Recapping a week in which a relatively sane man desperately trying to connect unconnectable dots slowly descended into madness
Since we could all use a good laugh right about now...
Moving on...A few people have emailed to suggest that it might be helpful if I provide links to the pertinent aspects of the Sarah Palin "did she or did she not have that baby" thing. So, breaking ranks with my traditional "fuck the reader" way of doing things around here, I've decided to comply. I'm also throwing in some links to my friend Karion's blog. She's been my partner in crime on this from the getgo. Here we go...
- "I'm sorry, feel free to call me crazy, but none of this makes any sense to me"
-My seed planted, I take Karion down the road to hell with me.
-Some digging is done. The Myspace page of Levi Johnston's sister is discovered, which just so happens to hold some pretty interesting photos (which by now have been circulated EVERYWHERE) and captions. They are here, here, and here. Through this Myspace find, the world got it's first look at Bristol Palin's self-proclaimed redneck sire, Levi, here.
-Karion compares a photo of a seven months pregnant Sarah Palin to photos of Demi Moore in her seventh month and Nicole Ritchie in her sixth.
-Video of an interview that Palin gave in her seventh month of pregnancy surfaces. There is no mention of a child at all, though she hikes through Juneau in heels while drinking coffee (a major no-no during pregnancy) and detailing how she loves to go for vigorous runs each day.
-Karion notices that the caption to a certain family photo has been altered.
-Due to the dogged persistence of some Internet people, the mainstream press is asking questions about all of this. Palin and the McCain campaign are, of course, refusing to respond and hoping that it'll all just go away.
-Sarah gave her speech.
And then there's this last thing that a reader named Alex just sent over to me...
This video is of Sarah Palin being interviewed by Newsweek's Karen Breslau at the magazine's Women & Leadership Event in Los Angeles back in March. Two days after this event, Palin would announce her pregnancy. So the question is...does a woman in her seventh month of pregnancy carrying a normal sized child sit like this?
Just as a reminder as to what a seven months pregnant woman looks like, here's an AP photo of Palin at seven months back in 1989...
Not to be lost in all of this is the content of what Palin, speaking on the subject of criticism of Hillary Clinton and her "whine," had to say...
I think she does herself a disservice...you have to plough through it...you have to know what you're into...any kind of perceived whine about that excess criticism...that doesn't do us any good...it bothers me hearing her bring that attention on herself.
Finally, let me just say that the past week has been beyond surreal. The most surreal aspect of all of this has been the fact that there were things that Karion and I found over the weekend that are now gone. There are other things that now read differently than they did previously, as there's obviously been some heavy editing going on. Hell, there's a huge swath of Palin photographs on the State of Alaska's website that went poof. Gone. I wish we would have thought to screen capture every single thing we ran across. It's as if her Internet record was being scrubbed at the precise time that Karion and I started digging into it.
Now, I need a drink before I go so crazy that I start masturbating on public transportation. Oliver Stone's meeting me in a back corner booth of a speakeasy in a city that I can't disclose to you because, you know, I'd have to kill you. We've got some things to talk about.
17 comments:
Great work all week, and I just read the incredible Vanity Fair timeline! I think you should also mention the Newsweek women in politics conference. This was 2 days before her big announcement and no one at the conference knew she was pregnant. Newsweek also posted video of the conference with Sarah speaking cross-legged and leaning forward. Ask any woman in her 7th month to do that and it is pretty much physically impossible and very painful. < http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9Y8FKAsxmk > article < http://www.newsweek.com/id/156190/output/print >
@alex...thanks so much man. i'd read the clip from newsweek's site but had not seen the video. i just added to the the post.
wow...i am becoming a believer...at first when i started reading about this (not here) i thought, no way, but there is too much going on here man, good work, dont go too crazee just yet, let readers know how to help you...i want to see this exposed big time
The only thing that makes me think Trig is Sarah's baby and not Bristols' is the unlikely occurrence of Downs syndrome in women under the age of 45. How many women Bristol's age have given birth to DS babies?
Then again, Trig is a humongous baby (and cute, too, if you ask me) and I can't see how he could not have shown in the seventh month of Sarah's pregnancy.
Lastly, you know that while discussing Sarah/Bristol/PregnancyGate, we're not talking about Obama. And that's what the Republicans want.
Fantastic work and totally fascinating. The only thing I'd say about the stuff you listed in this post is that drinking coffee while pregnant? Not really a big deal. The common suggestion from most doctors is just not to drink pots and pots of it, but a cup or two a day is fine. And I did read on the blog post of the guy who brought her the coffee in that Juneau story that it was decaf.
Anyway. Small and relatively unimportant detail when weighed against everything else you've found, here, but thought I'd share.
About half of all Down's Syndrome babies are born to women under 30.
http://www.leeds.ac.uk/lass/screening%20for%20Down's.htm
The chances of having a DS baby increase with age, but because there are still a large number of babies born to young women, a DS baby with a young mother is not an anomaly.
maitri the occurence of Downs syndrome births in women Bristol's age is approximately 1 in 2000 births. So it is certainly not unheard of. More than half of the Down's syndrome babies are born to women under 30. The odds of giving birth to a child with Down's syndrome increases dramatically as a woman ages, but still the vast majority (72%) are born to women under the age of 35.
Great job summing up the events of this surreal week in American politics. As far as I have seen, Palin has done nothing, except announce that her daughter was pregnant, to quell the rumors about Trig's birth. I'm still on the fence about who actually gave birth to him. If Sarah did, she's extremely stupid with the way she handled the events of the day of his birth. Something about the whole thing just doesn't add up right for me.
Anyway, I found this statement here (the last sentence addresses a question posted here about the likelihood of Bristol having a DS child): http://www.marchofdimes.com/professionals/14332_1214.asp
"Does the risk of Down syndrome increase with the mother's age? Yes. The risk of Down syndrome increases from about 1 in 1,250 at age 25, to 1 in 1,000 at age 30, 1 in 400 at age 35, 1 in 100 at age 40 and 1 in 30 at age 45 (6). Women over age 35 have been traditionally considered most likely to have a baby with Down syndrome. However, about 80 percent of babies with Down syndrome are born to women who are under age 35, as younger women have far more babies (2)."
Anyway, I am hoping for a huge skeleton to come tumbling out...one that the national media will actually report on. Should be an interesting 2 months. Keep up the good work!
There is no way you can cross your legs and lean forward like that at 7 mos. pregnant. Try putting a 5 lb. bag of potatoes in the front of your pants and doing it. I've had four kids.
Please see the photos found by SoCalDem--are they some of the ones you saw last weekend? The family picture (Bristol in red coat) is of particular interest:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=3912640&mesg_id=3929525
Also this:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=3912640&mesg_id=3930234
In the Comments on the "mommy in law" page, someone wrote: "You're related to Sarah? Do you know Lauden and her brothers?" See the link below, a page for when Sarah was running for governonr, which mentions "Lauden" (who would be Sarah's nephew) It is quite obvious from the MySpace page alone that Trig is Bristol's child. Why would the sister of a boyfriend take this much interest in the boyfriend's sister's baby brother?
http://www.xoxohth.com/thread.php?thread_id=850627&forum_id=2&PHPSESSID=4b1548ae1d90e4b3257e59e980da5877
I have been so depressed this week-and so upset I can't even sleep. If, as we fear, these stories and cover-ups are real, and these folks are really able to get away with all of this manipulation and lying, there's not much hope for a responsible and honest government. I have to hope there's a good internet researcher out there who wants the truth to be presented.
This is really important work. I can imagine at times it feels quite conspiracy theory-ish, but clearly you're uncovering factual information that someone doesn't want us to see. Something very unusual and disturbing is going on with the GOP and the second we stop asking questions we eliminate our chance of ever finding answers.
Mr. Cajun Boy,
I've been reading you for a short while (our common birthstate peaked my interest) and while I don't like making politicians' personal lives my business, I've got to commend you for your work. I was sequestered down in NOLA for the hurricane and today is the first I'm hearing about this story. I feel like I've fallen into some horrible world where Gossip Girl meets Primary Colors. Thank you for your research. It has saved me many hours of lexis-nexis and wayback machine.
glad to know other people noticed the net scrubbing...things were disappearing and changing nearly minute to minute for nearly four days.
Im sure many people stored all they could...it was indeed a very strange week.
it would be nice if strange was over...
Its already starting...rove et al blaming the dems/left/blogs/wretches/single parents/dogs for the horrid behavior of looking for info on this woman who jumped, nay, leaped into the fray.
Its really not about her.
It is about...Censorship.
What began as easy hunting of info on this woman turned into a frenzy because THINGS WERE DISAPPEARING RIGHT IN FRONT OF ONE'S EYES.
Literally.
Why?
Why were so many things CENSORED concerning her and who did this?
That is the question.
I dont think many at all really give a crap about her sex life.
Her...comments made no sense and someone decided to scrub the net.
Its about CENSORSHIP.
Censorship and rove.
Rove knew if salacious comments re SP were leaked out...the net would indeed go wild.
That would then appear as the only issue.
...they of course had to 'protect her' by censoring the sordid info.
And shout "sexism" when normal questions are asked.
But, meanwhile...MCC/P are bush/cheney.
Picking this woman because she is a 'woman' is insulting to women.
It does nothing for women.
McC is hoping swing states stay home.
Palin policies are quite the opposite of Hillary. Picking SP says women voters are not very smart. They'll vote for any woman and be happy.
Pat on the head stuff.
...its reverse sexism.
...give the little gals some woman and theyll be happy.
That is insulting to all women.
Post a Comment