, when it is not theirs to take.  And that, dear readers, is exactly what Sarah Palin is doing.  If you have any doubts, do the research.  If you have any doubts, remember that Trig is and has been her "ticket to ride."  The least you could do is verify the facts.  You'll find she has provided none of her own.  If you still have doubts, just start adding up all the times she has lied or exaggerated or twisted the actual truth in any number of other issues.  I do not think she can tell the truth, the whole truth.

Another Politico article, this one by Steve Seckler, says:

But what I really think cemented Sarah Palin’s most loyal following and elevated her personal mystique to a level transcendent of her politics was the single most selfless decision of her life: to give birth to her son Trig. That seemed the case among many at my 4th of July parade, including those who I know never attend church and would rather talk combines and corn borers than abortion or gay marriage.
[snip]
To Palin’s supporters as well as many who are not, no diva smirk or vapid interview response can ever say as much about her as the image of her nursing Trig on the Straight Talk Express.

That is exactly why we must continue to educate others and spread the truth about Sarah's amazing hoax regarding Trig.

The foregoing is my personal opinion regarding the hoax that Sarah birthed Trig, and especially that she nursed Trig.  Look at the Republican National Conventions pictures again.  Tell me who in the Palin family, if anyone, actually nursed Trig.

Lies.  More lies.  Red pill or blue, it's up to you.

Governor Sarah Palin RESIGNS

Quickie post here, I'm sure you all have heard the surprising news...  here's my prediction on some of the REAL reasons for this July 3rd Friday holiday weekend announcement:

1. SarahPAC is not going to report the kind of income that she'll need to move into the big league for a 2012 campaign.
2. Her "defense fund" (Alaska Fund Trust) is also not raking in nearly enough money to help pay for existing legal bills in addition to paying to defend her against upcoming ethics complaints.
3. There is, in addition to more troublesome ethics complaints, some big investigation in the wings, either from the IRS or the FBI or both.  This is not something she is going to be able to get her Personnel Board to take care of.
4. She figured she'd better throw in the towel now by committing sepuku, essentially, in the hopes that she will not figure very highly on the radar when the real feces hits the proverbial fan.

We'll see how much of this turns out to be true.

In the meantime I'm wondering how many lips will loosen once they realize that Sarah no longer holds a position of power and the ability to do them or their families harm.

And I'm also wondering how long it will take to undo / turn around / the policies that her appointees have in place - like making it illegal for Alaska natives to fish for their survival this winter, for example.

By Popular Demand...

Well, thank you to one of my readers for asking for more video.  Same as the last, this video displays clips from the Faux Noise production about Sarah Palin when she was a candidate for vice-president.  They got lots of footage from Elan Frank, who had shot video over 2-3 days encompassing April 8, 2008.  The reason this footage is so incredibly valuable (and likely the reason Faux has pulled its video of this very time frame) is because Sarah supposedly gives birth to Trig just 10 days later.

Clips here are taken from Part Two of the Faux Noise production (credit: Elan Frank) that I captured and converted.  There may be more coming, I still have to scour parts 3 - 5 of that "commercial for Sarah" that Greta Van Susteren narrated.  Take it for what you will, at least this time I figured out how to add some sound!

Why Babygate Matters

There are some people who say they don't care whether or not Sarah Palin gave birth to a 5th child, a son named Trig Paxson Van Palin. I care, and here is why.

Sarah Palin seems to see herself as a national political figure. She's done nothing to discourage any talk about running for President in 2012 or 2016, and in fact, she seems to be eager to promote herself as someone worthy of consideration.

Palin's supporters push for her candidacy and promote the idea on numerous blogs and other Web sites. They support her potential run financially through SarahPAC. I get the feeling they are not all that numerous but they are very vocal. We have to wait until the PAC's first accounting comes out to see how the support translates into dollars.

Even though many voices I respect claim Sarah Palin stands no chance being selected as the Republican nominee, much less winning the Presidency, I'm not confident enough in our mainstream media or our voting machines to think that such a fluke is 100% impossible. Besides, there is always a 3rd party ticket possibility.

I think most reasonable people would acknowledge that Sarah Palin uses people, including her own children, to further her political aims. If she did not give birth to Trig, she is especially using those who are against legal abortions, or those who also have a Down syndrome child, by appealing to them in events across the country. If she did not give birth to Trig, she has been lying to them and everyone else for a long time.

A person who would perpetrate a deception like this would also attempt to deceive on other issues. These are not the morals or ethics I want to see in a President, or in a person who holds any political office for that matter.

Sarah Palin's resume, and her appeal to what are called the core voters in the GOP, rests almost entirely on these "facts:"

1. She is an attractive woman and a mother of five.
2. She chose to give birth to a baby with Down syndrome.
3. She is a Governor.
4. She is knowledgeable about the "energy" issue.
5. She has a "servant's heart."

Point one is in dispute (the mother of five part). Point two is very much in dispute. Point three is true, but her legacy as Governor is still being written and it is so far peppered with incidents that do not reflect well on Sarah Palin's ability to govern wisely and well. That point four is in dispute is apparent if you do even a little research on the topic. That leaves us with point five, but it's not up to me to judge that.

Babygate is about points one and two. I can say with great confidence that the woman shown below could not have given birth to a 6 lb 2 oz baby a few weeks after these pictures were taken:

Sarah Palin on March 14, 2008

Sarah Palin on March 27, 2008

Sarah Palin, first week of April 2008

Babygate researchers have turned up all kinds of additional evidence that increases my confidence. This information is being preserved online at Team Truther as well as several other places. It's not hard to find if you look!

The only evidence to the contrary remains:

1. Sarah said she was pregnant. ("So, it was really great, I was only pregnant a month.")
2. The mysterious Gusty photos taken on one afternoon that appear to show a pregnant Sarah.
3. An ambiguous printed statement released by the McCain campaign purporting to be from Sarah's family doctor.

As for #1—We heard Sarah claim that the Alaska Legislative Council report on Troopergate cleared her of any wrongdoing even when it plainly told us she was guilty of abusing her office as Governor. Sarah also said she turned down the funds for the "bridge to nowhere" but neglected to mention she kept them anyway. And she also let everyone believe she sold the governor's jet on E-Bay for a profit even though she sold it at a loss to a political contributor. Believe what Sarah says at your peril.

As for #2—We know that a woman can appear to be pregnant when she is not. There are many ways to pad oneself under clothing. For some reason, the Gusty images are no longer publicly available. Neither are any other images that show a pregnant Sarah Palin. There are quite a few images that show a not-pregnant Sarah Palin though!

As for #3—Sarah's family doctor has never spoken on the issue even though local news media gave her the opportunity a few times in an attempt to put Babygate to rest. No birth certificate or medical records have ever been released that would back up Sarah's claim of being pregnant with and giving birth to Trig. No hospital birth announcements were published for Trig Paxson Van Palin.

If the Babygate deception was revealed as truth, would Sarah's chances at a national political office be virtually eliminated? My Magic 8 ball says:

That's why Babygate matters to me, and I'd guess that's also why Sarah Palin's supporters are so savage and vicious when anyone brings it up.

[cross-posted at Team Truther]

Ms. Disingenuous

A Sarasite's Ignore-ance

I wanted to find out if Sarasites knew how Governor Palin's legal debt came about, how much it actually amounted to, and to what degree the recent ethics complaint-filers were responsible for it. So, I had a little discussion the other night with RA Mansour of C4P in the comments under a post that likened Governor Sarah Palin to Joan of Arc. What actually happened was I asked a couple of questions and got a snarky non-answer and then silence:

ENNEALOGIC: I would appreciate very much someone who is knowledgeable about the "bankrupting" of the Palins to provide some information:

1) The figure of $500,000+ in legal fees: how was this incurred? I'm guessing these fees relate almost entirely to the Monegan-Wooten scandal, and only after VP Candidate Palin was advised by the McCain folks to say nothing to anybody without her own lawyers to run interference. But it would be nice to know the breakdown on this figure. Anyone here know?

2) How does it cost Governor Palin anything when someone files an ethics complaint against her? An ethics complaint isn't a lawsuit. She doesn't have to go to court. Doesn't the complaint get reviewed by the AG and then either thrown out or given to the Personnel Board for investigation? And isn't that investigation part of the job that the Board is paid for (by the state) whether there are complaints or not? If the complaints lack any foundation in law (e.g., if they are in fact "frivolous" as claimed), what would Governor Palin have to pay and to whom? If there is no wrongdoing, all she'd have to do is answer questions and I don't think the Board would charge her to do that.

Seems to me that only if there is wrongdoing would she consider hiring a private attorney to work out a settlement of some kind, which is probably what happened when she agreed to pay back around $9000 of the expenses she billed Alaska for her children's travel.

So, how do these ethics complaints end up costing her any money, much less "bankrupting" her?

RAM: Ennealogic, when a complaint is filed against her or her family personally (not her office), she has to hire a lawyer to defend herself.

ENNEALOGIC: RAM, none of the complaints that I am aware of are filed against her personally. They each relate to her obligations as an executive in the Alaska government.

Unless I'm missing something, could you please point out who has filed either a law suit or an ethics complaint against her that does not have to do with her role as Governor?

RAM: Ennealogic, uh, every one of the complaints allege personal benefit for her or her family. The one from yesterday does. The jacket complaint does. Even Troopergate did.

Naturally, all the complaints relate to her role as governor. Duh! If she were a private citizen they wouldn't be filing executive branch ethics complaints against her.

Are you being willfully obtuse?

ENNEALOGIC: RAM, thank you for re-stating what I said originally.

You said,
"Ennealogic, when a complaint is filed against her or her family personally (not her office), she has to hire a lawyer to defend herself."

Are you confident that this is how executive branch ethics complaints are handled? My initial question was about the process.

I believe it goes like this, but wanted to know if anyone had different information. The complaint is reviewed by the AG. If there is merit, the complaint is forwarded to the Personnel Board for further examination. If the complaint is unfounded, it is tossed. If the complaint is valid, then and only then would the Governor think that maybe she should have her own private attorney to negotiate a settlement or agreement.

In short, if the complaints were strictly of the nuisance variety, I don't see how Governor Palin would be out of pocket for anything. Do you?

(And I know you know what I'm talking about. Let's discuss this without casting aspersions.)

RAM: [no answer to my questions from then on, but in response to another poster...] Anyone defending these ankle-biting idiots is a complete ass.

Sarasitical Meme Origins

Sarasites can be heard chanting this meme of late:
These vile ankle-biters who keep filing ridiculous, frivolous ethics complaints want to bankrupt Sarah and leave her and her family in the poorhouse! They want to paralyze her and keep her from doing her job!

Not surprisingly, this idea that ethics complaints are causing severe financial hardship on the Palin family and creating conditions that make governing difficult originates from Sarah herself and her various spokespersons. (Bolding in the following quotes is mine.)

Are Alaskans outraged, or at least tired of this yet - another frivolous ethics charge by a political blogger? This would be hilarious if it weren’t so expensive for the state to process these accusations and for me to defend against these bogus harassments... How much will this blogger's asinine political grandstanding cost all of us in time and money?
~ Sarah Palin, March 24, 2009

“I must defend against these baseless ethics accusations out of my own pocket as the use of public monies to do so could itself violate state law,” Palin wrote. [My note - Is this true? and what defense does one need if the accusation is baseless, anyway?]

[Palin's financial] disclosure said only that she owed “hundreds of thousands of dollars.” On Friday in the written statement, attorney Thomas Van Flein wouldn’t give a precise number but said it was “a substantial debt.” Palin said she didn’t have an exact figure yet but “the debt is over a half a million dollars.”
~ Alaska Daily News, March 20, 2009

----- ===== -----

"Governor Palin has spent a considerable amount of time and money fighting ethics complaints – and no charge has been substantiated...

“These allegations are categorically false and ridiculous, and are an abuse of the Executive Ethics Act,” Nizich said...

“But obviously the purpose of this complaint and the previous ones is to distract the administration and the public, and to paralyze the Department of Law and the executive branch."
~ Mike Nizich, chief of staff, April 22,2009

The Sarasites either do not know or do not care that "Alaska's Joan of Arc" is asking them to pay for her failings while framing herself as a martyr for their cause. The Sarasites seem willing to accept the notion that unfounded ethics complaints have saddled the Governor with over $500,000 worth of legal bills, brought about by political opponents making bogus charges against her. Let's take a closer look at how the bulk of this financial liability was likely incurred.

Troopergate Redux

Let's all remember, please, that Troopergate did not start out as an ethics complaint! The Alaska Legislative Council was alarmed by Sarah's firing of long-time public servant Walt Monegan and initiated its own investigation, by a unanimous vote, in July, 2008. (The Council is a permanent interim committee of the Legislature and is responsible for conducting the business of the Legislature when it is not in session.)

The ethics matter was first brought to the Personnel Board by Sarah Palin herself on September 1, 2008, after she joined the national Republican ticket and reversed her promise of full cooperation with the Council's investigation. Suddenly, and without further explanation, the legislature no longer had a right to investigate her. (The court said they did have that right, but by then it was too late.)

According to an article last month in the Alaska Daily News,

Van Flein initially was hired by the state under a $95,000 contract to represent Palin in a legislative investigation of Troopergate.

Palin said she didn't think it would be fair to "sacrifice public monies to defend against something that was so politically charged."

Apparently Sarah was fine with the state paying the attorney in July and August. If Sarah would have let the Legislative Council do its job, her representation would not have cost her a dime. What was the real reason, then, that she hired her own attorney in the Troopergate matter? I found a clue in a comment made below a recent ADN article about the Alaska Fund Trust. A poster named Msimoniam provided this historical summary:

Everyone seems to forget that it is the Governor's choice to hire a private lawyer and pay for it on her own. Originally, Van Flein was hired to represent the Governor on state contract for Troopergate. That is perfectly legal and normal. That changed when Van Flein started consulting with the campaign and representing Todd too. It made his communications with people other than his client (Palin) subject to the Alaska public records act, thus open to the public. Thus, every communication he had as a state contractor with Todd, staff and McCain campaign people was not protected by attorney/client privilege.

So, Van Flein quickly became her private lawyer to avoid public record disclosure issues. It's Palin's choice to pay for it on her own, or get her supporters to pay, so that she can keep it all hidden. It also allows her to use her lawyer as a propaganda tool, which Van Flein happily did during the campaign. So for her to cry personal financial hardship is disingenuous.

Who's Scamming Who?

Whose fault is it that Ms. Disingenuous has significant legal bills? Any expense as a result of Troopergate was voluntarily incurred in an attempt to sidestep the legislative investigation. Any expense for other supposedly frivolous or bogus complaints needs to be supported by evidence which has yet to be provided. To this outside observer, it looks like Sarah is playing the victim yet again and trying to scam her devotees into paying bills for which she alone is responsible—not the "ankle-biters."

Sarah asked, "Are Alaskans outraged yet, or at least tired of this yet?"

I certainly think they should be. I know I am.

Sarah Palin's Amazingly Short Pregnancy [Updated]

Here is the story we are supposed to believe about Sarah Palin's 5^th pregnancy. I don't buy it, but I thought it might be worth retelling anyway. The story details that follow are largely from Sarah's own words. [Updates appear in blue]

Sarah found out in late September 2007, while attending an oil and gas conference, that she was pregnant (5-6 weeks). She considered having an abortion. "No one would ever know."¹

Sarah didn't tell anyone she was pregnant because of the "Neanderthals out there," who would criticize her for being pregnant.²

At 13 weeks, she underwent amniocentesis and discovered the baby would have Down syndrome. She once again, "for a fleeting moment," considered an abortion.³ (There is confusion about the date of the procedure. Sarah told told reporters she had the amnio in December at 13 weeks, but if we accept her doctor's statement that this child was born at 35 weeks and the 'official' birth date of April 18, the amniocentesis would have been done in mid-November.)

After receiving the results from the amnio, she waited three days until Todd came home from the North Slope before finally telling him the news.⁴

She chose to have this invasive procedure done, even though she is staunchly pro-life and the results should not have mattered. She also had the test done dangerously early in her pregnancy instead of waiting until the recommended 15 to 18 weeks gestation.⁵

She didn't know what a baby with an extra chromosome would look like. She had a "heckuva time researching Down syndrome" when she was pregnant—she just couldn't get herself to open the book about DS that the doctor gave her. However, she was "very anxious to meet [Trig]."⁶

As time went on, she kept her children, other members of her family, and the people with whom she worked in the dark. She didn't tell anyone about the pregnancy or the DS diagnosis. And nobody noticed anything out of the ordinary—not in November, December, January or February—halfway through the 90-day legislative session.

Finally, on March 5, the day after John McCain's nomination for President was announced, Sarah revealed to the public that she was 7 months pregnant (26 weeks). Nobody had even guessed that she was pregnant. She still didn't mention the DS diagnosis to anyone, not even her children.⁷

She was amazingly fit for a 44-year-old woman who had already given birth 4 times. She did not appear to be pregnant in multiple photographs taken during February, March and even April. She successfully used 'fashion-assisted camouflage' to disguise her condition.⁸

(She was also uncharacteristically frugal about maternity wear. Despite her penchant for clothes, she seemed to have only one outfit to wear for her pregnant public appearances: a black skirt or slacks, a black scoop-neck top, and a long black jacket, changing out a few large, colorful scarves for variety. She even kept wearing her snug-fitting high-heeled boots.)

When she was 35 weeks pregnant (eight months) she flew from Alaska to Texas for a conference on energy. The day she was to give a keynote address (Thursday, April 17) she woke up at 4AM leaking amniotic fluid and feeling a different kind of contraction from the Braxton-Hicks she'd been experiencing. She called her doctor and said she really wanted to give her lunch-time speech, and her doctor said okay.⁹

After the speech was over, she left the conference and boarded a flight back to Alaska without getting checked out by any local obstetrician. Her flight had a stopover in Seattle where she called her doctor again and then she continued her flight to Anchorage. Total travel time was around 10 hours. The flight attendants didn't notice she was pregnant said that the stage of her pregnancy was not apparent by observation.¹⁰

On arriving, she drove past two large hospitals in Anchorage that were equipped to handle premature at-risk deliveries. An hour later she reached a small, local hospital near Wasilla that had no neo-natal intensive care facilities. Her doctor decided to induce labor, and she gave birth a few hours later (early morning Friday April 18) to a 6-pound 2-ounce premature Down syndrome infant with jaundice and a heart condition.^{11 12 13}

Three days later she took the 4-5 week premature infant to her office where she introduced him to her staff and the news media. It turns out she wasn't really in labor when her water broke in Texas. That is why labor had to be induced even though that meant giving birth prematurely to a baby that would have been high risk even at term. ¹⁴

¹ YouTube - Sarah Palin address at Evansville pt 5
² ibid.
³ People Magazine
⁴ People Magazine
⁵ WebMD
⁶ YouTube - Sarah Palin address at Evansville pt 6
⁷ Fox News
⁸ New York Times
⁹ Alaska Daily News
¹⁰ Fairbanks Daily News-Miner
¹¹ Alaska Daily News
¹² Dallas Morning News
¹³ Trailblazer by Lorenzo Benet
¹⁴ Alaska Daily News

"Trig Truthers" ... scum?

"(Except the Trig Truthers, they're just subhuman scum.)"

The above parenthetical comes from a Conservatives4Palin post that thanked AKM and Mudflats for sticking up for anonymous opinion-giving.  No, I won't link there, but the post is named "Should Anonymous Free Speech Apply to….THEM??" -- mimicking exactly the title of AKM's post.

The essence of this Mudflats blog post was to support C4P who was chastised by Jay Ramras after C4P criticized their fellow conservative for being absent from the AK legislature in session, after Jay Ramras criticized Sarah Palin from being absent from proceedings, especially during the critical final weeks.

Ramras asked the bloggers behind C4P to "step out of the shadows." Having recently been 'outed' by an aging and sad ex-newspaper columnist named Mike Doogan, AKM of Mudflats naturally stood up for blogging under pseudonyms.

The essence of the C4P article re-affirmed the right to speak your mind whether or not you identify who you are.  And the author went further to say that it's alright that C4P and Mudflats have opposing political views, and that "we recognize that no matter how bitterly we disagree with our opponents, no matter what their political persuasion, they are still Americans, and human beings deserving of respect."  Except those who have serious doubts that Sarah Palin gave birth to the Down syndrome child named Trig.

This gave me real pause.  Why is this particular subject so touchy for the die-hard Sarasites?  Is it because they have nothing from which to build a counter-argument?

We disagree on pro-choice vs. anti-abortion.  We disagree on exploring ANWR.  We disagree that the people and former leadership of Iraq had anything to do with 9/11.  We disagree on thoughtlessly slaughtering wolves and their cubs to artificially pump up the moose population for out-of-state trophy hunters.  We disagree on allowing Pebble Mine to dump its waste in a pristine river.  We disagree whether Alaskan natives' subsistence lifestyle should be cherished and supported.  We disagree on a lot of things, but it is only when we disagree whether Sarah lied about her pregnancy that we are are no longer human beings.

Sensitive much?  Protesting too much?  Why is this issue so worthy of attacking the messenger and not the message when other disagreements are "still deserving of respect?" 

It is because, in my opinion, this issue strikes too close to home, and the C4P folks know that when it can be shown that Sarah pulled the wool over the eyes of her "right-to-life" base about Trig, the jig's up.  Sarasites are willing to suffer through her all-too-obvious inability to govern wisely and well.  They are willing to make excuses for her routine ethical failures.  They are even willing to pull the blinders over their eyes when, for instance, Sarah nominates an overtly chauvinistic, US government-hating racist for Attorney General.  But if it is proved that she faked the whole "I'm your candidate because my faith helped me to bear a special-needs child, which proves I believe in the culture of life!" — the façade that is Sarah Palin will truly crumble.

 
Let me know if you are an "I love Sarah" person and if you would still love her if you found out she lied, big time, about her right-to-life credentials.  I'd really like to hear how you'd justify that, if you can.  In the meantime, you might want to peek out from behind your blinders.  Palin's Deceptions is a great place to start if you are willing to spend the time.  And if any of the folks there have it totally wrong, well, they welcome reasonable and courteous discussion.

Babygate Research: Where We're At

Diana, a valued correspondent and a frequent poster at Palin's Deceptions, has summed up where we are in the citizen investigation regarding Babygate -- the examination of facts as we know them regarding Sarah Palin's faked pregnancy.  With Diana's permission, I am re-posting an excellent comment she left on Audrey's site (Palin's Deceptions).  The only things I've changed are to add some images and a link to Diana's well-researched timeline, and I made a few very minor spelling and grammatical corrections.  I concur with the majority of Diana's suppositions.

I know we can't prove it yet, but I believe beyond a reasonable doubt that Bristol and Levi are Trig's parents and that Trig was born in Feb 2008. For me it seems obvious and the only struggle I have is getting more facts to flush out the final picture. All the information we have gathered makes it only plausible for Bristol, not Willow, to be Trig's as well as Tripp's mom. Willow was photographed January 15th 2008 when it would have been obvious if she had been pregnant. She was not. She was also still visible and in travel reports going back and forth to school. Not true for Bristol. It appears Bristol became pregnant mid June of 2007 when she was still 16 and just after she finished her sophomore year in High School. This would have made her due with Trig mid March 2008 if she had carried him to full term. It is obvious that Bristol was kept out of view and in hiding once she started showing. It seems she was kept hidden until after the baby was born so that Trig could be put up for adoption and a scandal could be avoided. Bristol moves in with her Aunt and leaves behind all her friends and family and is able to keep anyone in her town from realizing that she is pregnant. They are used to her traveling back and forth to school during the year and they are only hearing rumors, not seeing for themselves she is pregnant.
	Look at the timeline. It tells you everything. She is not photographed once from 9-14-2007 until 4-25-2008 when we see her posing with Mercede the night of Mercede's prom. She left school once it might be noticed she was pregnant and moved in with her Aunt. She is off her mom's travel schedule permanently after 10-7-2008 and doesn't attend any events, family or otherwise, again until June... with one exception: she attends the "American Heart Association" luncheon on Feb. 15th which should have had media coverage and photos yet nothing has been found to show Bristol attended. She either had Trig by then or she did not attend.
Remember she was only 16 and just finished her sophomore year when she got pregnant. Her mom taught abstinence and was very vocal and active on this subject. This would have, at the time, been a crisis for the Palin family.  However, if they looked into the future at the decisions and choices that were being made, they might have realized this should have been addressed straight on and with the truth.  The larger crisis was yet to come. I can't imagine that Sarah ever planned on adopting Trig after Bristol told her she was pregnant.  I think Sarah hoped to keep Bristol's pregnancy private so that her 16 year old could adopt him out without the media finding out and or her friends and Christian following knowing. Sarah was extremely focused on not losing her momentum in her drive for the national stage. Having an adopted newborn, that was her 16 year old daughter's, would have been very difficult to explain. Not when she could privately adopt him out and avoid the fallout for her daughter's benefit as well as for hers. However Trig surprised them all by being born a month early, not only with Downs syndrome but with a heart problem, that would need to be watched and addressed possibly needing a future surgery. This is what changed the direction of the plan Sarah had put into place. From everything we know and from all the reports and timelines we have gathered it appears that Trig was born sometime during the month of February 2008. This was the unexpected catalyst that changed Sarah's direction from adopting Trig out to faking a pregnancy. It appears, Trig having Down syndrome came as a shock to everyone, especially with the problems and health concerns that he would be facing. The information we received from Sarah about knowing Trig had Down syndrome came after the fact and not prior to him being born. It seems they just dated the knowledge backwards to make it appear like they knew, but it doesn't appear like they did. It seems this sudden knowledge attributed to Sarah's rushed and poorly thought out plan.
It seems as this point Bristol's mom decides to adopt Trig as her own and decides to start faking a pregnancy in late February, only after Trig is born. This coincides with the photos of when Sarah started wearing scarves and "pretending" to look pregnant although not very convincingly. Sarah knows that she has at least 6 to 8 weeks to fake a pregnancy before Trig reaches a size that is "not presentable" as a newborn. Sarah already knows she will "present" one month earlier than she tells the press and it becomes a part of her plan to buy some time. Sarah telling everyone he is "one month early" will be very believable and it works to her advantage in being able to make her fake pregnancy work. All Sarah thinks she needs to do is to pretend long enough, say Trig is hers, and she can make this "embarrassment become a solution".
	It appears Sarah was waiting to get the "nod" to become "VP" before she decided to go into labor. On April 18th, after flying home in the middle of the night Sarah starts the birth story and later in the morning when everyone is in place she "presents" Trig as her own child. All the while avoiding the media scrutiny that should and would have been present if she hadn't planned on coming home late in the evening and having the time to make sure everything was in place before they were alerted to "Trigs birth".
In reality Trig was born early, by at least one month, but by Bristol. Trig was born with the complications of down syndrome and a heart defect. He was born to a teenage girl who more than likely tried to hide her pregnancy by "under-eating". Trig very likely lost at least one or two pounds from problems associated with not being able to nurse correctly, in addition to already being smaller by arriving early. Consequently, Sarah was able to present to the public a newborn looking Trig, April 18th, 2008 as her own child.  What Sarah didn't expect was how many people were going to question her behavior. She was use to getting away with mis-behaviors and having things go her way without question. She appears to have been very naive about the position she put herself into and the scrutiny she would receive when she accepted the offer for the Vice Presidential position.	Sarah Palin on March 27, 2008, three weeks before Trig's 'official' birthdate
It seems however, that even before Sarah presents Trig to the public as her own and after Levi and Bristol understand and accept that they are not keeping and raising Trig as their own, Bristol gets pregnant again. Easy to do when you are healing your emotional wounds with the boyfriend/father of your first child you are having to relinquish. Especially when you think breastfeeding will protect you from getting pregnant. Statistics show that it is relatively easy and not uncommon to get pregnant within 6 weeks of delivering because of the false sense of protection nursing mothers feel. So, now begins the newest Palin family crisis! Bristol becomes pregnant “again” at the end of March 2008. Nine months later on December 27th or 28th (as the date is a moving target), they are welcoming baby number 2, Tripp! It all seem clear for me, from their photos, interviews, behaviors and actions! I know from my own experiences that actions always speak louder than words. This could never be more true than what has occurred in Palin family drama! Sarah, Bristol, Levi, Mercedes, their actions ALL speak louder than their words. I sincerely understand Bristol's mom wanting to help these kids out and adopt Trig. But this shows Sarah's own immaturity and incredibly poor judgment. She showed her lack of ethics when she decided to lie and hide the truth.  Then she used her kids as her own personal, righteous and religious platform to further her political career. We have the basics correct. We have the timelines and dates Bristol disappeared. We have photos of Sarah, not pregnant. We have rumors, MySpace pages talking about being sexually active and actions that make it very clear what happened. The rest is coming. It will fill in the missing pieces to the picture. But I am convinced and I think a large majority of people following this site feel the same. We are in the process of filling in the last pieces to this puzzle. That is when a puzzle can be the most difficult to solve. We have been working for months and have accumulated an incredible amount of information. I know more is coming soon and I hope that it will continue to fill out the picture and give us the information we need to finalize this sad family drama. I personally would like to move on and let Sarah get back to finding ways to heal her broken family. But until we have Sarah acknowledge that she lied and covered up the truth or until we uncover that final piece of information that makes it clear, I for one will continue the search.

So, what does this all mean and what does it matter? Like it or not, the Governor of Alaska, supported by a small group of Sarasites, wishes to re-enter the national political scene. If a potential candidate can go to such lengths to deceive and trick her followers, I have no doubt she would lie about lesser and greater things as well, as long as it furthers her aims.

The day Sarah Palin swears off any future political candidacy is the day that I will happily let her slip quietly into the Alaskan night to take care of the family she professes to hold most dear.

The House That Sarah Built

Several insighful articles have appeared concerning questions about Sarah and Todd's half-a-million dollar house (see list at bottom). It was built in a couple of months while Sarah was (unsuccessfully) campaigning for Lt. Governor. It was completed just before her term as Mayor of Wasilla ended, during which she successfully removed the need for any building permits. Sarah's house was built only a mile away from the rather remote location chosen for the Wasilla Sports Complex. The suppliers of the materials for the Sports Complex, the construction contractor for the Complex, and the design firm for the Complex all have significant ties to Sarah. The suppliers of the materials for the Sports Complex are the same people who provided the materials for Sarah's house.

Given Sarah's inability to separate personal from public -- ethically speaking -- questions have been raised about how this house got built, by whom, and at what cost. I'd like us to remember that House-gate is still a possible ethics issue, and until Todd tells us who his buddies were, and what they 'donated' toward the building of the house, we have every right to question what could be a Ted Stevens redux.

 

Wasilla Sports Complex, upstairs

  

Wasilla Sports Complex, main floor

 

Sarah's House, railing is reflected in glass

Sarah's house, with balcony railing

The glass-paneled balcony railing in Sarah's house looks pretty similar to the one in the Sports Complex.  Go figure.

Articles about House-gate - please read the details if you have not seen them yet:

• Village Voice 
• TPM Muckraker 
• One Dollar, One Vote
• Mudflats
  

Don't It Make My Brown Eyes Blue

In the Pure Gossip Category

I thought of Crystal Gayle's song when I heard, from more than a couple people, that Bristol Palin's "fiance" has fathered another child besides Tripp.  This is being whispered by a few sources... and then I listened to Bristol's very vague answers about Levi Johnston during her recent exclusive interview with Greta, available here on YouTube.  "Eventually, we'd like to get married," said Bristol.  It sure doesn't sound like there are any firm plans.  We all thought the wedding was to take place last year, before Tripp's birth.  And then the wedding was supposed to happen this summer.  Could Levi's dallying around have anything to do with the hesitation?

Babies, Babies, Who Are Those Babies?

The baby that Sarah Palin brought into camera range as Greta was talking to Bristol could be, finally, the missing Tripp!  We didn't get to see much of him close up, but during the interview, several photographs of babies floated on the screen, interspersed with the live shots.  Just to play devil's advocate, we saw no attribution for any of the photos, nor any dating for the photos.  We should not assume that all the photos were of the same baby. Especially that one image of a grumpy-looking wide-nostriled baby sitting up. Just sayin'...

The Birth Date Issue

Since we have no way of verifying Tripp's birth date, I spent some time looking at babies on YouTube...

Here's a baby at 4 weeks:


And here's one at 7 weeks (Tripp's age if he was born 12-27-2008):


A seven-week infant seems to have more awareness of its surroundings, and responds more affirmatively to stimulus.

The shot we had of "Tripp live" could be at four weeks, five, six or seven weeks of age.  From what I've read, it is not at all uncommon to get pregnant again within 2-6 weeks of giving birth.  A little fudge on Trig, a little fudge on Tripp, and you've got a creamy bowl of Mudflats #4 winner of the new Sarah Palin Ben & Jerry's flavor:  "I Can See Fudge From My House!"

Now You See It - Now You Don't

A couple of posts ago, I blogged about Sarah Palin's intentions to run for US President in 2012.  She did start a PAC, and her name was listed in the Federal Election Commission's Web site as a candidate for President in 2012.  Other people took both of these happenings as a strong indication of her ambitions, in spite of her denial, "No, not at all, not at all, no," when asked if her PAC signaled her intent to run.

I was not the only one to notice these events.  Apparently, though, if someone starts a "committee-to-elect" someone (like David L. Kelly of Colorado Springs, CO -- coincidentally home to beleaguered ex-pastor Ted Haggard -- apparently did), they have to give the name of the someone they want to see elected.  So it might have been possible that someone other than Sarah, and without her knowledge or approval, filed with the FEC and listed her name, and that's how she came to appear in their database.

Fine, I said.  Maybe some of the Team Sarah people got ambitious (a couple years early).

Then I went back to check the FEC filing today.  And surprise, surprise, Candidate ID P20001939 has been wiped from the database.

 

So, okay, what happened?  Did David Kelly change his mind?  Did Sarah tell him to put the KABOSH on any public announcement of her ambitions?

Inquiring minds want to know.  Especially in light of the recent ethics violations filings, and how absent Sarah has been from Juneau or any pressing Alaska Governor issues.  Is she mounting a stealth campaign now?  Stealth seems to suit her ... in fact, one might say that deception is her modus operandi.