Thursday, 5 November 2009

Sarah Palin's faked pregnancy: More questions added to the puzzle - Update: Levi Johnston on "The Insider", part 2

There is no day without excitement for those who care about the affairs of Sarah Palin. Politically, the self-destruction continues. The Democrat Bill Owens in the NY-23 district wouldn't have won the election yesterday, hadn't Sarah Palin intervened and driven the Republican Dede Scozzafava out of the race. It is probably a good thing that after Alaska had received an overdose and disposed itself of Queen Sarah (the Alaskan version of "Yes we can!"), the Lower 48 get a taste of the "real" Sarah Palin. It's a good thing, because now there is still the chance to draw the right conclusions and to stop the madness. The Republican Party should think closely if they really want a mentally-unbalanced, nasty and utterly selfish person to dominate their party.

There is another issue I would like address right now. I would like to be open and straighforward as always. Our colleague Gryphen has posted an article concerning babygate yesterday which understandably stirred up a lot of controversy and caused quite a lot of confusion amongst his and our readers.

"Okay so now that Levi has gone public with his statement that Trig is Sarah's baby, I can confirm that I knew Trig was not Bristol or Levi's baby for about six months now. And I know that is very confusing to those following "babygate" to digest. When I first heard that I was confused as well.

However afterward I heard another piece of information which went a long ways toward explaining what actually DID happen, and why Bristol was hidden away in Anchorage for so many months.

Levi knows this as well, but I don't think he is ready to talk about it yet. Until he, or another source in the know, explain this I cannot go any further. I am sorry, as I know how frustrating this is, but I made an agreement.

I will give you this hint, which I have mentioned in the past, the key to this mystery is in the birth dates.

So then the question remains, "Who IS Trig's biological mother?" And I have to admit that I STILL don't know. And I don't believe that the pool of people who DO know, is very large. I am not sure that even Bristol knows.

All I can say with any certainty is that Sarah Palin did NOT give birth to him on April 18, 2008!"

He later added this update:

Update: I decided to address some of the questions and criticisms here because it would be lost in the flurry of comments coming in today.

Somebody asked, Midnight Cajun I believe, WHY I did not say that Bristol was not Trig's mom back when I first heard it. To be honest, I had trouble accepting it. I walked around for a while trying to fit it in with what I had come to believe about "babygate". I went back to my source at least four times before I accepted it completely.

After that I did not originally post about it because NOBODY would have believed it. You can see today how hard it is for people to accept and that is after Levi has done these interviews and you have heard hints from me these last few months alluding to that fact. If I had just come out and said it, with NO confirmation from anybody, it would have been dismissed out of hand.

Now Kathleen asked why I said back on Sept. 2, "Just ask yourself this question, "When would Sarah Palin be most likely to fake a pregnancy and then adopt her daughter's baby? When she was mostly out of the public eye as the Governor of an "off the radar" state like Alaska? Or while standing on a stage in front of millions of possible voters and camera crews?"

This was in response to Levi's statement that Sarah wanted to adopt Tripp. I was not confirming that Trig was Bristol's baby, I was asking why Sarah would want to adopt her daughter's baby right when she was being considered for a VP pick? The talk about Sarah being a possible VP pick had already started before April 2008. If it was going to be a straight up adoption how would you explain taking on an infant while running to be the Vice President of the United States? And if you were planning to fake your own pregnancy would it not have made sense to do so before the national media was watching your every move? This was one of my first attempts to get people to start thinking about the birth dates.

There is a line of logic that continues on from the above paragraph. I cannot just come out in say it because that betrays my agreement. I apologize, but I also want you to keep in mind that if I HAD simply put everything I learned on this blog back in May or June I would NEVER have learned another thing. My sources would have never trusted me again. So when I tell you I am saying as much as I can, you are just going to have to accept that or decide to walk away. Your choice.

But do keep in mind what I have said in the past, and how much has been confirmed by Levi and other sources. There are a lot of facts and rumors that we know now that we certainly did not know back in the spring.

Another thing to keep in mind is that when Levi says he knows some HUGE things, he is not exaggerating one little bit. And there are others who are waiting in the wings as well. Author Joe McGinnis said that people in Wasilla could not wait to talk to him. And boy does HE have some stories to tell."

What I would like to say to Gryphen's comments is this:

I have the highest respect for Gryphen. He is the only one of the bloggers in Alaska who was willing to pick up babygate several months ago, and has done a lot to drive this issue forward. He has built up a great blog and gained a large readership. However, that does not mean that I agree with everything that he writes about "babygate", and yesterday was such a case.

Trig Truthing is an exciting, but also difficult exercise, and as many of you have experienced before, sometimes it can make your head hurt. Like yesterday. In my 12 months of being an active Trig Truther and belonging to a resourceful investigative team, I have learned that it is just far too easy to get confused about all the theories, to think round in circles and to get distracted by smokescreens that other people have created. Once the confusion starts, all the scenarios keep spinning round in your head and that makes it difficult to come to any meaningful conclusion about the whole "Trig-mystery".

What we have also have experienced is that evidence itself might be confusing or might be interpreted in different ways, and that it takes great patience and constant fact-checking with an open mind in order to meaningfully progress with the investigation. This was one of the main reasons why the Palindeception research team was formed in the first place in 2008: To have a group of dedicated people looking together at the evidence, giving open and critical assessments, before they are being published afterwards, or sometimes they are not published straight away at all because they need further clarification. After Palindeception stopped posting a few months ago, a new babygate research team was formed which is now working with palingates. To have such a group of people is invaluable, because it is just too easy to get lost - and at the times when frustration sets in, it is also much easier to stay focused if there is a group of people behind you who support your efforts.

Gryphen and I agree in one thing right now: Sarah Palin is not the biological mother of Trig. Regarding the other circumstances, I am afraid to say that don't know whether he is right or not, because I haven't seen his evidence. Let me say one important thing: We do not see this as a competition. I would be very happy for him if Gryphen is correct! He would certainly deserve to be the one who breaks the story. What particular evidence he has, I don't know. He hasn't told us, and I would never ask anyone to tell me his secrets. After Gryphen published his blogpost yesterday, I wrote him an email and offered to tell him what WE know, so that he could check it with his information, but I have received no reply so far. I am still very happy to do so. Gryphen and I are not in regular contact, we have exchanged a few emails during this year, but that's it.

The evidence we have received, circumstancial and direct evidence, strongly points to the fact the Bristol Palin was pregnant at the end of 2007. There were for example not only rumors reaching back to December 2007 that Bristol was pregnant, but there were also people in high positions claiming this as a FACT, including a top-member of the leadership of the Republican Party of Alaska. This is not the kind of evidence which one can just dismiss. If we want to dismiss this evidence, one would have to explain how it's possible that such important people in Alaska claim to know that it's true. Personally, I find the "deception within the deception" difficult to believe.

As it currently stands, I see it as a confirmed fact that Bristol was pregnant during the year 2007.

We don't know for a fact WHEN Bristol gave birth, although we have received some clues in the course of the investigation. It seems most likely right now that she has given birth in December 2007 or January 2008. As I understand it, Bristol possibly attended Anchorage West High for several months from January 2008 onwards, although the details are not finally confirmed. We had received several reports from people who saw Bristol in public in March 2008, non-pregnant. We also received credible reports that Bristol was upset and angry about the fact that Sarah announced her "pregnancy" at the beginning of March 2008.

I also don't know for a fact IF Bristol has given birth. She might have had an abortion or miscarried. The revelation of an abortion would of course be the "scandal of the century". Some readers have speculated that such an abortion might have been performed when Bristol went to New York together with Sarah in October 2007. All I can say is that so far we have no hints that such a scandalous scenario could be true.

What I can also say is that there have been deliberate, deceitful attempts to manipulate the babygate discussion in the past in order to drive us and others away from the Bristol theory and confuse everybody. These attacks continue right up until the present day. Just a few days ago, an old "friend" popped up again, who is well known from the old PD-days: The commenter "BlueTx". He claims to know "the gruesome truth" about babygate - apparently Bristol is not the mother, and we even should feel sorry about Sarah. He managed to confuse some people over here at palingates and at Immoral Minority both yesterday and today. However, we know a few things about BlueTx. He opened the blog "Palindeception2" at the beginning of 2009, where he started to ridicule PD. Fine, no problem. Shortly before that, "BlueTx" appeared on PD, slamming the fake pregnancy theories in his comments, which "BlueTx" subsequently deleted. When confronted with the fact that Kathleen claimed to know that "Thomas" was in fact "BlueTx", he categorically denied it. Unfortunately for him, it was pretty easy to prove that the two were the same, as both posters used the same blogger ID number, and finally he snarkily conceded it. "Thomas" later also admitted that he was "Whitedog" on PD. "Whitedog", in fact, shared the same blogger ID number with "AlaskaGrown" and "cupofnoodles", who were also commenters on PD. But they were all one person - "Thomas", the man who claims to know "the gruesome truth". Using those ID's he tried to manipulate the conversation, and God knows which other ID's he might have used. In reality, however, he knows only one thing: How to confuse people and how to lie when he is cornered.

Those kind of manipulative attempts to derail the discussion make me incredibly suspicious. We have good sources telling us that Bristol was pregnant. On the other hand, we have seen deceitful commenters on the blogs telling us that she was not. What should be the conclusion of that?

The conclusion in my opinion is that the evidence has to be double and triple checked. We also have to be aware that most of the Trig Truthing discussion - is it stands right now - is confined to only three blogs - Immoral Minority, Bree Palin and palingates. This is not a lot. If one of these blogs gets discredited, it would be a major blow to the overall "movement". Therefore, we have to be very careful, and I wish that there could be more exchange of information going on. I also think that it's not ideal when information is being put out in a seemingly cryptic way and not properly explained.

I also understand that for Gryphen it probably makes sense for him to present his findings in the way he does, because he believes that he has all the pieces of the puzzle he needs.

However, we have to be aware that we are on a hazardous road: Hopefully at some point we will get to the final truth, but there are also smokescreens, and it is very important to be able to recognize them. If Gryphen is annoyed about my remarks, all I can say is: Don't be! We are in the same boat here. If theories such as "Bristol is not the mother" are being presented, I would have really liked to have seen it presented within a more coherent storyline which would have made it more digestable.

Update: Here is the second part of Levi Johnston's appearance on "The Insider". He says at the end that if Sarah "shuts up", then he might shut up, too. I find this remark a bit surprising, because the odds are that Sarah Palin has dissed him in her book. So it's very unlikely that she will shut up. I also don't think that it's in her nature to shut up at this point.

Please click on the title of the post or CLICK HERE before using the toolbar below for sharing.


1 – 200 of 313   Newer›   Newest»
get real said...

What we do know for sure is that Sarah Palin is a proven liar and she was not pregnant in 2008 and she is not the bio mother of Trig.

These are facts.

Frank LI NY said...

I would like to thank you and team palingates level headed and professional approach.

CC said...

Agreed, Frank LI NY, adding my appreciation too.

ginny said...

Great post Patrick! I agree with much of what you said. I do think that Gryphen is doing what he thinks is best, and trying to present as much information as he can without betraying his sources and their trust, and that often, his remarks come off as cryptic for this reason. Have you read Rationalist's Three Babies theory over on the Levi/Insider Ed. thread at IM? I think it's a good theory, though it may or may not fit with people seeing Bristol "not pregnant" in March of 08. But I feel like it's something close to the truth. It explains alot.
Thanks again to you, Regina, Kathleen (and Bree Palin, and all others of the "investigative team")!

crystalwolf aka caligrl said...

First of all, Thanks Patrick, PD, Regina and Gryphen and Bree for all your hard work and investigations...
I too think Bristol was pregnant in 2007,and the queen did not give birth to anyone,(except a supersized ego!) and I'm afraid somebody is trying to derail Gryphen with red herrings.JMO. Sometimes you can be too close to something and not see the forest for the trees!!!
I have been there!!! Ha!
Anyway Thanks to you all who are not afraid to go there and get to the Truth!
And the Truth will come out, I have absolute Faith that it will...

Helen said...

By all means, the operators of Bree Palin, Immoral Minority and Palingates need to have open communication with each other and be able to compare notes. It will not help one blog to break a story on Babygate if another blog has good sources with evidence to the contrary, now will it?

COOPERATION PLEASE between all interested parties - for chrissake set up a conference call or something and hash out what is known.

B said...

I think Gryphen is no longer saying that Sarah couldn't be TriG's bio mom, just that she didn't give birth April 18, 2008.

I agree with you that Bristol was likely pregnant in 2007. Perhaps she lost the baby. But then I can think of no reason for Sarah to fake pregnancy or to adopt a child. A DS child just for political purposes? I doubt it. Covering for Molly? Maybe. But TriG looks like Piper's baby pics.

Seems that if Levi and Bristol had TriG, they signed away parental rights and contractually agreed not to disclose. Levi can tell attorney Rex the truth but not Insider, not Gryphen, not even his buddies. So Gryphen's sources are saying what Levi told them (or his source could even be Levi), but Levi had to lie to them about TriG. And those who knew, like Sadie and Sherry or Rex, also have to lie or violate their agreement. So we may never hear confirmed that Bristol had TriG.

But we know a sitting Gov faked pregnancy and that is wacko.

Anonymous said...

I have been reading all three blogs for a year or so now. I would like to believe that Sarah did not give birth to Trig; it's an exciting and interesting theory. But, alas, I'm beginning to think that the truth is fairly simple - she did give birth to Trig. She didn't show much; she was in denial about the pregnancy; she couldn't accept having a special needs child, so she acted somewhat strangely - by not announcing until 7 months along, by flying to and from Texas, etc. etc. But, that doesn't mean she didn't give birth to Trig. Really, the simplest explanation is usually the real explanation.

Lisabeth said...

Hi Patrick, Thank you!! I really wanted to hear what you thought of this. The whole thing is so convoluted it is crazy! I think there is another person here whose only goal is to confuse as well. Thir approach is to act as if they know the inside scoop and I suspect that if this is true, this person is paid or a member of the Palin family. Or this person is clu
a clueless Palinbot. It doesn't matter. The point is there are people who are trying to throw all of you and us, away from the truth.

Someone wrote a possible theory at IM that made the most sense to me. It was that Bristol was pregnant in 2007 and Sarah tried then to convince Bristol and Levi that she should adopt the baby. Sarah announced herbown fake pregnancy and then Bristol lost the baby (or?) and Sarah had to find a "new baby" which she did through who knows where. And then Bristol got pregnant again. But who knows. It's very frustrating because it's obvious to anyone with a brain that the wild ride story is nuts and not believable. We know there is no way Sarah gave birth to Trig.

Countdown is talking about Sarah now and saying they have actual footage of her giving the speech she was determined to give. What a nut job! Must go watch. Thanks again for your work on this!

Anonymous said...


Trig looks like Piper with his round face but one of the prominent facial features of Down Syndrome is a very round face.


MK said...

The key to this lies in all of the anti Palin bloggers co-operating with each other. It was my understanding that they did so and I'm somewhat confused that this does not seem to be the case.

Can someone tell me why and how can we change this? MK

CC said...

Not only that, MK, but certain disrupters (JC and others, perhaps) want all the information on babygate spilled on this blog. Claiming you don't know anything or you would say it. We know $arah and her minions visit these blogs. Why give them the heads up?

Patrick and Kathleen, is there any more talk about a TT type forum? I think a lot of us would enjoy that, I know I would.

Any thoughts?

hannah said...

Patrick, thanks for this thread. I have to admit I was near tears when I saw gryphen's post. Not only for what it said, but the manner in which stated --
"now that Levi has said this...I can tell you that I'VE known for MONTHS!"

it sounds so juvenile and, well -- unreliable. Like the people who say "well, if you don't already know then *I* certainly am not telling" about a circumstance they know nothing of and are just trying to see what they can 'get' from the other side.

I am NOT a detractor of gryphen. If you look at all of my posts (and before I used the name Hannah I used my childhood nickname 'CC'...but realized it was already in use; sorry about that Cc) you will note that I spent many fruitless, maddening debates with the Troll Whom Shall Not Be Named, all is defense if gryphen. Enthusiastic defense, I would say. That gryphen has been an Alaska politics blogger for five years or more gave him a certain credibility to me...he was here before SP and I was sure that my own children might even one day read IM, ten years hence.

Now I see a blogger imploding. One whose 'sources' seem to change directions with each realisation that Levi is talking again.

My main grievance? Gryphen prefaced this bombshell post with "NOW that Levi has confirmed Trig is Sarah's baby..."

In reality, Levi 'confirmed' this much more solidly in the VF article. He said flat out, I was there when Sarah had him. He named the time of day. He included details, made up or real, about the kids accusing SP of being pregnant.

Isn't that MUCH more of a "confirmation" than a trembly-voiced "as far as I know", offered on a tabloid show with a sidelong glance at his 'keepers' Tank/Rex?

I just do not GET it.

This whole year of 2009, I have steadied myself each time one of my family or friends ridiculed me about my belief in babygate. I persisted on, secure in my thought that Gryphen will one day, hopefully sooner than later, be able to reveal his sources and unlock the truth of this story.

Now? I'm afraid my hopes are pinned on Patrick, Kathleen, Regina, and Bree. And ONLY on them.

And that truly breaks my heart -- TRULY.

Gryphen, please carefully consider your source(s). I fear you've been badly duped.

CC said...

No problem Hannah. When I first saw the "CC" on Gryphen's blog I did a double take and hoped it wasn't a palinista thinking they were cute and writing a bunch of drivel.

Obviously, this was before reading, as you are incredibly articulate and share the same views and opinions. Whew!! :))

Anonymous said...

Patrick, thanks for this sensible and well-reasoned post.

Pat in Texas

KaJo said...

Ah, Anonymous @ 02:05 Nov 05 2009...
"...But, alas, I'm beginning to think that the truth is fairly simple - she did give birth to Trig...Really, the simplest explanation is usually the real explanation."

Therein lies the fallacy that Sarah Palin presented to the world, and the one that you've fallen for.

There is NOTHING simple about a "wild ride" involving no visible evidence of a 8 month pregnant belly, allegedly leaking amniotic fluid for 12 hours, and supposedly a 45 mile drive past medical centers to a 30-bed minimalist hospital to deliver a high-risk, known DS baby to a high-risk multiparous older woman.

The "simplest explanation" is that it never happened. That the one so-called "pregnant" picture is the fake and all the other pictures are real, showing no pregnancy.

I just cannot understand, knowing that Sarah Palin lies about nearly EVERYTHING in her social and political life, how anyone can believe she was pregnant between summer 2007 and April 18, 2008.

(my WV is "expoo" -- as in expose)

anniebgood said...

Thanks for this great post. You're doing a fantastic job, Patrick and it's obvious that your motives are pure. I'm a little unsettled to learn that Gryphen hasn't replied to your email. Hopefully he's just busy but I do hope he will do you that courtesy. I agree that you all should work together and kudos to you, Regina, Kathleen and Bree for working in that spirit.

Palin is a dangerous person who sows discord wherever she goes. Whether it's babygate or something else, she needs to be held accountable for her at least one of her many unethical and illegal activities. For the good of this country, she needs to be completely discredited as a politician or any kind of public figure, for that matter.

Anonymous said...

Patrick thank you so much for posting.

You are extraordinary to be so cosiderate toward Gryphen after all the CRAP he posts to make himself seem in the "Know" with Palingates/Bree and AKM.

I never believed he had inside "Sources" like he claims. Why would anyone want to go to him with secrets and truths, he is not anyone special he is a Dlister on the Alaskan Blogger celebrity list.

Gryphen had the advantage when Van Flea and Palin threatened him. He could have owned Palin than but instead shown his true intent when instead of calling out the slander he sent 3rd grade nanananan Emails to McCain and Reihl in that lame ass oneupmenship contest for the most moronic blogger.

I found myself yesterday rooting for Palin to take her cake and eat it too after Gryphen posted more lies & I tell you I HATE PALIN.

I can imagine Gryphen being the death of the truthseekers with his B*S* attention getting ways. I would shut him out if I were you all.

Everyone can see he has got NOTHING. He is not an insider and worse of all Gryphen's personal obsession with Palin's womb is outright disturbing. The fact he tramped over to her home taking pictures in the bushes of her property, that is just freakin insane.

Distance yourself from the whack job or you will be in the same category as he is and right now he seems like a close cousin to that blonde haired birther woman who is constantly attacking Obama.

Kallie in Texas said...

I think BlueTx is a distraction. He doesn't know anything as far as I'm concerned. I do want some clarification from him...Is he from Blue,TX or is he Blue in Texas? Which is it? I'll explain when I get his answer.

Anonymous said...

I wrote this several weeks ago:

Bring it on, Gryphen.

You have nothing. You never had anything. The last time you broke something that even made a splash in the blogosphere, you were thoroughly discredited and made to look the fool. Your source in that instance, either directly or indirectly, was Mercedes Johnston, who penned a tabloid article trashing Sarah Palin that was released shortly after your "exclusive." Did it ever occur to you why she only spoke to a tabloid if she had anything legitimate to say? Perhaps any decent journalist would have done some basic investigation and found out that maybe she wasn't telling the truth. Or even more likely, selling a story to the tabloids was a quick way to make a buck. But I digress. Not a single thing in your 08/01/09 post has ever been empirically proved.

Now onto your next revelation that you have within your grasp the knowledge, the story that could finally destroy Sarah Palin forever. I doubt the veracity of your claims. First of all, you claim that your "sources" have access to this secret knowledge, but no one knows who these sources are, or what their motivations consist of. However, since they apparently possess such important information, this begs the question: Why would they share this data with you? You have mentioned that you are helping your contacts get in touch with a "media outlet," which is curiously ambiguous. Evidently, they need your help, which leads me to my next point, that being, if your sources actually have the smoking gun, why do they need your help? Why not go straight to the press themselves? There would be plenty of aspiring reporters that would run with this "iceberg" if the evidence was totally solid.

This brings me to my penultimate point. After asking all the aforementioned questions, I have come to the conclusion that the evidence you mention so frequently, Gryphen, either does not exist or is weak, e.g., hearsay. This would make your breakout absolutely worthless, but it might drive readers to your blog, which is what you really want, isn't it?

The end of my analysis reaches this singular judgment, which is based on your prior record, Gryphen. I strongly believe, though cannot conclusively prove, that you have caught some advance wind of a sensationalist story about Sarah Palin. I don't know the details, of course, but that's irrelevant. The fact is, you'll be given a heads up by your sources, which will circulate throughout the blogosphere. This will soften up internet readers and make them more receptive to the "big" story coming out shortly thereafter. Of course, the story itself will blow over quickly, dismissed as gossip by the mainstream media, but your sources will benefit financially from the sale of their "story," and you will move up a notch on the blogging totem pole-you will get the attention you want so badly, the controversy that will fan flames of anger among the conspiracy theorists you feed.

How do I know this? It is simple enough to answer. You did it over two months ago, with the "Splitsville" fabrication. So go ahead, censor this comment. I don't care. But if you do such a thing, I will know I am right, because if you really are correct then you would have nothing to fear from others reading my comment.

I stand here to tell you Gryphen that you mislead your readers. You lie to the world. You have no story that will ever undercut Sarah Palin and bring her down, because there is none. You can wail away all you want, but the facts shall remain untainted, and the truth will be unscathed.

You wish to talk about vindication like you spouted abour before? The only vindication here will be mine, as Sarah Palin will be standing tall a year from now, and you will be a laughingstock who failed in every attempt to destroy the Alaskan Governor. You may even become a hero among the circles you run in, but that is no title to be proud of.

And for the record, I use my real name and don't hide in the shadows of anonymity, unlike you.

hannah said...

CC -- I meant to apologise much sooner! When I was trying to choose a user name, I thought back to my childhood -- whenever I wanted to know about or understand something, I would say "I see? see? I see see?" so often that SeeSee or "CC" became an affectionate family name from my parents and sisters. When I saw almost right away that I had 'scooped' someone's name, a long-standing and well respected player here, no less -- I was so horrified! I am so glad you are gracious and forgiving!

Lately with all that has gone on here...I feel like the great manners offered by most participants here are a small miracle -- given that I know I must not be the only one who is just this close to screaming!

Anonymous said...

2:45, Palingates also had someone go take pictures of Sarah's construction, so....

Anonymous said...

I'm using my virtual ignore button. You can too.

CC said...

Oh my goodness, Hannah! Of course it is OK. Please don't apologize ... not needed at all.

I totally agree about the manners of most of the participants. Wonderful, really.

And no, you are NOT the only one close to screaming. My head has been spinning since yesterday.

Rationalist said...

Ignoring the trolls...

Anyway, I agree - thanks, Patrick and Kathleen and Regina, for the even tone of this blog. I appreciate that about it. I also like Gryphen! He's a hothead, but I think that's part of what I like about him - he's passionate. And Bree is really funny. So I believe the Trig Truthing Triumvirate will get past this temporary hitch and synchronize their watches and get to the bottom of this farce.

I'm cross-posting here what I just posted at IM:

emrysa - I agree with you. I don't think she'd adopt a random baby. That's why I think she was indeed covering for Bristol, but not with Trig. Her motivations and actions would be the same as we always thought, but just a little earlier and with a different baby.

Here's my new, improved Three Babies theory, taking into account the interesting "stillborn" discussion today:

Bristol is knocked up with Tripp #1 in 2007. This is the version where she's so nervous to tell her mom that a friend has to do it for her (Mercede?). Too late for an abortion. Sarah tells her to keep it a secret, which, like a good kid from a highly dysfunctional family, she does. Bristol is sent to Anchorage.

As Bristol gets bigger, Sarah hatches her plan to pretend the baby is hers. This is where she tells Levi and Bristol about her bright idea and they tell her no way. We're in love and we're old enough to raise the baby ourselves. Maybe the Johnstons and the Palins have a secret baby shower for her. Sherry is excited about her first grandchild.

Then one of two scenarios:

Palin talks the kids into giving up the baby and announces she's pregnant. Soon after, Bristol miscarries, and Palin is stuck with a faked pregnancy and no baby. With CBJ's help, she finds a pregnant teen (who is either willing to give up the baby, or is unwilling and is deceived into thinking the baby died), succeeds in adopting the baby, and presents Trig to the world on April 18th.

Or: same as above except Bristol miscarries before Palin announces she's pregnant. Even though she doesn't have to cover for Bristol anymore, by now Palin has decided there is a huge benefit to having a baby. But this seems unlikely, as why not just move on and be glad they dodged a bullet?

Anyway, after the miscarriage, the Johnstons and Bristol are devastated, as they had been, in spite of themselves, getting excited about the baby. Bristol is motherly - we've all seen that.

So then, a couple months after losing Tripp #1, here's Trig! A cute little baby. Levi holds him tenderly, Mercede refers to him as "brother." Bristol is immediately maternal to him. Levi's hanging out at the Palin house kind of like a member of the family, as he has for most of the last year. And Sarah, busy as ever, has no problem with any of this, as she doesn't really want to raise him anyway, because he's not hers.

Then, sure enough, Bristol gets pregnant again, this time with Tripp #2. This time, Levi and Bristol break the news. This time Sherry is thrilled, as she will finally get HER grandbaby. Then things go nuts as Sarah gets the VP nomination. Trig turns out to be a wonderful prop for Sarah. But when the campaign is over and Tripp #2 is born, Sarah is depressed and deflated and jealous that she's stuck with the "retarded" baby and Bristol has the "cute" one. They have significant conflict over this.

Bristol gets interviewed by Greta and makes a big point about Tripp being healthy and her choice.

And Levi can honestly say he doesn't know how Sarah got pregnant and that Sarah is the mom of Trig, "as far as he knows."

There you have my theory du jour@

conscious at last said...

Where to start? First, thank you Patrick for your honesty and clarity.
It is, of course, very different writing about SP if one is in Alaska. FOR IM, the personal pressures and the actual physical proxitmity changes the equation. I value all of the bloggers' efforts.

The most important point here is that SP DID NOT give birth to a child on 4/18/08. PERIOD

Secondly, we can certainly see that there is no conflict between the hypothesis that BP was pregnant in 2006-07-08(?) and that this pregnancy did not necessarily result in the child we know as Trig.
As the Bhuddists might suggest, we need not get too "attached" to any one particular conclusion-- except that SP DID NOT give birth to a child on 4/18/08. Because of this lie, a lot of other lies and deceptions were spun by SP and crew.

I think we are better served ignoring or minimizing the importance of statements made by SP, who we know to be dishonest or by Levi, who is a confused young guy "in over his head."

We should focus more on things that we know for sure such as:
Photographs, Fires, Alaskan legislation affecting birth certificates, SP's actions,
TP's actions, the presentation of
T2 to the world, the known whereabouts of key players etc...

Finally, speaking of photographs--
some of us remember a shortlived blog by someone named Morgan who did photo-analysis. She was also investigating babygate. She was forced to shut down after a few weeks by threats. Well- I remember what happened on the blog right before she shut down. There were photos of BP preggers at the GOP convention and some from a little before and after that time.
(If anyone else remembers this--please help me here) The point of the photos was to show some pretty interesting shape shifing in the pregnancy that wouldn't make sense in the course of normal development. Well- on comes an irate commenter (who was probably SP or TP) who tells Morgan that they are going to sue Morgan or see her in court or something like that. The threats came immediately after that. Hmmm....

Rationalist said...

Oh yeah, and remember: the only thing that made the "wild ride" wild was that Chuck Heath blabbed to a reporter that Sarah had told him her water had broken. She shouldn't have told him that, because then we'd never have been tipped off there was a deception! Anyway, if Chuck hadn't spilled that information, Todd and Sarah would have flown leisurely home from Texas no one would have any idea that labor supposedly started while she was away from Alaska.

Anonymous said...


I agree with you that Sarah feels stuck with the "retarded" baby, but I believe Bristol is the mother of both Trig & Tripp.

sg said...

@ B 2:03

As always, great insights!

Rationalist said...

Oh, brother, I just noticed that after my post about my "theory du jour" there appears to be a trademark symbol. I don't know how I did that. It was supposed to be an exclamation point. That looks really obnoxious - sorry.

Anonymous said...

Ah, Jesse, the Melancholy Conservative blogger is stil with us.

NakedTruth said...

I still believe that Bristol is the birth mother of Trig. I just don't think that Sarah would have faked a pregnancy for anyone else besides her daughter. Bristol's connection to Trig is just strange to me especially since she doesn't share or didn't share that same connection with Piper. She just doesn't strike me to be so loving with Piper and it appears that Sarah didn't force Bristol to keep Piper like she does Trig.

I think there is much more to this story and I bet it's unbelievably sad. Levi knows but there are just too many people he's trying to protect IMO. Bristol is definitely one of them. I wonder why?

Anonymous said...

10 characteristics of conspiracy theorists
A useful guide by Donna Ferentes

1. Arrogance. They are always fact-seekers, questioners, people who are trying to discover the truth: sceptics are always "sheep", patsies for Messrs Bush and Blair etc.

2. Relentlessness. They will always go on and on about a conspiracy no matter how little evidence they have to go on or how much of what they have is simply discredited. (Moreover, as per 1. above, even if you listen to them ninety-eight times, the ninety-ninth time, when you say "no thanks", you'll be called a "sheep" again.) Additionally, they have no capacity for precis whatsoever. They go on and on at enormous length.

3. Inability to answer questions. For people who loudly advertise their determination to the principle of questioning everything, they're pretty poor at answering direct questions from sceptics about the claims that they make.

4. Fondness for certain stock phrases. These include Cicero's "cui bono?" (of which it can be said that Cicero understood the importance of having evidence to back it up) and Conan Doyle's "once we have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however unlikely, must be the truth". What these phrases have in common is that they are attempts to absolve themselves from any responsibility to produce positive, hard evidence themselves: you simply "eliminate the impossible" (i.e. say the official account can't stand scrutiny) which means that the wild allegation of your choice, based on "cui bono?" (which is always the government) is therefore the truth.

Anonymous said...

5. Inability to employ or understand Occam's Razor. Aided by the principle in 4. above, conspiracy theorists never notice that the small inconsistencies in the accounts which they reject are dwarfed by the enormous, gaping holes in logic, likelihood and evidence in any alternative account.

6. Inability to tell good evidence from bad. Conspiracy theorists have no place for peer-review, for scientific knowledge, for the respectability of sources. The fact that a claim has been made by anybody, anywhere, is enough for them to reproduce it and demand that the questions it raises be answered, as if intellectual enquiry were a matter of responding to every rumour. While they do this, of course, they will claim to have "open minds" and abuse the sceptics for apparently lacking same.

7. Inability to withdraw. It's a rare day indeed when a conspiracy theorist admits that a claim they have made has turned out to be without foundation, whether it be the overall claim itself or any of the evidence produced to support it. Moreover they have a liking (see 3. above) for the technique of avoiding discussion of their claims by "swamping" - piling on a whole lot more material rather than respond to the objections sceptics make to the previous lot.

8. Leaping to conclusions. Conspiracy theorists are very keen indeed to declare the "official" account totally discredited without having remotely enough cause so to do. Of course this enables them to wheel on the Conan Doyle quote as in 4. above. Small inconsistencies in the account of an event, small unanswered questions, small problems in timing of differences in procedure from previous events of the same kind are all more than adequate to declare the "official" account clearly and definitively discredited. It goes without saying that it is not necessary to prove that these inconsistencies are either relevant, or that they even definitely exist.

9. Using previous conspiracies as evidence to support their claims. This argument invokes scandals like the Birmingham Six, the Bologna station bombings, the Zinoviev letter and so on in order to try and demonstrate that their conspiracy theory should be accorded some weight (because it's “happened before”.) They do not pause to reflect that the conspiracies they are touting are almost always far more unlikely and complicated than the real-life conspiracies with which they make comparison, or that the fact that something might potentially happen does not, in and of itself, make it anything other than extremely unlikely.

10. It's always a conspiracy. And it is, isn't it? No sooner has the body been discovered, the bomb gone off, than the same people are producing the same old stuff, demanding that there are questions which need to be answered, at the same unbearable length. Because the most important thing about these people is that they are people entirely lacking in discrimination. They cannot tell a good theory from a bad one, they cannot tell good evidence from bad evidence and they cannot tell a good source from a bad one. And for that reason, they always come up with the same answer when they ask the same question.

A person who always says the same thing, and says it over and over again is, of course, commonly considered to be, if not a monomaniac, then at very least, a bore.

ella said...

Patrick - The few times you gave e-mailed me (in response to MY emails to you), YOUR e-mail to me went to my spam file. That never happens (except with obvious spam). Had I not checked the spam folder, I would never have seen your e-mails. This COULD be what is going on with gryphen as to why he has not responded to you. By now, he likely knows you want to communicate (I'm sure he reads this blog).
FWIW everyone, my latest theory is Molly McMann Wooten and Todd as parents of Trig - explains Todd's obsession with going after Trooper Wooten and makes sense re Sarah covering for sister and husband (even though betrayed by both). JUST A THEORY.

CC said...

Oy vey ... again with the cutting and pasting. Sheesh!

Anonymous said...

LOL. Donna Ferentes must have slept through Latin.

Rationalist said...

I know I should ignore that list, but actually it's very helpful because it doesn't define this discussion at all. Speaking for myself: I don't believe ANY conspiracy theories. I think Oswald acted alone. I think the twin towers fell because of unprecedented heat and pressure. I think Diana crashed being chased by paparazzi.

This isn't a conspiracy. Hardy anyone would be in on it. It's just the old, sad, all-too-common story of a highly dysfunctional family, but played out in public. The reason I care is that a public figure who sought my vote lied about something so fundamental.

Anonymous said...

Seem's like there's someone in here that's trying to take down babygate, what better way then to get babygate bloggers to start to destroy each other, just like the republican party has destroyed itself within and with the help of Sarah. Look's like one of Palins manipulations. Any one can write a name in her so can I BESSE HENNISH but is it real? There is diffinately a TROJAN HORSE in here.
They want Gryphen discredited for a reason, why? To close to the truth?
@ jessee cornish, yes palin will stand tall so everyone can point their finger at her as they did in 2008 and say AGAIN in a year from now, What did McCain leash on us, she's not qualified to run for garbage collector, you won't get anyone that didn't vote for her to take a second look. FIRST IMPRESSIONS ever hear of that Jesse

CC said...

"A person who always says the same thing, and says it over and over again is, of course, commonly considered to be, if not a monomaniac, then at very least, a bore."

Please take note of your last comment, JC. PLEASE!!!

WV= sphiper ... as in SPalin and Piper being her last natural born child.

anniebgood said...

Rationalist, great theory. I think it makes a lot of sense and I lean toward believing that SP strong-armed or even tricked some poor woman or teenager into giving her Trig after Bristol lost her 1st baby (maybe threatening legal action against a wayward teenager or drug addict, threatening to ruin her or her family - we all know that's SP's modus operandi). That would make sense if the truth really is something that would make our blood run cold. Maybe not the blood of people on this blog, but people who aren't following babygate, anyway.

I also believe that Bristol and Levi never agreed to SP's adopting their baby #1, but that she announced her "pregnancy" to force them to agree. When the 1st baby died, she had to go to plan B, which was to find another baby. I honestly believe it's possible that at this point she sought out a DS baby, to increase her "walkin the walk" street cred with the far right of the GOP.

Anonymous said...

Todd and Sarah tried to get Wooten fired as early 2006...long before Sarah's "pregnancy."

Rationalist said...

I think you're right, anniebgood, that the Palin's capable of trying to force her daughter to give up the baby. But JC above makes a good point (thanks!) in bringing up the nature of conspiracy theories. The more people who know, the less chance it will stay a secret. So that's why I'm assuming the birth mom of Trig was either anonymous or duped into believing their baby had died.

Anonymous said...

I don't have a problem with Gryphen. He is in Alaska and he does good posts. I can't say I always understood him on babygate. I'm guessing his sources are in the Levi camp. I am baffled by Levi and not convinced he knows what he thinks he knows. He has been protective of Bristol. He may know facts or he may have been convinced of something. He is going to protect the mother of T2. I have no way to know if Gryphen has seen undisputable evidence of something so I lean toward he may be fed by people who are convinced of a contrived story. They may believe the story and been offered proof that satisfied them. Detectives working on the same case can come up with opposing leads and conclusions.

There were no WMDs but it was proven they existed.

Regina has been a beacon for me for a long time. Patrick, Kathleen, Bree and others bring so many good things. Words can't say how much I appreciate their constant steady perseverance in staying with this. The pests are a nuisance. When I get thrown off I try to regroup and start fresh.

I'm not quiet refreshed but it helps to hear from Regina and Patrick.

Anonymous said...

Thank you for following up yesterday's IM topic, I was a little surprised today that there was no more mention on that site after all the craziness yesterday...I think there should have been some follow-up at IM or refer everyone to your or another website for follow-up.... I just don't think you throw something like that out to the public and then say no more ...

I only wish for the truth...with the colder weather I began wearing scarves and on a couple of occasions i looked down and said noway could snarah have been pregnant the scarf would hang our much further from the body...try it when you wear a scarf that hangs below the belly......


Anonymous said...

Maybe Jessee cornish should send this to the BIRTHERS sure sounds like them.

10 characteristics of conspiracy theorists
A useful guide by Donna Ferentes

conscious at last said...

re my post above, sorry about type-o's--take the extra "t" from "proxitmity" and put it where it is missing-- in "shifing."

Also, too, it is possible that our friend at IM was given some false info along with lots of valid stuff, which gives certain commenters here just the opportunity they need- to try to
discredit the entire enterprise and to confuse folks who are new here. My reason for following this has always been that I see SP as a dishonest and dangerous "would be" demagogue who needs to be exposed. Others are happily dealing with her ethical violations while governor. This scandal, babygate, goes to the core of who this person is. And while I am on that issue, I do think that perhaps there is some confusion about EXACTLY WHO Levi is as well.
I think that LJ had some sort of relationshiop to BP at one time, but like Todd now, is/was used as a sham mate to present the appearance/illusion of domestic tranquility for the family values folks.

anniebgood said...

Rationalist said: So that's why I'm assuming the birth mom of Trig was either anonymous or duped into believing their baby had died.

Good point, and kind of a secret version of what I was thinking (and therefore, more like Sarah, who's all about the secrets).

sg said...

@ Anon 3:21

You said:

"LOL. Donna Ferentes must have slept through Latin."

Great catch!

As many here now know, I automatically skip over the troll. However, I did go back just to read that funny part.

sg said...

Gryphen has credibility issues. Not because I think he's lying (who can claim intent to deceive?). Rather, events have shown him to be sloppy with the information he obtains from his "sources" (e.g., overly trusting and/or insufficiently diligent in cross-checking).

First there was "Splitsville."

Then remember how, after the Levi VF article appeared, Gryphen said his head hurt, because what Levi said in the article was so different from what his sources had led him to believe.

Now we have Gryphen claiming he hid the ball for six months re his "knowledge" that Bristol was not Trig's mother. At best, it shows disrespect for his loyal blog readers. At worst, one might think he was covering his tracks for some other rumors he had erroneously believed.

Fortunately, Regina, Patrick et al. have a much more scrupulous and rigorous investigative style here at palingates!

Keep up the great work!

Anonymous said...

First and most important: A huge thanks and round of applause for Patrick, Kathleen, Bree and Gryphen for faithfully following the Babygate story. Thanks to Patrick for such a well written, well reasoned approach. I hope that it will point everyone in a positive direction.

My first instinct is to say that the most simple explanation is the most likely explanation. At first, three babies could be confusing. But, after reading Rationalist's post a second time, I like it.

Rumors existed that Bristol was pregnant. The captured My Space conversations speak to her party-style social life. So, as governor with an eye on a possible VP nomination, Sarah felt she had to cover for Bristol's pregnancy. Abortion was not an option (or they learned too late). Something happened (it's no secret that Bristol & Levi ran with a pretty wild crowd. There could have been issues from that life style that affected the fetus.

At IM, Armchair Jane spelled out a scenario where people could co-opt the birth certificate of a deceased person, as a way to assume their identity (and obscure their own identity). Sarah began her cover up, dance of the seven veils- I mean scarf disguise, and informed people that she was "pregnant, probably coincided with a point where they could guess the birth date of the first Trip, the baby who never made it.

Time period, beginning of March. We will have to check calendars and records to see what might have happened to Bristol and the baby after Sarah made her announcement). Could have been born prematurely and didn't survive, or could have been stillborn. But, Sarah had already announced her "pregnancy." Call of distress to Dr.CathyBJ because as a someone in touch with troubled teens, she might know of someone giving up a child. Also, the church that encouraged adoptions could also have that kind of information.

I'll go with the Church, since, oh what a strange coincidence, their records were destroyed in that mysterious (and little investigated) fire. So sorry. The only child available on such short notice had Down Syndrome, making him relatively unattractive as an adoption candidate. Sorry.

Sarah loves to tell that story about soul searching when learning about Trig's DS. This might have really been that moment. Thinking it out, what an advantage, an advocate for disabled children, a beautiful prop, and since Bristol put Sarah in this awkward position, Bristol can take care of him.

Bristol, Levi, the Johnstons felt affection for the "replacement" (I really hate using that word, but Sarah was stuck with a story, and Trig was the only kid around). The biological mother (let's just say under the care of the church and/or Dr.CJB) gave birth never knowing that her baby had DS, only that a nice family would give the child a loving home. She might have been told a story, for example, that she had a girl, so she wouldn't figure out what happened.

If we have to explain the wild ride story, someone suddenly went into labor after leaking amniotic fluid, but it wasn't Sarah. It was the gal giving up the child for adoption. Sarah & Todd would have to return to claim the child.

So, Gryphen's comment that Sarah did not give birth to Trig on April 18, 2008 is valid. The child was born earlier, and "adopted" (legally or defacto) by Sarah & Todd on April 18. When Levi said that Sarah had Trig, she did, she had possession of him. Audrey was right when she said that Sarah could never present Trig's birth certificate because the date and place of birth could not be changed.

Bristol and Levi crushed, hormones raging, Levi living with the Palins (home schooling and baby sitting) are not careful because they didn't think that a gal could conceive so soon after giving birth. In fact, if Bristol lost a child at birth and Trig arrived soon after, she may have still been producing milk. (Bolster picture, Trig always fed from bottles).

Oh what tangled webs we weave when first we practice to deceive.

Anonymous said...

Rationalist, indeed an interesting theory, and one that squares with a lot of what we know. But if Bristol had a stillbirth after Sarah announced the fake pregnancy, that means the delivery was 2/08 or later, right? Not much time to find a pregnant teen and arrange an adoption. And pregnant teens have been known to change their minds. So maybe with CBJ's help she found an actual baby, recently delivered and available, because he had DS. (Yes, I know DS babies are adoptable -- the point here is that if one wants a baby on short notice, a special-needs baby is more likely to be available.) This scenario implies a 2/2008 birthday for Trig, which squares with his chubby-cheeked appearance on 4/18.

Anonymous said...

Rationalist you nailed it!

Trig was Trip before Tripp came but Tripp is named in memory of Trip who became Trig

Sad so sad

Anonymous said...

C at Last:

I do not think the Bristol pics had anything to do specifically with the photo blogger shutting down. At least not as far as she knew. As I have mentioned before, we emailed a few times. She closed down the blog because in the space of a few hours, she received threats to expose 'dirt' on herself and/or family, as well as a photograph of her family vehicle. Both things scared the bejeezus out of her, she said. I have said it before and I will say it now ... I don't care what "dirt" there was on her. She was a good photo editor and just by detailed commentary and pointing out light, shadows, and lines- or the absense of.

In my last email I asked her to please consider sending all of her photo studies to Regina. She told me she was "done, done, and done" and to please respect her choice to be done with this. I did, but I still miss her blog.

Lisabeth said...

Of course you all can do what you want but it's better to ignore trolls or not respond. Also I don't think it's right to criticize Gryphen. First of all, he lives there and is taking a lot of risks. None of us are doing that. Also we know how dangerous Sarah is from stories. They could go after Gryphen, her thugs already have! But he continues to try and I give him a lit of credit for that.
Second everyone has different personalities. Gryphens personality is much differen than Patricks both in how they approach researching this and how they express themseves! I think Gryphen is doing the best he can an is not purposefully deceiving or misleading or stringing anyone! I don't know this for sure, but I believe it.
We all want the same thing, or most of us do!!
Give Gryphen a break-I agree the 3 bloggers should talk more. Let them work it out!

PS ignore the troll/s; they are NOT our friend/s

M.Lee Journell said...

Hi.. i was a regular reader of The Immoral Minority and loved his attitude and layout. I had the utmost respect for him, and gave him money. I overlooked the whole "Sarah and Todd are Splitsville" because honestly, i believe it to probably to be true.Of course, time is telling another story....BUT the posting with Levi on the Insider REALLY changed my mind about him. The whole 'ive known that for 6 months' crap was exactly that...crap!..he didnt want to say anything because 'it would turn your blood cold' or whatever....ummmm....HELLO!! 95 percent of America allready thinks that, so whats the shock?!?!... i was MORE than annoyed and this was the first time i questioned his authenticity. This broke my heart because i LOVED his site. Deep down i do believe that he did have 'insiders' who knew Palin and were very usefull....however, now she is pretty much in hiding and its highly doubtful that she has 10 people a day who come into contact with her. and im SURE they are watched like dogs...i believe his 'sources' have disappeared leaving him to 'make stuff up'...this makes ALL of you guys look very very bad, and that SUCKS!!! Unfortunately... this is ruining the credibility of all 3 blogging sites. The comments section of the Levi piece would make Orly Taitz scream with joy. I cannot stand Sarah Palin, but even I start to feel sorry for her after his posts. I can only imagine her supporters. Nothing he does is backed by facts at all....You guys need to come together and work towards the ultimate goal...who cares who gets the credit, put your ego's aside and get it done. all respect:)

sg said...


If Bristol miscarried after SP announced her pregnancy, why wouldn't SP then announce that she miscarried? Why go on with the hoax if it wasn't necessary?

If one goal was to end up with a baby, a simpler and cleaner way would be to formally adopt after announcing the miscarriage.

SP's anti-abortion base would still clap loudly for her in this situation.

M.Lee Journell said...

and i also agree that his taking pictures of her estate by foot was MORE than a little stalkerish. this looks INCREDIBLY bad for all of you guys... again, if i was one of her minions that would FUEL my desire to see her rise.... its quite obvious he has nothing. he might have at one time, but no longer. he cant prove anything he says with anything valid. DEFINETLY Orly Taitz here.... he is making you guys look horrible!!!!

Forever Anonymous said...

Thank you Patrick. I think that by now Sarah must have an idea of who could be giving information because whoever know of this,even minimally, have to be part of a very small group of people and Sarah knows who have had what duty or lie to carry.

When Audrey posted The Cornerstone, questioning the stage of Pregnancy of Bristol I got so frustrated I thought i'd stop following the story. How could she after all this time come up now questioning Bristol pregnancy with Trip?

Palindeception's blog is about the pregnancy hoax, yet my mind was not ready to accept what Audrey had posted. Now I think that she was dangerously close to the truth. And the truth has to be protected until it can be presented in an irrefutable manner.

I try hard to make sure not to post any disappointment or challenge the behavior of any of the bloggers known to be willing to expose Palin.

You all have my support.

emrysa said...

I'm sticking with my original theory. the only difference now is that I think levi was not part of it, whereas originally I thought that he was.

bristol gives birth to a premature ds baby. there is some question as to whether or not it will live. after some time in the hospital the child crosses the threshold and it is determined that the child will live.

sarah, knowing that this child is going to become her burden financially, convinces bristol to let her adopt it so that it will have care paid for on sarah's insurance - not out-of-sarah's-pocket, as would be the case if bristol legally remained the mother. surely bristol is intelligent enough to understand that this is a better situation than she, underage and unemployed, can provide for the baby.

I think it's likely that sarah convinced bristol to tell levi she gave the kid up for adoption, or that the kid did not survive. "bristol it's the best thing for trip-1 if levi doesn't know the truth."

I think that bristol had named the child trip, which explains the "Trig was Trip before Tripp came but Tripp is named in memory of Trip who became Trig" speculation. then sarah decided to name it TRI-G after it's birth defect, like the caring and loving mother that she is.

for me this scenario still remains the most likely.

Anonymous said...

Anon 3:50, Trig does not look chubby-cheeked in the Mercede Johnston Myspace/Tyra Banks photos, which are presumed to have been taken before May 2008.

Sizewise, he looks similar to my son who was born 2 weeks early. (No more, because he's not as emaciated-looking as my other child who was 4-5 weeks premature.)

To see the photo: go to Palindeceptions and look for the post titled "Smoking Gun."

LisanTX said...

Rationalist--good ideas you're presenting.

My thoughts about Trig are that Sarah can't stand him for some reason, and I believe the reason is something other than the fact that he has DS. Todd obviously accepts him and cares for him.

Sarah is mad at Todd for something. She seems to be holding something "over Todd." (some past "sin" of his) Could it be related to Trig? I don't know.

I don't think Sarah would adopt Trig from a third party just to cover for something that happened to Bristol. (I do think she would adopt him if Bristol gave birth to him.) It would be far easier to cover up the "something happened to Bristol" situation with lies, not with the lifelong committment of a child. Especially not a narcissistic, histrionic, antisocial, etc. person. Lying comes naturally and easily to such a person. I don't think Sarah would adopt Trig unless he was Bristol's baby, or possibly Todd's or Track's baby--so that adoption was the most attractive of two undesirable choices.

M. Lee Journell said...

hi again, this is on a personal note. can you PLEASE change the color of your background to something other than bright white??? the only reason i dont come to your site more often is that you need to work on it just a little bit. Look at Bree and Gryphen. It would make it much more enjoyable and make people want to spend some quality time here!!! this is just a friendly suggestion, please dont take offence. i GUARANTEE you your viewership will increse!!!

emrysa said...

I think some of y'all are being waaay to hard on gryphen. he seems like a decent guy. if he is being duped, then he deserves kindness and sympathy, not vitriol.

what happens when gryphen decides he's not going to take the abuse anymore and stops posting about babygate? that's one more blogger down - just what the palin loons want.

emrysa said...

oh yeah and one other thing I forgot to mention - good on gryphen for going and getting the pics of the palin compound. that's what a good investigator does, and it's interesting to hear people say that's creepy. it's hardly creepy, it's called "getting proof."

Patrick said...

@M.Lee Journell

You have apparently not noticed that we here on palingates had exclusively published some nice aerial pictures of Sarah's new house. This is certainly not stalking. Hasn't the public a right to know how the former Queen uses all these millions which she has earned through quitting her job and abandoning her voters?

sg said...

Wow! palingates now has a concern troll, in addition to the other, garden variety trolls.

Quoting above the comment box:

"Please don't feed the trolls. Do your best to ignore them completely."

Anonymous said...

We should also, too, ignore Jesse Cornish. He has a blog with the only post so far the same paragraphs above. Sounds also, too, like a teabagger with his anti-tax, constitution blah blah blah...

and Miss Wasilla would love it if the bloggers went after each other, so, enough of the Gryph bashing. People are begging him to tell and he can't so he tries to give us hints that won't spook his sources.

I am grateful to all bloggers who are trying to keep this woman away from governing our lives in any way.

allison said...

i tried to post this at IM, but he wouldn't let it through. here's what he said:
If your post did not find its way here than the reason is either it was horribly insulting to me or my visitors, contained the word "incest", or alluded to a young underage person as being the mother of Trig.

My sources also visit this blog and if I misuse their information or do not protect people that they care about, then I will never learn more and neither will you. Well at least not here.

Make sense?
now my "controversial post:
facts from gryphen:
-"trig" is not bristol's baby
-todd is not the father

i use quotes because i think we should all stop calling these babies the names the palin's use. let's call them baby 1 and baby 2 by the order of their birth. for lack of a better phraseology: the baby with down's syndrome is baby 1.

so with this logic, bristol could be trig's (baby 1's) mom.
by saying she is not "trig's" mom, gryphen is telling you the truth because she is actually “baby 1’s” mom.

now, who is the father? who could it be that would make this scenario worth faking a pregnancy for?

it is the only scenario that makes sense.

it's been proven to my satisfaction that palin was never pregnant during the time she purported to be. therefore, the question remains, who are baby 1's parents? i believe bristol is the mother because of her disappearance during the pregnancy; her visible bump before she disappeared; her maternal nature toward trig; the double stroller she owns, and a few other reasons that would make this already long post even longer. so here's more info on the father theory.

i stand by a theory i've posted before which only a few people have commented on:

keith johnston is the father!
sherry cannot be the mother b/c she had a hysterectomy 8 years ago. it's the source of her painful condition.

and the levi article in the anchorage press
has some more quotes which support this theory.

so again, here are my reason:

the palin and johnston children were all using drugs specifically oxycontin and pot, and possibly meth, since wasilla is the meth capital of alaska

-mercedes calls trig "baby brother triggy bear" on her myspace page (first alarm went off in my head)

-keith and sherry split in may, one month after baby 1 was supposedly born

-palin shut up when the johnstons went on their press junket and began to let levi see baby 2 again

-palin and bristol framed sherry in a drug bust to keep her quiet (as reported by immoral minority on june 4th)

-as you read above, keith likes younger women

there are many other reasons, but this is getting kind of long, so i'll end now.

imagine if you are sarah palin, and your daughter's boyfriend's father knocked up your daughter, you'd fight tooth and nail to keep it a secret. and yes. you'd even fake a pregnancy to cover it up.

palin made bristol fake the pregnancy of baby 2 to cover up the fact that she had baby 1. remember, that was the purpose of them trotting her out there with that empathy belly and awkward "bolster boobs."

the question remains: who are the parents of baby 2? the answer is:
it doesn't matter. and i don't care. bristol will probably take good care of both babies in her new "compound."

Anonymous said...

Oh Rationalist
How do you factor in Christian right voting block that withheld support for McCain until they found someone conservative enough on the ticket? Was SP "not" aborting a DS baby part of the calculation to differentiate her from other front runners as a REAL conservative?

Its TOO coincidental for March 2008?

SS said...

I also was very disappointed with Gryphen and I wrote as well on IM. (though I did not see it posted.)
After some careful thought.
I do however think he is credible,sincere, and had to handle things the way he saw fit at the time. Hindsight is always 20 - 20.
I do however think he is very very close with what he has come forth with and where all of the comments were going and that is making someone very worried.
That is why they are trying to discredit him and turn everyone against him.
Don't let it happen!!!!
You have heard of divide and conquor? Well, that is the tactic they are trying.

Go back read the comments and theories see when the discourse started. Just like with Morgan's blog and with PD.

So many things there Molly, Diane, Todd, Track, Whooton, fires, Look at connections with Johnston's and Palin's, Palin women, Birth dates....

Don't get distracted.

Give Gryphen the respect he deserves.

Anonymous said...

If Keith were the father, the Palins would have him arrested.

Anonymous said...

Having not descended into Montesinos' cave with rest of you, I can even fathom the terrible contructs you must develop in order to believe in a theory with no basis in fact. If you had but a shred of proof, you could go forth and demonstrate you claim as true. Yet you cannot, and that speaks volumes.

emrysa said...


I have also wondered about keith johnston being baby 1's father.

but the thing that makes me doubt that theory is baby #2, supposedly levi & bristol's baby. do you really think that levi would have anything to do with bristol if she slept with his dad? seems to me like baby #2 would have never happened if that was the case.

SS said...


I also think that confidentiallity has to be maintained. Gryphen does have to maintain the trust of his contacts. Please don't call him out as not being forthright if he has to hold some information close to the vest. And maybe the best place to work out the details being formulated is not in a public forum. As you and your fellow researchers did at PD before coming forth with the public post.
You can see what happens when information is getting close...bots of confusion come out.

mel said...

I miss Audrey.

allison said...

cortez said:
If Keith were the father, the Palins would have him arrested.

but they wouldn't want to do that b/c they wouldn't want a big scandal, and they definitely wouldn't want anyone to know what bristol did. i agree that it's hard to imagine levi standing by his father, so to speak, and not completely disowning him. this is so confusing and convoluted. that brother comment from mercede is so tough to figure out.

bucks_and_bron said...

Just wanted to make a quick comment, since people are formulating theories based on information from the IM post. After going back to the Levi on Insider/Bristol is not Trig's mother post, I realized that (based on memory and according to my computer's 'find' search)Gryphen never used the words 'blood run cold' or 'gruesome' to describe the truth behind the situation. 'Blood run cold' was first used by forever anonymous (@11:03), and 'gruesome' was first used by bluetx. Just something to ponder when sharing theories- lots and lots of ideas are being thrown around, and if we make sure to verify what we think we've read, the less we might be distracted from the main idea- that Sarah Palin, a sitting governor, lied to her constituents (and the country!) about 'her' pregnancy.

Love the integrity of this site said...

What is so ironic about trolls is: if there's nothing to see here, then they wouldn't be pestering us. So, troll invasions are a sign that something's afoot. If there's nothing for them to worry about, they'd leave. No, they are drawn to the heat! It also shows that Palin's own followers don't trust her. If they did, they'd have nothing to worry about. RIght?

I want to weigh in re: Gryphen. I have donated to him, and I think it's pretty clear that someone else is going to break the story. And it's already in someone's galleys. And it will not please the Queen. I think it was a smart move on Gryphen's part to pass the ball. I really don't care who gets the credit or how it plays out. Endgame is all that matters.

Leadfoot said...

Rationalist and Anon 3:49 - I have never bought the 3 baby theories before, but you have sold me. That is the only way I can see all the pieces and clues fitting together!

Anonymous said...

anon 4:23, I know the photo, and agree that Trig looks younger than his "birth" day of 4/18. But he could have lost weight due to early feeding problems associated with the DS. Or I could be wrong.

A comment I tried to post earlier is that Rationalist's theory could explain Gryphen's comment, "Levi isn't ready to talk about it yet." Maybe it was his baby and he isn't over the death yet; maybe he was complicit in bad behavior on Bristol's part that contributed to a still birth. I do agree that we shouldn't jump to conclusions about Gryphen. He could be right.

Helen said...

It's not going to work obnoxious attack poster(s) - regular readers and casually interested parties do not come to comments and rip apart the liberal bloggers! Gryphen is a blogosphere hero and your disparaging remarks simply reveal you for what you are - jealous, small minded and feeble in the manhood department.

Forever Anonymous said...

allison I see a reason not to post your theory, it is a well thought out reason but way too incendiary not to have strong evidence to back it up.

I think it is good to say whatever we think it happened, it can be freeing, but I would really love to be part of a forum with strict guidelines to collect or arrange info, but that has been done, now is how to get story out?

Anonymous said...

I miss Audrey too. And Morgan.

Anonymous said...

I was thinking that Palin announced the pregnancy to force Bristol to give up a baby she didn't want to give up and then something happened to that baby and SP was forced to come up with another. Making Bristol not the mother of baby 1. The more I think about that scenario though, the more I agree with SG above who asks "why not just say she had a miscarriage to the public, not having to go through with finding a baby and especially one with DS". I think it must be something closer to home to make SP take a child. It is all very confusing.

Another thought is that every time a blogger has gone very far with findings in this matter, they are personally threatened and we all know by whom, so that they drop their questioning and observations. Especially if there is any hope that the subject might be taken up by the MSM.

Leadfoot said...

Oh and also too, Rationalist and Anon 3:49 --

Gryphen keeps saying that the birth dates are a clue. What if the original Tripp (baby #1, who did not make it) was stillborn on DECEMBER 27, 2007?

Then Sarah passes the stillborn birth certificate bill, and procures a birth certificate that says "Tripp, born Dec. 27, 2007."

When the second Tripp is born, sometime in late Dec 2007 or Jan 2008 -- his real birth date is obscured, but we are TOLD it is Dec. 27 2008.

Sarah then can use Tripp #1's birth certificate for Tripp #2, thus hiding the fact that there ever was a Tripp #1. If ever called out on the one-year discrepancy in birth dates, she can just say, "oh, lookey there, that must be a typo you betcha!"

Anonymous said...

@Cortez, if you mean that you miss the moderator Morgan, you can find her at her own blog THE TOKEN HIPPIE.

Anonymous said...

I don't miss Morgan the moderator, thank you very much!

Anonymous said...

Its March 5 2008 the influential wing of the Republican party the conservative voting bloc will not vote for McCain. They despise each other so much that Republicans are looking at single digit turnout in November.

March 6 2008 SP announces to the Conservative voting bloc "i did not abort my DS baby" I walk the walk and talk it" The rest of us hear "Gov. of Alaska is 7 months pregnant"

Its Summer 2008, Obama is no joke phenomena, and not one conservative voter is being told -they need to be told- to vote John McCain.

Fast forward to August 29, 2008

Hannity and Dobson:
Dr. Dobson, she -- on issues that I know matter to both you and to me, she wants to define marriage as between a man and a woman. On issues involving education, the story of her being pro-life, the story that she knew that she would have a child that would have special needs, and she stayed true to her conviction, what does that mean to you as a solid Christian social conservative?

DOBSON: Well, I am very excited about what I know about her. I've not met her yet, but I did write her about two months ago. I had no idea this was coming, and so I wrote her a letter to thank her for her attitude toward that little Down's child.

They knew that little boy was coming, and that he would be mentally handicapped. They understood that, they welcomed that child into life. If that does not speak to the sanctity of life, I don't know what does.

This political narrative is thought up in January/February 2008 during Bristol pregnancy

premeditated 42 day pregancy seals nomination 6 months later

Anonymous said...

@5:48 - me neither but I was trying to possibly help out Cortez.

hannah said...

I really did not mean to 'disparage' gryph. I just am so confused and frustrated. I know he can't reveal sources. But the presentation of his latest 'knew it all along' bit is to me.

I also am appalled that gryphen gave no head's up to the good folks here at PG who have supported him at every convoluted turn. If patrick or regina planned to do an in depth 'expose'/bombshell post that directly contradicted a theory which gryphen held close in both a personal AND evidentiary manner...I know they would invite him into the fold and make sure he at least KNEW and could prepare for the fallout.

I am just disappointed in gryph's methodology -- that's all.

Anonymous said...

anon 5.49

March 6 2008 SP announces to the Conservative voting bloc "i did not abort my DS baby" I walk the walk and talk it" The rest of us hear "Gov. of Alaska is 7 months pregnant"

Anonymous said...

anon 5.49

March 6 2008 SP announces to the Conservative voting bloc "i did not abort my DS baby" I walk the walk and talk it" The rest of us hear "Gov. of Alaska is 7 months pregnant"

Link please or is this conjecture?

Anonymous said...

I made a long post that has not appeared. This is a test to see if it is possible for me to post here.

Anonymous said...

I am mystified with the Levi "shut up" YouTube.

Patrick said...

Anon 06:05

Anybody can post here, and if we delete a post after it has been posted, which only happens in very rare circumstances, we would make it clear afterwards. It must have been a technical error. I am sorry that you apparently lost your post, please always make a safety copy before you post a comment.

Anonymous said...

political instincts, conjecture, framing, messaging

Anonymous said...

People have asked: Suppose that Sarah was covering for Bristol's unexpected pregnancy and something happened to Bristol's baby. Why didn't Sarah just pretend to have a miscarriage, or elicit sympathy for having just delivered a still born child?

Because after announcing that she was "pregnant," Sarah, who loves attention was getting so much wonderful adoration. "Oh, you don't look pregnant," "Do you know if it's a boy or a girl," "Can we give you a shower?" She began to believe it and loved the attention.

At the same time, the buzz in conservative circles was Sarah would stand for family values.
Sounds stupid, sure, but it was just as stupid as trying to cover up for a pregnant daughter. Especially when Sarah turned around and "outed" a pregnant daughter a few months later.

(An aside here: Sarah only said that she knew ahead of time that it was a boy and that he had DS after Trig arrived. I don't recall her saying anything before his birth.)

Nothing that woman does makes any sense. She does not think like a chess player, three moves ahead. She is still trying to figure out how to handle the diagonal jump in checkers and marvels at how some one else can double jump. (It's a metaphor).

I also think that things happened very fast, not giving Sarah much time to think things through. She reacts to things, and I am sure that emotion was really running high regarding her relationship with Bristol. We have seen evidence of tension between them (remember how she burst in on Bristol's interview with Greta, sneering, "Here's your little bundle of joy."

Anonymous said...

How many pictures are available of Palin and her daughters taken in December 2007 at the Vogue photo shoot at her home?
I've only found 2 that just show Palin.

Anonymous said...

"The reason I care is that a public figure who sought my vote lied about something so fundamental."

That's kind of where I am. Sarah is a legend in her own mind, but the majority of Republicans (not to mention the majority of Americans) have moved on and don't care. I believe there is something deeply immoral about a woman coopting another woman's baby for political gain, and I think some people are just unable to grasp how fundamentally wrong that is- and if they can't grasp it, I'm not capable of explaining it.

I'm slightly annoyed with Gryphen because I do respect him, and I think if he "knew" something six months ago, there would be a way for him to speak about the issue that would continue to cast doubts. If I knew, for a certainty, that people were posting things that were wrong, I would be saying things like "I think we need to be cautious about saying anything absolutely, we don't have all the facts" and things like that. OTOH, I don't blame him for the splitsville post in the least, and I don't think he was wrong- I think Sarah and Todd may quite likely have decided to live separate lives and eventually divorce and when splitsville was posted, Sarah got huffy and issued a denial- and in the meantime, Todd realized that if he divorces Sarah before she collects the money for her book, he won't get any of it. The fact that they haven't officially filed for divorce doesn't mean their marriage is solid. Are they even living together? Sarah disappeared while she was dictating her memoirs.

Changing the subject, I wonder if this is a tale of three babies. Are there public death records available? If, in fact, a first pregnancy was lost- a stillbirth or a baby dying of prematurity complications- where is that recorded, and is there any way to find out?

To me, the logical scenario is that Bristol was pregnant in 07 and gave birth prematurely, her identity concealed with assistance of CBJ. Baby Doe, aka T1, beat the odds and survived, and Sarah decided it would look better for her to be pregnant unexpectedly than to acknowledge an illegitimate grandchild when she was shortlisted for VP. The fake pregnancy helped Sarah to achieve the nomination, and Bristol, dependent on her parents and already, perhaps, chastened a bit by being sent away from home, accepted the fact that her mother was going to be the baby's official mother. She accepted it, but managed to get pregnant fairly soon afterwards, an accidentally-on-purpose sort of pregnancy to replace the one her mother stole. Sarah kept the second, T2 pregnancy, under wraps until the VP nom was announced, at which point rumors started flying about T1. Since the nomination was public, the T2 pregnancy was announced as refutation.

To me, the kicker is that the T2 pregnancy was supposed to be the proof that Sarah gave birth to T1, and yet the T2 birth was concealed. For consistency's sake, it should have been heralded. Instead, nobody saw Tripp until he was 7 weeks old- and was brought, wrapped up, and handed to a sitting Bristol- and how easy is it to judge the difference between a 9 lb 7 week old baby and a 7 lb 2 week old- when the baby is wrapped up and kept snuggled against Mom?

T1 may not be Bristol's, but I believe he is, and I believe T2 is, too. Sorry for the long posting.


Cortez said...

I see things the same way, Ivyfree.

hannah said...

Speaking of that Vogue piece on SP -- I have always wanted someone to ask her "if you were so slim and trim at seven months pregnant that people were literally stunned to hear of your pregnancy...why did Vogue need to 'hide' you in that giant coat-- two or three months BEFORE the super skinny super tuesday photos were taken?"

anyone recall where she mentions that Vogue dressed her to 'hide' the pregnant belly she allegedly sported?

I hate that she has never been made to reconcile the "I didn't hide anything, I was hardly showing" remarks to the looks like she's ten months pregnant with triplets gusty photos. This is insane, what she was getting away with.

Wait a minute. Triplets. Twins. Multi-baby theories.

Could TWINS of some sort be any part of this strange game of whose baby is whose and when were they born?

I put nothing past SP, no matter how outrageous.

Helen said...

hannah - My commennt was not referring to you at all (hence the manhood remark). Disagreeing with a blogger is fine, you don't need to explain yourself.

hannah said...

Oh btw, did anyone see the sesame street 40th anniversary show? Huffpo did a piece about it -- it is sooo funny. Oscar the grouch pops out of his trashcan and says he is watching the 'trashiest show on tv'... so they ask him what it is...and he says "POX news".

I love it.

Anonymous said...

BlueTx is a distraction. I know who he is and where he lives. He has multiple aliases.

hannah said...

Helen, oh -- I know! I mean, I did not THINK you were referring to me, but you post made me realise that perhaps I should explain my position further -- I do not want gryphen to think that I dislike or distrust him and I felt I should just clarify my position, in case anyone out there identified with me.

Anonymous said...

Hi Patrick, thanks for responding to my query about my inability to post. I have been following this story from the beginning and used to read and post at PD somewhat regularly. It took me a while to figure out where you and Kathleen had landed when Audrey was silenced. I appreciate what you, Kathleen, Regina and all the posters are doing to keep the spotlight on scary Sarah and all her gates.

I think Gryphen's assertion yesterday that Bristol and Levi are not the parents of Trig has caused everyone to start brainstorming again on just where did Trig come from. I know I am 99.44% sure that he is not Sarah's biological son.

Way back in the beginning before all the pictures of Bristol looking pregnant in the fall of 2007 surfaced, I thought that Sarah's sister Heather was the mother of Trig.

Heather has an autistic son who is somewhere between the age of 10 and 14. She has devoted her life to giving him all the special care and attention an autistic child requires. (This is why John McCain, during the campaign, made the crazy statement that Sarah knew more about autism than any one in Congress.)

My theory was that when Heather became pregnant with another special needs child, she became distraught and had a breakdown. Sarah, Miss I-Can-Do-Anything Superwoman, quickly came to her rescue and said, "Todd and I will adopt the baby and raise him as our own. How hard can it be? The girls will help!"

The baby came very early. Bristol was sent to Anchorage to live with a very depressed Aunt Heather. At first Bristol visited the baby at the hospital, then she cared for him when he came home. When it became apparent that Trig would survive, Sarah announced her pregnancy. Levi often visited Bristol in Anchorage and they both bonded with the baby, thus leading to the displays of Trig-love that we saw from both of them at the convention.

Some problems with this theory: in the fall of 2007 Bristol looked pregnant; Heather didn't. Wouldn't someone in Anchorage have spilled the beans by now, especially since Sarah is no longer governor? Well, maybe Heather never told anyone about the pregnancy because she couldn't accept it and then had the baby very early. (Just like Sarah said SHE never told anyone and didn't show. There always seems to be some grain of twisted truth in everything Sarah says.)

Sarah skipped out on the dinner in Dallas because it seemed to be the right time to present her darling DS baby. Her dad was in the dark about Heather's pregnancy and she had to tell him some reason why she came home a day early. (The grandparents were staying with the Palin children.) Sarah made up the small leak story, never realizing that Papa would tell the press. But he did, and that's what got all of us so skeptical of her preposterous story.

Do I really think that's what happened? Probably not, but after these last few days my head is just spinning from one hypothetical explanation to the next!


Rationalist said...

Whew. What a couple of days. I keep stealing away from making dinner etc. to read the new posts. My secret soap opera, yet one that affects us all.


Anyway, look. This is all speculation. I have no inside knowledge. And even if we do guess right, that's not proof. But common sense goes a long way, and maybe it will break something, or someone, loose.

I think, have always thought, that Sarah Palin has gotten unbelievably lucky. Right when questions were being asked about pregnancies and babies, Obama said, "families are off limits." What news agency that wanted access to Obama during the campaign would pursue the Babygate story? And Palin's been a non-stop geyser of newsworthiness since then. Why go out on a limb with Babygate when there are Death Panels and Chinese Speeches and Playgirl? There's just no percentage in any MSM outlet pursuing the Trig story.

I don't see how this will break unless a. someone in the know comes forward with proof, or b. a substantial journalist pursues the deeper story - which is the utter breakdown of the investigative media in the US.

Anyway, to Anon at 4:56 - what's your question? that it's too coincidental that she found a Downs Syndrome baby just when she needed one?

Well, if she had Trig herself, that would just be her good luck. So I'm thinking the same holds if she was fortunate (!) enough to end up with one accidentally.

Anonymous said...

I have asked this before and never got answered. Tonight maybe there is enough people here in the know for me to get an answer. Patrick and Kath, why did you stop working with Audrey well before PD went dark? Patrick, I have seen you make reference to this fact in a comment before but not with any explanation.

I fully admit I am just being nosy; with PD being shut down and you two still going strong, you are obviously very committed to seeing this through. So why split with PD when Audrey was still the queen of truthers? I am just curious.

Archivist1000 said...

Sorry this is off topic but a bit of comic relief is always welcome, isn't it?

Just came across this on my FB page.. Sarah's book is now available for FREE yes FREE with a 4.97 subscription to Newsmax!

What author wouldn't KILL to be a Free gift with subcription, huh? I mean that is where I get all my cheap calculators, with my TIME magazine subscription! Or, an extra SHAMWOW (if you order now, we'll double the offer!)

How many millions of these books did Murdoch print anyway (and sell for a .25/doz price) to get it on the Bestseller's list, I wonder??

I just dropped in to tell all you good people that is you are waiting for Sarah's book to sell in the remainder section for cheap, do not wait! It is available now for FREE with a 4.97 subcription to Newsmax! Free, yes that's right folks, it's not out yet and it's FREE.

Helen said...

There is something very powerful in a group brain when certain "givens" and applied logical thinking is the goal - as is being demonstrated here. The types of scenarios that are being posted here tonight are the closest I've seen yet to convincing timelines and probable Babygate realities.

WV is simply "cures" = potent medicine or antidote to the lies.

Helen said...

meant "when there are certain givens..."

LisanTX said...

Anon. @7:15 who says they know where BlueTX lives. Is it Giddings, Texas?

Patrick said...

Anon 07:24

Thanks for the question. It is correct, Kathleen and I left PD at the end of June 2009, several weeks before PD "went dark". The reason is not really a secret. We had different approaches to the ways in which the investigation should be conducted, and when you work in a team with several members over a long time, differences of opinion can easily occur - with one or two members, that happened. I won't give more details, which you will certainly understand. The important thing is that the babygate investigation still continues with full force. I hope that answers your question.

Rationalist said...

Hey - one last thing before bed - to Anon at 3:50. You're right. In fact, it's even later. A miscarriage after the pregnancy announcement would mean a miscarriage after 3/8, right? Isn't that when she announced the pregnancy? So about one month to come up with a baby.

I think I amend my theory. I say now that Bristol lost a baby in Jan or Feb, after Sarah had proposed adopting it. But by March, Sarah had decided that a baby, particularly a special needs baby, was just the ticket to success for an ambitious conservative woman. So she found one (from where, is the question) and announced she was pregnant. And no one in her dysfunctional family (except, I assume, Todd) knows for sure.

Whoa - that's really, really, cold. Gryphen may not have actually said anything about blood running cold, but I literally just got a little chill thinking that she could have done something so calculating.

Anonymous said...

Patrick, ss much as I love and respect Audrey and her leadership, this blog with almost instant posting is so much better because the posters can have actual discussions in real time. In its last few months the postings on PD were only updated once or twice a day and promised new material never appeared. I guess Audrey was off fighting battles we knew nothing about and I do thank her for all the time she spent and for her professionalism. If this Sarah mystery is ever solved, Audrey will also deserve credit, even if she never says another word.


Rationalist said...

Ooh! One more facet to the theory. Didn't she start wearing scarves in January or February? She may have begun the deception before Bristol lost the baby, and by then she had already decided it was good for her politically.

Anonymous said...

Just a thought...but what if Track is the father of T1...since the term "incest" draws and immediate block @ IM?

That would explain why those "in the know" don't wish to hurt the parties involved; nor expose the depth of this family's dysfunction.

Anonymous said...

SP has months to think about Bristol's baby cover up plan. Sleepless nights then ShamWow! Fake pregnancy is easy in AK! Miscarry happens but by then runner is in motion, DS is even better, in her mind for conservative VP candidates. quietly adopts. Its working until fluid leaks "literally" and figuratively. female media swarms. doubt starts

Anonymous said...

Lissa in TX, why ask if blue is in Giddings? I only ask because I am in Brenham, not terribly far from there. It's hard to imagine anything BUT Palinbots trying hard to confuse and divide lurking in those type towns. Including mine! I haven't found a kindred soul YET in or near Brenham...

Patrick, thank you for answering honestly re the PD question. No details necessary, of course.

Anonymous said...

Regina ~ Patrick

I would also have to agree with the poster who suggests a more mellow, eye-friendly background to quell the starkness of the white backdrop against the black text.

Please give it some consideration...

Thanking you in advance.


Anonymous said...

If I'm not mistaken, sarah is standing behind Mercides and Mercides is holding baby trig, both with smiles on their face.
Why would Sarah pose for a picture of her daughters boyfriend's sister
holding what is suppost to be Palin's baby? This picture is the clue.
Patrick, this was the picture on Facebook. Why was sarah behind Mercides with a smile and Mercides holding baby Trig with a happy smile. Seems like they where one happy family then. Lets wonder why Sarah and Marcides had that picture together. I doubt Marcides loved Sarah's baby that much, Sarah is no blood kin to her, there's only one reason for that kind of love look, the baby's related to everyone some way form or another.

I'm spelling Marcides name wrong I just know it

Patrick said...

Anon 08:24

Do you like the change? I think it's very eye-friendly now.

Anonymous said...

anon @ 8.17

We have had no information that suggests that Track is the father of Trig.

We have also never seen any evidence pointing to the fact that incest is involved in this matter, none at all.

We allow comments regarding incest because we believe that some readers regard the issue as worth discussing. It does not mean that we think that it is supported by any evidence.

I would just like to make that clear.

Patrick said...

According to Andrew Halcro, the upcoming book of Frank Bailey, Sarah Palin's ex-enforcer or whatever he calls himself, should be pretty good!

Andrew Halcro: Bailey on the rocks

Patrick said...

Haha! I love Wonkette!

Wonkette about Sarah Palin’s scheduled interviews

ArmchairJane said...

Patrick and Kathleen,

Thank you for the great new post and clarification of where the investigation stands. I have been away from the computer most of last evening and today and am looking forward to getting a chance to read the comments in better detail.

I also want to thank you for taking a considered approach to Gryphen's most recent posts on Babygate and the new information that he has revealed. Some leaving comments I think are honestly disappointed in him, but a number of others seem to be interested more in damaging confidence in the investigations.

Your information that Bristol was pregnant in late 2007 seems to be solid. I think Gryphen is also sincere with his information, although he may or may not be correct. Since the discussion on IM does filter over to here, I hope it is okay to address this topic.

My personal feeling is that Gryphen is in a unique position in that he may deal more closely with some of his sources, and that living where he does, is much different than investigating from afar. Gryphen is passionate about his topic, and this can show in his writing. I think the reason for the tone of relief that he could finally reveal that (as far as he knows) Trig was not born to Levi and Bristol is because HE found it so hard to believe, and so he took some time to process AND verify it.

And I also think that he's quite right to be interested in getting a MSM outlet for the story in order to make sure it can't be ignored. Anonymous folks who seem to repeatedly show up any time it seems like some new piece of the puzzle is being revealed to say "I was with you all this time but now I've had it and you should just tell us all you know right now and who cares what you told your sources" are not believable. I can understand people being frustrated but just my own opinion Gryphen is not stringing people along with no info. And as he says, Babygate is also not the only gate that can bring Palin down.

At this point I think it is reasonable to think that there IS more to this than "just a straight adoption". Palin was just so obviously NOT PREGNANT.

Just how ridiculous Palin's supposed pregnant slimness was reinforced to me again tonight, as my husband and I, who both have the flu, decided to watch some TV to pass the time, including some episodes of "Mythbusters". One of the mythbuster gang was pregnant, and she dressed in a variety of outfits in the episodes we watched. She wore scarves in one episode, with outdoor coats both opened and closed. In both cases the scarves OR coats did nothing to hide the pregnancy and rather emphasized it. She wore a life jacket in another segment. Again, it only emphasized the pregnang belly. There was NO way you were missing it. This woman is quite a bit younger than Palin and looks fit as well as taller than Palin. She stands with the posture of a pregnant woman. That she is pregnant is apparent in the way she moves at all times. It was just another reminder of how non-pregnant Palin appeared with the exception of the Gusty photo. And I don't think that square accent pillows look pregnant either.

The information about the birth certificates for stillbirths continues to interest me, as does the role of the church, the church fire, and the connection of CBJ as well as how the church would likely handle scandals involving high ranking members. I go back to Max Blumenthal and how he says that these groups cover things up by networking. The recent scandals involving conservative Republican politicians and how they covered for their own, including what appear to be illegal acts bears this out.

At this point, I can see scenarios where Bristol being pregnant in late 2007 AND not the mother of Trig, as well as Sarah not pregnant at all during that time could all be true. Rationalist, you are thinking along the way I am.

The truth is going to come out. I agree with those who note that the trolls come out when they get worried, or when we get too close to the truth. We must be getting closer.

Anonymous said...

better color 4 sure

jo said...

I think it makes the most sense that Trig is Bristol's and Levi's. Bristol was sent away and was out of school for several months. She looked like she was nursing during the campaign. Sadie's pictures with Trig referring to $P as mommy-in-law. Pictures of Levi with Trig, both of them have a lot of affection for him. Levi volunteering for Special Olympics. Levi saying that $arah wanted to hide Bristol's pregnancy and adopt the baby was dropping a hint that what we think is true, he just can't come out with it now. The radio interview where Tank says we don't know for sure $P gave birth to Trig. The Insider interview where he trips around on the grilling about $P giving birth and if Todd is the father. I think all this points to what we think happened in the first place. IM's informant must be trying to throw him off for some reason. Remember Morgan and Audry came to this conclusion and what happened to both of them, Plain or her goons scared them so much they quit. Which is the same reason more people who know something about this don't talk. Some people think the nurse who died in the fire was killed because of babygate. The fire at the church is in question too. If they did go that far that would scare lots of people quite. I don't know if they are responsible, but I do believe they are that evil and would go as far as that. If so I do hope they pay with jail time. Wow she has such a bad personality that I would not be surprised if she did do such a thing. I have always gotten a strong feeling of her being evil, even before we found out about her ugly past and continued ugly behavior.

EyeOnYou said...

–Telling the kids: Palin couldn’t bring herself to tell her children she had accepted McCain’s offer to be his running mate. “The governor decided not to deliver the life-changing news herself. Instead, she asked Steve Schmidt to tell her children that their worlds were about to be turned upside down.” There’s no explanation for why this happened – but Conroy and Walshe do point out that the timeline means the children weren’t asked for their permission, as Palin suggested during the campaign.

And (my favorite)

A growing preoccupation with bloggers: There’s not a lot about why Palin resigned this past summer as Alaska governor after less than a full term, except that it had something to do with “the extent to which she had allowed her critics in Alaska to get to her. The woman who had steadfastly faced down powerful oil companies two years earlier had now become preoccupied with bloggers.”

Book Report On Sarah From Alaska

M.Lee Journell said...

hi its me again. thank you for changing the color, it is a good improvement and im sure you will get great feedback... so now what do you need to get people here?... you need to get rid of the pigs at the top, they really dont make any sense. all respect ok?.... if they do, its not immediately apparent as it should be. bree palin has a fantastic, good looking site that i enjoy visiting, and gryphen's is laid out very well... yours is kind of all over the place, and if you want to be taken seriously - as i hope you do (and deserve to be) - get some help out with it. i PROMISE you this will be a place i and others will visit very often, and bring you up to the level of everyone else....which is where you deserve to be.
thanks so much also for the quick postings.... very cool.
make the grey background darker also...

ArmchairJane said...


I agree that certainly back at the time of the MySpace photos from Sadie as well as Bristol and Levi together back at the RNC that Levi thought the baby was his and Bristol's, or at a minimum that he loved Bristol and was nearly sure that the baby was his.

Later on, things may have been revealed to Levi, accidentally or on purpose. I also still think it is possible that DNA testing has been done so that Rex knows what he is dealing with at least as far as Levi's parentage of the boys, but that possibly Rex and Levi have agreed Levi will not be told the outcome of such testing until later.

Why might that be? I am just guessing so he can say honestly things like "to my knowledge he is" etc with regard to Trig's parentage. After all, he may have known he was "with" Bristol, and that she was pregnant at the right time, but may not have been present for the delivery itself, or some other key times. Or he may have been deceived at some point. Some unpleasant truth may now be known that he's not ready to face or that some key person is not yet ready to reveal. Sherry's sentencing date might figure in with this.

Pretty much where I am at with this is that I think Bristol was pregnant at the right time to be Trig's mother. Levi either thought he was Trig's father or else felt some other reason to be close to him. He says he Sarah is "Trig's mother, as far he as knows" I believe the quote was from "The Insider", but I would have to doublecheck to be sure. To me that implies he actually did NOT see the birth, but means instead adoptive mother.

It also seems possible that there is some confusing factor in the middle of all of this, such as a stillbirth, miscarriage, or other factor that has confused the timeline. Whoever Trig's parents are, I do think he look an awful lot like Piper, as others have said.

I certainly agree with you about Palin. She seems to have no conscience or emotional maturity and to delight in bullying others. I have no doubt she would be willing to push things quite far if she felt it would protect her or get her ahead toward her goals. I wonder if McCain had won, would he have slept at night, knowing how ambitious she is and how she seems to think God wants her to be president? My guess is that he would have watched his health very carefully.

ArmchairJane said...

Dear Regina,
To me the pigs make total sense. I love the pigs. When pigs fly is when I will believe Sarah Palin was pregnant and delivered on April 18, 2008. I have loved the pigs from the start. For me, the quality of information, the open forum, and general level of discourse is what brings me here.
Just my two cents :-)

EyeOnYou said...

M.Lee Journell,

No offense intended, but you are being awfully critical, and come across as rather pushy in how you think things should be done here.

Anonymous said...

Right when I think this all sounds so crazy, I remind myself that I have a family member Bristol's age who has now been pregnant (unplanned) twice in the span of a year, the last time with twins. First baby was mysteriously "lost" -- i.e., pregnancy was confirmed but then never spoken of again and no baby resulted. Out of politeness, no one has asked.

This family member is from an area very similar in make up to Wasilla. And the town is very small. The relatives of said baby are all inter-related and any number of scenarios could and have played out in regards to parentage. Drugs are involved -- and not like you see on TV; it's just that everyone in this town does them. It's like drinking beer to them. And brothers sleep with sister's friends, etc...

My point is, it's really not that unusual in some social/cultural circles for multiple pregnancies and weird, incestuous relationships to exist.

The scary thing to me is that this woman would hold any office.

No offense, but I do think the POTUS is a job for an exceptional person- most powerful job in the world. $arah is not exceptional in any way save her narcissism. She's so common it strains the imagination.

Anonymous said...

Does anybody remember the time frame of the quote from Bristol, when she said she was disappointed to find out that Levi was the father of her baby?

Anonymous said...

I love the pigs. I love this blog. It has a friendly vibe, and then when you start reading, the information is so factual and hard-hitting, yet easy to digest, that it keeps you coming back.

Please don't change it.


A long-time reader and poster.

anniebgood said...

SG 3:48, you captured really well why Gryphen makes me a little nervous. The main reason being when he was so rattled by the VF story... that really worried me, because just a few weeks before he had announced that he'd finally hooked up his source with someone in the MSM and the truth would be coming out very soon. Hopefully he's just not as good as presenting his information in a coherent way - for instance, his updates on THE post the other day were pretty puzzling. Maybe that's how they have to be. Hopefully after the onslaught with the book, Sarah will crawl back into her bedroom and hide for another few months.

Anonymous said...

You all need to have all your ducks on a row, and have all the proof ironclad. No holes, no wiggle room. This woman needs to be stopped, and stopped hard.

Please, for the sake of our country. Make sure it sticks. Thanks for everyone's hard work on this. The truth will come out, and it won't be wearing naughty monkeys.

Anonymous said...

Why does brisotl have to be the mother? Why can't Track be the father ... with someone else? He was shoved off to war pretty quickly (another great photo op and political thing to use). I think she covered for Track and his gal pal (or courgar?). Or Track perhaps did something illegal (would not be the first time) but this time, it involved a young girl who was (shall we say?) less than "willing" to bed the gov's son. These kids were known as party animals. This trig could have been concevied during a drunken stupor.

Could I be heading down the right road?

comeonpeople said...

M.Lee Journell go start your own blog and design however you please.
If you don't get the term "when pigs fly" then google it, my dear.

I need to reread gryphen's post, did he say Levi and Bristol are not the parents of Trig? That still leaves open possibility that it is Bristol, just not the father we think.
I think Bristol is both kids' mom. I know Sarah was not pregnant or gave birth in April 08.
The stillbirth birth cert thing could just be coincidence. Grieving parents have been lobbying for these and most states have passed the legislation by now. Alaska may just be catching up with rest of states in this matter. Or, it could be really siginificant. I just dont know anymore.

Just want to add that I can't believe that this smalltown mayor and governor quitter is still a political player. This country is pathetic sometimes..really we let this go on. She is a stupid cheating vindicitive unqualified, small minded poser and shame on the media and powers that be for letting this go on so long. Out Palin for all her misdeeds and be done with it her for good.

Anonymous said...

The grey background reduces the contrast with the text, which makes the text less readable. It also puts the piggies in a box, which makes them look like a tacky add-on when, before, they were an integral part of the blog. The minimalist look is better than the cluttered look that can come with a variety of colors.

Anonymous said...

What is the title on an Alaskan birth certificate? I was not born in Alaska, but my birth certificate's title is "Certificate of Live Birth."

Lilybart said...

The thing about birth certificates for stillborn babies: isn't that part of the anti-choice crowds bag of tricks to get a fetus defined as a person?

It might be convenient for Miss Wasilla in other ways, but this is also about her rabid anti-choice position.

Anonymous said...

Before changing the color scheme, readability would be improved if quoted text were indented and, perhaps, set in a different typeface. Some blogs use a text-box (often with a different color background) to do that, but the book and magazine style of indentation without the box (and without the differently colored background) is better. Just trying to help.

Lilybart said...

This is a great plot for a movie or an HBO series!

Especially if you add in the fire, the nurse, etc...would make quite a potboiler!

Anonymous said...

Now, to get the piggies right, someone has to spend a lot of time to get the piggies background to match the background's color. Same is true for other graphics that often appear beside the text. See other posts to confirm that this problem is true everywhere graphics have been used.

CC said...

Good morning to all the faithful PG readers. (And the new ones, welcome!)

Just to add my own .02 regarding the appearance of this blog, I like it just the way it is, with pigs flying and instant comments. And I thank Regina for starting her blog with instant comments.

Most of the folks here are respectful of Regina, Patrick and Kathleen so instant comments work, except for the occasional troll.

I speak for myself only but I believe the instant comments are good when testing theories out ... it keeps the thread going and the brain cells working. Besides the well researched/written posts this is a wonderful feature for brainstorming, so thanks!

Anonymous said...

Perhaps Gryphen's under threat and is posting nonsense in a kind of hostage-secretly-pleading-for-help way?

No, thought not.

But if there really is nothing to see, I don't know why the trolls and misinformers keep coming on here to ridicule and deflect discussion.

Anonymous said...

Agreed about keeping the instant comments and flying pigs. However, the blog's aesthetics and readability have been damaged by switching to a grey background in the posting area.

Anonymous said...

This is ridiculous!!! I think this critic is a total troll! The blog looked perfect before and now it's harder to read! Palingates was great the way it was and I also think it should be Reginas decision whether to change it or not.
Please put it back the way it was. Again people are interfering with the discussion on purpose!

Reginas blog was here before Brees and has ALWAYS been the crispest and clearest blog. I can read it easily on a mobile device and now I can't! Patrick, Regina should make any changes, not you. And this critic is a troll. Please put it back to the original minimalist format with white background. It was far easier than Bree's or Gryphen's to read.

Anonymous said...

Just an observation from a avid reader of this and other babygate blogs. Audrey (Palin's Deceptions) and Morgan (photo analysis expert) were both threatened and effectively shut down when they began questioning the authenticity of Bristol's pregnancy with Tripp (T2). I just reread "The Cornerstone" post and it does raise many questions. Could they have been getting too close to the truth?

Anonymous said...

I love this blog but it is definitely harder to read now. Please change it back.

Lilybart said...

I hear lots of condescension in this commet by Dobson: "I wrote her a letter to thank her for her attitude toward that little Down's child."

that little Down's child


Anonymous said...

anon 15:46 Agreed that it was Audrey's cornerstone post that questioned Bristol's pregnancy. The picture that is still at the top of Audrey's blog, was also devastating to the palinbots.

I arrived at the same conclusion about Bristols's "pregnancy" before ever seeing Audrey's blog, just from what McCain's staffers told the media: the story of Bristol's pregnancy was put out there to stop the story that Sarah Palin faked a pregnancy. NY Times reported it, I decided.

Lilybart said...

Two thoughts and a question:

1) When her book and others come out, there will certainly be many contradictions and new stories. This will open up many avenues of inquiry plus new questions for her. This could break something loose.
2) If her book disses many people and if she takes credit for stuff that she didn't do, then people who have remained quiet might get pissed off and talk.

When bloggers were threatened, is there a common path the bloggers were pursuing that could tell us which part of the story the Palinites are most concerned about? Is it speculation about Bristol and her various states of looking pregnant? OR what?

Marcy said...

This blog is delightful: even the trolls make themselves obvious. And the data is welcome. I want to defend Gryphen. If you have never dealt with the craziness of fundamental evangelicals, you can't imagine what he deals with every day. Please read Leah Burton's blog, too. As far as I know, she and Gryphen are the only bloggers talking about Sarah Palin who actually live in the part of Alaska where the crazies can get at them.

These are some of the things I've experienced. The crazies instructed their children to threaten and attack my children at school. One of the crazies installed an illegal wiretap on our phone -- he worked for the phone company, had easy access and knew the technique. I was bedeviled by nuisance calls, especially during the night. (With a huge family, and several small children, that sleep deprivation was AWFUL.) Vandalism: blood-red paint poured on our car windshield, garbage cans stolen, children's bikes and trikes damaged. All these things happened back in the 70s and 80s. When my husband's mind softened and he signed on to the main tenet of these crazies, he became violent toward me. I divorced him and moved away. It's much, much harder to "divorce" a town full of crazies! And Gryphen and Leah are coping with the newly techno-savvy crazies of the 90s and 2000s.

It took more courage than most people have to go to Lake Lucille and take photos. Thanks Gryphen! Leah Burton has been able to put up a partial shield by publishing her books. But I have no doubts that these crazies would bomb her home and/or car if they hoped they could get away with it. Sarah Palin's public image is valuable to these crazies: of course they fight against any exposure of her faults. This babygate fault is too tangible for them to blow off with "That's just your opinion" or "She wasn't convicted". This woman violated all sense of propriety and honesty by pretending to give birth: then she asked us to vote for her. Mary Glazier and the rest of that crazy crowd haven't groomed another figurehead yet: they want to keep Sarah. We want Sarah to be exposed and judged. But only Gryphen and Leah are within striking distance of the opposition. grammy

Anonymous said...

anon 1555 ... Gryph started having a problem when he published the "splitsville" story. A blogger known as the 'other mccain' claimed he received an email for Sarah Palin that denied the story by saying something like she'd never divorce because Todd is good looking. The 'other mccain' is also co-author of a book with Sarah Palin's ghostwriter, Lynn Vincent.

The 'other' also lit into Audrey, but I haven't looked into the timing relative to blog posts.

CC said...

Marcy, that is horrible. I'm so sorry you experienced all those awful things. I must have been living in a parallel universe because I had no idea these types of "christians" even existed until a short while ago.


Anonymous said...

"an email for Sarah Palin" shoud be "an email from Sarah Palin"

anon 1603

NakedTruth said...

O.K. Something is just not adding up with Levi. He has something major to hide or lose in all of this as well. Levi has got to know or actually believe that Trig is his son. Is it possible that Bristol told Levi that she miscarried or had a stillbirth when actually she did not? Why would Levi quit school in Feb/Mar 2008 to work? Him quitting school to get a job makes me think that he needed money fast for some reason. This is something a young person does when they have a baby on the way and a mouth to feed. Does Levi possibly think that he will have to pay back child support if it comes out the Trig is his son and that Sarah/Todd didn't actually adopt Trig? What does Levi have to gain/lose for telling the truth?

I agree with someone that said that possibly Trig was once Trip (with one p)but Sarah changed the 'p' to a 'g' and named him Trig after his birth defect. Maybe this is why Levi and Bristol named T2, Tripp with two 'P's in honor of the first Trip. Anything is possible with this family. And plus young people do things like this.

Bristol was pregnant in that 2007 Christmas photo and on MTV in October. We know that there were no sightings or pictures of her from late Oct. 2007 until March 2008. She had a court date moved from August 2007 until late Jan. 2008 and it occurred on a Saturday so we aren't sure about that either. Where was Bristol during this time? Why was this 17 year old not with her family and friends? She had a very active social life before this time according to her own facebook. Why were there rumors that she was pregnant and Sarah never directly disproved them?

And now Bristol is the primary caregiver of Trig. Others can believe what they want to believe but my belief is that Bristol is the birth mother of Trig and Levi knows this.

Anonymous said...

The story was going mainstream once the NY Times wrote that the Bristol-is-pregnant story was done by McCain's people to stop the Sarah-faked-it story. Then Obama said that family should be off limits.

Part of Palin's animosity toward Obama may be that she can't comprehend his generosity and kindness, which did a lot to quash the story and keep it out of the mainstream press.

Sunshine1970 said...

Allison @ 05 November 2009 04:56: Your theory does give me a bit of a gruesome factor....

Maybe Keith Johnston is the key to this crazy plot..?

Also. I'd love to see a post about what could be significant about the birth dates. The only oddity I can find is originally Trig was supposed to be due on May 18, 2008, but was then 'born' on April 18th, and Bristol was due on December 18th, yet he was 'born' on Dec 27th, 2008.

Anonymous said...

Ask any journalist worth a grain of salt, and they'll tell you that nutty sources (even wackos) may have the best information. It's the journalist who takes source material, cleans it up and makes it work. A blog that channels hundreds (or thousands?) of brains and thoughts and theories is more apt to come up with truth than a blog written by one person pushing his/her agenda. That's why journalists have sources! I don't give a hoot who BlueTx is or really who any of you are. I'm old enough, wise enough, and well-read enough to decide for myself what comments have an interesting idea or the ring of authenticity.

I am grateful to Bree, Gryph, Patrick, Kath, and Regina for putting the time in to keep these forums humming. Bless you all.

But please keep the lines wide open. A troll may even be the one who knows everything (who knows how the truth will come?)Think of the serial killers who taunt police with phone calls andletters!

Censorship has always been the tool of the right wing. Let freedom reign.

midnightcajun said...

Please bring back the white background. This gray is hard to read and it detracts from the aesthetics of the blog. Your critic was a troll who is just trying to distract the discussion--and you.

Anonymous said...

Oh, and since I can:

I think the gray looks like sludge. The site no longer has its gay and cheery, light-hearted and feisty Regina-ness that I loved from the beginning. And yes, when pigs flew, Sarah Palin gave birth.

Anonymous said...

I know a lot of people are interested in the fammily dynamics and how or why Bristol became pregnant, etc.

Thing is, it's possible that Trig isn't Bristol's baby. It doesn't matter. The question is whether Sarah Palin faked a pregnancy. So I think the speculation about Bristol is a sideshow.

I disagree that it is a "fact" that Bristol was pregnant before Trig was born. She may have been or may not have been. It doesn't matter where a faked pregnancy baby came from ... a faked pregnancy is the story.

Reesie said...

Regina, Patrick, Kathleen, I have been reading this blog for over a year now and no one has asked you to make any changes to it until now.

The requests from M.Lee Journell is a distraction, in my opinion.

You cannot please everyone.

NakedTruth said...

The idea about Bristol faking her pregnancy is definitely interesting. Tripp to me does look a lot like Levi IMO but is it possible that Tripp was adopted? They did need to cover for the Sarah- faked -a- pregnancy- rumor- for- her- daughter by announcing that Bristol was about 5 months pregnant and couldn't be the mother of Trig. Did PD and this other blogger hit a nerve when posting about Bristol's shifting belly. Is this why they needed shut down? Strange. Still believe that Trig is Bristol's though.

crystalwolf aka caligrl said...

please do not take away the flying pigs!
M.Lee Journell is a troll. Please don't pay attention to it.
I love how Regina has things all organize nice here.
If people want to criticize a blog its really time they go start their own!

NakedTruth said...

Anon. 16:32,

I agree with you that it is about Sarah faking a pregnancy but my question to you is how do you convince people that she faked a pregnancy without proving where the baby she presented came from? As you can see we have pictures that show an unpregnant Sarah at 7 months, a square-white belly Sarah and a stomach that grew from nothing to fully round in just 8 days.

We may never find out the truth but I believe that if Sarah did not give birth to Trig (and I don't think that she did)that the truth will be revealed by uncovering Trig's birth mother versus proving Sarah was not pregnant. If the pictures haven't proved it then what will? Medical people aren't talking and more than likely they can't.

What are your thoughts? I am interested in how you think this mystery can be solved.

midnightcajun said...

I think it would be interesting to look again at the size of the babies. Remember the photos of Bristol in the hospital with a tiny baby that were shown, I believe, when she was doing her Do as I Say NOt as I DO Abstinence Tour? The baby in those photos was unbelievably little--obviously premature. I found it odd that no one remarked on it.

We have the small baby in the Triggy Bear photos, versus the baby shown by the Heaths at the hospital and the baby taken to work by Sarah on Monday. And then there's the baby at the shower given a month later in May. Hardly any bigger.

Then we have the tiny baby that Sarah carted to her office and around Alaska in that nursing sling. The baby at the Philadelphia zoo and at the governor's picnic.

None of these square well with the suddenly large, obviously DS baby that Sarah held up on the stage at the Convention. Oddly, that baby even looked bigger than the baby Todd is shown holding (and obviously showing affection for) on the video taken on the campaign bus with Greta and Piper.

These babies are like the Palin women's "pregnant" bellies: they grow and shrink, grow and shrink. Something weird is going on even once the babies come out.

Anonymous said...

I work as a consultant in professional branding. The look of this blog was FINE. We read this blog for content, not its aesthetics. You have allowed a troll or a random opinion to disrupt the "brand" you have going.

Are you that desperate for more traffic that one remark from someone (whose motives may or may not be good) will send you to change colors and design?

This blog's readership will grow on the basis of its content. But you can lose loyal readers if you keep changing its existing brand resonance on a dime at the whim of one.

Rationalist said...

Good morning, everyone. I don't know about you, but my head is spinning after the discussion we've been having.

A few people commented about Levi's attitude toward Trig and the Mercede pictures. I agree that they are hard to understand - always have been.

What's been making me re-think things is this: I'm operating under the assumption the Levi is telling the truth, if not yet the whole truth. So I'm trying to fit all the pieces together within that framework.

If Levi says Trig is Sarah's "as far as he knows," and he's "not sure how she got pregnant," I conclude that means he has suspicions about Trig but no firsthand knowledge. But he does come right out and say that she "nagged" Bristol and him about adopting their baby in secret to make everything easier for them. He also says that they told Palin they were pregnant with Tripp two weeks after Trig's birth.

So how to reconcile those things? It makes no sense that Sarah proposed to secretly adopt a baby after she just had one, especially just as McCain got the nomination. She has to be talking about a different baby. But according to Levi, it's not Trig. Hence: three babies.

The Mercede pictures can be explained, in this theory, by grief. Levi and Bristol would have lost a baby weeks before - perhaps one that lived for a little while. Mercede and Sherry, who dote on Levi, were, I believe, excited about having a new family member. Sherry's statement on Tyra, "Bristol knew how much that baby meant to me," was heartfelt.

That could explain the Triggybear pictures, although I agree that they are problematic. But so is the fact that Levi has shown no particular interest in Trig since Tripp (2?) was born. Originally I figured he had cut his losses and was focusing on the baby he was allowed to keep. But now I think it's because Trig isn't his.

As for Bristol being parental to both babies - that's always been her dysfunctional role in this dysfunctional family - surrogate mom to all the kids. And if she just lost a baby and was pregnant again and the world was going nuts around her with her mom's nomination - why wouldn't she cling tightly to an innocent little baby?

Anonymous said...

I have been an avid lurker but am left wondering something. Gryphen states that Bristol is not Trigs mom, but provides no evidence for this assertion. I am wondering what evidence this blog has that shows Bristol is the mother. Sorry if I have missed it but I am missing the evidence from this blog for the assertions made here.
Is there evidence or just "sources"
Thanks in advance

Anonymous said...

NakedTruth, Not only are there pictures, but also the wild-ride story in Sarah's own words. A lot of this may never be proven without DNA. But there are a lot of questions and doubts among ordinary people as well as medical professionals. The loss of interest came from Obama's statement that family is off limits and that she lost the election and is not running (not yet). Even so, we have Inside Edition asking the question: Is Sarah Trig's mother? So there is progress.

If Bristol suddenly came out and said that she gave birth to Trig, a lot of people would say it's because she's had a fight with Sarah or gone crazy. Sarah's cheering section will never be convinced.

Rationalist said...

What if instead of Tripp #1 - Trig - Tripp #2, it's Trig #1 - Trig #2 - Tripp?

All the way down the rabbit hole: What if Bristol and Levi had a baby named Trig - hence Triggybear - and he died? Then Sarah adopted a baby and also named it Trig?

Sick, huh? But the Palins named their daughter Piper Indy Grace (P.I.G.), so who the f knows?

Anonymous said...

I use Firefox which gives me the option of overriding colors or font styles. I'm betting IE has a similar option for it's users.

For Firefox users:
At the top of the screen, click on "tools" and select "options" from the drop-down menu. Look in the middle for a box labeled "fonts & colors". To your right you will see a box labeled "advanced" and one labeled "colors".
(The box marked "advanced" will take you to a page where you can change fonts.) Click on "colors" and down at the bottom, uncheck the box labeled "allow pages to use their own colors" and select whatever background and text color you prefer. Click the box labeled "ok" and click "ok" again on the main "options" page and the background will change to the color you selected.

Personally, I like the white background and pigs, but such decisions are solely at the discretion of the blog owner(s).

Anonymous said...

Are the Johnsons members of the same church as the Palin's?

wv: reaks haha

Anonymous said...

If we go with the "three baby theory" it compliments both Patrick's and Gyrphen's evidence. Patrick says Bristol was pregnant in 2007 (baby #1, not Trig, most likely died), Gryph knows Bristol is not Trig's bio mom and doesn't know who is (mysterious adoption of Trig, Baby #2), then there is Tripp which Bristol gave birth to (baby #3). I appreciate all the hard work all the bloggers do. I have a lot of respect for Gryph who lives in the middle of Wackystan and honestly could be in harms way. Gryph HAS to protect his source. If it is someone really in the "know" and he leaks stuff too fast, Sarah will know who the source is and punish them.


leu2500 said...

Anon on 20091105 @1711. Thanks for the tip! I remember that Andrew Sullivan had to tell his readers how to adjust color, size, etc years ago 'cause they didn't like the choices on his blog.

I just tested on Celtic Diva's; works great!

Anonymous said...

Thanks so very much for the "cool gray"...

It is much appreciated and my eyes immediately embraced the "change."

Warmest regards,


NakedTruth said...

Anonymous 17:02

If Bristol comes out and say she gave birth to Trig the MSM would definitely give her the stage. Most individuals would believe her. You are right, Sarah's cheering section will never be convinced but since they represent only about 15% of Americans who really cares.


I am feeling you but have you ever thought that maybe Levi thought Bristol miscarried or stillbirthed but she actually didn't. The baby could have been born with DS with Levi not present and Sarah and Bristol could have told him that his baby died.

Or you could be right, it's possible that Bristol and Levi baby did die but why would Sarah fake a pregnancy in order to secure a special needs child for her career? Wouldn't it have been easier for her to just adopt a child? I guess I just can't get my arms around the idea of Sarah being gracious enough to adopt a DS baby that is not directly connected to her in some way.

Hey but I'm just guessing like everyone else. Like I say, who knows about this family.

wv: belsd (blessed) That I am.

Anonymous said...

Some are trying to sow trouble and turn the bloggers against each other.

Gryphon deserves a lot of credit for hanging in there, with all the trolls demanding he give his sources.

Also the Palins have a political marriage. Sarah called marriage a business contract. So they have an arrangement. Todd gets the second house? Shares it with Bristol and the offices.

The trolls are shameless and do what they do either because they are paid to, are Palin loyalists, or out and out trolls.

Anonymous said...

I have been reading via Safari. I guess I will switch to Firefox now, as I can't STAND the grey.

snowbilly said...

So why not go back to Regina's color scheme and let those that have problems with it adjust the colors to suit themselves! The readability, graphics and aesthetics (which is what I first found attractive about the blog) have been diminished with the gray background.

Rationalist said...

Naked Truth - yes, that's a good point, and that's the weak link in my theory. What would compel Sarah to actually adopt a baby that wasn't hers? It doesn't make sense, really, unless all this happened after she had already announced she was pregnant. Then she was stuck, because if she said she'd had a miscarriage that wouldn't look good either.

Anonymous said...

Once again in the past week, a graphic distraction has taken hold of the blog and its comments. Sigh.

Anonymous said...

FYI. Did everyone see this in comments section of the top thread: : "Yes..., Trig is hearing impaired.

This was the first time I realized it.

If you see pictures of him today you will see him with glasses and hearing aids. Poor little guy."

Anonymous said...

Sorry, that previous post references IM.

Sunshine1970 said...

I'm gonna comment on the new theme.

Personally, I like darker themes. Easier on my eyes on a CRT monitor at work. I always have to turn down the brightness on the monitor.

At home, although I still prefer dark themes, but I don't find whites all that distracting, since I'm using LCD's.

MissSunshine said...

I love the flying pigs.

Audrey and Morgan were shut down through threats and intimidation, not contrary evidence.

Bravo to all who continue to look at the available material and brainstorm for solutions to this puzzle.

What is clear is that events are decidedly not as SP has said they were. If her version were correct, it would be easy for her to produce evidence, and then do one of her very favorite things, which is to wring her hands and whine about how she is so persecuted.

Babygate may just involve the Palin/Heath/Johnston families, or may be part of a web of deception involving her dominionist church, or even further, if the AIP is trying to establish false identities for some of their more paranoid or criminal members.

Still, with time I do expect this ball of twine to unravel and truth will come forth.

I would not be so quick to criticize Gryphen. I trust he is doing the best he can. I don't blame him for being cagey - he is in the quitter's backyard, and she and her friends don't mind playing dirty.

Any evidence against the quitter has got to be airtight, and solid. She has mastered every trick in the book to avoid being held accountable for her words and actions.

Patience, friends. Truth will come out in due time.

CC said...

I don't know who to cite as there have been many comments but I wanted to agree with the person who commented on $arah's obvious distaste to Trig. It is so blatantly obvious, to me, which is why I don't think it is just a random baby, especially since Todd DOES show him affection.
I am wondering if this is a key ... although I go from one good theory to the next, thanks to the excellent posters on here.

Any thoughts?

Marcy said...

Thank you to CC @ 16:05. Please keep your eyes open, Sweetie! It's been more than 40 years since I first began to notice that some of the "christians" around me were claiming the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ in vain. The number of the phonies has multiplied. And the organized political movement that Leah Burton documents is very dangerous. grammy

Anonymous said...

@CC: I think that this post of Regina's from September (with 2008 footage clips) shows antipathy towards the Dude from the Queen:

Anonymous said...

From Andrew Sullivan today:

"Marc has an interesting interview with Shushannah Walshe and Scott Conroy, authors of a new book about Palin. On why she tells easily disprovable lies:
Palin almost always seems outwardly poised and confident in front of a microphone, but she also demonstrates time and again--often in more subtle ways--signs of profound insecurity. It takes a self-confident person to admit mistakes and acknowledge one's own shortcomings, but Sarah Palin is quick to cast aside people who cross her in even minor ways, and her unwillingness to tolerate much dissent often leads to an infallibility syndrome.
And the conservative movement is enabling it all. Oh God. What a November it's gonna be."

Anonymous said...

From Andrew Sullivan today (punctuation amended):

"Marc has an interesting interview with Shushannah Walshe and Scott Conroy, authors of a new book about Palin. On why she tells easily disprovable lies:
'Palin almost always seems outwardly poised and confident in front of a microphone, but she also demonstrates time and again--often in more subtle ways--signs of profound insecurity. It takes a self-confident person to admit mistakes and acknowledge one's own shortcomings, but Sarah Palin is quick to cast aside people who cross her in even minor ways, and her unwillingness to tolerate much dissent often leads to an infallibility syndrome.'
And the conservative movement is enabling it all. Oh God. What a November it's gonna be."

sfwilliamson said...

Lurker here. Love the conversation and ideas. Really appreciate all the work and the persistence you show. I can't stand SP and hope she will soon just go away but don't think that will happen. So it is going to continue to be bloggers who finally out her completely.

Thanks to a poster, I got the colors back to black on white but what about the pigs??? Please bring them back!

Sunshine1970 said...


I'm really having trouble with this 'third baby' theory. It's just too convoluted--something just beyond, IMHO Sarah's brain power, and her family's capability to be able to keep everything straight--and may be too convoluted for the Johnstons to keep straight. It makes absolutely no sense for her to cover for anyone besides her daughter--no matter who the father of the child is.

What Levi said in the interview--that Trig is Sarah's etc--yes Trig is Sarah's baby--now. How? By adoption or by force, who knows (I'm leaning towards by force--and that would be in line with Sarah's personality to get what she wants). But his other answers are very generic. They don't prove or disprove anything. (Taking from Bree's blog) After the interviewer asks if Trig is Sarah's baby, Levi doesn't say Yes. Definitely. He says "As far as I know" Same with if Todd is the father. This isn't a confirmation of anything. It's coy.

So, although I am beginning to believe Levi may not be the father of Trig--and may not know the parentage that way, he doesn't say anything about Bristol being the mother or not the mother of Trig.

So. There are two babies, only. Until proven otherwise, those are the facts I'm sticking with.

(although I'm totally curious if anyone can find out the significance of the "birthdates" of both Trig & Tripp, and see if there is anything to it...)

CC said...

Thanks, anon@17:44. I remember that post and reading over some of the comments again (including mine) I realized this was also the day we were discussing the VF article and the horrible name she called Trig. What a coincidence that those very words came out on the day Regina posted about her antipathy towards Toad...

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 313   Newer› Newest»