Sunday, June 5, 2011

Sarah Palin's Fake Pregnancy? How Big Does a Conspiracy Have to Be?

"Babygate" has been covered in more detail in previous posts. You can find all this information here:

Palin-biographer Joe McGinniss"I think the Politicalgates archives are the best single available resource for anyone wondering why questions are still being asked about Sarah really being Trig’s birth mother." (from August 28, 2011)
Kathleen Baker, editor of Politicalgates, writes in the UK "Guardian" about Sarah Palin's faked pregnancy: "Sarah Palin, unreliable narrator"
Read all posts at Politicalgates about Sarah Palin's faked pregnancy with Trig - CLICK HEREHEREHEREHEREHERE AND HERE.

Download the research paper regarding Sarah Palin's faked pregnancy and the role of the media, written by Brad Scharlott, Associate Professor for Journalism at Northern Kentucky University - CLICK HERE.

Brad Scharlott's revised version of the paper has also been published by "Business Insider."

Read the old post at Palingates about the faked pregnancy with the pictures still intact in hardcopy HERE.

Read the old posts at Palingates online HERE (useful also for watching the video clips which were published with the posts).

In addition, please don't hesitate to watch the excellent video-documentaries about "babygate" which our reader Lidia17 created - HERE, HERE and HERE.

We break the "Spiral of Silence" - Read the details about the "biggest hoax in American political history!"

WATCH: Sarah Palin's faked pregnancy, an open secret in Alaska. Interview with Michael Carey, journalist with the Anchorage Daily News, from September 2, 2008:

By Ennealogic

It's fairly well proved by photographic, circumstantial, and anecdotal evidence that the former governor of Alaska managed to perpetrate a daring hoax on the media, the American people, and even close associates. Those who still deny what's called "babygate" have three main comebacks:
  1. The hoax is simply too outrageous, nobody would be crazy enough to try something like that.
  2. It doesn't matter, this is a personal womanly thing and who cares anyway?
  3. In order to keep it a secret, a huge number of people would have to be involved and someone would have leaked by now.
As for #1, if we've learned anything about Sarah over the last couple of years, it is that she is perfectly capable of trying any lie if it serves her purposes. According to her, the Branchflower Report cleared her of any wrongdoing or ethical lapses. Her crosshairs graphic had nothing to do with inciting intense emotions and the symbols weren't even crosshairs. Her One Nation bus tour, wherein Sarah attempts to politicize history, is just a family vacation (or so she told Piper). She never wanted that bridge to nowhere, either, even though she campaigned on it. She lies profusely and some say pathologically. She thinks she can snow the reporters who sniff the exhaust of her bus by saying idiotic things like Paul Revere rode a horse, clanging bells and firing guns, to warn the British that we Americans would never give up our arms. There is no lie too outrageous for the ex-half-term governor.

Sarah Palin, VP candidate
Then there are those, per #2 on the list, who dismiss discussion about what I consider to be Sarah's most egregious lie, by saying we shouldn't go there. How dare we? Who cares what goes on in her private life and private parts? Do we want to see her stretch marks? Yet... did the media care about what went on with Bill Clinton's private parts? Yes indeed. Or what about the private life of John Edwards, the wholesome family man? They still do! Or the airport bathroom dalliances of Larry Craig, the famously anti-gay Senator? What about this week's obsession with a bulge in briefs? Women should not be immune from delicate discussion just because of their sex. Sarah has made a lot of hay with her "walking the walk" talk. She gets invited to give speeches for $100,000 a pop around the nation. She has suckered the extreme right-wing Christian contingent with her heart-warming tales of "choosing life." So why should we not go there, if she did not, in fact, choose life?

But this post is about comeback #3. How many people would actually have to be in on this unique hoax, and why hasn't one of them broken the silence so far? It's far fewer than you'd think:

(1) There's Sarah herself, of course.
(2) And Todd.
(3) Someone had to bring a baby to MatSu Regional on April 18, 2008 for photo ops.
(4) CBJ is a likely accomplice, especially since she has not stepped up to disclaim the election eve letter.
(5-6) One or another of Sarah's closest inner circle probably had knowledge.
(7?) The actual mother might know, especially if she is a family member.
(8?) The actual father might know.
(9?) Whoever helped the actual birth mother deliver and then turn over the infant may know.

Nine is not a lot.

No other medical or hospital personnel would have had to be involved. There wouldn't have been an amniocentesis or other testing, no pre-natal visits, and no birth attendants because there was no Sarah pregnancy. The actual place of birth, the attendants and the doctors, would not necessarily have to be in on a hoax. The mother may have only been a Jane Doe to them.

Heather, Sarah's sister

If Bristol was pregnant with Trig, it's likely that her aunt Heather, Sarah's sister who was living in Anchorage in late 2007 and early 2008, would have known about the hoax.

Sally and Chuck Heath
We have a photo showing Sarah's mother and father holding a "newborn" baby in a hospital room. The only people who had to know the baby wasn't Sarah's was Sarah herself and whoever helped her use the hospital room, though. Sarah's parents didn't have to know. They were no doubt told things, of course, some of which Chuck blabbed to a reporter causing Sarah to scramble during the interview she gave 3 days after the birth. We have no indication, though, that Sarah and her parents had a lot of face time in the 6 weeks between the announcement and the staged birth. There wasn't even time for a baby shower until after the "birth," eliminating even more potential witnesses.

Frank Bailey
In Blind Allegiance, Frank Bailey relates that he went to the hospital and "caught a glimpse of Sarah and hours-old Trig." But the photo he took was of Todd with the baby. (This picture doesn't make it into his book.) Frank also says, quite interestingly, that as he was leaving, he saw Bristol "lying on the couch… [and] for the record… she had not just given birth." He goes on to state how amazed he was at Sarah's "remarkable physical willpower as she went back to work only two days later." With respect to Frank and how he recollects things for the book, he was at this time still completely entranced and entangled with Sarah. It would not be until over a year later that the veil would begin to lift from his stricken eyes. He would not have had to be in on the hoax. (If he was, he didn't go all the way there in his book. He does firmly document that rumors swirled about Bristol being pregnant and Sarah not being pregnant, though, in the first few months of 2008.)

Kris Perry
Ivy Frye
What about the rest of the "rag tags" who enabled Sarah? Chances are one or another of her closest associates would have known: Kris Perry, perhaps, or Ivy Frye. Would Sarah have had a way to keep them in line, with bribes of some kind or with inside knowledge that could be used as emotional blackmail? I consider that likely. It is equally likely that their own sense of loyalty remains strong.

Todd Palin

Let's see, who else would necessarily have to know? Certainly Todd, since he accompanied Sarah to Dallas and was there during the Reckless Ride back to Alaska. And being a husband, after all, to a wife who had already given birth four times before, he surely would not have been fooled. But as we've learned, Todd has participated in and even instigated many lies and is the least likely person to spill the beans, besides Sarah.

Cathy Baldwin-Johnson

Then there's Cathy Baldwin-Johnson, who provided cover for Sarah's Reckless Ride. Someone also would have had to arrange for a baby to appear at the right time and place, and possibly pave the way for an adoption. The actual birth parents may have been in the know, but adoptions can happen where the biological parents do not know who ends up with their child. It seems obvious that Sarah's favorite doctor would know at least many details about the hoax. Medical ethics could well be a big reason CBJ has not said anything.

Track Palin

What about the Palin children? Track enlisted in September, 2007, and was still in the military in April 2008—ruling out any chance he would have noticed the stage of his mother's 6-week pregnancy. He's also male, and a boy in his late teens would have little to no interest in such things. I'm going to assume, for the sake of this post, that Track was not the father of Trig, but one could make a case for that, and then of course he'd be in the know but with good reason to remain silent.

Piper Palin

Seven-year-old Piper was definitely too young and could easily have been "left out of the loop." She would have believed whatever she was told. Heck, she believed her family was really going on vacation this summer.

Bristol Palin
Willow Palin
Bristol and Willow, leaving out for the time being their own possible roles in the deception, were not being well-parented and had their own lives and issues to deal with. It's conceivable that 13-year-old Willow, especially, could have been left out of the loop as well. I doubt I would have had the general awareness at that age to be curious about the fact that my mother didn't look really pregnant at 7-8 months. I'm thinking back... my mother gave birth to her 3rd child, a son, when I was 15. I don't recall much at all about my baby brother until a few months after he was born, and next to nothing about the state of my mother's pregnancy.

Naturally, if Bristol had anything to do with the reason Sarah perpetrated her hoax, she'd be in the know. Even though she must have caused Sarah great consternation with her Tripp pregnancy, she has done pretty well for herself. New car, new condo in Anchorage, glitzy gig at Candies, spreads in Vanity Fair and People, contestant on DWTS, new house in Arizona, new face and chin, and a potential TV show in LA with the Massey brothers… She's been handsomely rewarded for something.

Therefore, if we postulate that someone close to Sarah is the mother (e.g. Bristol) and someone equally close in some way is the father and they both voluntarily gave the infant to Sarah, then that adds them both to the list.

Sherry Johnston

Let me add in the Johnston family members, who seem to have some knowledge yet also seem reluctant to reveal what they know. Whether this has to do with Sherry's drug bust or something else is not clear.

Levi Johnston

Mercede Johnston
Both Mercede and Levi of course play a role, especially if Levi is the biological father of Trig. Given what they've both revealed so far, though, I have doubts about how much they actually knew and are sure of at this time.

Seven or eight people (even ten) plus Sarah is not a large number, and considering that most of these are family or very close friends or associates, it's not that surprising that nobody has spilled the beans to date. Remember, 5 weeks is not a long time to pretend one is pregnant. Nobody knew beforehand, and Sarah viciously attacked anyone she thought was spreading the rumors that she was not the one who gave birth. If there's one thing I picked up from Frank Bailey's book, it is that you didn't want to upset Sarah. It was much better to just set aside doubts and be righteously indignant along with her.

If recent comments on other blogs are at all true, there are likely others who do know at least a part of the real story. For example, a tubal ligation that would have absolutely prevented Sarah from conceiving Trig had to be performed by somebody. A premature birth where the mother was known to be Bristol had to be attended by somebody. It is difficult to assess these stories when those who tell them decline, for whatever reason, to go on the record. What we can be sure of, though, is that the number of those who absolutely had to know the full story is not that large, and I can easily imagine why they have decided it was best to hold their tongues so far.

No comments:

Post a Comment