Wednesday, 13 January 2010

"In Touch Weekly" magazine reports the happy Palin family life - Spot the fake! - UPDATE 2!

UPDATE 2 (click to enlarge):

"In Touch Weekly" have some more info on their website now.

Apparenty the "last few years" have been "unreal and surreal" for Sarah Palin.

Change this to "last year", and I feel that I have something in common with Sarah Palin! Who would have thought!

+++

UPDATE (click to enlarge):




"Jezebel" has new pictures and information.

According to the new details as reported by Jezebel, Bristol Palin now appears to be a "born again virgin":

"She does tell In Touch what kind of guy she'd like, when she's "ready" to date: "One with values, one with a good family, a hard worker, and someone who is going to love me and my baby." But Bristol says: "I'm not going to have sex until I'm married. I can guarantee it." (The word "again" seems to have been left out there.)"

More excerpts from the article:

Now, the mother and daughter are sharing a unique experience — raising baby boys together under the same roof, along with Sarah's husband, Todd, and their other children, Willow, 15, and Piper, 8.

While Sarah is extremely proud of Bristol, she hasn't coddled her or taken over mothering duties. She lets Bristol learn and make mistakes on her own, and it's understood that Bristol will support Tripp financially as much as possible — which means buying her own diapers and formula.

"There's no mistaking that Tripp is her baby, and she is in charge," Sarah explains. "this whole experience has made her grow up so quickly , but she has taken total responsibility and never gripes about it."

"Tripp is the love of my life — I couldn't ask for a better baby," she insists. "But the reality is I'm 19 years old and I have a one-year-old. I wish I could be in my 20s with a baby and not be in my 20s. Just having him so young — I have to work, and I have to provide for him, because I'm a single mom."


+++



You read it on Palingates first. In our exclusive story on Monday, we also pointed out how this magazine deal directly contradicts Bristol Palin's own claim in her custody trial.

The Palins have arrived in dreamland. They pretend to be a happy family, and cash in a six-figure amount for a few hours of "work" at the same time, posing for a cover-story in "In Touch Weekly" magazine. In a deal which was brokered by Bristol's lawyer Thomas Van Flein, Bristol Palin proves that it apparently pays off to be a pregnant, unmarried, teenage mother. Surely Bristol's terrible fate as a celebrity mom will serve as a deterrent for other teenagers! Won't it?

However, what is it that distinguishes the Palins from some other "celebrity families"?

Readers of Palingates know the truth already: The private world that the "mentally unstable" mom Sarah Palin has created in her quest for fame, attention and fortune is FAKE - from beginning to end. Which is again apparent in this cheery gossip cover story.

First of all, Sarah Palin is not the biological mother of Trig. She faked the pregnancy, apparently in order to avoid embarrassment and not to jeopardize her chances for the vice-presidential nomination.

What else is fake here?

Levi Johnston doesn't seem to take a part in Tripp's life - instead, both Bristol and "Grandma Sarah" are raising Tripp, according to the article.

"Popeater" reported:

Sarah Palin and her daughter Bristol are doing something rare -- going front-and-center in an exclusive In Touch Weekly interview and photo spread given exclusively to PopEater, talking about the drama that has plagued the Palin family over the last year. Bristol's split from Levi Johnston and how she and Grandma Sarah have dealt with raising Bristol's son Tripp is the focus of the interview, as the politicians daughter says her headline-making split was "as bad as it gets."

Really? Isn't it the truth that the Palins constantly DENIED Levi access to his son, despite the fact that he wants to play a huge part in his life? Isn't it also the truth that Bristol Palin claimed in her affidavit:

"My mother, Sarah Palin, is not involved in this custody matter other than as a grandmother, so Levi Johnston has no need to be "protected" from her. This case is between me an Levi; my mother has nothing to do with it."

So how come Grandma Palin is also "raising Tripp"? Now that Trig is getting too old to be carried around as a cutie on her various travels and appearances, I am under the impression that Sarah Palin needs a new prop! Isn't this the real reason why Bristol Palin wants sole custody, so that the Palins can do with Tripp whatever they like?

Bristol also said in her affidavit:

"I cannot imagine any reason why Levi Johnston would think that having this custody proceeding take place in the media spotlight would be in Tripp's best interests. It appears that the only reason Levi wants this case to remain public is so that he can continue to capitalize on his name and this case by selling stories to the media. To my knowledge, Levi's media exposure is currently his only source of income. That leads me to believe that Levi's interest in keeping this case unsealed is purely financial. Levi's interest in self-promotion has nothing to do with Tripp's best interest."

Screenshot (click to enlarge):


In addition: In the pictures you can see that the Palins are having a birthday celebration for Tripp. There is only one problem here: According to the timeline that we were given, there is simply no way that these pictures were taken on Tripp's actual birthday, but the pictures were probably taken only a few days ago. It's is therefore our educated guess that the birthday pictures were FAKED and just staged for this magazine shoot.

Is anyone surprised? I am not!

Which family member is missing, by the way? Our readers guessed it before - Track is nowhere to be seen. I am sure he has a "good reason". Keep you eyes open for new upcoming photo comparisons between Track and the Menard family. Here on Palingates you get the REAL gossip. What you get from the Palins for a six-figure sum is only the FAKE gossip. Everyone has the right to choose.
.

No comments: