This interview was a classic. One of the joint ones with McCain (separate from this segment). Where he looks like he's going to have a stroke every time Palin opens her mouth.
In the video, she shrugs her shoulders as she says she's healthy, then again when she says she's happy, but not when she says she's had five kids. Signifigant?
So the girl I work with, in her 8th month, Bugarian and super slim, 5'6 with a tall torso.. one of those envious pregnancies as the rest of her is just "chipper" other than the belly
I was looking at her today and she looks like a J The gut protrudes and there is a hollowing between the boobs and the bulge Sarah is so nicely rounded, so perfect, so perfect prego belly But a late state pregnancy takes on the "J" type look like you got a bowling ball the size of an NBA basketball that was put in your sweatshirt. gravity makes it lower Thats how late stage looks She went from looking "flabby" to having the perfect belly..
When this story blows there will be too much to tell how she worked this fake pregnancy to her favor on every turn.. she has to look "extraordinary"
Anon 1:54 I didn't notice the shoulder shrugging... but I did sit up and take notice when she said "happy, healthy, had five kids -- you'll see that in the medical records"... what an odd thing to say
I don't recall seeing that before. Wow. Just wow. You can almost see the wheels in her head turning as she stammers and does everything BUT answer the question.
By the way, this is OT, but you are the only people in my life who will understand:
I had a dream last night about SP! I was in a talent contest and was planning to sing a song I knew by heart. I stepped onto stage in front of a HUGE theater full of people, and when the music started - it wasn't my song. It was a song I had never heard before. I looked around desperately, and saw SP standing in the wings laughing maniacally. She had done this to me on purpose to humiliate me. At some point, someone brought me a CD case with lyrics inside and she ordered Piper to go out on stage and rip it out of my hands. I finally ran off stage in tears.
LOL! SOOOO random. But typical mean-girl Sarah rears her ugly head again -- even in my dreams.
Leadfoot, I think Piper may go into politics. She has certainly done a lot of campaigning and attended a lot of government functions. We may be faced with a Palin dynasty!
I completely understand you! Kathleen also had dreamt about Sarah several times, but then she has in general the weirdest and most details dreams in the world, so that was no surprise! ;-)
"...I've had five kids..." Note that $P used the loosey-goosey verb "had" again. Not "I've given birth to five kids," but "I've had five kids," like someone handed them to her and soon they squiggled away. Which is pretty close to the truth.
"She had four term deliveries in 1989, 1990, 1994, and 2000, and one pre-term delivery at 35 weeks gestation in 2008"
"Trisomy 21, which was confirmed by perinatology consultation and ... she followed the normal and recommended schedule ..., including follow-up perinatology evaluations ... ."
apparently nothing "that would preclude delivery at her home community hospital."
re the non-pregnant Willow picture(s) - is it possible to post them? I remember the discussion was that this picture(s) was going to prove to Dangerous that his Willow is the mother theory was groundless.
anon @3:51 - Bristol is an adult, Willow is a minor child. If Patrick, Audrey et.al. have confirmed that they have seen the pictures and know that Willow is not involved, I think we should leave her alone. JMO.
Okay, I am not hungry to humiliate any child and I'm not trying to cause any problems, I just remember that this was a big topic of discussion a month or so ago. Pictures and a post was promised by Audrey. I am simply asking the status of this particular topic.
Yeah. No way the Gusty belly is hiding underneath that turquoise jacket. That is an un-suckable belly there.
This can mean only one thing: the "real" fake belly did not arrive until on or about April 13th. At the Governor's speech thing in TX, it looks too like her belly is way out there (and I detect a look of "I am SO going to get away with this tomorrow" on her face), so she MUST have been wearing it then too, then she MUST have taken it off for the long plane trips to the "air crossroads of the world".....LOL. Seriously, has anyone thought how Sarah might have been concerned that either the fake belly would set off the metal detectors, and/or that somehow some airport personnel might be in danger of discovering the fake belly during routine security checks? If I were her, I'd put the fake belly in the suitcase and just go with the scarf business for the plane ride.
Bree, it was SIX days! Six days to make that photo shoot! And Politico has changed the definition of "Rogue" (an unprincipled, deceitful, and unreliable person) to: "implies rugged action and steely independence". Gee, how accommodating of them. But then again, it is Politico. Much like Faux Noise that “reports” their own talking points.
This April 8th photo of Flat Sarah getting out of the chair versus 'Fat-gut' Sarah is a killer. Even my ten year old son is shocked. He first groaned when I asked for a turn at the computer to check this site, but when he saw the side by side photos, his comment "I thought you hated dumb SP" turned into "she is full of it,mom." All foam, fabric, and hot air. Even her sh*t eatin' grin irks me. She only has guts in trying to pull the wool over everyone's eyes and taking advantage of trusting True Believers. Why, oh why, did our state get stuck with her? Please Texas or Idaho-lure her away. She is a abomination and a northern anomaly. Boy, does she have a lot to answer to when she faces her maker....(let alone answering future questions from her two grandsons.)
Let’s Say Dr CBJ Is Innocent ( -- or relatively so)
We’ve all been puzzled by Dr CBJ’s alleged quotes -- and medical letter, odd though it may be -- supporting the idea that SP birthed T1.
Like many others, I longed for Dr CBJ to explain herself, either confirming or denying SP’s supposed pregnancy. I thought she was ethically bound to do so at some point, in some way, without violating confidentiality. Probably with SP’s permission, I thought. To confirm the pregnancy.
As time has passed and more and more clearly non-pregnant photos surface, proving that the Gusty photos are of a fake belly, I no longer doubt. I am now sure SP was not pregnant with T1. At this point, if there appeared a sworn statement by an MD saying that SP delivered T1, or a birth certificate saying so, I would have to ask: “how do you explain the incontrovertible proof of photos showing a flat belly six weeks before a 6+ pound baby is born?”
I revisited the CBJ material with this certainty rather than with my earlier uncertain stance. All of a sudden, and with the help of a fellow blogger on palingates (MadlyTrulyDeeply), everything fell into a scenario that seems credible to me: CBJ was not involved in this hoax.
Starting with the certainty that SP was not pregnant with T1, it would have been impossible to have the conversations with CBJ that SP reported for the morning of the Wild Ride. CBJ would have had to know that SP was not pregnant unless she had never once examined SP. If that were the case, CBJ surely would have referred SP to the main MD overseeing SP’s pregnancy. But we know SP was not pregnant. So why did SP phone Dr CBJ? Perhaps she did not phone and just said she did. Whatever the case, any conversation between them could not have been about water breaking, contractions, and the wisdom of flying back, because SP was not pregnant.
The Alaska Daily News announcement of T1’s April 18 birth, written by Lisa Demer, offered several statements by Dr CBJ. They were presented as quotes that Lisa Demer presumably knew to be authentic. Or did Ms Demer take SP’s word about the quotes? We do not know. But the nature of the quotes reveals that either (1) they were fake quotes (because they referred to a pregnancy and delivery that we know never happened) supplied perhaps by SP (leaving CBJ innocent of them) or (2) they were actual, legitimates quotes delivered by CBJ (in which case CBJ is a liar and an accomplice to the Palin hoax).
There’s no point asking Lisa Demer for clarification. Undoubtedly, SP brought the lie to the interview, just as SP brought the fake belly to the Gusty photo shoot. If Demer/Gusty knew or suspected there was deception afoot, they could (and Gusty did) maintain deniability – so important in a matter that has had two web sites intimidated out of existence (Audrey and the Gusty photo photoshop site), two other cases of intimidation that failed (IM and Patrick), and who knows how many other cases that succeeded. No, neither Lisa Demer nor Andrea Gusty can fairly be expected to speak freely about this story.
On the day after the so-called “birth” of Trig, SP recounted the Wild Ride. She quoted CBJ a number of times. These quotes are corroborated by no one. We have only SP’s word that they ever existed.
On the eve of the election, the medical letter signed by CBJ was released by the McCain campaign. This letter, which supports the idea that SP delivered T1, is either a lie by CBJ or a forgery. Because we know that SP was not pregnant.
In the past, I felt sure that an MD would refute false claims about her. I have come to believe that is incorrect. Even if the topic is a crime (which it is not in the SP case, as far as we know), unless an MD is under oath, she is under no obligation to set straight the wild claims about her made by a crazy person. Just keeping one’s head down, minding one’s own business, and refusing to dignify the wild claims by an answer is a far better approach. This is what CBJ has done.
If CBJ were to take the other approach, of trying to set the record straight, she would be doing one of two things:
1. If CBJ says she delivered T1 from SP, or if she corroborates SP’s Wild Ride story, she would be lying and be an accessory to Palin’s hoax – because we know that SP was not pregnant with T1. Furthermore, she might be lying and making herself an accomplice for the first time, if she can make the same case I have done, that she never uttered the words SP claimed she did, and she did not prepare the medical letter that bears her signature. To step into the public realm with a lie, perhaps a lie for the first time on this matter, would be to join SP on a sinking ship that could cost CBJ her medical license.
2. If CBJ were to say she was not involved in phone calls regarding the wild ride, knew that SP was never pregnant with T1, and did not write the medical letter, she would be destroying SP’s hoax and probably SP’s career. It is clear that there is a preexisting relationship between these two women based on their shared religious and political values and goals. CBJ is unlikely to want to rain on SP’s parade, especially now that it is in so much trouble. It is hard to imagine any credible motive for doing so.
The happiest ending for SP and CBJ on this matter would be for T1’s birth to remain the lie that SP has set it up to be. All the evidence to the contrary should just die a quiet death. If it would all just go away, both women would be off the hook.
Sorry this is so long, folks. Please tell me where you see flaws in the reasoning. Thx!
That "if" was a big one. The McCain/Palin campaign never had a plan to release Sarahs medical records...remember John McCain is an expert at hiding things(his VM military record has been sealed for over 49 yrs thanks to his grandpa the admiral) The campaign thought this would all blow over and it still hasn't. It surprises me greatly that Sarah who has stated Trig is hers hasn't bothered to clear this all up, apparently she can't.
As with the Gusty photo, the MD letter has only made everything worse for SP re keeping the hoax intact. I wonder, in view of your comment CR46, whether that last-minute release of the MD letter was an end run around campaign advice, an SP act-alone special, just like her putting her speech up on the teleprompter (at the McCain concession speech moment) was an attempt at an end run?
a potential treasure trove today at the ocean of urine:
"The idea behind "Media Monday" is simple: Let's bring to light positive and uplifting YouTube videos about the Governor. We have the influence, let's use it.
What I'm looking for are rare videos, exclusive footage (personal video from the campaign trail or things like that), News Reports from before she was picked as VP candidate and things that tie into the current national conversation about her."
Amy1, I also think that it is likely that the last minute "medical records release" that was really just a summary of some statements about SP (supposed) health, was probably an end run around the McCain campaign, like some of her other rogue activities, and like putting her own speech in the teleprompter after being told NO in no uncertain terms by McCain by all reports.
Furthermore, I have often wondered about CBJs actual real specialty, which is NOT high risk deliveries, and how it might play into the silence from CBJ about SP's story. What if CBJ was involved because she helps arrange adoptions for victims of rape or incest, including underage girls whose parents oppose abortion?
Obviously CBJ cannot reveal real medical details that were part of the patient relationship without SP's permission. If SP lied about what CBJ said and it did not involve a confidential medical matter, CBJ could have been within her rights to come forward on this topic, but Amy1, I agree that with their shared beliefs and goals, CBJ would be unlikely to do so.
But I have also thought that SP may have gained CBJ's sympathy on the matter by presenting to CBJ a false story about how it was that Bristol, who I believe is Trig's most likely mother, came to be pregnant (rape, for example).
CBJ may have been involved in helping to set up one of the fast track adoptions that Palin's church supposedly handles. Then imagine that the Downs syndrome is discovered and the adoption falls through. SP then hatches the fake pregnancy plot. CBJ may not approve of that aspect but feel it is better to keep her mouth shut in the interest of not having Bristol's situation made public.
I also think that we don't know for sure if CBJ made some of the "quotes", or if SP just said she did. Also, some word twisting could make some of the quotes from the letter technically true, for instance if SP ever had a miscarriage, she could then say "5 pregnancies" and it is technically not a lie.
Also remember when discussing CBJ and the Wasilla area that church members did take over the board in the 90s, and completely banned abortion at that hospital, a ban that the Alaska Supreme Court eventually overturned. I am too tired to look up source on that but I trust where I saw that piece of info was reliable.
I think that when you are dealing with a group of people that has such strong feelings on abstinence only, no abortion even in rape or incest, etc, that you may find practices like people adopting their grandchildren and raising them as their children might still go on. Of course many times grandparents do raise their grandchildren these days, it's just that they usually don't hide the true familial relationship,
Another reason I hate facebook so much. I do not want to join, I don't want to log in.
I WOULD like to know what Shannyn is posting about a new scandal, but not enough do I want to know that bad enough to join facebook. Hopefully she'll post it on her blog. If not, then I guess I can just find out whenever the non-Facebook people get to find out.
Even if she WAS in the dark up to a point -- she isn't now. Her name is synonymous with "quack"...ALL because she is now known only as the doctor who "told" an 8 month pregnant woman who was IN labor with a preemie, down syndrome, heart defect challenged baby...that it was ok to fly. Twice.
There is a reason that CBJ has not charged every media outlet out there, saying "that crazy woman! I would never, ever encorage a 3rd trimester patient to fly at ALL -- and I would certainly not remotely consider a patient whose water at broken and put her into premature labor with a special need infant a reasonable candidate to fly!"
I think that reason MAY be...that SP "has something" on CBJ. Or CBJ owed a big favor to SP -- some situation where CBJ was, for whatever reason...somehow "beholden" to SP.
I have always thought the wild ride may one day catch the attention of the right person. When you deconstruct it -- premature labor, fifth child (reasonable expectation of expedient labor), known presence of down syndrome and likely knowledge of heart defects, mother of advanced maternal age...yet CBJ did not think it was "unreasonable" for SP to fly cross country? Please!
I think SP's tubes were tied after piper and that is why the promised med records never materialized. CBJ probably IS bound by confidentiality on that one. Can you imagine if Obama had just flat out refused to provide a physician of sterling reputation to vouch for his health condition and release a statement certifying said condition?! The resorvoir of tinkle drones would be so up in arms, the MSM would cover it with serious faces and grave voices!
If there was to be any kind of legal issue regarding Sarah and Trig, then the only acceptable proof now would be a court ordered and supervised DNA test. I would not believe any piece of paper or any witness statement after this much time has gone by.
And, while we are on the subject, I think that the only fair thing in terms of Levi is a DNA test so he is absolutely sure that the child he is paying to suppport is his biological son, DNA again. All the rest of it, interviews, statements, even a doctored doctor report or birth certificate is suspect. Let's face it. Even the Gusty picture which appeared months after the fact is suspicious.
I am glad that there is more attention being given to CBJ and her role and Amy1's excellent summary, and I wonder if Patrick would mind posting (again) the links to the PD "purloined letter" piece and the more detailed analysis of the letter there? (I also recall that there were some commenters on PD who brought up some good points about problems with the first paragraph on page 2, as well, athough I don't recall the specifics.)
While CBJ may be under no legal obligation to reveal the deception, she is under an ethical obligation according to the code of medical ethics. HIPAA is not a shield to allow participation in a fraud. I know for a fact that CBJ was asked privately (by letter) during the campaign to reveal the hoax, but chose not to do so -- in my mind at least, that makes her an abettor. I suspect (but do not know for a fact) that she was sanctioned by the hospital and that is why she was no longer on staff in the fall of 2008. As we now know, she would not confirm to Lisa Demer a key detail of the birth (I think it was that CBJ was present; is that right, Patrick or Kathleen?). Also, keep in mind that there are others who played a role in the hospital aspect of the deception, including other staff and the hospital itself.
Patrick, Did you find out anything from Shannyn?? She is tweeting that she "is smelling a scandal...I love that smell...it's like a new car, fresh bread, baby's breath...but way better."
Could this possibly be Babygate?? Using my vivid imagination, could this be interpreted that the scandal involves bribes of a new truck, $$ (for Levi) to keep quiet about the baby ('s breath) Tirg??
Amy1 I respectfully disagree with you with myentire being. I am a pediatric nurse , in the field nearly25 years. I feel strongly that if cbj religion is interfering with her ability to practice safe medicine then that is a huge problem. Huge .If she is being blackmailed, also a huge problem. It seriously sounds like she is not thinking clearly or is so blinded by religious right that she doesn't see clearly anymore . Maybe because I am in healthcare her actions just blow me away . I can think of no situation that a doctor would allow their name to be associated with horrible ridiculous advice without speaking up. Geez Louise, I've said many times now . What if a highly pregnant palinbot leaking fluid does the same wild ride with catsteophic consequences,? Does cbj think she has no obligation to refute the wild ride associated with her name?no excuse. Silence is agreement.
Audrey had a great line in one of her posts re the Wild Ride that still rattles around in my brain. It was something like: "SP and CBJ were confident that, for the return trip to Alaska, SP would not give birth on the plane for the same reason that I am confident I will not give birth when I get on a plane: I am not pregnant."
Once we keep the mantra in the forefront of our brain that SP was not pregnant, lots of things make more sense. I can see CBJ not caring much about her reputation with lower 48 folks or bloggers. She lives and works in a small community where this issue and her lack of comment on it is a v small deal.
SP might "have something on her," but it seems far more likely that she refrains from speaking only because to do so would land her in the middle of a self-created firestorm of publicity, and not speaking means life goes on as usual, AND she can maintain deniability when the Palin Hoax is revealed.
CBJ's specialty, and the unknowns of T1's parentage, which I don't feel we need to address, is why I say "relatively innocent." But I do now think CBJ was not involved in quotes about the wild ride or in writing the MD letter for SP.
Anon14:22 -- I can see CBJ refuting your position by saying "medical issues like this are between a woman and her MD. I take no responsibility for someone who takes her medical advice from the National Enquirer, no matter what wild stuff they say about me."
Thank you for responding about the Willow picture. I was all about the idea of eliminating W from the suspect list - a recurring and serious topic on Audrey's blog. I appreciate the three of you continuing to provide us with information on the hoax. I thought it would be respectful to wait a few weeks before bringing up this unfinished business of the other blog. Thanks for providing the info we need and want.
It's a very good idea to go into detail again about CBJ's medical letter, we will work on that.
@Anon 14:52
This whole Willow-discussion just came up because one particular commenter on PD pushed this subject for many months and wouldn't let go despite the fact that we discovered more and more "circumstancial" evidence for the "Bristol-theory" and couldn't find anything which would support the "Willow-theory".
It's not only pictures which contradict the "Willow-theory", but also her travel records (she travelled extensively via plane even at the end of 2007 and beginning of 2008) and other records (for example, she played basketball while she would have been several months pregnant), and there was never any indication that Willow was missing from school. Therefore it is pointless to discuss this theory again. Bristol is the mother, according to all the evidence we have, including the "inside information".
I find the singular fact that CBJ may have said ANYTHING regarding Sarah's pregnancy (proxy or real) also disturbing.
Whether she actually made these statements, or they were reported secondhand or just attributed to her. . .what responsible, professional doctor would EVER make a public statement about a PRIVATE patient's health care. . .or allowed one's name to be attached to one?
Whatever happened to patient confidentiality?
CBJ is in up to her neck on this one, whether Sarah was pregnant or not. I can't believe she hasn't been censored by some medical board.
Oh, I forgot, Sarah gave her that Doctor of the Year award a few years ago, eh?
I don't know who the real mother of Trig is. . .I have always suspected that this was an adoption behind the scenes arranged by Palin's church to gain her political creds. Perhaps CBJ justifies her silence and collusion on the basis that she is protecting the identity of another innocent teenager, or older mother unable or unwilling to raise a DS child.
If you add the 'seasoning' ingredient of fervent religious belief to the mix, a number of people colluding and remaining silent on this issue becomes far less surprising.
I really can't understand why CBJ (if she is basically an honest person) does not want to set the record straight unless she is protecting Bristol and the circumstances regarding her becoming pregnant w Trig.
You can't understand them because they are sociopathic narcissists who believe they are tapped by god, entitled to lie, cheat and steal to gain power because they are the chosen.
Do not under-estimate the religious/mental illness aspect of this.
CBJ thinks she's doing the work of God by protecting Palin/Esther, because Palin/Esther belongs, is due, is owed, the White House.
If you remember this, all of the lies begin to make sense. Stop projecting liberal values on to these folks, because you will never understand them if you keep doing that. They are not protecting some teenager. They do not care about teenagers. They advance their agenda as themselves being God's HOly Warriors, reclaiming their rightful place. That is all they care about.
I neglected to mention this in my post last night -- but I think the hospital/church (which is it?) fire needs further attention. When babygate rumours reach a fever pitch -- there just HAPPENS to be a fire which destroys any document that would shed light on this mess? Again -- one must do more than "suspend disbelief" to concede that this is possible...one must be willing to accept that this situation is more like a bad movie of the week than real life.
I have heard various reports about CBJ being "hardcore" pro life...and you don't need to reach too far in order to realize that a pro life doctor plus a specialty in incest/child abuse plus an association with a church that places babies for adoption ... could indeed add up to something unthinkably sinister.
Perhaps in her prolife zeal, CBJ strong armed a young, scared victim into staying pregnant, then going through with an adoption?
Many scenarios -- All more disturbing than the one before.
There IS a reason CBJ is letting her reputation go to hell in a handbasket -- and I do not believe HIPPA is at the heart of it.
We have decided to post the photo alongside several photos of Sarah Palin with some text of explanation in order to give Palingates readers some context regarding the photo of Willow that we have.
I'm presently travelling in Scotland and will not get back home until tomorrow evening so the post is unlikely to go up before Thursday.
Yes, if CBJ did know that Bristol was really the mother, and was in fact keeping patient confidentiality, then it was Bristol's privacy that was at issue, and Sarah merely reaped the benefit of knowing CBJ could not/would not talk. I can even imagine a scenario where Sarah just blurts out made-up correspondence with CBJ in order to answer questions about Trig's wild birthday. CBJ would not then have refuted any such contact in order to maintain Bristol's privacy.
The matter of the MD letter released the night before the election is the same issue. Again, if CBJ is still keeping Bristol's pregnancy with Trig confidential, then it is possible that even if that letter got produced and released without the permission of CBJ herself, that she would not have made any effort to refute it, since she was interested in protecting Bristol. Sarah would have known that CBJ would remain silent about the whole matter if CBJ was, indeed, involved in the care of Bristol in the capacity of her specialty--child abuse and sexual abuse.
Another part of the equation is that Sarah also lived at the time under the extra protection of being Governor, and knew that people would be WAY more likely to give her the benefit of the doubt--on any and all matters.
Just to be clear -- the scenario I described was a theory concerning the premise that SP "has something" on CBJ -- after reading my comment I realized that it could be interpreted as implying that "young scared victim" could have been Trig's bio mom -- that is not at all what I meant. The "adoption for political clout" theory never washed with me -- the pics of bristol and Levi tenderly cradling baby Trig -- the absence of Bristol at critical time ...the "seeking out" a baby for poitical reasons just doesn't wash for me.
The ADN Lisa Demer story doesn't directly quote CBJ. There are no quote marks around what CBJ supposedly said. So it is very questionable where the information attributed to CBJ came from. It could be something that CBJ told the reporter, but then why are there no quote marks? Even a journalist like $sarah would -- should -- have learned that stuff in j-school. My guess is that what is attributed to CBJ is what $arah told the reporter.
So, what we should do is contact some of the reporters who have gotten quotes from the campaign staff.
Ask those reporters to check into whether it was Scarah's idea to go rogue and release a letter the night before the vote? or the campaign staff's idea. Because it sounds like something impulsive Scarah would do.
It doesn't have to be put in a way that directs attention to the fake pregnancy. I can be asked to find out what other rogue acts she may have pulled.
If they say it was her idea, like the losing speech and her wanting to lie about health insurance and Toad's AIP connection.
Well then, if they say it was her idea to do this, it will give us more teeth to then who created the letter which would be Scarah herself.
I highly doubt the campaign staff would knowing be in on creating a fraudulent act. That is unless it's the guy who stuck by her. I forget his name.
Unfortunately, I think you are correct. It is important to understand the unbalanced cult mentality if we want to understand SP and her ilk. I would add to this the social pressure/threats that are part of maintaining this arrangement. That said-- I am wondering out loud(or in print here) if there is now a conflict between the Dominionsts Palinistas and the Hard Right-lower 48 Palinistas. Might that be why we are seeing some type of a shake-up /realignment a la "Stand Up for the Nation ?" For example, what if SP and her most inner circle had been using some of the Pac funds as hush money re:babygate and the Hard Right faction was lied to about it. Then the Hard Right finds out the truth about Trig- OOPs! Now what ? They need to grab the reins of this operation.. oh well, just speculating..
"... follow-up perinatology evaluations to ensure [that there was no condition of the baby] that would preclude delivery at her home community hospital."
Was this the opinion when a full-term delivery was expected? If the doctor had known that the baby would be premature, would that opinion have been different?
-----
"He had some problems with jaundice that required phototherapy in the hospital and at home for several days"
Is that phototherapy equipment normally used at home? Is it expensive? Was it purchased? Rented? Is any skill or license required to operate it?
Note: I am assuming (for the sake of discussion) that she was pregnant.
"My employer, Providence Health & Services Alaska, and I are committed to protecting the confidentiality of patient health information. Therefore, this letter and the information contained herein are being released at the express request and with written consent of Governor Palin."
Did Governor Palin supply the information? If so, is the information consistent with her records?
-----
I have an idea: The questions that this "records release" raises might be used to argue for a new law regarding candidates for national office. There can be genuine privacy concerns, so Congress could create an independent panel of physicians that would collect the candidates' records, review them, then release its opinion concerning whether the candidate has or has had any condition that could affect his/her job performance. In that way, the public could be informed about a candidate's health without releasing the actual records, which voters, most of whom are not medical professionals, are unable evaluate in any case.
I'm interested to see that some of you are trying to figure out who is the mother of Trig (seems as if Bristol is the leading candidate). I noticed on Bree's website that the leading point-of-view is that it does not matter. What matters to them is that SP is NOT his mother and it doesn't matter who is. I have no wish to bring more embarrassment or shame on Bristol (who I see as a victim of her mother), but I do think that Trig's real mother must be discovered in order to "out" SP as a liar and fraud.
anon 18:48 ... Don't forget that the panel should also have authority to comment on any inconsistencies between the health record and the candidate's statements concerning thier health/treatment. And it is not just CBJ's statement, here, that could be used to argue for the creation of a commission. Health questions have been raised about other candidates.
If she was "innocent", then WHY did CBJ appear WITH HER LAWYER to the interview with the ADN in late 2008 - this interview which was never published. In this interview she was asked whether she delivered Trig and replied that she "could not confirm" it.
We only know of this interview through reliable inside information. The ADN never said ONE WORD about this interview! Maybe I will bring this up in a future blog post again.
Bringing your own lawyer to an interview with a newspaper is not what innocent people usually do...
When trying to figure out a mystery you have to look for things that are out of place. This whole pregnancy thing from beginning to end has so many things out of place, out of order, that it is totally unbelievable. If Palin was pregnant then she had one of most bizarre looking pregnancies in the history of women in my lifetime. She can't even fake a pregnancy consistantly enough to support her story. I suppose she will show in her book a fake birth certificate and have some other witness quoted about the birth. Then what do you do? Demand a dna test? That's not going to happen so it is up to overwhelming evidence presented on these blogs that she's making this stuff up. Bottom line is that Palin is not that smart, she can't even cover up the numerous lies very well for very long. I have a feeling that when the State is finally forced to release the emails at the time when she was in office it is going to show that Palin broke many laws including faking the pregnancy. Thanks for all the work you do Patrick to keep the pressure on. Justice and the truth needs to be served to this woman. She has certainly brought forth the ugliness of what the human species has to offer.
There was a good post (yesterday?) over at AKM about how the emails could have been processed much more quickly. I suspect that there are at least a few embarassing things there that would reveal her two-faced, backstabbing nature.
Now where Rebecca Mansour is not with C4P any more, maybe she will have more time for reading. Here are some books she would like to read - Christmas is on our doorstep, folks!
Patrick@19:00 .. One way the lawyer's presence could be spun is that the lawyer was there for advice about patient confidentiality. If that's tried, then the question is, "who was the lawyer? does that lawyer specialize in that type of law?" They might even say that "could not confirm it" was said to preserve confidentiality, but then a person would have to ask about the release that Palin presumably gave the doctor for the election-eve release.
anon @19:07 - the relevant emails will NEVER be released because SP used two PIRVATE yahoo accounts to conduct State business. One of the emails released (when her account was hacked) is a dialogue about HOW to avoid using State e-mail address. Already ruled (to my understanding) that the yahoo emails do not have to be released, and were "erased." I think LITTLE business was conducted on the official government account - thus, this e-mail chase will likely be useless.
Re your suggestion that Congress pass legislation to have a panel review presidential candidates' medical histories:
As good and as civic-minded as your suggestion is, such a law would probably be deemed unconstitutional. The US Supreme Court has already ruled that Congress cannot add qualifications to those given in the Constitution, for the election of its own members. A similar rationale could be expected for legislation adding qualifications for the presidency--not to mention the issue of separation of powers.
And that's probably not a bad thing. If Congress could add qualifications, what would stop them from requiring, say, that only sitting members of Congress could be elected president?
sg, having the commission wouldn't add qualifications. People would be free to vote for a candidate with cancer or whatever. It is just a way to provide independent, non-biased information to the public. Anyone would be free to say, in fact the commission would have to say, that the information provided by the commission is an opinion. However, it would be an opinion of people qualified to consider candidates' health and would relieve the candidates of any privacy concerns.
What if the commision didn't opine about, say, the prospects of a candidate living-out the term, but just provided a summary of a candidate's medical history and current health?
Anyway, here we go again with CBJ rehash. Same stuff was discussed almost a year ago. :-/
The "CBJ letter" was released by the McCain campaign one day before the election. Who knows who wrote it. It could all be made up. It's not up to CBJ to admit that she did or did not write it. No one is on trial and no one is under oath to speak honestly about it. Until then, no one won't.
As mentioned before, since there was no Palin pregnancy in 2008 any CBJ advice about the "pregnancy" are moot - it never happened in the first place so there was no "bad" medical advice given to Palin.
Remember, all we are really looking for is more evidence that Sarah Palin was not pregnant. That's it really. All the other stuff is interesting but the Palin non-pregnancy is the core babygate issue.
anon @ 19:37. It is OK to assume that Sarah Palin was pregnant. You can find a lot about her story that doesn't make sense, if you begin with the belief that she was pregnant. She claims that she was pregnant.
There could not be a legal requirement that a candidate supply any medical information at all to such a commission. For what would be the sanction if a candidate refused to supply medical information--disqualification?
That's why such legislation is on shaky grounds constitutionally.
Of course, a purely voluntary medical review commission could be devised, along the lines of the independent commission that runs the presidential debates. But there could be nothing legally requiring any candidate's cooperation with it.
from the State of Alaska isn't even prepared to mention in public that the interview had happened.
By the way, in my "angry email" to Pat Dougherty I did mention this "secret" interview with CBJ, and in his response he didn't confirm or deny it, he just ignored it. Speaks for itself. This seems to be their general strategy regarding the delicate "pregnancy matter". Don't talk about it, don't confirm anything.
sg, I don't understand why you keep citing constitutional concerns about a commission on candidates' health. Is that an effort on your part to insert some sort of distraction into the discussion? There may be constitutional concerns about any piece of legislation. So what are we to do? Nothing?
Patrick: Thanks for mentioning those details about the lawyer+CBJ interview. Even without your comments, the fact that not one quote from CBJ emerged from that event is a big clue.
WITH your comments, my suspicion is confirmed. It's as sg says. CBJ is under no obligation to say anything. To say anything would be to open a huge can of unneccessary worms for her. She is not obliged to comment on a pregnancy that never was -- even if she is involved in the whole mess in some other way. ESPECIALLY if she was involved in some other way. Then it would be esp wise to remain mum in a way she is legally entitled to do.
To the outraged posters who feel it is her duty to talk, let's write letters to make her talk, let's pass new laws, etc.: very naive. It ain't going to happen.
I agree that there is not much more to be mined from the CBJ letter. Audrey and PD did a great analysis, and Amy1 has some additional insights on her site.
Trying to catch CBJ in a "gotcha" for bad advice given for a non-event seems futile and a distraction.
At this point, what actually happened on the Wild Ride is only interesting if additional witnesses come forward saying they saw a not-pregnant SP traveling back to AK.
Amy1, is it naive to try to get a commission on candidates' health created, using questions about CBJ's letter, among other things, as evidence of the need for such a commission? Doing that might get the letter in the news; might get it discussed more. Wouldn't that be helpful in solving this mystery, in addition to preventing these sorts of shenanigans in the future?
Geez, guys, we can't even get normal people to be interested in the fact that SP was not pregnant, and that it matters. And you are talking about constitutional ammendments!
Anon20:19: Naive to think it could be accomplished anytime soon. You are suggesting a job so big that my head spins. More power to you, but I have the far more modest goal of helping to get rid of SP.
"CBJ thinks she's doing the work of God by protecting Palin/Esther, because Palin/Esther belongs, is due, is owed, the White House"
"They are not protecting some teenager. They do not care about teenagers. They advance their agenda as themselves being God's HOly Warriors, reclaiming their rightful place. That is all they care about."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
BINGO.. Now you're getting the picture. Most people don't understand the complete insanity of this Dominionist mentality and the Assembly of God church in Wasilla. They don't give a damn about anyone after they're born, witness Palins REAL death panels that happened in this state. People freezing, starving and dying while she hands out bibles. They really don't care about the unborn either other than it helps them to garner votes and elevate their standing in the psycho church.
CBJ is indebted to SP for many things and is one of her worshipers. She believes SP is the chosen one and that Alaska will be the last place of refuge during the Armageddon. They don't care what happens in the present, because they believe Armegeddon is happening soon and they will be vilified in the end with Queen Sarah sitting at the right hand of God.
It's very hard for most people to try and grasp the mentality of these people because it's just so mindboggling
And to further agree wth you, sg20:15 -- the bad advice for the nonpregnancy was almost certainly never given by CBJ (since she knew all along SP was not pregnant). It was cited ONLY by SP as part of her lie that she was pregnant. But she was not.
Ok guys, I appreciate all of you but it seems that some of you are going into another direction with this story. I've been reading here a lot and I think we need to stay on track.
Phototherapy can be done at home with in-home nursing. You wrap the baby in a blanket and flip a switch. The blanket glows, creating a funny glow worm effect. A nurse comes by regularly to check the baby's blood.
While this equpiment is highly portable, I do not understand the trip from Wasilla to Juneau when the baby was so young. When did they return to Wasilla? The time of treatment is highly variable, so he could have been been fine after two days, I suppose. But to then travel so far? Perhaps there is no logic here, only bone-headedness. But it is puzzling.
As I said in my most recent 19:59 post, a voluntary commission would be fine. My original comment re constitutionality of a Congressionally-legislated commission assumed that cooperation with the commission was intended to be mandatory. If that wasn't the case, then the constitutional issues go away. (And I apologize for causing a distraction! :-) )
Since you asked:
Re Congress not having power to add qualifications to election of its members: see USSC case Powell v. McCormack (1969).
Anon at 20:27 , you are SO right. I attended a fundamentalist Christian school as a child. (For some reason, my parents thought I'd get a better education there. Not.) Most of the teachers did not even have teaching certificates. That's right, they were 'called by God to do His work'.
Fortunately I did not get the same indoctrination either at home or in the Episcopal church we attended on a casual basis. So I was able to get some perspective on the religious radicalism taught at school. (Guess my parents were right about that part of my education, because most people are clueless). If you got this stuff at home, at church, and at the church school you attend, imagine how powerful that would be.
It is true, the dominionists do believe that Alaska will be a place of refuge in the latter days and they are driven by that belief into all sorts of insane behaviors, since the end justifies the means. In their minds what they are doing is the work of the righteous. Arguing with that mindset is futile.
So a "physician of the year" who has used her power to run roughshod ALL over womens rights up here ever since Palin was Mayor. A woman who sits on the Alaska State Medical Board involved in the cover up of a major scandal AND used as absolute PROOF by c4pee'rs of Trigs birth is not relevant to the conversation?
Great post, again! That would have been the very picture I would have picked for comparison. She was never pregnant while governor and the abundance of photo and video evidence continues to support assertion.
I heard McCain indicate this weekend that she was still in a group of acceptable candidates for the next GOP presidential run. And I learned from listening to a rush interview, that the GOP never wins unless they cater to the right wing super conservative base.
Seems like there should be a board of professional doctors that investigate unprofessional activities. Like that doctor in Arkansas who ended up in the hospital after finding a bomb in his driveway one morning while leaving to go to work. He worked on some kind of investigative medical board, but he wasn't currently working on an open case according to the news.
Anyway, the abundance of photo and video evidence disputes SP doctor's letter as well as the wild ride story. And that letter was made public; thus, her doctor's silence would indicate a co-conspiracy.
Telling lies to achieve goals set by man to promote religious doctrine does not reflect Jesus who reflects God. Playing God is a dangerous act.
I agree no one will answer questions or clear up anything where the T1 matter is concerned, it is only under oath where more would be revealed.
What Amy1 is saying about "innocent" is more semantics or perception to me. CBJ didn't eat my kids homework, I believe CBJ is innocent. She may or may not have said the quotes/wrote the letter. She may or may not be innocent. That is not conclusive. She did allow the letter to be written by her in the "official" version. The letter belongs to her until shown it was not.
Her silence does not prove innocence to me. It does to Amy1. We all have our opinions.
Let's say someone started to make false claim that I made statements/wrote a letter. I said nothing. I did contact a lawyer. Whatever the matter was, it became problematic and involved something big. I know there is a lie about my part, I don't know anything about the rest of the matter. I only know I didn't do as claimed and I know it is possibly a fraud case. I am innocent because I don't say anything? I would not feel innocent. Amy1 would feel innocent in the same situation.
That is where I differ with Amy1. I believe I would be part of the crimes and coverup if all I do is remain silent in that scenario.
The official story is what it is and more people are seeing there is no way SP was pregnant with T1. The work with the pictures is stellar. When it all hits the fan, CBJ is a major conspirator if all she did was remain silent. I would like to see others come forward with what they know, more pictures and documents to prove SP condition for the time of T1. I continue to believe CBJ is an important back up to support SP as not pregnant. Not because CBJ will volunteer new information. While the pictures are invaluable, I don't think they will effect media or getting the story out. Witnesses coming forward will help, I don't know that could be conclusive for the media. I think the media will go viral when CBJ and others are under oath. How to get there?
If someone submitted a forged or fake document to the campaign or the campaign did it or knows it is fake. Wouldn't that be a matter for the Federal Election Committee to take up?
The first woman Republican in history to run for Veep is no small thing when it comes to history. It is imperative letters and documents are authentic, not fraudulent. We have no historians that want to get it straight or that would come up.
Wasn't McCain part of an election reform? With both the election committees and history moot and the media in McCain/Palin's pocket there is not much left. Endless rehashing of pictures is about it.
'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.' http://wizbangblog.com/docs/Daily-Kos-Sarah-Palin-Smear.htm
Thank you all for keeping CBJ in the limelight for another moment. The facade of a pure church going good doctor with awards and care for incest/abuse survivors is misleading and not the whole CBJ story. The church influence is too enormous for anyone to speak up about the adoptions and what happens to the incest, abuse, addicts and unwed mothers. SP and CBJ in connection with that and the campaign cover ups is a dead subject no matter how many survivors would like to tell their stories. CBJ stands strong with the community. CBJ alone could convince me that SP was T1's mother and she does not even have to speak.
Just my thoughts, but it seems that having umpteen pictures (and video) of Sarah that indicate that she was not pregnant in 2008 are not enough evidence for the MSM to go with this story. If one could prove who IS the mother of Trig, that would be concrete proof that Sarah was not pregnant with him. Similarly, discrediting the doctor who is purported to have advised Palin during her TX trip and who is assumed to have delivered him would be the kind of proof that the MSM would touch.
We can discuss the issue of HOW involved CBJ was in the deception ad infinitum and it will not add anything more to the discussion.
This is because unless we have a statement from the ADN or CBJ herself stating that she either did or did not make the statements in the Demer article then we have no concrete proof whether she actually did so. We will continue to go round in circles.
The time to discuss the issue would be if we had a statement clarifying CBJ's supposed claims.
I can tell you that we have someone who is working this angle and she should get back to us soon. So please be patient...we will as they say get back to you.
I will be glad if someone could clarify CBJ's supposed claims. CBJ looks like an honorable person and she deserves to be redeemed across the world to all those who are paying any attention to this. Like Patrick said most people are not that familiar, this subject is over, it's done. The pictures do show a not pregnant fake. What is more widely known is that the people who think SP faked are like the "birthers." They are both nuts. It is that simple. Levi is a liar who just wants to get rich off of innocent Sarah. It is that simple. "Birthers" and "Truthers" are nuts. It is that simple.
CBJ is beyond reproach and leave her alone unless someone can clarify. We've all seen what the pictures will do, do more pictures.
Thanks to Audrey, Regina, Patrick, Kathleen, Gryphen, etc ... we have loads of photos and videos and the MSM doesn't touch this subject. Perhaps a new approach, as you suggested, would bear some fruit. Maybe proving who did birth T1 is the way to get this story to break.
I am sorry, but "being at the forefront of women's issues" does NOT INCLUDE being complicit, either by commission or by omission, in a cover up of a faked pregnancy by a woman who proclaims herself to be a good Christian wife and mother and a selfless advocate for challenged children.
It is not necessary to actively lie in order to be guilty of telling untruths. That is why 'lies of omission' (in which valid and pertinent information is not included in a person's testimony) are part of legal terminology. I would call CBJ's silent acquiescence to this charade a lie of omission (at best, and that is being charitable). I don't care what her public persona is, we have plenty of examples of 'public personas' which are just a facade.
But you guys did finally get my husband's attention ! I showed him a printout of the screen shot and Gusty photos above and asked him where the baby was in the screen shot. He has always taken sarah's word re : Trig but that comparison floored him. He said, 'maybe she left the baby on the chair when she stood up'.
CBJ is questionable. She has already answer questions and given statements based on Sarah as mother of Trig. You can't blame Sarah if she felt she was pregnant, sought medical help, went to the hospital and CBJ told her that at 6:30 AM she delivered a boy and the she, as her Dr., would make the announcement to the press.
or At the time, CBJ was not aware of Palindeception do come time for delivery, Sarah tells her she had a wild ride, delivered prematurely in the van on her way to the hospital, Todd cut the umbilical cord and they wanted to keep those details out of the press. People may expect them to call him Road or Moon but really, all she could see out the van were trigs.
It is wrong to slander the doctors name just because she is helping Sarah Palin. They are friends and most of us would help a friend. She has been dedicated to helping abuse victims and unwed teens. Look at her record, not what is said about commission or by omission. A woman of her morals can be taken at face value. The pictures have yet to be proved by any higher authority than a few blogs.
There is plenty of credible evidence to support the notion that the truth about SP will NOT become public knowledge or gain public acceptance.
Consider:
GWBoosh used drugs, was forbidden to continue being a pilot (after failing a drugs test), was AWOL, is married to a woman who literally killed her boyfriend (in a "tragic automobile accident")...and few in the public knows or cares about any of it.
9/11 was an inside job...and few in the public knows or cares about it.
JFK was assassinated as the result of a conspiracy...and few in the public knows or cares about it.
The "War on Terror" is an excuse for restricting liberties and transferring huge amounts of taxpayer funds to the military/security complex...and few in the public knows or cares or even believes any of it.
Why would anyone here expect the SP situation to be any different? After all, she isn't a Democrat or even a moderate Republican.
Palingates is my favorite place for Palin because everything is covered. I like the blogs that have a certain focus also, too. They all have importance.
For MSM it is all useless noise until something gives. CBJ is more involved than the wild ride. It can't hurt to document the people with despair for our public servants and role models. Not every complaint is a home run. I am for filing complaints and making noise about CBJ. I haven't read all the comments yet. Did Amy1 ever explain the innocence of CBJ?
If a woman could get on a plane - as the Gusty belly shows Palin was days before birth - and no flight attendant notices - can you image what else someone could hide in plain sight? Plane sight? Alaska Air has the worst trained crew. Homeland Security needs to check them out and see they get the training needed to keep passengers safe. She had room for several bombs in that Gusty belly and no one saw that?
For those that think CBJ needs focus, someone posted this: To whoever wants to get CBj to talk: Write letters to: 1)American Academy Of Family Physicians (AAFP). CBJ was family physician of the year 2002 i think. Voice your concern over the advice/care given to Palin and Trig. 2) Go to Alaska state board of licensure and lodge a complaint against her medical license. Can be done on line or via paper and snail mail. 3) Contact national midwive and ob/gyn groups voicing same concern.
There are all the picture sites and more to come for those that like that alone or both CBJ and pictures.
Cwhatimean has a point. I don't know about Levi now. If he did say he knew she did not give birth to T1 he still needs more proof.
— her closest friends, sisters, even her obstetrician — Did she have an obstetrician?
— The next day, her office issued a minimalist masterpiece of a press release, conveying the news in three curt sentences. — Is this the Anchorage daily that is no longer available?
If you are seeking the authenticity of a letter how is HIPAA a shield?
Something like .....
It's come to my attention that blah blah letter was not properly authenticated ...... perhaps you can help speed up the process ......
I know Patrick will do better. Toss in something about election board taking so long. A request that is not fingering anyone but looking for historical verification would be non-threatening.
This website never changes. You all go on andbon analyizing, overanalyzing and " investigating." and still NOTHING has changed! Nothing! You are all spinning your wheels and do you see anyone in the MSM picking up on this and exposing it? NO and it is not going to happen this way I don't understand why you all don't see that.
A month or two ago there were many great suggestions about DOING something instead of more blogging, more writing, more investigating. Why not DO more?
This is going nowhere sorry folks. I don't know you all can stand rehashing the same old thing. Face the music. Palin has gotten away this charade, end of story.
As to CBJ, we are not trying to slander a doctor's good name. We are however, trying to ferret out the truth about SP's questionable pregnancy and the fairy-tale she has presented to the American people. I just read over the Dallas/NY Times article. I have read this tale repeatedly over the last year, but anytime I return to it after some absence of time, I am reminded of how incredulous this story really is. Looking at it again tonight from the standpoint of the doctor's role in it: complicit. That is the word we need to keep in mind. Partnership in wrongdoing. If SP was advised as the article says by CBJ to go ahead and make the speech, go ahead and make the long flight home, IF SP was pregnant at the time, CBJ is complicit in the act of endangering a fetus's life. If the letter (which in the case of certifying that a candidate is physically able to carry out the duties of the office to which he/she is aspiring - especially important in the case of POTUS or VPOTUS of the United States)which is more like an affidavit, saying that SP was in good physical health, nothing to hide, was in any way fradulent, and went out over CBJ's signature, and she allows it to stand, then she is complicit in that fraud. I don't think HIPAA goes that far, and I deal with HIPAA matters every day.
She has not gotten away with this charade with us. That may be more important than we think.
And I don't see anyone here 'slandering' CBJ. Just asking legitimate questions re: medically ethical behavior. Any 'slandering' would actually have been done by either SP or CBJ herself.
Good point about the letterhead ! Aren't companies supposed to be responsible for information under their letterhead ?
Hint of Palin's so called pregnancy: She's a spotlight stealer and she keeps a pregnancy secret till nearly the time a baby was born. Then her father claims she's very private about her family. Then flash forward to the campaign and she places her family in the spotlight for all to see. Can anyone in the MSM see Palin's calculator doesn't have a + button. It doesn't add up.
I prob should not have used the word "innocent" re cbj. I wanted to show that SP lied, had to have lied, about the CBJ/SP conversations SP reported. And that there's no point in hoping that CBJ will come forward because she can make a good case that she had nothing to do with this nonpregnancy. Saving her own hide has got to be a priority for her right about now. Her specialty and the fact that SP used her name with such abandon to lie about the pregnancy suggests involvement to me, but not re the quotes and prob not re the letter. Putting it all more squarely on SP's shoulders.
I guess it was bugging me a little that people kept complaining about the bad medical advice -- no pregnancy, no advice, just SP lies.
I'm just having mid-project doldrums because SP is still winning: the hoax is still intact.
Here are a couple of good questions a journalist or investigator could/should directly ask CBJ (or Providence) that I don't believe her answering would violate HIPAA:
1) Did you (CBJ) write the letter bearing your signature released by the McCain campaign on Nov. 3?
If "yes" to (1):
2a) Do you (CBJ) still stand by all the facts asserted in the letter?
If "no" to (1):
2b) What then was your (CBJ) involvement in the preparation of the letter?
Answers to these questions would at least get CBJ on the record, perhaps even revealing some unknowns (depending on how credible her answers were). They might also open up additional lines of inquiry.
Amy1, me too. She is still winning. I personally think that that the doctor is complicit in the act(s) by allowing her name to be used as the source of sanction to fly home from TX, and definitely her signature is either on that letter or has been forged, so she is allowing herself to be used as the authority on which SP's medical affidavit is based. OMG, my wv is ancest. I don't usually refer to these.
O/T, but sweet! (I hope nobody else posted t yet - otherwise: Sorry!)
I love the end quote:" In an interview with Talking Points Memo, Taitz said she had no intention of paying the fine. "Are you kidding? Of course not," she said. "This is a form of intimidation."
Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/13/orly-taitz-slapped-with-2_n_318546.html
One of my points on CBJ is that she is a medical professional. Even if/though there was no pregnancy, the fact that Sarah said CBJ gave advice which is now on the public record as being associated with her, (which is bad medical advice for a truly pregnant person ), and which she has never denied, i think gives her a modicum of responsibility to say 1)don't try this at home or 2)i don't advise pregnant women to fly while leaking amniotic fluid. I think some previous posters are right. These people are freaks of nature and there really is no point trying to assignnormal behavior ,morals or ethics to them. Pictures aren't working yet. Videos aren't working yet. Anyone who may know anything is so fing brainwashed or apparently scared of the Wasilla mafia that they don't talk. A doctor who is complicit in the fraud may be the only culpable person right now worth investigating. There are channels for investigating the letter and the advice. Whatever, my head is exploding. Like a previous poster said, with all the evidence that there is more to JFK assasination, that 9/11 has much more to the story than we are allowed to know, despite the overwhelming evidence to contradict the 9/11 commission whitewash, Sarah could get away with it. The only thing on our side is her utter stupidity but that seemingly is only getting us so far. Too bad no one ever tried to get the security tapes from alaska airlines flgiht. I wonder how long those are kept. Would be vital to see what her belly looked like going through security. Good point about being able to hide lots of contraband in that belly!!
Just one more example of my frustration: An hour ago, the top photo/story on the NYTimes was cakes that had been decorated wrong. Supposed to be funny. What is the world coming to -- don't they think the PalinHoax might be a tiny bit more important than poking fun at illiterate, incompetent, (prob) exhausted cake decorators??
Or the endless coverage of Dave Letterman's affairs -- I left a comment (#67, still being moderated) with the Dave pregnancy joke, designed to pull a few newbies into our info. I bet they will delete my post. This article is written by the NYT's "ethicist" (!), and I emailed him suggesting covering the SP hoax as more worthy of his efforts and title than endlessly noodling Dave's stuff. I've sent a lot of these emails, and I have never yet gotten a single response -- except from Mudflats, who very politely told me she is not handling babygate.
Anyone who may be incapable of reasoning for themselves, like young pregnant teenagers, who read about the wild ride, may think that this nonchalent behavior is OK. If we are to believe the media reports on SP's story, we might believe we all could get away with risky behavior of long flights, long drive back to a hospital with questionable obstetric specialists, with a little amniotic fluid leaking. Their argument would be, if a 45 year-old Governor could do it, then why shouldn't they?
Highly unlikely anyone would take these chances, but, the wild ride doesn't do much to educate young girls on, "don't do this at home".
I wouldn't want to be on the public record with this kind of pre-birth story that I spent hours traveling, no mention of seeing a specialist, and seemingly not taking precautions right as soon as leakage started. I wouldn't brag about it, concerned that someone might follow my lead.
Unfortunately, CBJ will skate re the Wild Ride, absent the revelation of the hoax.
Consider this passage from that NYT article:
"A woman with symptoms like Ms. Palin's should be examined to determine her condition, said Dr. Laura Riley of Massachusetts General Hospital. The long trip home could have posed a risk, "but the odds were still in her favor that everything would be O.K.," said Dr. Susan E. Gerber of Northwestern University."
That highlights the high burden of proof for anyone lodging a complaint against CBJ. For every Dr. Riley the complainant trots out to impugn CBJ's (non) advice, CBJ would introduce her own Dr. Gerber to affirm CBJ's (non) advice. Result: stalemate, complaint dismissed.
But the idea that the medical licensing board would even entertain in the first place a complaint from an uninvolved, non-witness third party to a (non) event where no medical harm occurred, is pretty far-fetched IMO.
It's been eighteen months since Trig's presentation, a year since the presidential campaign. No new evidence has emerged re the Wild Ride. With all the newspaper publicity (local to AK as well as national) about the Wild Ride, if CBJ were going to be hauled before a medical review panel re her Wild Ride advice, it probably would have occurred already.
Anon at 23:40 said,"It is wrong to slander the doctor's name just because she is helping Sarah Palin. They are friends and most of us would help a friend."
Sorry, but the "good" doctor dragged her own name through the mud when she agreed to lie for a corrupt, scheming little politician.
Would I violate my professional ethics and my own moral code to "help" a friend deceive the public? No. But then, I'm not a dominionist, so I don't deceive myself into believing that the ends (helping Sarah become VP) justify the means (lying about the birth of Trig).
Not to state the obvious, but the WILD RIDE IS PART OF THE HOAX. What am i missing? The only reason CBJ isn't before a board is becasue no one has the guts to try and do it. If there were enough third party complaints and questions to organiations like AAFP, national midwives association, and the licensing board something would come of it. At least there are Channels for investigating impropriety - something which seems to be evading us right now with everything Sarah. Really do you think if the licensing board suddenly got 1000 third party complaints they wouldn't be pissed off enough to start doing something? If AAFP got 1000 letters questioning the wisdom of her being an honored member of the academy and having advice that sucks associaiteed with her would not garner attention? I think a letter writing campaign CAN NOT HURT. And for those who think it is futile - I found it EXTREMELY therapeutic if nothing else. I've done something.
Patrick I don't know the details well enough to form reasonable suggestions for inquiry. If I get a brain storm I will contact you. I once had a friend who loved historical novels. I am reminded of him. When he was alive he worked on a few local stories. His research dug out stories that had no interest at the time they happened. Finding out if a document is authentic or not can be grueling but it can be done. Does anyone know of a historian that is interested in women politicians? Expect to find more than you bargain for if you go that route.
I have a tendency to think of this as if writing-dreaming a history book about women who ran for Vice President and documenting everything about Ferraro and Palin. However, I'm not a historian. What would one do when they got to the medical letter? If there is the slightest indication it is fake that should be followed through. If all that comes up is no answers, that says something. If they answer, that will be on record whether or not it resolves anything. If people have lied this far, they are not going to stop. A letter to CBJ might not get an answer, but I would include her in an inquiry. Say the hospital is innocent of wrong doing but were used by others. Believing the official story they would be glad to help. If they have guilt, no or non-answer is likely.
If I think that I will be ignored I will send to multi-entities at once, if it is not private. When by snail mail, I get receipts.
The Library of Congress, Smithsonian and everywhere that Ferraro history is kept will also be interested in Palin history. Why not contact them about the provenance of the letter in question? Is it a letter that can be viewed? Who is dealing with the questionable aspects of the letter? I would find it interesting to learn what has been done so far by historians recording the history of Palin's run. Who all to contact?
Do they just say an historical medical letter exists, end of story? Is it an email? Is the signature a stamp or what? Do they write about both sides of a controversy and what it is about? If not, why? Are any historians suspect that it is fake or dubious? I think the letterhead is significant but I don't believe anyone has to answer inquiries. They would respond if there is nothing to hide. I wish I knew a historian, even an amateur historian journalist that was ready to go on that journey.
I do think instigating a campaign to flood the medical licensing board with a thousand complaints against CBJ by non-witness third parties WOULD be counter-productive. This is not the same situation as encouraging constituents to flood members of Congress with phone calls and emails saying they support, for example, health care reform. Physicians stand up for their own; what you suggest would appear to be a witch hunt and would likely result in a backlash of sympathetic support for CBJ (remember, she's a nationally recognized physician). That's the last thing we need.
You say:
"The only reason CBJ isn't before a board is becasue [sic] no one has the guts to try and do it."
So what are you waiting for? Why don't you lead the way?
Here's the link where you can file your very own complaint:
But do note this sentence on the web page: "Please briefly describe your complaint i.e. dates, witnesses (and contact information)"
THANK YOU.
CBJ was not in Texas but the client was there before she was flying cross country. Are there other states or federal places to contact?
I am alarmed about the dangers for the unborn. I understand the other passengers were in danger if she was pregnant. What troubles me is the example CBJ is setting. This is behavior that young women will follow. Whether or not someone was pregnant isn't what I care for. As a leader and role model CBJ's part in this needs to be better known and she needs to tell young mothers what is safe and not safe. She needs to revisit this even if it is in generalities. If she has second thoughts, it would be best to advise with a safe plan.
That NYTIMES article included this sentence: "For much of the summer, she carried Trig in a sling as she signed bills and sat through hearings, even nursing him unseen during conference calls." Unseen? *NO ONE* saw her allegedly nursing Trig? Does anyone else consider that to be very curious?
I passed her in the Anchorage airport in late July 2008 - before the VP announcement. She was alone with Trig (in a sling) and Piper, dragging them to their gate like any other harried mom trying to catch a plane with two little kids. (I think she had a meeting in Fairbnanks the next day). No entourage, no cameras, no fans. I thought it was pretty cool at the time that the gov. was so down-to-earth.
Regarding CBJ what I am actually most concerned about is that while CBJ supposedly does good work regarding rape and incest and underage pregnant girls, she also belongs to a church with a belief system that abortion is not permissible even in the event of rape or incest.
CBJ's specialty seems such that it would provide access to a steady stream of pregnant victims of rape and incest. I would imagine that part of CBJ's "expertise" may consist of telling victims that abortion would be wrong but that she can arrange an adoption.
Her "expertise" may also consist of some sort of "counseling" that might attempt to convince some who may want to consider abortion in these circumstances that they are wrong to consider it, and that "doing the right thing" and giving the baby up for adoption will somehow "make up for" the trauma of the rape/incest.
Adults at least could make up their own minds, but what about minors? Is part of CBJ's expertise helping to force teens pregnant as a result of rape or incest not to abort and to instead adopt out the baby?
Abortion opponents often have a problem with Planned Parenthood, claiming that Planned Parenthood covers up statutory rape of underage girls, and uses that concern as a reason to try to strip underage girls of any reproductive privacy from their parents. I wonder if the same concern could be had about doctors with CBJ's views? How do we know that some of these pregnancies are not hushed up and nothing is done about the abuser/rapist?
Unfortunately, with rape, the victim is often harmed twice, once with the rape, and again if a prosecution is attempted. Especially if the accused is wealthy and powerful, or if the victim can be cast in a bad light. For that reason so many victims do not want to prosecute.
I really have to wonder about the underlying motivations of CBJ and her work with victims of abuse and incest, especially when she and Palin are supposedly quite close, and also considering Palin's activities to cause rape victims to have to pay for their own rape kits?
What I am really wondering, is if CBJ's church is so strongly anti-abortion, how do they feel about rape and incest committed by a member? What would really be the result if a prominent member of the church were found to have raped or committed incest on a young girl? What if the only people who knew were the rapist, the victim, Dr. CBJ, and the church patstor? Would the church perhaps counsel the member and would it be considered a private matter that might be cured with prayer?
Given the way "The Family" even now can be seen to cover up and apologize for sexual affairs, with Governor Sanford comparing himself to King David, I really do wonder what to think about a doctor who is strongly anti-abortion and who practices in an area with high rates of rape and incest. And is good friends with someone who made victim pay for their own rape kits.
Is the church office that burned where the adoption records were kept?
Are there any underage victims from the Wasilla area who were forced against their own wishes to carry to term due to their parents' religious beliefs? If so, and these victims are now adults, maybe one or two might be willing to give some insight into the adoption situation and how CBJ fits in.
I know that many people praise Dr. CBJ, and no doubt she cares for her patients, but personally I find it hard to entirely trust somebody who supports NOT EVEN ALLOWING THE OPTION of abortion to the very victims she specializes in treating, if they have been the victim of rape or incest.
I think that opinion is out of the mainstream, it seems it could lead to all sorts of cover ups if stopping abortion is CBJ's ultimate goal, and if that is the case, I think that it is hard to trust what CBJ says about Palin's supposed pregnancy and delivery.
PS. to my above comment, I know I run the risk of being piled on by at least a few people here for supposedly "slandering" CBJ.
However, I am discussing what I understand the position of her church to be, and from what I have read about her, I assume Dr. CBJ subscribes to the "no abortion even in cases of rape or incest" position. Specifically I made the above comment in the context of Political Dominionism, because I think that SP's belief system has been very important in building her base of support, and that her strong position against abortion, but also for abstinence only for teens, had to have been key in deciding to fake the pregnancy. I don't think it is possible to really understand the hoax unless it is placed into the context of SP's belief system, including the view of her church and herself that she is "annointed" to lead and rule.
CBJ is opposed to abortion under ANY circumstances. She led the charge when Palin and her cronies took over Valley hospital and banned abortion under any circumstances. The Alaska Supreme Court had to step in and rule it was unconstitutional after many suits were filed against them.
She was also a PART of the panel that decided free rape kits was a bad idea. You have to realize all these supposed "accolades" and appointments this woman has received were due directly to Palin either as Mayor or Governor. They belong to the same church and share the exact same philosophies.
She and SP went about setting womens rights back 100 years up here and never even batted an eye. She along with Palin, W.A.R. etc. believe being raped is always the womans fault and thus they should receive no help or support for letting it happen. The punishment for allowing such behaviour is to be forced to have the child and of course once it's born they could care less about that person or the child anymore. That was what her appointment to the Alaska Health Care Strategies Council was all about.. Banning abortion period
@7:13, Thank you for the info about CBJ and that she was indeed part of the Valley hospital takeover.
That she was part of the panel that decided against free rape kits is even worse. I think now I know the answer about how it would be handled if a high ranking church member were responsible for a rape or incest pregnancy.
Max Blumenthal's excellent book "Republican Gomorrah" quoted R.J Rushdoony, the guy who has inspired so many of these really fundamentalist folks who want to actually take over government and rule as a theocracy. Blumenthal wrote that Rushdoony felt it is okay for so-called Christians to lie to achieve their aims. from p. 43: "Under Reconstructionist rules of engagement, lying, deception, and stealth are considered legitimate tactics and even encouraged. There is no requirement for Christians to be truthful "in acts of war," Rushdoony wrote. "Spying is legitimate, as are deceptive tactics".
We saw in the campaign how determined Palin was to try to force the McCain campaign to whitewash Todd's AIP involvement as if he just misunderstood and thought he was marking "Independent" affiliation. Palin clearly saw no reason not to lie if she thought it would help her get elected.
Given the church affiliation and CBJ's involvement in the hospital takeover and rape kit issue, I tend to think that CBJ may consider keeping quiet well justified if it helps a higher goal of Palin achieving more political power.
"She had four term deliveries in 1989, 1990, 1994, and 2000, and one pre-term delivery at 35 weeks gestation in 2008"
The first four were obviously children birthed by Sarah, However, the mention of the fifth child can be taken two ways; 1. sarah gave birth to Trig; OR 2. Sarah was present and helped deliver Trig when *Bristol* gave birth to him in 2008. It definitely does NOT state unequivocally that Sarah Palin is Trig's birth mother. I believe the ambiguity used in CJ's statements is very deliberate...she has a licence to protect (if it hasn't already been yanked).
indy_girl, I agree, ambiguous wording, and also it is not a medical record, but supposedly info allowed to be released by SP. Only the actual medical record would tell the story. I think we're at a dead end there, at least for now.
But I will be interested to see if we do get a birth certificate photo in SP's book. I am doubting it.
ArmchairJane makes excellent points. I am also concerned about the prosecution of perpetrators. If things are handled like other churches have been known to do, they would handle it as a private matter. The Catholic church took decades to begin to face what goes on behind closed doors. I've read they continue to have problems in rural Alaska where Natives are used and abused. I live on land that once belonged to the church. In another house several old jars of embryos were found buried beneath a basement floor. A dentist had lived in the house for years from the early 20th century until the late 1970s. It was believed he preformed abortions for the nuns. Times have changed but I don't think it is unusual for men in religious organizations to have these shortcomings.
The record keeping in Alaska is dismal. There is no way to know what happens to these children. If a pregnant child wanted to escape how could they? In the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints what started that investigation was a call from someone outside of the religion. The actual victims are brainwashed or scared to death.
This is something that must be discussed somewhere. I don't think it is "slander" to question CBJ or religious secrets or practices. Religious leaders are all about being wonderful and "trust me." The few that are caught not living up to their moral codes give us an insight into the double lives that some lead. CBJ is a professional that makes her own choices. She associates with fringe types and she put herself in a place where there are suspicions of high crimes. She has a right not to clear her name or anything. She will be discussed until the end of time or this is resolved. If Leah of Gods Own Party is half right and there is anything to the Dominists going for more power in government then you know they want everyone on earth to be like them. How can we not discuss the little they let us see about what they are doing?
SG: Did you read my post? I am leading the way. I have written to the state licensing board and the AAFP and the midwives association. I have posted these suggestions on all the blogs, starting with Audrey back in the summer - ( who also didn't think it will get anywhere.) Well, not trying this route absolutely will not get us anywhere. I have also written to Rachel Maddow asking her to do a public service announcement about "What not to do when pregnant and leaking amniotic fluid" but have heard no response so far. Going on two weeks. I have repeatedly posred the link to the alska medical licensing board on multiple blogs. I disagree about the volume of letters and perhaps i should not have used the term "pissed off". When licensing boards get complaints in volumes (such as a shady physician writing alot of scripts for narcs) it has more weight than just a few complaints.
Sg: it's been a week via ISPs mail. I also plan to write to a national ob/ gyn org. As I think of other relevant orgs I'll write to them also, too, as well!!
http://www.adn.com/626/story/382864.html As far as I can tell, these are the only “quotes” of Cathy Baldwin-Johnson (CBJ) from Lisa Demer’s 4/22/08 ADN article “Palins’ child diagnosed with Down syndrome”:
1. Palin kept in close contact with Baldwin-Johnson. The contractions slowed to one or two an hour, "which is not active labor," the doctor said.
2. "Things were already settling down when she talked to me," Baldwin-Johnson said. Palin did not ask for a medical OK to fly, the doctor said.
3. "I don't think it was unreasonable for her to continue to travel back," Baldwin-Johnson said. ********* If you think about it, those quotes don’t actually testify a whole lot on Sarah’s behalf. I have said before, so I will say again, IMHO, Cathy Baldwin-Johnson did NOT know about Sarah’s fake pregnancy plan until Sarah announced her “pregnancy” on 3-5-08, the day AFTER John McCain won the Republican nomination on 3-4-08. I believe CBJ’s silence speaks volumes.
I used to believe that CBJ was complicit in the conspiracy to fake the pregnancy. But that was when we were confused about the smokescreen “birth” date of 4-18-08. From more information that has come to light in the past couple of months, we now have even stronger reason to believe that Trig was born to Bristol sometime in January 2008. Sarah began to wear her long scarves on 2-19-08, AFTER the mysterious 2-15-08 American Heart Association “Go Red for Women” luncheon for which there is no evidence that she and her three daughters actually attended. I now believe that CBJ was probably stunned when Sarah announced her “pregnancy” on 3-5-08. I went back to review Audrey’s information about CBJ. http://www.palindeception.com/subpages/subpage12.html
Look at the whole scenario again, but this time, consider that CBJ was NOT part of the planning, but instead was unwillingly made a party by Sarah. Now read the Dallas Morning News report again: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/politics/national/stories/090808dnpolpalinbaby.54709f95.html?ocp=5#slcgm_comments_anchor “Around 4 a.m. on the day of her presentation, Palin stirred in her hotel room to an unusual sensation. She guessed she was leaking amniotic fluid, she told The Anchorage Daily News. She woke her husband and called her doctor back home. Go ahead and give the speech, said the doctor, Cathy Baldwin-Johnson, who declined to comment for this article.”
CBJ DECLINED TO COMMENT for that article. CBJ’s silence has been deafening, as well as another time when she brought an attorney with her when she was to be interviewed.
Now realizing that Trig was born much earlier than when Sarah announced her pregnancy, the CBJ letter presented in the last hours before Election Day is even more suspicious, if in fact it was written by CBJ. I do believe that CBJ’s good reputation was thrown under the bus by Sarah Palin, but CBJ can’t say anything to defend herself because of HIPPA. Read the discrepancies about that letter on Palin’s Deceptions “The Purloined Letter” at: http://palindeception.blogspot.com/2009/02/purloined-letter.html
Also see PalinHoax: http://www.ottoline.net/PalinHoax/md.shtml and read “Here’s what’s wrong with it” about CBJ’s letter.
I continue to firmly believe that Bristol gave birth to Trig in January 2008 and I believe he was born in Fairbanks and was transported from Fairbanks to Wasilla by automobile or RV on 2-17-08 after the Iron Dog weekend.
I believe CBJ was involved with Bristol because of the circumstances of how Bristol became pregnant. She may have accompanied Bristol to the hospital in Fairbanks, but I doubt she is the doctor who delivered Trig.
I just want to emphasize something PCGrandma just wrote - she mentioned the 2-15-08 American Heart Association “Go Red for Women” luncheon - that luncheon took place in Fairbanks - and the family was gathered in Fairbanks that weekend for the Iron Dog festivities. It was after this weekend that Sarah started wearing her scarves and Patrick recently mentioned that they think Fairbanks is a key to this mystery. All signs point to something significant happening that weekend in Fairbanks.
Yes, Bree, the weekend of the 15th February 2008 still remains clouded in mystery, despite substantial efforts to bring light into the darkness.
Until today, no pictures of Sarah Palin and her children from the AHA luncheon on 15th February 2008 could be found, despite great efforts. We finally achieved to get hold of pictures of the event, but none of these pictures show Palin or her children. There are witness reports that she "was there", but my impression is that she probably attend the luncheon only for a very short while and then left again.
As was mentioned before, the fact that Piper's return airline ticket was cancelled and that she instead drove back after the AHA luncheon from Fairbanks to Wasilla by car "with a friend" is HIGHLY suspicious in my opinion (a 500 mile drive!). We don't know who this "friend" is and who else might have been in the car. It is very possible that on this day Trig was transported back from the NICU in Fairbanks to Wasilla.
I know not all complaints are answered or productive. I know a woman that ended up killed by her husband. It was hard to get anyone to pay attention. Do you not try because the odds are against you?
I've been reading Max Blumenthal's book and he had a couple of tidbits in there I hadn't seen before, gleaned from the research he did on the ground in Wasilla.
The first, when referring to the time Bristol spent living with her aunt, is a quote from a resident who said B moved in with her aunt "because she resented her mother's imperious, hyperambitious nature." (I'm quoting Blumenthall who is paraphrasing; I doubt many Wasilla resident even know what "imperious" means.)
The second, referring to Levi, quotes a classmate as saying that Levi was expelled from high school for vandalizing a local liquor store and cutting the brake lines on the school's fleet of buses (evidently not the same school bus vandalizing episode involving Track, since that was deflating tires and unplugging engine block heaters).
I find this information very interesting. Why have we not heard about Levi's brush with vandalism? (I'm not judging him; I knew some troubled kids in school who acted out, too) It does provide an alternate explanation as to why he dropped out of school and tried to home school. Then again, finding out you're about to become or have become a dad could be a reason for an already troubled kid to act out.
The bit about Bristol is also intriguing. We've tended to see her move to Anchorage as banishment for being pregnant. But if she left because she had a huge fight with mom, was it because 1) Sarah wanted B to get an abortion and she refused, or 2) Sarah DID force B to get an abortion against her will and B couldn't forgive her?
The above suggests an explanation for what happened in Fairbanks. If the family was all gathered there for the Iron Dog, there may have been a reconciliation of sorts. At this point, Bristol could have agreed to let Sarah adopt the prematurely born Trig. Or, if Trig is Sarah's by an unknown father, then perhaps it was at this time that they learned he would live, requiring Sarah to fake a pregnancy simply to claim her own child.
ProChoiceGrandma: I'm reading Audrey's "Purloined Letter" again, and this statement jumped out at me: 1. Back in April, when Trig Palin was allegedly born. She gave ambiguous statements to the press about the circumstances of the birth (several of which contradicted explicitly statements Gov. Palin made) and then she clammed up.
As you know from my posts above, I'm making the case that SP made up ALL the CBJ quotes plus the letter (unless CBJ was lying for SP, which I doubt -- and even if CBJ was lying for SP, the statements SP said CBJ made to SP on the phone call from Texas were made up by SP because CBJ and SP did NOT discuss a pregnancy on the phone because SP WAS NOT PREGNANT and CBJ would have known it).
So: 2 questions. Which "CBJ statements" explicitly contradicted SP's? Which statements did Audrey think "she [CBJ] gave to the press"? (As opposed to CBJ quotes SP would have fed to the press, presenting them as direct quotes from CBJ when in fact they were just made up by SP.)
This tangled mess is evidence of one thing for sure: deceit !!!
A curious thing (in the NYT article) is that she says she hid the pregnancy out of concern that some would think she couldn't do her job and be pregnant. Later, she goes back to work as soon as possible to show "the Neanderthals" something.
As Governor, she could show "the Neanderthals" something by just doing the job. If she's trying to make a point, why hide? Tell everyone and show them that she could do the job while pregnant. That would show "the Neanderthals" just as well or better than going back to work as soon as possible.
Also in the "summary of problems" re the medical letter (that is linked in Audrey's "Purloined Letter", there are a number of things listed at the end that would constitute a breach of medical ethics, that would make CBJ guilty of participating in the SP hoax.
Reading those items, my take is CBJ's role, if any, has deniability written all over it. And for an MD to have not commented at all on a goofy fraud that attempts to implicate her is not illegal.
So, by never offering up any quote re the SP Hoax, and by having no part in the writing of the forged letter, CBJ is in a good position to maintain deniability.
MIGHT she have said "I had nothing to do with quotes or letter"? Sure. We wish she had. But doing so would have blown SP's hoax apart. and not doing so is not illegal or contrary to the "rules" listed in the "summary of letter" pdf linked to Audrey's post.
My take is that CBJ is involved in some fashion. But with the deniability identified above, she can claim she had nothing to do with it and ge away with it.
Why does this matter? I think the more loose ends we gather up and put in place, the clearer the PalinHoax becomes. Easier for newbies to understand. I also think that the more SP is out there swinging in the wind all alone re responsibility for it, the better the case against her becomes.
"Trailblazer also reveals another reason Palin kept the pregnancy quiet. She tells Benet, who interviewed Palin and her family for a 2008 PEOPLE cover story: "Not knowing in my own heart if I was going to be ready to embrace a child with special needs – I couldn't talk about it."
Massive inconsistency there with the reason for hiding given in the NYT article!!! That quote is from Sarah Palin's Secret Pregnancy
Hmmm ... First the story is that she hid out of fear that some would think she couldn't do her job while pregnant. Later the story is that she hid the pregnancy for another reason. And later, she did travel for a speech in which she indicated that she had considered an abortion. I suppose the tempted-by-Satan-and-triumphed-over-evil story is more compelling than the first reason, given in the NYT article.
midnightcajun: TWO SEPARATE similar bus vandalisms? I never realized that. Are you sure that's true? The identity of the unnamed under-age participant that some speculated was Track was never clearly and absolutely identified as Track, but I NEVER read anything implicating Levi in vandalism. Where did you see this?
I thought Levi had had lifelong ADD issues that affected his academics and was therefore homeschooled (by his mother) because of it. I assumed that was why he dropped out. I wish we knew more about that.
If we are now thinking Trig was born (and hidden) in Fairbanks -- that is just another reason to go to the Fairbanks newspaper and pitch this story to them. We need to talk about the cover up by the ADN, how they chose ad dollars over reporting the truth, etc.
Does anyone have a relationship with a reporter or editor at the Fairbanks paper?
She didn't need to hide the Gusty belly on the wild ride because no one saw it.
I've seen pictures of Levi that were probably scrubbed when he was going to marry Bristol. It looks like he could have a problem with substance abuse. They don't talk like a family in recovery. Rich kids that get in trouble here will be put on prescriptions and they call that sobriety.
If Sarah has compromised pictures of Levi that could be a negotiating tool.
Exactly Leadfoot, i am totally thinking that there are people at the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner that know things, including the managing editor Rod Boyce, that is the only way to explain a conservative, military town newspaper's antagonistic attitude towards miss sarah.
They are not going to stick their necks out though without a compelling reason. However, Dermot Cole writes a sort of 'hometown happenings' column and has said surprisingly honest things about miss sarah in the past.
Another possibility might be to approach Erica Goff, who is the editor of the Sunday supplement section. She is fairly young and liberal minded. The Sunday section always features some sort of essay about some historical figure or event, or hunting trip, or some such. They are always well written and usually include photos. It might be possible to pitch a story about sarah, not from the perspective of faking a pregnancy but just from the perspective of what was happening in her life (all on public record) during the spring of 2008. A good journalist could write a compelling story which draws no sensational conclusions, but which does put the information out there. The photos would have to be VERY carefully chosen. Definitely the Gusty photo, but no captured screen shots, etc. I think the photo from March where she is standing with Parnell and others, wearing the a-line skirt, is pretty damning. Also the blue windbreaker photos. A good opening to such a story might be quotes from man-on-the-street interviews done by tv stations when sarah first announced her pregnancy. The statements I heard at the time expressed surprise, but also good will and good wishes for miss sarah and her family. This establishes that people were responding in good faith to her pronouncement.
wv : theastr (as in this is all theater, shakespearean)
Did I read that Palin & Johnston got together because of Track, Levi and hockey? Bus vandalizing may have been what was a popular teen rebellion. Blumenthall may have heard a rumor set up to take the heat off of Track. Who knows?
I know I once read about Keith Johnston's involvement with hockey teams and a rink. I can't remember the details and it wasn't there when I went back to look for it. Keith Johnston may have been scrubbed.
I could be wrong but I thought Fairbanks was a sanctuary for Republican conservatives?
For me the most interesting photo is this in Bree Palin's Album. At first it struck me that she was wearing the outfit that McDonald's employees wear. She is 6 months along there. On the left is a member of the Alaska legistature, presumably not pregnant.
I believe the baby known as Trig was born on December 27, 2007 and transported from a hospital ICU in Fairbanks in February. Prochoice Grandma sounds as if she's really put the pieces of this story together.
"A good opening to such a story might be quotes from man-on-the-street interviews done by tv stations when sarah first announced her pregnancy. The statements I heard at the time expressed surprise" ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I could be wrong but my recollection is she never made public the "announcement" she was pregnant. As I recall the headline at ADN was "Alaskans stunned as Palin gives birth" or something to that effect. Which would lead me to believe there was never any formal announcement. I certainly had never heard of it before that headline (nor had anyone I know) and was "stunned" also.
Therein lies what helped this deception work though. I first met SP in '92 and have disliked her ever since. I always knew she was a fraud and was absolutely amazed that this dimwit could became Gubnah. When I saw that headline I looked at my wife and said "Palin gave birth? I didn't even know she was pregnant." My wife who works in city government and also knows her responded by saying "I didn't either.. obviously no one did"
All sorts of questions went thru my mind at the time that I asked my wife. How could no one know? Why wouldn't she have told anyone etc.. My wife of course had no answers, she just shook her head.
So even knowing Palin was a liar and a fraud, it NEVER crossed my mind at that time that she would have faked the whole thing. I just figured she was a very strange woman to start with so I shouldn't be suprised by some odd behaviour and that she must have had her reasons. I'm pretty sure that's how everyone up here reacted. So no one questioned it at the time
Does anyone know if this statement is true made by Palin in the NYT article that she gave birth to Piper on Monday and returned to work on Tuesday?
"She assured them she would not take much time off: she had given birth to Piper on a Monday and returned to work on a Tuesday, the child in tow. “To any critics who say a woman can't think and work and carry a baby at the same time,” she said, “I'd just like to escort that Neanderthal back to the cave.”
I agree with your scenario on the birth of Trig in January. Thank you for your in depth analysis.
What I do not understand is why CBaldwin said ANYTHING? Why didn't she just keep her mouth shut? By doing so, she would have not had so much controversy about her involvement with a cover up.
In addressing whether CBaldwin's "good name" is being maligned, well I think she brought that on herself. Her poor advise to a woman supposedly 7 months pregnant with a special needs child, leaking amniotic fluid, and having contractions should not have been to fly home from Texas to Alaska. The only proper advice would have been to go to the nearest hospital and get things monitored. For instance, the baby's heart beat, the rate of amniotic fluid loss, the actual timing of contractions.
Anything other than this is poor medical practice and she should be called on to justify such ridiculous medical guidance. Had this been an actual pregnancy and a medical emergency developed, CBaldwin would be held responsible inpart for any untoward outcome. She certainly would be named in a legal suit.
I laugh everytime I read that the "contractions had settled down." What does that mean? Do physicians always take the word of their patients who are thousands of miles away? Or do they do the PRUDENT thing and advise the patient to seek local medical care?
Last, had SP refused to under go examination at a local facility, a PRUDENT physician would have covered her ass by making certain, in writing, that she did advise a medical examination and that the patient acted outside of that advice!
Sorry, but I have no sympathy for CBaldwin, who I think acted without thought and has damaged the reputation of fine family physicians.
The religion connection, well that's just icing on the cake.
IF Palin was pregnant with T1 - nobody at the church, or all the doctor's appointments, or family or neighbors or friends or political foes or goody-two-shoes, or coworkers - nobody has any convincing statements or evidence that she gave birth to T1, besides a letter by a fellow church person CBJ which says nothing concrete. All these people in all these everyday activies, and the only thing that comes up is her inconsistant pregnant looking bump. Everybody seems surprised - everybody?! Over and over again, you hear how everyone was surprised. T1 supposidly needs special help after the birth, in Fairbanks, and no one around that time or that hospital or in that city says anything? No one? She hid T1 from everbody all the time? I don't think so - she didn't have T1 and I bet CBJ knows who the mother or father is. Palin made up the story to make herself look like a superwoman.
But Skeptical: CBJ DIDN'T say anything! That's the whole point!! We all thought she did, because SP said she did, but now that we know SP was not pregnant, it makes no sense for CBJ to have said anything. The newspaper quotes were most likely offered by SP and printed as fact. As ProChoiceGrandma explains above, cbj's silence on all this is deafening.
Certainly CBJ would not have said what SP claims CBJ said -- because CBJ, of all people, would know that SP was not pregnant.
anon @ 21:07 -- Miss Sarah did indeed announce her 'pregnancy', just after McCain was declared the Republican nominee, as has been discussed here. I think the date was March 5th or 6th. That is when someone was quoted (I think it was ADN columnist Elsie Paktokak, not sure if last name is spelled right) as saying, "Where are you keeping that baby, in your pocket ?"
Most Alaskans knew at that time, and there were 'man on the street' tv interviews. The surprise about the 'birth' itself was due to the fact that it was a month earlier than expected as Sarah had announced a May delivery date.
If CBaldwin did not say those things, she may as well have. She allowed the statements to be attributed to her. She also went along with reading the statement on the eve of the election. What else but her active involvement would have compelled her to do so? I don't buy her innocence. She is complicit in the charade.
If someone were maligning my professional reputation by making statements about advice that I HAD NOT given, I certainly would have made it clear that I was uninvolved.
Perhaps the real reason CBalwin has allowed the statements to be attributed to her is because she knows the truth about the baby's origin and SP paid her to keep her mouth shut. Again, she is complicit and that shows very poor judgment.
Skeptical: thanks for your posts. I was feeling very lonely in my opinion that cbj should run , not walk, to the meRest media outlet and refute the advice associated with her name regardless if Sarah was not pregnant ( as I believe she wasn't, as a physician cbj needs to set the record straight. Say " any high risk pregnant woman leaking amniotic fluid preterm should be examined by an ob before commencing travel plans" at the very least. Anyway , thanks. At least one person gets my view. Feel like writing some letters to the aafp, Alaska state board, etc???
In my opinion, the important sentence in this article is:
"The mayor said she had been to work Tuesday, but only to redirect e-mail and phone messages to her home."
This is a clear indication to me that she did not "return to work" like she did with Trig, which is important because Sarah compared these events and made it seem that they were basically "identical". However, she apparently did NOT take Piper to the office three day after the birth, but stayed at home and did some work from there - and we have no idea how much work she actually did.
Let's not forget the risk of HAPE (high altitude pulmonary edema) in downs syndrome children. Either CBJ is unaware of this or she just doesn't care because SP flew some 7,000 miles in her last trimester. None of this adds up no matter how you look at it
(Photo comparison courtesy of a good friend of palingates)
210 comments:
1 – 200 of 210 Newer› Newest»I guess she's "sucking it in" in the 4/8 picture. Bwa ha ha. Will anyone ever pay this some attention?!
That video was taken in 2008. Nothing has been done as far as real transparency since then. It's still a no go!
Did Brian Williams catch the "if" and ask whether they were certainly going to be released.
This interview was a classic. One of the joint ones with McCain (separate from this segment). Where he looks like he's going to have a stroke every time Palin opens her mouth.
OT but speaking of SHANNYN M. here she is today on MSNBC on the future political life of SP.
http://tinyurl.com/yg93q98
In the video, she shrugs her shoulders as she says she's healthy, then again when she says she's happy, but not when she says she's had five kids. Signifigant?
Dear Lawd
Your last photo comparison. "nailed it"
So the girl I work with, in her 8th month, Bugarian and super slim, 5'6 with a tall torso.. one of those envious pregnancies as the rest of her is just "chipper" other than the belly
I was looking at her today and she looks like a J
The gut protrudes and there is a hollowing between the boobs and the bulge
Sarah is so nicely rounded, so perfect, so perfect prego belly
But a late state pregnancy takes on the "J" type look
like you got a bowling ball the size of an NBA basketball that was put in your sweatshirt. gravity makes it lower
Thats how late stage looks
She went from looking "flabby" to having the perfect belly..
When this story blows there will be too much to tell how she worked this fake pregnancy to her favor on every turn.. she has to look "extraordinary"
Anon 1:54 I didn't notice the shoulder shrugging... but I did sit up and take notice when she said "happy, healthy, had five kids -- you'll see that in the medical records"... what an odd thing to say
I don't recall seeing that before. Wow. Just wow. You can almost see the wheels in her head turning as she stammers and does everything BUT answer the question.
By the way, this is OT, but you are the only people in my life who will understand:
I had a dream last night about SP! I was in a talent contest and was planning to sing a song I knew by heart. I stepped onto stage in front of a HUGE theater full of people, and when the music started - it wasn't my song. It was a song I had never heard before. I looked around desperately, and saw SP standing in the wings laughing maniacally. She had done this to me on purpose to humiliate me. At some point, someone brought me a CD case with lyrics inside and she ordered Piper to go out on stage and rip it out of my hands. I finally ran off stage in tears.
LOL! SOOOO random. But typical mean-girl Sarah rears her ugly head again -- even in my dreams.
Leadfoot, I think Piper may go into politics. She has certainly done a lot of campaigning and attended a lot of government functions. We may be faced with a Palin dynasty!
Patrick,
Whatever happened to the picture of Willow that was being discussed at Audrey's site - the one that proved she was not the pregnant one?
@Leadfoot
I completely understand you! Kathleen also had dreamt about Sarah several times, but then she has in general the weirdest and most details dreams in the world, so that was no surprise! ;-)
@Anon 02:22
Answered on the last thread.
"...I've had five kids..." Note that $P used the loosey-goosey verb "had" again. Not "I've given birth to five kids," but "I've had five kids," like someone handed them to her and soon they squiggled away. Which is pretty close to the truth.
Mrs. Tarquin Biscuitbarrel
Here's links to the CBJ letter and what's wrong with it.
Very interesting:
Sarah Palin's photographer for the cover-picture, John Keatley, was interviewed by politico:
JOHN KEATLEY INTERVIEWED BY POLITICO
Intersting, too, also:
"Keatley said that the propriety of the photos that he shot of Palin but weren’t ultimately selected by HarperCollins is “still up in the air.”
I read from the CBJ letter:
"She had four term deliveries in 1989, 1990, 1994, and 2000, and one pre-term delivery at 35 weeks gestation in 2008"
"Trisomy 21, which was confirmed by perinatology consultation and ... she followed the normal and recommended schedule ..., including follow-up perinatology evaluations ... ."
apparently nothing "that would preclude delivery at her home community hospital."
The "propriety of the photos"? Did he mean "ownership"?
Patrick - but this is the best part:
“She was very kind and I didn’t have any deep or interesting conversations with her,” he said.
After three days straight with her?
"Propriety?"
“still up in the air?”
Is HC going to change the cover?
What is wrong with her eye in the black suit profile picture next to the "Going rogue" cover?
".....something much softer. Like “Going For a Hike.”
Take a hike!!!! ROTFLMAO
Palin tradition: “A lot of them feel very uncomfortable,” he says. “She looks uncomfortable, the lighting looks uncomfortable.” THEY SUCK.
re the non-pregnant Willow picture(s) - is it possible to post them? I remember the discussion was that this picture(s) was going to prove to Dangerous that his Willow is the mother theory was groundless.
anon @3:51 - Bristol is an adult, Willow is a minor child. If Patrick, Audrey et.al. have confirmed that they have seen the pictures and know that Willow is not involved, I think we should leave her alone. JMO.
Ella,
Okay, I am not hungry to humiliate any child and I'm not trying to cause any problems, I just remember that this was a big topic of discussion a month or so ago. Pictures and a post was promised by Audrey. I am simply asking the status of this particular topic.
Yeah. No way the Gusty belly is hiding underneath that turquoise jacket. That is an un-suckable belly there.
This can mean only one thing: the "real" fake belly did not arrive until on or about April 13th. At the Governor's speech thing in TX, it looks too like her belly is way out there (and I detect a look of "I am SO going to get away with this tomorrow" on her face), so she MUST have been wearing it then too, then she MUST have taken it off for the long plane trips to the "air crossroads of the world".....LOL. Seriously, has anyone thought how Sarah might have been concerned that either the fake belly would set off the metal detectors, and/or that somehow some airport personnel might be in danger of discovering the fake belly during routine security checks? If I were her, I'd put the fake belly in the suitcase and just go with the scarf business for the plane ride.
Did the MSM lose interest in the story when Obama said families are off limits in the campaign?
Bree, it was SIX days! Six days to make that photo shoot! And Politico has changed the definition of "Rogue" (an unprincipled, deceitful, and unreliable person) to: "implies rugged action and steely independence". Gee, how accommodating of them. But then again, it is Politico. Much like Faux Noise that “reports” their own talking points.
anon @3.51
Dangerous saw the photo. Audrey sent a copy of it to him and it was enough for him to agree that it was not Willow who was pregnant.
We do have a copy of the photo and it has also been up on Team Sarah for quite some time now. In fact one of the research team found it at Team Sarah.
Perhaps the best thing for me to do is to provide a link to the photo and then those who wish can look at it and those who don't can ignore it.
I hope that this suggestion satisfies everyone.
Leadfoot: I interpret your nighmare as fearing that SP will get away with it. I have the same nightmare, often when I am awake.
This April 8th photo of Flat Sarah getting out of the chair versus 'Fat-gut' Sarah is a killer. Even my ten year old son is shocked. He first groaned when I asked for a turn at the computer to check this site, but when he saw the side by side photos, his comment "I thought you hated dumb SP" turned into "she is full of it,mom." All foam, fabric, and hot air. Even her sh*t eatin' grin irks me.
She only has guts in trying to pull the wool over everyone's eyes and taking advantage of trusting True Believers. Why, oh why, did our state get stuck with her? Please Texas or Idaho-lure her away. She is a abomination and a northern anomaly.
Boy, does she have a lot to answer to when she faces her maker....(let alone answering future questions from her two grandsons.)
Let’s Say Dr CBJ Is Innocent
( -- or relatively so)
We’ve all been puzzled by Dr CBJ’s alleged quotes -- and medical letter, odd though it may be -- supporting the idea that SP birthed T1.
Like many others, I longed for Dr CBJ to explain herself, either confirming or denying SP’s supposed pregnancy. I thought she was ethically bound to do so at some point, in some way, without violating confidentiality. Probably with SP’s permission, I thought. To confirm the pregnancy.
As time has passed and more and more clearly non-pregnant photos surface, proving that the Gusty photos are of a fake belly, I no longer doubt. I am now sure SP was not pregnant with T1. At this point, if there appeared a sworn statement by an MD saying that SP delivered T1, or a birth certificate saying so, I would have to ask: “how do you explain the incontrovertible proof of photos showing a flat belly six weeks before a 6+ pound baby is born?”
I revisited the CBJ material with this certainty rather than with my earlier uncertain stance. All of a sudden, and with the help of a fellow blogger on palingates (MadlyTrulyDeeply), everything fell into a scenario that seems credible to me: CBJ was not involved in this hoax.
Starting with the certainty that SP was not pregnant with T1, it would have been impossible to have the conversations with CBJ that SP reported for the morning of the Wild Ride. CBJ would have had to know that SP was not pregnant unless she had never once examined SP. If that were the case, CBJ surely would have referred SP to the main MD overseeing SP’s pregnancy. But we know SP was not pregnant. So why did SP phone Dr CBJ? Perhaps she did not phone and just said she did. Whatever the case, any conversation between them could not have been about water breaking, contractions, and the wisdom of flying back, because SP was not pregnant.
The Alaska Daily News announcement of T1’s April 18 birth, written by Lisa Demer, offered several statements by Dr CBJ. They were presented as quotes that Lisa Demer presumably knew to be authentic. Or did Ms Demer take SP’s word about the quotes? We do not know. But the nature of the quotes reveals that either (1) they were fake quotes (because they referred to a pregnancy and delivery that we know never happened) supplied perhaps by SP (leaving CBJ innocent of them) or (2) they were actual, legitimates quotes delivered by CBJ (in which case CBJ is a liar and an accomplice to the Palin hoax).
There’s no point asking Lisa Demer for clarification. Undoubtedly, SP brought the lie to the interview, just as SP brought the fake belly to the Gusty photo shoot. If Demer/Gusty knew or suspected there was deception afoot, they could (and Gusty did) maintain deniability – so important in a matter that has had two web sites intimidated out of existence (Audrey and the Gusty photo photoshop site), two other cases of intimidation that failed (IM and Patrick), and who knows how many other cases that succeeded. No, neither Lisa Demer nor Andrea Gusty can fairly be expected to speak freely about this story.
On the day after the so-called “birth” of Trig, SP recounted the Wild Ride. She quoted CBJ a number of times. These quotes are corroborated by no one. We have only SP’s word that they ever existed.
On the eve of the election, the medical letter signed by CBJ was released by the McCain campaign. This letter, which supports the idea that SP delivered T1, is either a lie by CBJ or a forgery. Because we know that SP was not pregnant.
In the past, I felt sure that an MD would refute false claims about her. I have come to believe that is incorrect. Even if the topic is a crime (which it is not in the SP case, as far as we know), unless an MD is under oath, she is under no obligation to set straight the wild claims about her made by a crazy person. Just keeping one’s head down, minding one’s own business, and refusing to dignify the wild claims by an answer is a far better approach. This is what CBJ has done.
(continued from above)
If CBJ were to take the other approach, of trying to set the record straight, she would be doing one of two things:
1. If CBJ says she delivered T1 from SP, or if she corroborates SP’s Wild Ride story, she would be lying and be an accessory to Palin’s hoax – because we know that SP was not pregnant with T1. Furthermore, she might be lying and making herself an accomplice for the first time, if she can make the same case I have done, that she never uttered the words SP claimed she did, and she did not prepare the medical letter that bears her signature. To step into the public realm with a lie, perhaps a lie for the first time on this matter, would be to join SP on a sinking ship that could cost CBJ her medical license.
2. If CBJ were to say she was not involved in phone calls regarding the wild ride, knew that SP was never pregnant with T1, and did not write the medical letter, she would be destroying SP’s hoax and probably SP’s career. It is clear that there is a preexisting relationship between these two women based on their shared religious and political values and goals. CBJ is unlikely to want to rain on SP’s parade, especially now that it is in so much trouble. It is hard to imagine any credible motive for doing so.
The happiest ending for SP and CBJ on this matter would be for T1’s birth to remain the lie that SP has set it up to be. All the evidence to the contrary should just die a quiet death. If it would all just go away, both women would be off the hook.
Sorry this is so long, folks. Please tell me where you see flaws in the reasoning. Thx!
That "if" was a big one. The McCain/Palin campaign never had a plan to release Sarahs medical records...remember John McCain is an expert at hiding things(his VM military record has been sealed for over 49 yrs thanks to his grandpa the admiral) The campaign thought this would all blow over and it still hasn't. It surprises me greatly that Sarah who has stated Trig is hers hasn't bothered to clear this all up, apparently she can't.
CR46 -- what is VM (miliary record)?
As with the Gusty photo, the MD letter has only made everything worse for SP re keeping the hoax intact. I wonder, in view of your comment CR46, whether that last-minute release of the MD letter was an end run around campaign advice, an SP act-alone special, just like her putting her speech up on the teleprompter (at the McCain concession speech moment) was an attempt at an end run?
a potential treasure trove today at the ocean of urine:
"The idea behind "Media Monday" is simple: Let's bring to light positive and uplifting YouTube videos about the Governor. We have the influence, let's use it.
What I'm looking for are rare videos, exclusive footage (personal video from the campaign trail or things like that), News Reports from before she was picked as VP candidate and things that tie into the current national conversation about her."
Hmmm - Shannyn Moore is writing on her Facebook about a new scandal coming. Something to do with her meeting with VO?
Amy1,
I also think that it is likely that the last minute "medical records release" that was really just a summary of some statements about SP (supposed) health, was probably an end run around the McCain campaign, like some of her other rogue activities, and like putting her own speech in the teleprompter after being told NO in no uncertain terms by McCain by all reports.
Furthermore, I have often wondered about CBJs actual real specialty, which is NOT high risk deliveries, and how it might play into the silence from CBJ about SP's story. What if CBJ was involved because she helps arrange adoptions for victims of rape or incest, including underage girls whose parents oppose abortion?
Obviously CBJ cannot reveal real medical details that were part of the patient relationship without SP's permission. If SP lied about what CBJ said and it did not involve a confidential medical matter, CBJ could have been within her rights to come forward on this topic, but Amy1, I agree that with their shared beliefs and goals, CBJ would be unlikely to do so.
But I have also thought that SP may have gained CBJ's sympathy on the matter by presenting to CBJ a false story about how it was that Bristol, who I believe is Trig's most likely mother, came to be pregnant (rape, for example).
CBJ may have been involved in helping to set up one of the fast track adoptions that Palin's church supposedly handles. Then imagine that the Downs syndrome is discovered and the adoption falls through. SP then hatches the fake pregnancy plot. CBJ may not approve of that aspect but feel it is better to keep her mouth shut in the interest of not having Bristol's situation made public.
I also think that we don't know for sure if CBJ made some of the "quotes", or if SP just said she did. Also, some word twisting could make some of the quotes from the letter technically true, for instance if SP ever had a miscarriage, she could then say "5 pregnancies" and it is technically not a lie.
Also remember when discussing CBJ and the Wasilla area that church members did take over the board in the 90s, and completely banned abortion at that hospital, a ban that the Alaska Supreme Court eventually overturned. I am too tired to look up source on that but I trust where I saw that piece of info was reliable.
I think that when you are dealing with a group of people that has such strong feelings on abstinence only, no abortion even in rape or incest, etc, that you may find practices like people adopting their grandchildren and raising them as their children might still go on. Of course many times grandparents do raise their grandchildren these days, it's just that they usually don't hide the true familial relationship,
Another reason I hate facebook so much. I do not want to join, I don't want to log in.
I WOULD like to know what Shannyn is posting about a new scandal, but not enough do I want to know that bad enough to join facebook. Hopefully she'll post it on her blog. If not, then I guess I can just find out whenever the non-Facebook people get to find out.
So hard to buy that CBJ is "innocent".
Even if she WAS in the dark up to a point -- she isn't now. Her name is synonymous with "quack"...ALL because she is now known only as the doctor who "told" an 8 month pregnant woman who was IN labor with a preemie, down syndrome, heart defect challenged baby...that it was ok to fly. Twice.
There is a reason that CBJ has not charged every media outlet out there, saying "that crazy woman! I would never, ever encorage a 3rd trimester patient to fly at ALL -- and I would certainly not remotely consider a patient whose water at broken and put her into premature labor with a special need infant a reasonable candidate to fly!"
I think that reason MAY be...that SP "has something" on CBJ. Or CBJ owed a big favor to SP -- some situation where CBJ was, for whatever reason...somehow "beholden" to SP.
I have always thought the wild ride may one day catch the attention of the right person. When you deconstruct it -- premature labor, fifth child (reasonable expectation of expedient labor), known presence of down syndrome and likely knowledge of heart defects, mother of advanced maternal age...yet CBJ did not think it was "unreasonable" for SP to fly cross country? Please!
I think SP's tubes were tied after piper and that is why the promised med records never materialized. CBJ probably IS bound by confidentiality on that one. Can you imagine if Obama had just flat out refused to provide a physician of sterling reputation to vouch for his health condition and release a statement certifying said condition?! The resorvoir of tinkle drones would be so up in arms, the MSM would cover it with serious faces and grave voices!
If there was to be any kind of legal issue regarding Sarah and Trig, then the only acceptable proof now would be a court ordered and supervised DNA test. I would not believe any piece of paper or any witness statement after this much time has gone by.
And, while we are on the subject, I think that the only fair thing in terms of Levi is a DNA test so he is absolutely sure that the child he is paying to suppport is his biological son, DNA again. All the rest of it, interviews, statements, even a doctored doctor report or birth certificate is suspect. Let's face it. Even the Gusty picture which appeared months after the fact is suspicious.
I am glad that there is more attention being given to CBJ and her role and Amy1's excellent summary, and I wonder if Patrick would mind posting (again) the links to the PD "purloined letter" piece and the more detailed analysis of the letter there? (I also recall that there were some commenters on PD who brought up some good points about problems with the first paragraph on page 2, as well, athough I don't recall the specifics.)
While CBJ may be under no legal obligation to reveal the deception, she is under an ethical obligation according to the code of medical ethics. HIPAA is not a shield to allow participation in a fraud. I know for a fact that CBJ was asked privately (by letter) during the campaign to reveal the hoax, but chose not to do so -- in my mind at least, that makes her an abettor. I suspect (but do not know for a fact) that she was sanctioned by the hospital and that is why she was no longer on staff in the fall of 2008. As we now know, she would not confirm to Lisa Demer a key detail of the birth (I think it was that CBJ was present; is that right, Patrick or Kathleen?). Also, keep in mind that there are others who played a role in the hospital aspect of the deception, including other staff and the hospital itself.
Patrick,
Did you find out anything from Shannyn??
She is tweeting that she "is smelling a scandal...I love that smell...it's like a new car, fresh bread, baby's breath...but way better."
Could this possibly be Babygate??
Using my vivid imagination, could this be interpreted that the scandal involves bribes of a new truck, $$ (for Levi) to keep quiet about the baby ('s breath) Tirg??
Amy1 I respectfully disagree with you with myentire being. I am a pediatric nurse , in the field nearly25 years. I feel strongly that if cbj religion is interfering with her ability to practice safe medicine then that is a huge problem. Huge .If she is being blackmailed, also a huge problem. It seriously sounds like she is not thinking clearly or is so blinded by religious right that she doesn't see clearly anymore . Maybe because I am in healthcare her actions just blow me away . I can think of no situation that a doctor would allow their name to be associated with horrible ridiculous advice without speaking up. Geez Louise, I've said many times now . What if a highly pregnant palinbot leaking fluid does the same wild ride with catsteophic consequences,? Does cbj think she has no obligation to refute the wild ride associated with her name?no excuse. Silence is agreement.
Audrey had a great line in one of her posts re the Wild Ride that still rattles around in my brain. It was something like: "SP and CBJ were confident that, for the return trip to Alaska, SP would not give birth on the plane for the same reason that I am confident I will not give birth when I get on a plane: I am not pregnant."
Once we keep the mantra in the forefront of our brain that SP was not pregnant, lots of things make more sense. I can see CBJ not caring much about her reputation with lower 48 folks or bloggers. She lives and works in a small community where this issue and her lack of comment on it is a v small deal.
SP might "have something on her," but it seems far more likely that she refrains from speaking only because to do so would land her in the middle of a self-created firestorm of publicity, and not speaking means life goes on as usual, AND she can maintain deniability when the Palin Hoax is revealed.
CBJ's specialty, and the unknowns of T1's parentage, which I don't feel we need to address, is why I say "relatively innocent." But I do now think CBJ was not involved in quotes about the wild ride or in writing the MD letter for SP.
Anon14:22 -- I can see CBJ refuting your position by saying "medical issues like this are between a woman and her MD. I take no responsibility for someone who takes her medical advice from the National Enquirer, no matter what wild stuff they say about me."
Kathleen,
Thank you for responding about the Willow picture. I was all about the idea of eliminating W from the suspect list - a recurring and serious topic on Audrey's blog. I appreciate the three of you continuing to provide us with information on the hoax. I thought it would be respectful to wait a few weeks before bringing up this unfinished business of the other blog. Thanks for providing the info we need and want.
It's a very good idea to go into detail again about CBJ's medical letter, we will work on that.
@Anon 14:52
This whole Willow-discussion just came up because one particular commenter on PD pushed this subject for many months and wouldn't let go despite the fact that we discovered more and more "circumstancial" evidence for the "Bristol-theory" and couldn't find anything which would support the "Willow-theory".
It's not only pictures which contradict the "Willow-theory", but also her travel records (she travelled extensively via plane even at the end of 2007 and beginning of 2008) and other records (for example, she played basketball while she would have been several months pregnant), and there was never any indication that Willow was missing from school. Therefore it is pointless to discuss this theory again. Bristol is the mother, according to all the evidence we have, including the "inside information".
I find the singular fact that CBJ may have said ANYTHING regarding Sarah's pregnancy (proxy or real) also disturbing.
Whether she actually made these statements, or they were reported secondhand or just attributed to her. . .what responsible, professional doctor would EVER make a public statement about a PRIVATE patient's health care. . .or allowed one's name to be attached to one?
Whatever happened to patient confidentiality?
CBJ is in up to her neck on this one, whether Sarah was pregnant or not. I can't believe she hasn't been censored by some medical board.
Oh, I forgot, Sarah gave her that Doctor of the Year award a few years ago, eh?
I don't know who the real mother of Trig is. . .I have always suspected that this was an adoption behind the scenes arranged by Palin's church to gain her political creds. Perhaps CBJ justifies her silence and collusion on the basis that she is protecting the identity of another innocent teenager, or older mother unable or unwilling to raise a DS child.
If you add the 'seasoning' ingredient of fervent religious belief to the mix, a number of people colluding and remaining silent on this issue becomes far less surprising.
God First, Country Second.
Fits.
I really can't understand why CBJ (if she is basically an honest person) does not want to set the record straight unless she is protecting Bristol and the circumstances regarding her becoming pregnant w Trig.
You can't understand them because they are sociopathic narcissists who believe they are tapped by god, entitled to lie, cheat and steal to gain power because they are the chosen.
Do not under-estimate the religious/mental illness aspect of this.
CBJ thinks she's doing the work of God by protecting Palin/Esther, because Palin/Esther belongs, is due, is owed, the White House.
If you remember this, all of the lies begin to make sense. Stop projecting liberal values on to these folks, because you will never understand them if you keep doing that. They are not protecting some teenager. They do not care about teenagers. They advance their agenda as themselves being God's HOly Warriors, reclaiming their rightful place. That is all they care about.
People (other than god's chosen) are irrelevant.
I neglected to mention this in my post last night -- but I think the hospital/church (which is it?) fire needs further attention. When babygate rumours reach a fever pitch -- there just HAPPENS to be a fire which destroys any document that would shed light on this mess? Again -- one must do more than "suspend disbelief" to concede that this is possible...one must be willing to accept that this situation is more like a bad movie of the week than real life.
I have heard various reports about CBJ being "hardcore" pro life...and you don't need to reach too far in order to realize that a pro life doctor plus a specialty in incest/child abuse plus an association with a church that places babies for adoption ... could indeed add up to something unthinkably sinister.
Perhaps in her prolife zeal, CBJ strong armed a young, scared victim into staying pregnant, then going through with an adoption?
Many scenarios -- All more disturbing than the one before.
There IS a reason CBJ is letting her reputation go to hell in a handbasket -- and I do not believe HIPPA is at the heart of it.
anon @14.52 and all readers
We have decided to post the photo alongside several photos of Sarah Palin with some text of explanation in order to give Palingates readers some context regarding the photo of Willow that we have.
I'm presently travelling in Scotland and will not get back home until tomorrow evening so the post is unlikely to go up before Thursday.
Thanks for your patience.
Anon at 15:13--
Yes, if CBJ did know that Bristol was really the mother, and was in fact keeping patient confidentiality, then it was Bristol's privacy that was at issue, and Sarah merely reaped the benefit of knowing CBJ could not/would not talk. I can even imagine a scenario where Sarah just blurts out made-up correspondence with CBJ in order to answer questions about Trig's wild birthday. CBJ would not then have refuted any such contact in order to maintain Bristol's privacy.
The matter of the MD letter released the night before the election is the same issue. Again, if CBJ is still keeping Bristol's pregnancy with Trig confidential, then it is possible that even if that letter got produced and released without the permission of CBJ herself, that she would not have made any effort to refute it, since she was interested in protecting Bristol. Sarah would have known that CBJ would remain silent about the whole matter if CBJ was, indeed, involved in the care of Bristol in the capacity of her specialty--child abuse and sexual abuse.
Another part of the equation is that Sarah also lived at the time under the extra protection of being Governor, and knew that people would be WAY more likely to give her the benefit of the doubt--on any and all matters.
Just to be clear -- the scenario I described was a theory concerning the premise that SP "has something" on CBJ -- after reading my comment I realized that it could be interpreted as implying that "young scared victim" could have been Trig's bio mom -- that is not at all what I meant. The "adoption for political clout" theory never washed with me -- the pics of bristol and Levi tenderly cradling baby Trig -- the absence of Bristol at critical time ...the "seeking out" a baby for poitical reasons just doesn't wash for me.
Anon 8:05, Treasure is right! no telling what we will see in those personal videso, BEFORE she was picked!!'
Bring it on Pee-ers!
And we could send them some of our more interesting videos!!!
Miss Wasilla is a little like Jesus for her followers.
They believe and worship even though it seems she is not going to return any time soon!!
They have begun to mythologize her.
The ADN Lisa Demer story doesn't directly quote CBJ. There are no quote marks around what CBJ supposedly said. So it is very questionable where the information attributed to CBJ came from. It could be something that CBJ told the reporter, but then why are there no quote marks? Even a journalist like $sarah would -- should -- have learned that stuff in j-school. My guess is that what is attributed to CBJ is what $arah told the reporter.
Is it sloppy reporting? Doesn't ADN do editing?
So, what we should do is contact some of the reporters who have gotten quotes from the campaign staff.
Ask those reporters to check into whether it was Scarah's idea to go rogue and release a letter the night before the vote? or the campaign staff's idea. Because it sounds like something impulsive Scarah would do.
It doesn't have to be put in a way that directs attention to the fake pregnancy. I can be asked to find out what other rogue acts she may have pulled.
If they say it was her idea, like the losing speech and her wanting to lie about health insurance and Toad's AIP connection.
Well then, if they say it was her idea to do this, it will give us more teeth to then who created the letter which would be Scarah herself.
I highly doubt the campaign staff would knowing be in on creating a fraudulent act. That is unless it's the guy who stuck by her. I forget his name.
To Anon @ 15:35-
Unfortunately, I think you are correct. It is important to understand the unbalanced cult mentality if we want to understand SP and her ilk. I would add to this the social pressure/threats that are part of maintaining this arrangement. That said-- I am wondering out loud(or in print here) if there is now a conflict between the Dominionsts Palinistas and the Hard Right-lower 48 Palinistas. Might that be why we are seeing some type of a shake-up /realignment a la "Stand Up for the Nation ?" For example, what if SP and her most inner circle had been using some of the Pac funds as hush money re:babygate and the Hard Right faction was lied to about it. Then the Hard Right finds out the truth about Trig- OOPs! Now what ? They need to grab the reins of this operation.. oh well, just speculating..
From the CBJ letter:
-----
"perinatology consultation" "follow-up perinatology consultation"
So she did see a specialist?
-----
"... follow-up perinatology evaluations to ensure [that there was no condition of the baby] that would preclude delivery at her home community hospital."
Was this the opinion when a full-term delivery was expected? If the doctor had known that the baby would be premature, would that opinion have been different?
-----
"He had some problems with jaundice that required phototherapy in the hospital and at home for several days"
Is that phototherapy equipment normally used at home? Is it expensive? Was it purchased? Rented? Is any skill or license required to operate it?
Note: I am assuming (for the sake of discussion) that she was pregnant.
From the CBJ letter:
----
"My employer, Providence Health & Services Alaska, and I are committed to protecting the confidentiality of patient health information. Therefore, this letter and the information contained herein are being released at the express request and with written consent of Governor Palin."
Did Governor Palin supply the information? If so, is the information consistent with her records?
-----
I have an idea: The questions that this "records release" raises might be used to argue for a new law regarding candidates for national office. There can be genuine privacy concerns, so Congress could create an independent panel of physicians that would collect the candidates' records, review them, then release its opinion concerning whether the candidate has or has had any condition that could affect his/her job performance. In that way, the public could be informed about a candidate's health without releasing the actual records, which voters, most of whom are not medical professionals, are unable evaluate in any case.
I'm interested to see that some of you are trying to figure out who is the mother of Trig (seems as if Bristol is the leading candidate). I noticed on Bree's website that the leading point-of-view is that it does not matter. What matters to them is that SP is NOT his mother and it doesn't matter who is. I have no wish to bring more embarrassment or shame on Bristol (who I see as a victim of her mother), but I do think that Trig's real mother must be discovered in order to "out" SP as a liar and fraud.
anon 18:48 ... Don't forget that the panel should also have authority to comment on any inconsistencies between the health record and the candidate's statements concerning thier health/treatment. And it is not just CBJ's statement, here, that could be used to argue for the creation of a commission. Health questions have been raised about other candidates.
Regarding CBJ's "innocence":
If she was "innocent", then WHY did CBJ appear WITH HER LAWYER to the interview with the ADN in late 2008 - this interview which was never published. In this interview she was asked whether she delivered Trig and replied that she "could not confirm" it.
We only know of this interview through reliable inside information. The ADN never said ONE WORD about this interview! Maybe I will bring this up in a future blog post again.
Bringing your own lawyer to an interview with a newspaper is not what innocent people usually do...
When trying to figure out a mystery you have to look for things that are out of place. This whole pregnancy thing from beginning to end has so many things out of place, out of order, that it is totally unbelievable. If Palin was pregnant then she had one of most bizarre looking pregnancies in the history of women in my lifetime. She can't even fake a pregnancy consistantly enough to support her story. I suppose she will show in her book a fake birth certificate and have some other witness quoted about the birth. Then what do you do? Demand a dna test? That's not going to happen so it is up to overwhelming evidence presented on these blogs that she's making this stuff up. Bottom line is that Palin is not that smart, she can't even cover up the numerous lies very well for very long. I have a feeling that when the State is finally forced to release the emails at the time when she was in office it is going to show that Palin broke many laws including faking the pregnancy.
Thanks for all the work you do Patrick to keep the pressure on. Justice and the truth needs to be served to this woman. She has certainly brought forth the ugliness of what the human species has to offer.
Hmmm ... with congressional consideration of a commission, CBJ could be called to testify
There was a good post (yesterday?) over at AKM about how the emails could have been processed much more quickly. I suspect that there are at least a few embarassing things there that would reveal her two-faced, backstabbing nature.
Now where Rebecca Mansour is not with C4P any more, maybe she will have more time for reading. Here are some books she would like to read - Christmas is on our doorstep, folks!
RAM's real Amazon wishlist (no spoof):
BUY ME A NICE BOOK FOR CHRISTMAS, PLEASE
Patrick@19:00 .. One way the lawyer's presence could be spun is that the lawyer was there for advice about patient confidentiality. If that's tried, then the question is, "who was the lawyer? does that lawyer specialize in that type of law?" They might even say that "could not confirm it" was said to preserve confidentiality, but then a person would have to ask about the release that Palin presumably gave the doctor for the election-eve release.
anon @19:07 - the relevant emails will NEVER be released because SP used two PIRVATE yahoo accounts to conduct State business. One of the emails released (when her account was hacked) is a dialogue about HOW to avoid using State e-mail address. Already ruled (to my understanding) that the yahoo emails do not have to be released, and were "erased." I think LITTLE business was conducted on the official government account - thus, this e-mail chase will likely be useless.
Rebecca should get a copy of the Going Rouge Coloring Book.
@Anon 18:48
Re your suggestion that Congress pass legislation to have a panel review presidential candidates' medical histories:
As good and as civic-minded as your suggestion is, such a law would probably be deemed unconstitutional. The US Supreme Court has already ruled that Congress cannot add qualifications to those given in the Constitution, for the election of its own members. A similar rationale could be expected for legislation adding qualifications for the presidency--not to mention the issue of separation of powers.
And that's probably not a bad thing. If Congress could add qualifications, what would stop them from requiring, say, that only sitting members of Congress could be elected president?
sg, having the commission wouldn't add qualifications. People would be free to vote for a candidate with cancer or whatever. It is just a way to provide independent, non-biased information to the public. Anyone would be free to say, in fact the commission would have to say, that the information provided by the commission is an opinion. However, it would be an opinion of people qualified to consider candidates' health and would relieve the candidates of any privacy concerns.
What if the commision didn't opine about, say, the prospects of a candidate living-out the term, but just provided a summary of a candidate's medical history and current health?
Anyway, here we go again with CBJ rehash. Same stuff was discussed almost a year ago. :-/
The "CBJ letter" was released by the McCain campaign one day before the election. Who knows who wrote it. It could all be made up. It's not up to CBJ to admit that she did or did not write it. No one is on trial and no one is under oath to speak honestly about it. Until then, no one won't.
As mentioned before, since there was no Palin pregnancy in 2008 any CBJ advice about the "pregnancy" are moot - it never happened in the first place so there was no "bad" medical advice given to Palin.
Remember, all we are really looking for is more evidence that Sarah Palin was not pregnant. That's it really. All the other stuff is interesting but the Palin non-pregnancy is the core babygate issue.
anon @ 19:37. It is OK to assume that Sarah Palin was pregnant. You can find a lot about her story that doesn't make sense, if you begin with the belief that she was pregnant. She claims that she was pregnant.
@ Anon 19:34
There could not be a legal requirement that a candidate supply any medical information at all to such a commission. For what would be the sanction if a candidate refused to supply medical information--disqualification?
That's why such legislation is on shaky grounds constitutionally.
Of course, a purely voluntary medical review commission could be devised, along the lines of the independent commission that runs the presidential debates. But there could be nothing legally requiring any candidate's cooperation with it.
Ok, I try again (hopefully no typo now):
Anon 19:22
Yes, good thoughts, I agree. These would be valid questions to ask, but to who?
The ADN, a local paper which receives
MASSIVE PAYMENTS
from the State of Alaska isn't even prepared to mention in public that the interview had happened.
By the way, in my "angry email" to Pat Dougherty I did mention this "secret" interview with CBJ, and in his response he didn't confirm or deny it, he just ignored it. Speaks for itself. This seems to be their general strategy regarding the delicate "pregnancy matter". Don't talk about it, don't confirm anything.
sg, fine. If a candidate didn't want to send records for the commission's review, then the commission could just state that fact.
sg, I don't understand why you keep citing constitutional concerns about a commission on candidates' health. Is that an effort on your part to insert some sort of distraction into the discussion? There may be constitutional concerns about any piece of legislation. So what are we to do? Nothing?
Could you cite cases in support of your concerns?
Patrick: Thanks for mentioning those details about the lawyer+CBJ interview. Even without your comments, the fact that not one quote from CBJ emerged from that event is a big clue.
WITH your comments, my suspicion is confirmed. It's as sg says. CBJ is under no obligation to say anything. To say anything would be to open a huge can of unneccessary worms for her. She is not obliged to comment on a pregnancy that never was -- even if she is involved in the whole mess in some other way. ESPECIALLY if she was involved in some other way. Then it would be esp wise to remain mum in a way she is legally entitled to do.
To the outraged posters who feel it is her duty to talk, let's write letters to make her talk, let's pass new laws, etc.: very naive. It ain't going to happen.
@Anon 19:37
Re CBJ rehash:
Well said!
I agree that there is not much more to be mined from the CBJ letter. Audrey and PD did a great analysis, and Amy1 has some additional insights on her site.
Trying to catch CBJ in a "gotcha" for bad advice given for a non-event seems futile and a distraction.
At this point, what actually happened on the Wild Ride is only interesting if additional witnesses come forward saying they saw a not-pregnant SP traveling back to AK.
Amy1, is it naive to try to get a commission on candidates' health created, using questions about CBJ's letter, among other things, as evidence of the need for such a commission? Doing that might get the letter in the news; might get it discussed more. Wouldn't that be helpful in solving this mystery, in addition to preventing these sorts of shenanigans in the future?
Geez, guys, we can't even get normal people to be interested in the fact that SP was not pregnant, and that it matters. And you are talking about constitutional ammendments!
Anon20:19: Naive to think it could be accomplished anytime soon. You are suggesting a job so big that my head spins. More power to you, but I have the far more modest goal of helping to get rid of SP.
"CBJ thinks she's doing the work of God by protecting Palin/Esther, because Palin/Esther belongs, is due, is owed, the White House"
"They are not protecting some teenager. They do not care about teenagers. They advance their agenda as themselves being God's HOly Warriors, reclaiming their rightful place. That is all they care about."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
BINGO.. Now you're getting the picture. Most people don't understand the complete insanity of this Dominionist mentality and the Assembly of God church in Wasilla. They don't give a damn about anyone after they're born, witness Palins REAL death panels that happened in this state. People freezing, starving and dying while she hands out bibles. They really don't care about the unborn either other than it helps them to garner votes and elevate their standing in the psycho church.
CBJ is indebted to SP for many things and is one of her worshipers. She believes SP is the chosen one and that Alaska will be the last place of refuge during the Armageddon. They don't care what happens in the present, because they believe Armegeddon is happening soon and they will be vilified in the end with Queen Sarah sitting at the right hand of God.
It's very hard for most people to try and grasp the mentality of these people because it's just so mindboggling
And to further agree wth you, sg20:15 -- the bad advice for the nonpregnancy was almost certainly never given by CBJ (since she knew all along SP was not pregnant). It was cited ONLY by SP as part of her lie that she was pregnant. But she was not.
Ok guys, I appreciate all of you but it seems that some of you are going into another direction with this story. I've been reading here a lot and I think we need to stay on track.
Just my opinion....
Anon 18:25:
Phototherapy can be done at home with in-home nursing. You wrap the baby in a blanket and flip a switch. The blanket glows, creating a funny glow worm effect. A nurse comes by regularly to check the baby's blood.
While this equpiment is highly portable, I do not understand the trip from Wasilla to Juneau when the baby was so young. When did they return to Wasilla? The time of treatment is highly variable, so he could have been been
fine after two days, I suppose. But to then travel so far? Perhaps there is no logic here, only bone-headedness. But it is puzzling.
@ Anon 20:12
As I said in my most recent 19:59 post, a voluntary commission would be fine. My original comment re constitutionality of a Congressionally-legislated commission assumed that cooperation with the commission was intended to be mandatory. If that wasn't the case, then the constitutional issues go away. (And I apologize for causing a distraction! :-) )
Since you asked:
Re Congress not having power to add qualifications to election of its members: see USSC case Powell v. McCormack (1969).
anon @ 19.37
I agree with you
The issue is to prove that Sarah Palin was not pregnant not how involved was CBJ in that deception.
Can we please get back on track?
Thanks to all for your co-operation
Anon at 20:27 , you are SO right.
I attended a fundamentalist Christian school as a child. (For some reason, my parents thought I'd get a better education there. Not.) Most of the teachers did not even have teaching certificates. That's right, they were 'called by God to do His work'.
Fortunately I did not get the same indoctrination either at home or in the Episcopal church we attended on a casual basis. So I was able to get some perspective on the religious radicalism taught at school. (Guess my parents were right about that part of my education, because most people are clueless). If you got this stuff at home, at church, and at the church school you attend, imagine how powerful that would be.
It is true, the dominionists do believe that Alaska will be a place of refuge in the latter days and they are driven by that belief into all sorts of insane behaviors, since the end justifies the means. In their minds what they are doing is the work of the righteous. Arguing with that mindset is futile.
So a "physician of the year" who has used her power to run roughshod ALL over womens rights up here ever since Palin was Mayor. A woman who sits on the Alaska State Medical Board involved in the cover up of a major scandal AND used as absolute PROOF by c4pee'rs of Trigs birth is not relevant to the conversation?
Wow
Great post, again! That would have been the very picture I would have picked for comparison. She was never pregnant while governor and the abundance of photo and video evidence continues to support assertion.
I heard McCain indicate this weekend that she was still in a group of acceptable candidates for the next GOP presidential run. And I learned from listening to a rush interview, that the GOP never wins unless they cater to the right wing super conservative base.
Seems like there should be a board of professional doctors that investigate unprofessional activities. Like that doctor in Arkansas who ended up in the hospital after finding a bomb in his driveway one morning while leaving to go to work. He worked on some kind of investigative medical board, but he wasn't currently working on an open case according to the news.
Anyway, the abundance of photo and video evidence disputes SP doctor's letter as well as the wild ride story. And that letter was made public; thus, her doctor's silence would indicate a co-conspiracy.
Telling lies to achieve goals set by man to promote religious doctrine does not reflect Jesus who reflects God. Playing God is a dangerous act.
I agree no one will answer questions or clear up anything where the T1 matter is concerned, it is only under oath where more would be revealed.
What Amy1 is saying about "innocent" is more semantics or perception to me. CBJ didn't eat my kids homework, I believe CBJ is innocent. She may or may not have said the quotes/wrote the letter. She may or may not be innocent. That is not conclusive. She did allow the letter to be written by her in the "official" version. The letter belongs to her until shown it was not.
Her silence does not prove innocence to me. It does to Amy1. We all have our opinions.
Let's say someone started to make false claim that I made statements/wrote a letter. I said nothing. I did contact a lawyer. Whatever the matter was, it became problematic and involved something big. I know there is a lie about my part, I don't know anything about the rest of the matter. I only know I didn't do as claimed and I know it is possibly a fraud case. I am innocent because I don't say anything? I would not feel innocent. Amy1 would feel innocent in the same situation.
That is where I differ with Amy1. I believe I would be part of the crimes and coverup if all I do is remain silent in that scenario.
The official story is what it is and more people are seeing there is no way SP was pregnant with T1. The work with the pictures is stellar. When it all hits the fan, CBJ is a major conspirator if all she did was remain silent. I would like to see others come forward with what they know, more pictures and documents to prove SP condition for the time of T1. I continue to believe CBJ is an important back up to support SP as not pregnant. Not because CBJ will volunteer new information. While the pictures are invaluable, I don't think they will effect media or getting the story out. Witnesses coming forward will help, I don't know that could be conclusive for the media. I think the media will go viral when CBJ and others are under oath. How to get there?
If someone submitted a forged or fake document to the campaign or the campaign did it or knows it is fake. Wouldn't that be a matter for the Federal Election Committee to take up?
The first woman Republican in history to run for Veep is no small thing when it comes to history. It is imperative letters and documents are authentic, not fraudulent. We have no historians that want to get it straight or that would come up.
Wasn't McCain part of an election reform? With both the election committees and history moot and the media in McCain/Palin's pocket there is not much left.
Endless rehashing of pictures is about it.
'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.'
http://wizbangblog.com/docs/Daily-Kos-Sarah-Palin-Smear.htm
Thank you all for keeping CBJ in the limelight for another moment. The facade of a pure church going good doctor with awards and care for incest/abuse survivors is misleading and not the whole CBJ story. The church influence is too enormous for anyone to speak up about the adoptions and what happens to the incest, abuse, addicts and unwed mothers. SP and CBJ in connection with that and the campaign cover ups is a dead subject no matter how many survivors would like to tell their stories. CBJ stands strong with the community. CBJ alone could convince me that SP was T1's mother and she does not even have to speak.
Just my thoughts, but it seems that having umpteen pictures (and video) of Sarah that indicate that she was not pregnant in 2008 are not enough evidence for the MSM to go with this story. If one could prove who IS the mother of Trig, that would be concrete proof that Sarah was not pregnant with him. Similarly, discrediting the doctor who is purported to have advised Palin during her TX trip and who is assumed to have delivered him would be the kind of proof that the MSM would touch.
We can discuss the issue of HOW involved CBJ was in the deception ad infinitum and it will not add anything more to the discussion.
This is because unless we have a statement from the ADN or CBJ herself stating that she either did or did not make the statements in the Demer article then we have no concrete proof whether she actually did so. We will continue to go round in circles.
The time to discuss the issue would be if we had a statement clarifying CBJ's supposed claims.
I can tell you that we have someone who is working this angle and she should get back to us soon. So please be patient...we will as they say get back to you.
I don't care who the hell Palin is if she made up statements that reflected on my professional status then I would shout it from the rooftops.
The fact that Cathy Baldwin Johnston did not do so tells me that she is up to her knees in Palin's dirt. No way is that woman innocent.
I will be glad if someone could clarify CBJ's supposed claims. CBJ looks like an honorable person and she deserves to be redeemed across the world to all those who are paying any attention to this. Like Patrick said most people are not that familiar, this subject is over, it's done. The pictures do show a not pregnant fake. What is more widely known is that the people who think SP faked are like the "birthers." They are both nuts. It is that simple. Levi is a liar who just wants to get rich off of innocent Sarah. It is that simple. "Birthers" and "Truthers" are nuts. It is that simple.
CBJ is beyond reproach and leave her alone unless someone can clarify. We've all seen what the pictures will do, do more pictures.
I agree with you, anon 22:04
Thanks to Audrey, Regina, Patrick, Kathleen, Gryphen, etc ... we have loads of photos and videos and the MSM doesn't touch this subject. Perhaps a new approach, as you suggested, would bear some fruit. Maybe proving who did birth T1 is the way to get this story to break.
Just my thoughts, too.
Today Gryphen posted about rape in Alaska;;;; My visit with STAR (Standing Together Against Rape)
The real star is CBJ. She has been at the forefront of women's issues. Donate to The Children's Place, a nonprofit organization.
Anon 20:51
Sarah did'nt take Trig to the office in Juneau.She took him to the office in Anchorage on the Monday after his birth on Friday.
I am sorry, but "being at the forefront of women's issues" does NOT INCLUDE being complicit, either by commission or by omission, in a cover up of a faked pregnancy by a woman who proclaims herself to be a good Christian wife and mother and a selfless advocate for challenged children.
It is not necessary to actively lie in order to be guilty of telling untruths. That is why 'lies of omission' (in which valid and pertinent information is not included in a person's testimony) are part of legal terminology. I would call CBJ's silent acquiescence to this charade a lie of omission (at best, and that is being charitable). I don't care what her public persona is, we have plenty of examples of 'public personas' which are just a facade.
But you guys did finally get my husband's attention ! I showed him a printout of the screen shot and Gusty photos above and asked him where the baby was in the screen shot. He has always taken sarah's word re : Trig but that comparison floored him.
He said, 'maybe she left the baby on the chair when she stood up'.
wv : tringst
CBJ is questionable. She has already answer questions and given statements based on Sarah as mother of Trig. You can't blame Sarah if she felt she was pregnant, sought medical help, went to the hospital and CBJ told her that at 6:30 AM she delivered a boy and the she, as her Dr., would make the announcement to the press.
or
At the time, CBJ was not aware of Palindeception do come time for delivery, Sarah tells her she had a wild ride, delivered prematurely in the van on her way to the hospital, Todd cut the umbilical cord and they wanted to keep those details out of the press. People may expect them to call him Road or Moon but really, all she could see out the van were trigs.
Forever Anonymous. wv:obiess wv:bosesses
It is wrong to slander the doctors name just because she is helping Sarah Palin. They are friends and most of us would help a friend.
She has been dedicated to helping abuse victims and unwed teens. Look at her record, not what is said about commission or by omission.
A woman of her morals can be taken at face value. The pictures have yet to be proved by any higher authority than a few blogs.
There is plenty of credible evidence
to support the notion that the truth
about SP will NOT become public knowledge or gain public acceptance.
Consider:
GWBoosh used drugs, was forbidden to
continue being a pilot (after failing
a drugs test), was AWOL, is married
to a woman who literally killed her
boyfriend (in a "tragic automobile accident")...and few in the public
knows or cares about any of it.
9/11 was an inside job...and few in the public knows or cares about
it.
JFK was assassinated as the result of a conspiracy...and few in the public knows or cares about it.
The "War on Terror" is an excuse for restricting liberties and transferring huge amounts of taxpayer funds to the military/security complex...and few in the public knows or cares or even believes any of it.
Why would anyone here expect the SP
situation to be any different? After all, she isn't a Democrat or even a moderate Republican.
www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stor - [Cached Version]
Published on: 9/8/2008 Last Visited: 9/8/2008
Go ahead and give the speech, said the doctor, Cathy Baldwin-Johnson, who declined to comment for this article.
FA wv:negratib
Palingates is my favorite place for Palin because everything is covered. I like the blogs that have a certain focus also, too. They all have importance.
For MSM it is all useless noise until something gives. CBJ is more involved than the wild ride. It can't hurt to document the people with despair for our public servants and role models. Not every complaint is a home run. I am for filing complaints and making noise about CBJ. I haven't read all the comments yet. Did Amy1 ever explain the innocence of CBJ?
If a woman could get on a plane - as the Gusty belly shows Palin was days before birth - and no flight attendant notices - can you image what else someone could hide in plain sight? Plane sight? Alaska Air has the worst trained crew. Homeland Security needs to check them out and see they get the training needed to keep passengers safe. She had room for several bombs in that Gusty belly and no one saw that?
For those that think CBJ needs focus, someone posted this:
To whoever wants to get CBj to talk: Write letters to:
1)American Academy Of Family Physicians (AAFP). CBJ was family physician of the year 2002 i think. Voice your concern over the advice/care given to Palin and Trig.
2) Go to Alaska state board of licensure and lodge a complaint against her medical license. Can be done on line or via paper and snail mail.
3) Contact national midwive and ob/gyn groups voicing same concern.
There are all the picture sites and more to come for those that like that alone or both CBJ and pictures.
Cwhatimean has a point. I don't know about Levi now. If he did say he knew she did not give birth to T1 he still needs more proof.
NY Times Story via Dallas News
Thanks Vaughn. I was confused. Still puzzling though.
Shannyn Moore wrote on her facebook:
"Shannyn Moore
thinks it's funny that blogs are writing about people I meet as though it's a conspiracy. Really?"
So I guess that's all we gonna here from her regarding her meeting with Tim Lindell.
Andrew Sullivan on Palin's Medical Records
The Dallas article is a piece.
— her closest friends, sisters, even her obstetrician —
Did she have an obstetrician?
— The next day, her office issued a minimalist masterpiece of a press release, conveying the news in three curt sentences. —
Is this the Anchorage daily that is no longer available?
NY Times Original Story
Dr. CBJ works for Providence.
Since she used their letterhead to write the letter, why not not ask them to prove authenticity.
Ginger
Thanks a lot, Anon, excellent links!
Ginger, I think that's not a bad idea at all! They will probably hide behind HIPAA, but it's worth a try.
If you are seeking the authenticity of a letter how is HIPAA a shield?
Something like .....
It's come to my attention that blah blah letter was not properly authenticated ...... perhaps you can help speed up the process ......
I know Patrick will do better. Toss in something about election board taking so long. A request that is not fingering anyone but looking for historical verification would be non-threatening.
Send letters with cc to other agencies?
This website never changes. You all go on andbon analyizing, overanalyzing and " investigating." and still NOTHING has changed! Nothing! You are all spinning your wheels and do you see anyone in the MSM picking up on this and exposing it? NO and it is not going to happen this way I don't understand why you all don't see that.
A month or two ago there were many great suggestions about DOING something instead of more blogging, more writing, more investigating. Why not DO more?
This is going nowhere sorry folks. I don't know you all can stand rehashing the same old thing. Face the music. Palin has gotten away this charade, end of story.
As to CBJ, we are not trying to slander a doctor's good name. We are however, trying to ferret out the truth about SP's questionable pregnancy and the fairy-tale she has presented to the American people. I just read over the Dallas/NY Times article. I have read this tale repeatedly over the last year, but anytime I return to it after some absence of time, I am reminded of how incredulous this story really is. Looking at it again tonight from the standpoint of the doctor's role in it: complicit. That is the word we need to keep in mind. Partnership in wrongdoing. If SP was advised as the article says by CBJ to go ahead and make the speech, go ahead and make the long flight home, IF SP was pregnant at the time, CBJ is complicit in the act of endangering a fetus's life. If the letter (which in the case of certifying that a candidate is physically able to carry out the duties of the office to which he/she is aspiring - especially important in the case of POTUS or VPOTUS of the United States)which is more like an affidavit, saying that SP was in good physical health, nothing to hide, was in any way fradulent, and went out over CBJ's signature, and she allows it to stand, then she is complicit in that fraud. I don't think HIPAA goes that far, and I deal with HIPAA matters every day.
Anon 01:46
If you have further suggestions how to word the message, please don't hesitate to send me an email! I am always thankful to receive suggestions.
Sorry for the run-on sentences above fellow bloggers. I hope what I said makes sense;however, I do not know what we can do about it.
She has not gotten away with this charade with us.
That may be more important than we think.
And I don't see anyone here 'slandering' CBJ. Just asking legitimate questions re: medically ethical behavior. Any 'slandering' would actually have been done by either SP or CBJ herself.
Good point about the letterhead ! Aren't companies supposed to be responsible for information under their letterhead ?
wv : ouwin (we -- in french yes ! win)
Hint of Palin's so called pregnancy: She's a spotlight stealer and she keeps a pregnancy secret till nearly the time a baby was born. Then her father claims she's very private about her family. Then flash forward to the campaign and she places her family in the spotlight for all to see. Can anyone in the MSM see Palin's calculator doesn't have a + button. It doesn't add up.
I prob should not have used the word "innocent" re cbj. I wanted to show that SP lied, had to have lied, about the CBJ/SP conversations SP reported. And that there's no point in hoping that CBJ will come forward because she can make a good case that she had nothing to do with this nonpregnancy. Saving her own hide has got to be a priority for her right about now. Her specialty and the fact that SP used her name with such abandon to lie about the pregnancy suggests involvement to me, but not re the quotes and prob not re the letter. Putting it all more squarely on SP's shoulders.
I guess it was bugging me a little that people kept complaining about the bad medical advice -- no pregnancy, no advice, just SP lies.
I'm just having mid-project doldrums because SP is still winning: the hoax is still intact.
Here are a couple of good questions a journalist or investigator could/should directly ask CBJ (or Providence) that I don't believe her answering would violate HIPAA:
1) Did you (CBJ) write the letter bearing your signature released by the McCain campaign on Nov. 3?
If "yes" to (1):
2a) Do you (CBJ) still stand by all the facts asserted in the letter?
If "no" to (1):
2b) What then was your (CBJ) involvement in the preparation of the letter?
Answers to these questions would at least get CBJ on the record, perhaps even revealing some unknowns (depending on how credible her answers were). They might also open up additional lines of inquiry.
Amy1, me too. She is still winning. I personally think that that the doctor is complicit in the act(s) by allowing her name to be used as the source of sanction to fly home from TX, and definitely her signature is either on that letter or has been forged, so she is allowing herself to be used as the authority on which SP's medical affidavit is based. OMG, my wv is ancest. I don't usually refer to these.
Amy1:
Good points about CBJ's "non-advice" re the Wild Ride.
I should have made my original point this way:
"Trying to catch CBJ in a "gotcha" for bad advice NOT given for a non-event seems futile and a distraction."
BTW...
Have you pointed Philosopher Jay to your CBJ letter analysis? Perhaps, after reading it, he might get back on the case...
O/T, but sweet! (I hope nobody else posted t yet - otherwise: Sorry!)
I love the end quote:" In an interview with Talking Points Memo, Taitz said she had no intention of paying the fine. "Are you kidding? Of course not," she said. "This is a form of intimidation."
Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/13/orly-taitz-slapped-with-2_n_318546.html
One of my points on CBJ is that she is a medical professional. Even if/though there was no pregnancy, the fact that Sarah said CBJ gave advice which is now on the public record as being associated with her, (which is bad medical advice for a truly pregnant person ), and which she has never denied, i think gives her a modicum of responsibility to say 1)don't try this at home or 2)i don't advise pregnant women to fly while leaking amniotic fluid.
I think some previous posters are right. These people are freaks of nature and there really is no point trying to assignnormal behavior ,morals or ethics to them.
Pictures aren't working yet. Videos aren't working yet. Anyone who may know anything is so fing brainwashed or apparently scared of the Wasilla mafia that they don't talk.
A doctor who is complicit in the fraud may be the only culpable person right now worth investigating. There are channels for investigating the letter and the advice.
Whatever, my head is exploding. Like a previous poster said, with all the evidence that there is more to JFK assasination, that 9/11 has much more to the story than we are allowed to know, despite the overwhelming evidence to contradict the 9/11 commission whitewash, Sarah could get away with it. The only thing on our side is her utter stupidity but that seemingly is only getting us so far.
Too bad no one ever tried to get the security tapes from alaska airlines flgiht. I wonder how long those are kept. Would be vital to see what her belly looked like going through security. Good point about being able to hide lots of contraband in that belly!!
Just one more example of my frustration: An hour ago, the top photo/story on the NYTimes was cakes that had been decorated wrong. Supposed to be funny. What is the world coming to -- don't they think the PalinHoax might be a tiny bit more important than poking fun at illiterate, incompetent, (prob) exhausted cake decorators??
Or the endless coverage of Dave Letterman's affairs -- I left a comment (#67, still being moderated) with the Dave pregnancy joke, designed to pull a few newbies into our info. I bet they will delete my post. This article is written by the NYT's "ethicist" (!), and I emailed him suggesting covering the SP hoax as more worthy of his efforts and title than endlessly noodling Dave's stuff. I've sent a lot of these emails, and I have never yet gotten a single response -- except from Mudflats, who very politely told me she is not handling babygate.
Remember, Palin quit government. For no good reason. That's extremely rare in US history.
She's not getting away with everything.
Anyone who may be incapable of reasoning for themselves, like young pregnant teenagers, who read about the wild ride, may think that this nonchalent behavior is OK. If we are to believe the media reports on SP's story, we might believe we all could get away with risky behavior of long flights, long drive back to a hospital with questionable obstetric specialists, with a little amniotic fluid leaking. Their argument would be, if a 45 year-old Governor could do it, then why shouldn't they?
Highly unlikely anyone would take these chances, but, the wild ride doesn't do much to educate young girls on, "don't do this at home".
I wouldn't want to be on the public record with this kind of pre-birth story that I spent hours traveling, no mention of seeing a specialist, and seemingly not taking precautions right as soon as leakage started. I wouldn't brag about it, concerned that someone might follow my lead.
Daisydem:
Unfortunately, CBJ will skate re the Wild Ride, absent the revelation of the hoax.
Consider this passage from that NYT article:
"A woman with symptoms like Ms. Palin's should be examined to determine her condition, said Dr. Laura Riley of Massachusetts General Hospital. The long trip home could have posed a risk, "but the odds were still in her favor that everything would be O.K.," said Dr. Susan E. Gerber of Northwestern University."
That highlights the high burden of proof for anyone lodging a complaint against CBJ. For every Dr. Riley the complainant trots out to impugn CBJ's (non) advice, CBJ would introduce her own Dr. Gerber to affirm CBJ's (non) advice. Result: stalemate, complaint dismissed.
But the idea that the medical licensing board would even entertain in the first place a complaint from an uninvolved, non-witness third party to a (non) event where no medical harm occurred, is pretty far-fetched IMO.
It's been eighteen months since Trig's presentation, a year since the presidential campaign. No new evidence has emerged re the Wild Ride. With all the newspaper publicity (local to AK as well as national) about the Wild Ride, if CBJ were going to be hauled before a medical review panel re her Wild Ride advice, it probably would have occurred already.
Let's focus on the hoax, not the Wild Ride.
Anon at 23:40 said,"It is wrong to slander the doctor's name just because she is helping Sarah Palin. They are friends and most of us would help a friend."
Sorry, but the "good" doctor dragged her own name through the mud when she agreed to lie for a corrupt, scheming little politician.
Would I violate my professional ethics and my own moral code to "help" a friend deceive the public? No. But then, I'm not a dominionist, so I don't deceive myself into believing that the ends (helping Sarah become VP) justify the means (lying about the birth of Trig).
Not to state the obvious, but the WILD RIDE IS PART OF THE HOAX. What am i missing?
The only reason CBJ isn't before a board is becasue no one has the guts to try and do it. If there were enough third party complaints and questions to organiations like AAFP, national midwives association, and the licensing board something would come of it. At least there are Channels for investigating impropriety - something which seems to be evading us right now with everything Sarah. Really do you think if the licensing board suddenly got 1000 third party complaints they wouldn't be pissed off enough to start doing something? If AAFP got 1000 letters questioning the wisdom of her being an honored member of the academy and having advice that sucks associaiteed with her would not garner attention?
I think a letter writing campaign CAN NOT HURT. And for those who think it is futile - I found it EXTREMELY therapeutic if nothing else. I've done something.
Patrick
I don't know the details well enough to form reasonable suggestions for inquiry. If I get a brain storm I will contact you. I once had a friend who loved historical novels. I am reminded of him. When he was alive he worked on a few local stories. His research dug out stories that had no interest at the time they happened. Finding out if a document is authentic or not can be grueling but it can be done. Does anyone know of a historian that is interested in women politicians? Expect to find more than you bargain for if you go that route.
I have a tendency to think of this as if writing-dreaming a history book about women who ran for Vice President and documenting everything about Ferraro and Palin. However, I'm not a historian. What would one do when they got to the medical letter? If there is the slightest indication it is fake that should be followed through. If all that comes up is no answers, that says something. If they answer, that will be on record whether or not it resolves anything. If people have lied this far, they are not going to stop. A letter to CBJ might not get an answer, but I would include her in an inquiry. Say the hospital is innocent of wrong doing but were used by others. Believing the official story they would be glad to help. If they have guilt, no or non-answer is likely.
If I think that I will be ignored I will send to multi-entities at once, if it is not private. When by snail mail, I get receipts.
The Library of Congress, Smithsonian and everywhere that Ferraro history is kept will also be interested in Palin history. Why not contact them about the provenance of the letter in question? Is it a letter that can be viewed? Who is dealing with the questionable aspects of the letter? I would find it interesting to learn what has been done so far by historians recording the history of Palin's run. Who all to contact?
Do they just say an historical medical letter exists, end of story? Is it an email? Is the signature a stamp or what? Do they write about both sides of a controversy and what it is about? If not, why? Are any historians suspect that it is fake or dubious? I think the letterhead is significant but I don't believe anyone has to answer inquiries. They would respond if there is nothing to hide. I wish I knew a historian, even an amateur historian journalist that was ready to go on that journey.
Anon 01:46
@Anon 3:47
I do think instigating a campaign to flood the medical licensing board with a thousand complaints against CBJ by non-witness third parties WOULD be counter-productive. This is not the same situation as encouraging constituents to flood members of Congress with phone calls and emails saying they support, for example, health care reform. Physicians stand up for their own; what you suggest would appear to be a witch hunt and would likely result in a backlash of sympathetic support for CBJ (remember, she's a nationally recognized physician). That's the last thing we need.
You say:
"The only reason CBJ isn't before a board is becasue [sic] no one has the guts to try and do it."
So what are you waiting for? Why don't you lead the way?
Here's the link where you can file your very own complaint:
http://www.commerce.state.ak.us/occ/apps/CmpltFrm.cfm?page=MEDICAL
But do note this sentence on the web page:
"Please briefly describe your complaint i.e. dates, witnesses (and contact information)"
This is from Elisabeth at Bree Palin's Blog.
It's a picture of Sarah in 1/07. Maybe we can try to locate other pictures like this dated later.
"Here's Sarah dressed appropriately (sort of) for a photo-op indoors, pre-pregnancy. My goodness, even in SC in January we'd wear more than that."
http://www.akdemocrats.org/gallery/main.php?g2_view=core.ShowItem&g2_itemId=7418
http://www.commerce.state.ak.us/occ/apps/CmpltFrm.cfm?page=MEDICAL
But do note this sentence on the web page:
"Please briefly describe your complaint i.e. dates, witnesses (and contact information)"
THANK YOU.
CBJ was not in Texas but the client was there before she was flying cross country. Are there other states or federal places to contact?
I am alarmed about the dangers for the unborn. I understand the other passengers were in danger if she was pregnant. What troubles me is the example CBJ is setting. This is behavior that young women will follow. Whether or not someone was pregnant isn't what I care for. As a leader and role model CBJ's part in this needs to be better known and she needs to tell young mothers what is safe and not safe. She needs to revisit this even if it is in generalities. If she has second thoughts, it would be best to advise with a safe plan.
That NYTIMES article included this sentence: "For much of the summer, she carried Trig in a sling as she signed bills and sat through hearings, even nursing him unseen during conference calls." Unseen? *NO ONE* saw her allegedly nursing Trig? Does anyone else consider that to be very curious?
I passed her in the Anchorage airport in late July 2008 - before the VP announcement. She was alone with Trig (in a sling) and Piper, dragging them to their gate like any other harried mom trying to catch a plane with two little kids. (I think she had a meeting in Fairbnanks the next day). No entourage, no cameras, no fans. I thought it was pretty cool at the time that the gov. was so down-to-earth.
Regarding CBJ what I am actually most concerned about is that while CBJ supposedly does good work regarding rape and incest and underage pregnant girls, she also belongs to a church with a belief system that abortion is not permissible even in the event of rape or incest.
CBJ's specialty seems such that it would provide access to a steady stream of pregnant victims of rape and incest. I would imagine that part of CBJ's "expertise" may consist of telling victims that abortion would be wrong but that she can arrange an adoption.
Her "expertise" may also consist of some sort of "counseling" that might attempt to convince some who may want to consider abortion in these circumstances that they are wrong to consider it, and that "doing the right thing" and giving the baby up for adoption will somehow "make up for" the trauma of the rape/incest.
Adults at least could make up their own minds, but what about minors? Is part of CBJ's expertise helping to force teens pregnant as a result of rape or incest not to abort and to instead adopt out the baby?
Abortion opponents often have a problem with Planned Parenthood, claiming that Planned Parenthood covers up statutory rape of underage girls, and uses that concern as a reason to try to strip underage girls of any reproductive privacy from their parents. I wonder if the same concern could be had about doctors with CBJ's views? How do we know that some of these pregnancies are not hushed up and nothing is done about the abuser/rapist?
Unfortunately, with rape, the victim is often harmed twice, once with the rape, and again if a prosecution is attempted. Especially if the accused is wealthy and powerful, or if the victim can be cast in a bad light. For that reason so many victims do not want to prosecute.
I really have to wonder about the underlying motivations of CBJ and her work with victims of abuse and incest, especially when she and Palin are supposedly quite close, and also considering Palin's activities to cause rape victims to have to pay for their own rape kits?
What I am really wondering, is if CBJ's church is so strongly anti-abortion, how do they feel about rape and incest committed by a member? What would really be the result if a prominent member of the church were found to have raped or committed incest on a young girl? What if the only people who knew were the rapist, the victim, Dr. CBJ, and the church patstor? Would the church perhaps counsel the member and would it be considered a private matter that might be cured with prayer?
Given the way "The Family" even now can be seen to cover up and apologize for sexual affairs, with Governor Sanford comparing himself to King David, I really do wonder what to think about a doctor who is strongly anti-abortion and who practices in an area with high rates of rape and incest. And is good friends with someone who made victim pay for their own rape kits.
Is the church office that burned where the adoption records were kept?
Are there any underage victims from the Wasilla area who were forced against their own wishes to carry to term due to their parents' religious beliefs? If so, and these victims are now adults, maybe one or two might be willing to give some insight into the adoption situation and how CBJ fits in.
I know that many people praise Dr. CBJ, and no doubt she cares for her patients, but personally I find it hard to entirely trust somebody who supports NOT EVEN ALLOWING THE OPTION of abortion to the very victims she specializes in treating, if they have been the victim of rape or incest.
I think that opinion is out of the mainstream, it seems it could lead to all sorts of cover ups if stopping abortion is CBJ's ultimate goal, and if that is the case, I think that it is hard to trust what CBJ says about Palin's supposed pregnancy and delivery.
PS. to my above comment, I know I run the risk of being piled on by at least a few people here for supposedly "slandering" CBJ.
However, I am discussing what I understand the position of her church to be, and from what I have read about her, I assume Dr. CBJ subscribes to the "no abortion even in cases of rape or incest" position. Specifically I made the above comment in the context of Political Dominionism, because I think that SP's belief system has been very important in building her base of support, and that her strong position against abortion, but also for abstinence only for teens, had to have been key in deciding to fake the pregnancy. I don't think it is possible to really understand the hoax unless it is placed into the context of SP's belief system, including the view of her church and herself that she is "annointed" to lead and rule.
CBJ is opposed to abortion under ANY circumstances. She led the charge when Palin and her cronies took over Valley hospital and banned abortion under any circumstances. The Alaska Supreme Court had to step in and rule it was unconstitutional after many suits were filed against them.
She was also a PART of the panel that decided free rape kits was a bad idea. You have to realize all these supposed "accolades" and appointments this woman has received were due directly to Palin either as Mayor or Governor. They belong to the same church and share the exact same philosophies.
She and SP went about setting womens rights back 100 years up here and never even batted an eye. She along with Palin, W.A.R. etc. believe being raped is always the womans fault and thus they should receive no help or support for letting it happen. The punishment for allowing such behaviour is to be forced to have the child and of course once it's born they could care less about that person or the child anymore. That was what her appointment to the Alaska Health Care Strategies Council was all about.. Banning abortion period
Anon at 7:13 and ArmchairJane--
thank you so much for your informative comments.
Thank you for taking the time and effort to post here.
@7:13,
Thank you for the info about CBJ and that she was indeed part of the Valley hospital takeover.
That she was part of the panel that decided against free rape kits is even worse. I think now I know the answer about how it would be handled if a high ranking church member were responsible for a rape or incest pregnancy.
Max Blumenthal's excellent book "Republican Gomorrah" quoted R.J Rushdoony, the guy who has inspired so many of these really fundamentalist folks who want to actually take over government and rule as a theocracy. Blumenthal wrote that Rushdoony felt it is okay for so-called Christians to lie to achieve their aims.
from p. 43:
"Under Reconstructionist rules of engagement, lying, deception, and stealth are considered legitimate tactics and even encouraged. There is no requirement for Christians to be truthful "in acts of war," Rushdoony wrote. "Spying is legitimate, as are deceptive tactics".
We saw in the campaign how determined Palin was to try to force the McCain campaign to whitewash Todd's AIP involvement as if he just misunderstood and thought he was marking "Independent" affiliation. Palin clearly saw no reason not to lie if she thought it would help her get elected.
Given the church affiliation and CBJ's involvement in the hospital takeover and rape kit issue, I tend to think that CBJ may consider keeping quiet well justified if it helps a higher goal of Palin achieving more political power.
"She had four term deliveries in 1989, 1990, 1994, and 2000, and one pre-term delivery at 35 weeks gestation in 2008"
The first four were obviously children birthed by Sarah, However, the mention of the fifth child can be taken two ways; 1. sarah gave birth to Trig; OR 2. Sarah was present and helped deliver Trig when *Bristol* gave birth to him in 2008. It definitely does NOT state unequivocally that Sarah Palin is Trig's birth mother. I believe the ambiguity used in CJ's statements is very deliberate...she has a licence to protect (if it hasn't already been yanked).
indy_girl,
I agree, ambiguous wording, and also it is not a medical record, but supposedly info allowed to be released by SP. Only the actual medical record would tell the story. I think we're at a dead end there, at least for now.
But I will be interested to see if we do get a birth certificate photo in SP's book. I am doubting it.
Whoa, VO/Tim Lindell is fighting with and threatening Alaska state rep Gutenberg on Shannyn Moore's facebook!
Tim Lindell is fighting with and threatening Alaska state rep Gutenberg? Is Shannyn in the mix?
What's it about?
ArmchairJane makes excellent points. I am also concerned about the prosecution of perpetrators. If things are handled like other churches have been known to do, they would handle it as a private matter. The Catholic church took decades to begin to face what goes on behind closed doors. I've read they continue to have problems in rural Alaska where Natives are used and abused. I live on land that once belonged to the church. In another house several old jars of embryos were found buried beneath a basement floor. A dentist had lived in the house for years from the early 20th century until the late 1970s. It was believed he preformed abortions for the nuns. Times have changed but I don't think it is unusual for men in religious organizations to have these shortcomings.
The record keeping in Alaska is dismal. There is no way to know what happens to these children. If a pregnant child wanted to escape how could they? In the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints what started that investigation was a call from someone outside of the religion. The actual victims are brainwashed or scared to death.
This is something that must be discussed somewhere. I don't think it is "slander" to question CBJ or religious secrets or practices. Religious leaders are all about being wonderful and "trust me." The few that are caught not living up to their moral codes give us an insight into the double lives that some lead. CBJ is a professional that makes her own choices. She associates with fringe types and she put herself in a place where there are suspicions of high crimes. She has a right not to clear her name or anything. She will be discussed until the end of time or this is resolved. If Leah of Gods Own Party is half right and there is anything to the Dominists going for more power in government then you know they want everyone on earth to be like them. How can we not discuss the little they let us see about what they are doing?
Anonymous @10:21 asks...
Is Shannyn in the mix?
_____________________________
Well she responded to one of Tim's questions in the middle of it, and has not deleted anything that either has said.
But from reading the comments Tim is making I think we can safely assume that he has not backed away from his devotion to Sarah Palin in the least.
SG:
Did you read my post? I am leading the way. I have written to the state licensing board and the AAFP and the midwives association. I have posted these suggestions on all the blogs, starting with Audrey back in the summer - ( who also didn't think it will get anywhere.) Well, not trying this route absolutely will not get us anywhere. I have also written to Rachel Maddow asking her to do a public service announcement about "What not to do when pregnant and leaking amniotic fluid" but have heard no response so far. Going on two weeks. I have repeatedly posred the link to the alska medical licensing board on multiple blogs.
I disagree about the volume of letters and perhaps i should not have used the term "pissed off". When licensing boards get complaints in volumes (such as a shady physician writing alot of scripts for narcs) it has more weight than just a few complaints.
@ Anon 13:18
OK, so you've already written the licensing board. How long ago was it? And have you heard back from them yet?
I'm still skeptical that flooding the board with identical complaints would be productive, so I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.
Sg:
it's been a week via ISPs mail. I also plan to write to a national ob/ gyn org. As I think of other relevant orgs I'll write to them also, too, as well!!
http://www.adn.com/626/story/382864.html
As far as I can tell, these are the only “quotes” of Cathy Baldwin-Johnson (CBJ) from Lisa Demer’s 4/22/08 ADN article “Palins’ child diagnosed with Down syndrome”:
1. Palin kept in close contact with Baldwin-Johnson. The contractions slowed to one or two an hour, "which is not active labor," the doctor said.
2. "Things were already settling down when she talked to me," Baldwin-Johnson said. Palin did not ask for a medical OK to fly, the doctor said.
3. "I don't think it was unreasonable for her to continue to travel back," Baldwin-Johnson said.
*********
If you think about it, those quotes don’t actually testify a whole lot on Sarah’s behalf. I have said before, so I will say again, IMHO, Cathy Baldwin-Johnson did NOT know about Sarah’s fake pregnancy plan until Sarah announced her “pregnancy” on 3-5-08, the day AFTER John McCain won the Republican nomination on 3-4-08. I believe CBJ’s silence speaks volumes.
I used to believe that CBJ was complicit in the conspiracy to fake the pregnancy. But that was when we were confused about the smokescreen “birth” date of 4-18-08. From more information that has come to light in the past couple of months, we now have even stronger reason to believe that Trig was born to Bristol sometime in January 2008. Sarah began to wear her long scarves on 2-19-08, AFTER the mysterious 2-15-08 American Heart Association “Go Red for Women” luncheon for which there is no evidence that she and her three daughters actually attended. I now believe that CBJ was probably stunned when Sarah announced her “pregnancy” on 3-5-08.
I went back to review Audrey’s information about CBJ.
http://www.palindeception.com/subpages/subpage12.html
Look at the whole scenario again, but this time, consider that CBJ was NOT part of the planning, but instead was unwillingly made a party by Sarah. Now read the Dallas Morning News report again:
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/politics/national/stories/090808dnpolpalinbaby.54709f95.html?ocp=5#slcgm_comments_anchor
“Around 4 a.m. on the day of her presentation, Palin stirred in her hotel room to an unusual sensation. She guessed she was leaking amniotic fluid, she told The Anchorage Daily News. She woke her husband and called her doctor back home. Go ahead and give the speech, said the doctor, Cathy Baldwin-Johnson, who declined to comment for this article.”
CBJ DECLINED TO COMMENT for that article. CBJ’s silence has been deafening, as well as another time when she brought an attorney with her when she was to be interviewed.
Now realizing that Trig was born much earlier than when Sarah announced her pregnancy, the CBJ letter presented in the last hours before Election Day is even more suspicious, if in fact it was written by CBJ. I do believe that CBJ’s good reputation was thrown under the bus by Sarah Palin, but CBJ can’t say anything to defend herself because of HIPPA. Read the discrepancies about that letter on Palin’s Deceptions “The Purloined Letter” at:
http://palindeception.blogspot.com/2009/02/purloined-letter.html
Also see PalinHoax:
http://www.ottoline.net/PalinHoax/md.shtml
and read “Here’s what’s wrong with it” about CBJ’s letter.
I continue to firmly believe that Bristol gave birth to Trig in January 2008 and I believe he was born in Fairbanks and was transported from Fairbanks to Wasilla by automobile or RV on 2-17-08 after the Iron Dog weekend.
I believe CBJ was involved with Bristol because of the circumstances of how Bristol became pregnant. She may have accompanied Bristol to the hospital in Fairbanks, but I doubt she is the doctor who delivered Trig.
I just want to emphasize something PCGrandma just wrote - she mentioned the 2-15-08 American Heart Association “Go Red for Women” luncheon - that luncheon took place in Fairbanks - and the family was gathered in Fairbanks that weekend for the Iron Dog festivities. It was after this weekend that Sarah started wearing her scarves and Patrick recently mentioned that they think Fairbanks is a key to this mystery. All signs point to something significant happening that weekend in Fairbanks.
Thank you, PCG!
Yes, Bree, the weekend of the 15th February 2008 still remains clouded in mystery, despite substantial efforts to bring light into the darkness.
Until today, no pictures of Sarah Palin and her children from the AHA luncheon on 15th February 2008 could be found, despite great efforts. We finally achieved to get hold of pictures of the event, but none of these pictures show Palin or her children. There are witness reports that she "was there", but my impression is that she probably attend the luncheon only for a very short while and then left again.
As was mentioned before, the fact that Piper's return airline ticket was cancelled and that she instead drove back after the AHA luncheon from Fairbanks to Wasilla by car "with a friend" is HIGHLY suspicious in my opinion (a 500 mile drive!). We don't know who this "friend" is and who else might have been in the car. It is very possible that on this day Trig was transported back from the NICU in Fairbanks to Wasilla.
I know not all complaints are answered or productive. I know a woman that ended up killed by her husband. It was hard to get anyone to pay attention. Do you not try because the odds are against you?
"prembuse" wv
preemie abuse
If Trig was born by Feb. 15th, does his size at any known showings correspond to that? Republican convention? Pictures with Sadie/Levi?
Anon 16:49
According to this working theory, Trig was not born in the 15th February, but a few weeks earlier, probably very premature.
The issue with premature babies has in the past discussed for example
HERE
I've been reading Max Blumenthal's book and he had a couple of tidbits in there I hadn't seen before, gleaned from the research he did on the ground in Wasilla.
The first, when referring to the time Bristol spent living with her aunt, is a quote from a resident who said B moved in with her aunt "because she resented her mother's imperious, hyperambitious nature." (I'm quoting Blumenthall who is paraphrasing; I doubt many Wasilla resident even know what "imperious" means.)
The second, referring to Levi, quotes a classmate as saying that Levi was expelled from high school for vandalizing a local liquor store and cutting the brake lines on the school's fleet of buses (evidently not the same school bus vandalizing episode involving Track, since that was deflating tires and unplugging engine block heaters).
I find this information very interesting. Why have we not heard about Levi's brush with vandalism? (I'm not judging him; I knew some troubled kids in school who acted out, too) It does provide an alternate explanation as to why he dropped out of school and tried to home school. Then again, finding out you're about to become or have become a dad could be a reason for an already troubled kid to act out.
The bit about Bristol is also intriguing. We've tended to see her move to Anchorage as banishment for being pregnant. But if she left because she had a huge fight with mom, was it because 1) Sarah wanted B to get an abortion and she refused, or 2) Sarah DID force B to get an abortion against her will and B couldn't forgive her?
The above suggests an explanation for what happened in Fairbanks. If the family was all gathered there for the Iron Dog, there may have been a reconciliation of sorts. At this point, Bristol could have agreed to let Sarah adopt the prematurely born Trig. Or, if Trig is Sarah's by an unknown father, then perhaps it was at this time that they learned he would live, requiring Sarah to fake a pregnancy simply to claim her own child.
ProChoiceGrandma: I'm reading Audrey's "Purloined Letter" again, and this statement jumped out at me: 1. Back in April, when Trig Palin was allegedly born. She gave ambiguous statements to the press about the circumstances of the birth (several of which contradicted explicitly statements Gov. Palin made) and then she clammed up.
As you know from my posts above, I'm making the case that SP made up ALL the CBJ quotes plus the letter (unless CBJ was lying for SP, which I doubt -- and even if CBJ was lying for SP, the statements SP said CBJ made to SP on the phone call from Texas were made up by SP because CBJ and SP did NOT discuss a pregnancy on the phone because SP WAS NOT PREGNANT and CBJ would have known it).
So: 2 questions. Which "CBJ statements" explicitly contradicted SP's? Which statements did Audrey think "she [CBJ] gave to the press"? (As opposed to CBJ quotes SP would have fed to the press, presenting them as direct quotes from CBJ when in fact they were just made up by SP.)
Glad you brought up Piper's mystery ride from Fairbanks to Anchorage. 500 miles. In February. In ALASKA.
That can now be dubbed the "Weird Ride".
I mean, think about it: This family owns their own plane! They purchased airline tickets on Alaska Airlines allll the time...!
Why would you put your grade school CHILD in a car that time of year?
This tangled mess is evidence of one thing for sure: deceit !!!
A curious thing (in the NYT article) is that she says she hid the pregnancy out of concern that some would think she couldn't do her job and be pregnant. Later, she goes back to work as soon as possible to show "the Neanderthals" something.
As Governor, she could show "the Neanderthals" something by just doing the job. If she's trying to make a point, why hide? Tell everyone and show them that she could do the job while pregnant. That would show "the Neanderthals" just as well or better than going back to work as soon as possible.
Also in the "summary of problems" re the medical letter (that is linked in Audrey's "Purloined Letter", there are a number of things listed at the end that would constitute a breach of medical ethics, that would make CBJ guilty of participating in the SP hoax.
Reading those items, my take is CBJ's role, if any, has deniability written all over it. And for an MD to have not commented at all on a goofy fraud that attempts to implicate her is not illegal.
So, by never offering up any quote re the SP Hoax, and by having no part in the writing of the forged letter, CBJ is in a good position to maintain deniability.
MIGHT she have said "I had nothing to do with quotes or letter"? Sure. We wish she had. But doing so would have blown SP's hoax apart. and not doing so is not illegal or contrary to the "rules" listed in the "summary of letter" pdf linked to Audrey's post.
My take is that CBJ is involved in some fashion. But with the deniability identified above, she can claim she had nothing to do with it and ge away with it.
Why does this matter? I think the more loose ends we gather up and put in place, the clearer the PalinHoax becomes. Easier for newbies to understand. I also think that the more SP is out there swinging in the wind all alone re responsibility for it, the better the case against her becomes.
"Trailblazer also reveals another reason Palin kept the pregnancy quiet. She tells Benet, who interviewed Palin and her family for a 2008 PEOPLE cover story: "Not knowing in my own heart if I was going to be ready to embrace a child with special needs – I couldn't talk about it."
Massive inconsistency there with the reason for hiding given in the NYT article!!! That quote is from Sarah Palin's Secret Pregnancy
Hmmm ... First the story is that she hid out of fear that some would think she couldn't do her job while pregnant. Later the story is that she hid the pregnancy for another reason. And later, she did travel for a speech in which she indicated that she had considered an abortion. I suppose the tempted-by-Satan-and-triumphed-over-evil story is more compelling than the first reason, given in the NYT article.
midnightcajun: another possible agenda for the "fight with Mom" might have been that Bristol wanted an abortion and Mom refused to allow it.
midnightcajun: TWO SEPARATE similar bus vandalisms? I never realized that. Are you sure that's true? The identity of the unnamed under-age participant that some speculated was Track was never clearly and absolutely identified as Track, but I NEVER read anything implicating Levi in vandalism. Where did you see this?
I thought Levi had had lifelong ADD issues that affected his academics and was therefore homeschooled (by his mother) because of it. I assumed that was why he dropped out. I wish we knew more about that.
anon@18:39 .. Let us not forget that she said that she didn't need to hide on the wild-ride.
If we are now thinking Trig was born (and hidden) in Fairbanks -- that is just another reason to go to the Fairbanks newspaper and pitch this story to them. We need to talk about the cover up by the ADN, how they chose ad dollars over reporting the truth, etc.
Does anyone have a relationship with a reporter or editor at the Fairbanks paper?
She didn't need to hide the Gusty belly on the wild ride because no one saw it.
I've seen pictures of Levi that were probably scrubbed when he was going to marry Bristol. It looks like he could have a problem with substance abuse. They don't talk like a family in recovery. Rich kids that get in trouble here will be put on prescriptions and they call that sobriety.
If Sarah has compromised pictures of Levi that could be a negotiating tool.
Exactly Leadfoot, i am totally thinking that there are people at the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner that know things, including the managing editor Rod Boyce, that is the only way to explain a conservative, military town newspaper's antagonistic attitude towards miss sarah.
They are not going to stick their necks out though without a compelling reason. However, Dermot Cole writes a sort of 'hometown happenings' column and has said surprisingly honest things about miss sarah in the past.
Another possibility might be to approach Erica Goff, who is the editor of the Sunday supplement section.
She is fairly young and liberal minded. The Sunday section always features some sort of essay about some historical figure or event, or hunting trip, or some such. They are always well written and usually include photos. It might be possible to pitch a story about sarah, not from the perspective of faking a pregnancy but just from the perspective of what was happening in her life (all on public record) during the spring of 2008. A good journalist could write a compelling story which draws no sensational conclusions, but which does put the information out there. The photos would have to be VERY carefully chosen. Definitely the Gusty photo, but no captured screen shots, etc. I think the photo from March where she is standing with Parnell and others, wearing the a-line skirt, is pretty damning.
Also the blue windbreaker photos. A good opening to such a story might be quotes from man-on-the-street interviews done by tv stations when sarah first announced her pregnancy. The statements I heard at the time expressed surprise,
but also good will and good wishes for miss sarah and her family. This establishes that people were responding in good faith to her pronouncement.
wv : theastr (as in this is all theater, shakespearean)
Did I read that Palin & Johnston got together because of Track, Levi and hockey? Bus vandalizing may have been what was a popular teen rebellion. Blumenthall may have heard a rumor set up to take the heat off of Track. Who knows?
I know I once read about Keith Johnston's involvement with hockey teams and a rink. I can't remember the details and it wasn't there when I went back to look for it. Keith Johnston may have been scrubbed.
I could be wrong but I thought Fairbanks was a sanctuary for Republican conservatives?
For me the most interesting photo is this in Bree Palin's Album. At first it struck me that she was wearing the outfit that McDonald's employees wear. She is 6 months along there. On the left is a member of the Alaska legistature, presumably not pregnant.
Anon19:59 -- "presumably not pregnant EITHER," right? LOL. And LOL re McD's!
Puckinbugg
The Palin plane is not large enough to carry the whole family. Todd could accomodate 1 extra passenger at most.
Amy1, you are so right about the EITHER. -- anon19:59
CNN is in Wasilla asking questions at Jessica's Beehive hair salon?
snowlady6:37 -- your comment about SP being "down-to-earth" reminded me of this quote:
"A modest little person, with much to be modest about." -- Winston Churchill (about Clement Attlee)
I believe the baby known as Trig was born on December 27, 2007 and transported from a hospital ICU in Fairbanks in February. Prochoice Grandma sounds as if she's really put the pieces of this story together.
Why is CNN talking to the hair stylist now?
anon@20:30 .. I read that $P went for hair surgery to have a bumpit removed.
I have never understood why she didn't keep the style she got while running for VP, which was much better for her.
anon@20:48 .. "only her hair dresser knows for sure" -- old Clairol ad
CNN wants to know if she has hair? No wonder they never get anywhere.
"A good opening to such a story might be quotes from man-on-the-street interviews done by tv stations when sarah first announced her pregnancy. The statements I heard at the time expressed surprise"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I could be wrong but my recollection is she never made public the "announcement" she was pregnant. As I recall the headline at ADN was "Alaskans stunned as Palin gives birth" or something to that effect. Which would lead me to believe there was never any formal announcement. I certainly had never heard of it before that headline (nor had anyone I know) and was "stunned" also.
Therein lies what helped this deception work though. I first met SP in '92 and have disliked her ever since. I always knew she was a fraud and was absolutely amazed that this dimwit could became Gubnah. When I saw that headline I looked at my wife and said "Palin gave birth? I didn't even know she was pregnant." My wife who works in city government and also knows her responded by saying "I didn't either.. obviously no one did"
All sorts of questions went thru my mind at the time that I asked my wife. How could no one know? Why wouldn't she have told anyone etc.. My wife of course had no answers, she just shook her head.
So even knowing Palin was a liar and a fraud, it NEVER crossed my mind at that time that she would have faked the whole thing. I just figured she was a very strange woman to start with so I shouldn't be suprised by some odd behaviour and that she must have had her reasons. I'm pretty sure that's how everyone up here reacted. So no one questioned it at the time
It may have been in the NY Times article that it was revealed the Palin's gave away all their baby furniture after Piper's birth.
Does anyone know if this statement is true made by Palin in the NYT article that she gave birth to Piper on Monday and returned to work on Tuesday?
"She assured them she would not take much time off: she had given birth to Piper on a Monday and returned to work on a Tuesday, the child in tow. “To any critics who say a woman can't think and work and carry a baby at the same time,” she said, “I'd just like to escort that Neanderthal back to the cave.”
ProchoiceGrandma,
I agree with your scenario on the birth of Trig in January. Thank you for your in depth analysis.
What I do not understand is why CBaldwin said ANYTHING? Why didn't she just keep her mouth shut? By doing so, she would have not had so much controversy about her involvement with a cover up.
In addressing whether CBaldwin's "good name" is being maligned, well I think she brought that on herself. Her poor advise to a woman supposedly 7 months pregnant with a special needs child, leaking amniotic fluid, and having contractions should not have been to fly home from Texas to Alaska. The only proper advice would have been to go to the nearest hospital and get things monitored. For instance, the baby's heart beat, the rate of amniotic fluid loss, the actual timing of contractions.
Anything other than this is poor medical practice and she should be called on to justify such ridiculous medical guidance. Had this been an actual pregnancy and a medical emergency developed, CBaldwin would be held responsible inpart for any untoward outcome. She certainly would be named in a legal suit.
I laugh everytime I read that the "contractions had settled down." What does that mean? Do physicians always take the word of their patients who are thousands of miles away? Or do they do the PRUDENT thing and advise the patient to seek local medical care?
Last, had SP refused to under go examination at a local facility, a PRUDENT physician would have covered her ass by making certain, in writing, that she did advise a medical examination and that the patient acted outside of that advice!
Sorry, but I have no sympathy for CBaldwin, who I think acted without thought and has damaged the reputation of fine family physicians.
The religion connection, well that's just icing on the cake.
IF Palin was pregnant with T1 - nobody at the church, or all the doctor's appointments, or family or neighbors or friends or political foes or goody-two-shoes, or coworkers - nobody has any convincing statements or evidence that she gave birth to T1, besides a letter by a fellow church person CBJ which says nothing concrete. All these people in all these everyday activies, and the only thing that comes up is her inconsistant pregnant looking bump. Everybody seems surprised - everybody?! Over and over again, you hear how everyone was surprised. T1 supposidly needs special help after the birth, in Fairbanks, and no one around that time or that hospital or in that city says anything? No one? She hid T1 from everbody all the time? I don't think so - she didn't have T1 and I bet CBJ knows who the mother or father is. Palin made up the story to make herself look like a superwoman.
But Skeptical: CBJ DIDN'T say anything! That's the whole point!! We all thought she did, because SP said she did, but now that we know SP was not pregnant, it makes no sense for CBJ to have said anything. The newspaper quotes were most likely offered by SP and printed as fact. As ProChoiceGrandma explains above, cbj's silence on all this is deafening.
Certainly CBJ would not have said what SP claims CBJ said -- because CBJ, of all people, would know that SP was not pregnant.
anon @ 21:07 -- Miss Sarah did indeed announce her 'pregnancy', just after McCain was declared the Republican nominee, as has been discussed here. I think the date was March 5th or 6th. That is when someone was quoted (I think it was ADN columnist Elsie Paktokak, not sure if last name is spelled right) as saying, "Where are you keeping that baby, in your pocket ?"
Most Alaskans knew at that time, and there were 'man on the street' tv interviews. The surprise about the 'birth' itself was due to the fact that it was a month earlier than expected as Sarah had announced a May delivery date.
Amy1,
If CBaldwin did not say those things, she may as well have. She allowed the statements to be attributed to her. She also went along with reading the statement on the eve of the election. What else but her active involvement would have compelled her to do so? I don't buy her innocence. She is complicit in the charade.
If someone were maligning my professional reputation by making statements about advice that I HAD NOT given, I certainly would have made it clear that I was uninvolved.
Perhaps the real reason CBalwin has allowed the statements to be attributed to her is because she knows the truth about the baby's origin and SP paid her to keep her mouth shut. Again, she is complicit and that shows very poor judgment.
Reesie
Here is the tinyurl for the article on Piper's birth on Monday March 19 2001
http://tinyurl.com/yfakztb
Skeptical: thanks for your posts. I was feeling very lonely in my opinion that cbj should run , not walk, to the meRest media outlet and refute the advice associated with her name regardless if Sarah was not pregnant ( as I believe she wasn't, as a physician cbj needs to set the record straight. Say " any high risk pregnant woman leaking amniotic fluid preterm should be examined by an ob before commencing travel plans" at the very least.
Anyway , thanks. At least one person gets my view. Feel like writing some letters to the aafp, Alaska state board, etc???
Reesie / Vaughn
In my opinion, the important sentence in this article is:
"The mayor said she had been to work Tuesday, but only to redirect e-mail and phone messages to her home."
This is a clear indication to me that she did not "return to work" like she did with Trig, which is important because Sarah compared these events and made it seem that they were basically "identical". However, she apparently did NOT take Piper to the office three day after the birth, but stayed at home and did some work from there - and we have no idea how much work she actually did.
And remember that the
MAYOR OF WASILLA DOESN’T HAVE SUCH A HARD JOB
(one of my most favourite clips ever)
Let's not forget the risk of HAPE (high altitude pulmonary edema) in downs syndrome children. Either CBJ is unaware of this or she just doesn't care because SP flew some 7,000 miles in her last trimester. None of this adds up no matter how you look at it
Post a Comment