Steve Flesher aka "snorp73", founder of "gayconservatives.org" and author at "conservatives4palin", insults Kathleen online with a gay slur - what a douche! Bonus: Steve Flesher aka "snorp73" falsely claims that the "Palin pregnancy pictures" from March 26 and April 13, 2008 cannot be dated properly

By Patrick

Once upon a time...there was a female politician in the lonely and cold state of Alaska, a place many people did not care too much about. She wanted fame and power, and although some people thought she was quite dumb, our politician had realized something very important: In politics, it's all about building a movement for yourself. You need fans - and the best thing is: They will do the work for you, sometimes "dirty" work (if that is what you really want). If they are fanatic enough, they will lie and cheat for you and insult others. You don't even have to do it yourself. Often, they will even do it for free.

Sarah Palin's "rise to power" in Alaska has been well documented, as well as her "downfall." However, it is very interesting to note that fascinating revelations about exactly how Sarah Palin rose to power in Alaska recently were published by unlikely sources: By her father, Chuck Heath Sr. and her brother, Chuck Heath Jr. In their 2012 book "Our Sarah", they explained how Sarah Palin at a very early point had realized that you need an "online brigade" to drum up support for you - and how such a group of people, often volunteers, can be used with great effectiveness.

They write (pp. 167 and 168):

Finally, in October 2005, before a packed living room at her home, Sarah announced her decision. She was running for governor. (...) Sarah's announcement came early, which gave her an advantage. She also had a volunteer network already in place from the lieutenant governor's campaign. They hadn't been formally organized during the interim, but they were just the same. They went to work immediately. (...)

They also began an Internet group that operated on its own, apart from the campaign. Members of that group manned their computers and searched for blogs and news sites with articles about the governor's race. Using multiple e-mail-accounts, and sometimes multiple computers, they made it their own personal mission to post responses to every news article that touched on the issues and candidates. They diligently and relentlessly countered every negative comment and encouraged every positive response, not just with partisan invective but with well-researched facts. (...)

They conclude this chapter on page 173 and write:

On February 2, 2007, Adam Brickley, a student at the University of Colorado, created a blog entitled Draft Sarah Palin for Vice President. His first entry offered an argument for why she should be named as the vice presidential running mate for Rudy Giuliani, at the time the front runner for the Republican nomination for president in the 2008 election. Don (Benson) and the pro-Sarah Internet group learned about the blog a few days later and immediately began organizing support for a push to get Sarah on the ticket.

As they had done during the gubernational campaign, they searched the Internet for related blogs and news sites, where they posted comments and directed users to Brickley's blog. They located websites that invited users to vote in vice presidential preferential polls and made sure they voted for Sarah. With polls that did not include her name, they posted comments suggesting her as an alternative to others then being considered and encouraged sites to add her name to the list. Their help moved Sarah's name up in several of the informal polls, not all the way to the top but high enough to get noticed. That, in turn, generated discussions about her among news outlets. Before long she wasn't just the first female governor of Alaska. She was on the short list of names mentioned as a potential Republican vice presidential candidate.

Chuck Heath Jr. and Sr.: Their book wasn't so boring after all

Therefore Sarah Palin experienced the benefits of have a large group of supporters who defend you online and, ideally, shout down the opposition in online forums with lies, insults and heavily distorted or made-up "facts" - Scientology-style. Because that is what can be witnessed today on virtually every article which is posted online about the Quitter, with the supposedly "independent" website "Conservatives4Palin" (C4P) at the heart of this ugly "movement" for Sarah. Her online "mini-me's" imitate the "Governor" perfectly: They are mean, they play dirty and they surely don't let facts get in their way.

"Conservatives4Palin" have rather murky beginnings when at some point in early 2009, three supposed "grassroots activists" founded the website (see their "official story" about the start of the website). If you believe that this was an "independent" start-up, you might as well believe in Santa Claus. Co-founder Rebecca A. Mansour ("RAM") secretly vanished from the site later in 2009 with virtually no trace remaining, so to speak - until we at Palingates "found" her again in an exclusive revelation on February 1, 2010, when we reported that Rebecca A. Mansour secretly had become one of Sarah Palin's highly paid advisors.

That claim that "Conservatives4Palin" is independent from Sarah Palin has long been exposed as a lie. I recently wrote in my post about the practice of banning even mildly critical commenters from "Conservatives4Palin":

It is a website which claims to be independent from Sarah Palin and her official organizations, but Sarah Palin's former top-aide Frank Bailey inconveniently revealed in his book "Blind Allegiance to Sarah Palin" that Conservatives4Palin received their talking points from Palin-aide Meg Stapleton in 2009 in order to discredit Juneau-resident Chip Thoma (p. 323). As a result of the communications between Meg Stapleton and C4P, their writer Joey Russo published a bogus-story about the invented fact that Thoma wanted to "close down Piper Palin's lemonade stand."

So what fun fact have we got to report today? We recently wrote about Steve Flesher, a leading author and moderator at C4P, who is also the founder of "gayconservative.org." Steve Flesher proved just as "ban-happy" as "RAM" back in the old days. Anyone who "disrespects the Governor", which according to Steve Flesher also includes asking the question why Palin is silent on immigration issues, will get the boot from "Conservatives4Palin" - the fan club does not want to be disturbed.

It is therefore understandable that Steve Flesher does not like us too much. However, that is not very surprising, as his internet history proves that apart from being one of the most important authors at C4P, he has been one of Sarah Palin's most rabid and vicious "online defenders" during the recent years as well. Many people might not be aware of the fact that the very vocal pro-Palin online-commenter "snorp73" is actually Steve Flesher. He never identifies himself in the comments, but his sign-up history is partially online - you find it with a simple google-search:

In the meantime, Steve deleted his "snorp73" twitter account, but still uses his disqus-profile for combative and mostly insulting pro-Palin comments on blogs and articles (despite having a disqus-profile with his real name as well).

When my dear wife Kathleen recently left a comment on the "Atlantic Wire" article about John Olivers wonderful segment about Sarah Palin, Steve Flesher aka "snorp73" shot back with a remark which is more than eyebrow-raising in its hilarity, or might I even say "hypocrisy" - the conservative gay activist Steve Flesher, founder of "gayconservative.org", attacked Kathleen with a "gay slur." He responded to Kathleen:

"Low standards, mister-sister."

Screenshots:

Even for Steve Flesher, this has to a new low.

In some older comments "snorp73" actually mentioned that his is gay:

The "urban dictionary" has this to say about the phrase "mister sister".

Could you also say "hypocrisy?" 

Funnily, that is what justifies banning commenters at "Conservatives4Palin", according to Steve Flesher:

To conclude, there are two other comments by Steve Flesher aka "snorp73" which are worth mentioning. But before doing that, I would like to point out the following - Steve Flesher aka "snorp73" is no stranger to check out other people's comment histories as well and commenting about it:

First, it is particularly interesting to note that Steve Flesher found it necessary to dismiss the allegation that Sarah Palin faked her pregnancy with Trig (which is, of course, a true fact and not just an allegation) with a flat out-lie.

On a Palin-related article at "The Hill" the commenter "nolaredhead" posted the following photo comparison in the comments, a photo-comparison which was originally created by our reader "Lidia17":

Steve Flesher aka "snorp73" responded to this photo with a very revealing comment:

"Nobody can prove that they correspond with the dates they claim to be taken on"...?

You really want to believe that, am I correct, Steve?

So let's make the fact-check. That's always great fun as far as Sarah Palin is concerned, did you know that, Steve?

Let's start with the picture on the right, taken on April 13, 2008. It's a real pleasure to confirm that authenticity of this photo, because you know, Steve, there was even a TV-report done about this photo, by KTVA-reporter Andrea Gusty, who interviewed Sarah while the photo was taken.

This is the TV-report about the photo, from April 2009:

This is the original photo, in the highest resolution available (click on photo to enlarge):

There was also a second photo published together with this one:

When were they published? Well, anonymously, on August 31, 2008, on flickr, by videographer Dan Carpenter, as we know today. He used the the flickr-account named "erik99559." This account has long been deleted, but the screenshots survive, as well as the original photos:

News of the anonymously posted picture spread suspiciously fast, because just one day later, on September 1, 2008, HuffPost writer Lee Stranahan, who today writes for Breitbart, used this photo to debunk that fast spreading claim that Sarah Palin faked her pregnancy:

See our post from April 17, 2011 with more facts and documentation about the "Gusty-pictures."

So I think we confirmed that authenticity of this photo, won't you agree, Steve?

Let's get to the second photo, from March 26, 2008, when Sarah Palin was only three weeks away from "giving birth" to a baby weighing more then six pounds.

There are actually several pictures existing from this day. The one in the picture-comparison above only came to light in August 2011 after they had been released by photo-agency Polaris (see our major post about these photos from August 2011).

Here is it again in its full glory:

Well, apart from the fact that we have a professional photo-agency website dating the photo on March, 2008...

...we also have several other pieces of documentation, as explained in great length in this post.

Originally, we had found a different picture from March 26, 2008 at a much earlier point, already late in 2008.

This was the original "nail in the coffin" picture from March 26, 2008 (click to enlarge), which was posted on flickr by the user "surfdaf":

The picture was taken on March 26, 2008, in the Alaska State Museum in Juneau where Palin signed Bill HB 259. Here is a news report from this event:

Here is a screenshot of Sarah Palin's official diary from that day, which was obtained through a FOIA request (click to enlarge):

Sarah Palin's complete official schedule from late 2007 and early 2008, which was obtained through a FOIA request, can be found HERE.

In addition, here is a screenshot from a news report about this event in the "Juneau Empire" - already including a picture which was taken by Brian Wallace:

The picture links to this short story - written by Brian Wallace, whose additional pictures from this event now appeared on the agency website virtually "out of the blue":

The "wayback Machine" also saved the official press release of the Governor's office for this event at the Alaska State Museum which took place on March 26, 2008.

The "nail in the coffin" picture with Palin's flat belly was upload to flickr on April 15, 2008, three days before Trig was officially born, by the user "surfdaf". It's not the only picture she uploaded from this event. There were several others as well.

Here are the original screenshots from flickr:

I even made PDF-hardcopies of the flickr-pages on November 30, 2008. You can access the PDF-document with the "nail in the coffin" picture HERE.

While "surfdaf" made the famous "nail in the coffin" picture private shortly after it was discovered, the other pictures are still online, "embedded" in a huge batch of other pictures from Alaska which were also uploaded to flickr on April 15, 2008.

So I guess we have this picture covered as well.

What do you say now, Steve? Where is the baby weighing more than six pounds which was presented only three weeks later on April 18, 2008? Where was it hiding? Because one thing is certain: On March 26, 2008, it certainly was not "there."

This was the situation on April 18, 2008:

Steve, maybe the answer to all these questions can be found in your own comments.

On June 27, 2011, when Sarah's fan, you included, were still certain of a presidential run, you commented:

You wrote:

"If she doesn't run, she irritates a massive following of people requiring her to at least give it a shot. She has to -- even if she loses --- to stay in the mix."

Actually, I agree with you here, Steve. If Sarah Palin had been aspiring to become the US President, she definitely should have attempted a run - even if she lost.

So why didn't she run, Steve?

And let me add: Why will she never run for anything else again, Steve?

You should think long and hard about these questions, Steve. Sometimes it's too hard to see the wood if there are too many bears and popes around, you know.

+++

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 - FOR THE COLLECTION, CLICK HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE 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).

Listen to Sarah Palin's own description of her unbelievable "Wild Ride" from Texas to Alaska, which happened on April 17, 2008: Sarah explains how she decided to make the trip, despite of the fact that her "water broke" the night before.

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

Sarah Palin's speech in Philadelphia yesterday at the "Terri Schiavo Life & Hope Network’s Award Gala" - Boots on the ground report and pictures! - UPDATE - Revealed: The press photographers by Getty and Corbis were told by a Palin-representative that they need to get their photos approved before publishing! - UPDATE 2: Video with the full speech

Sarah Palin speaking in Philadelphia yesterday - 
Photo taken by our reader "ComeOnPeople" (click to enlarge)

+++

By ComeOnPeople

For 4 ½ years I have waited to see Palin in person. I know she is not Tri-G’s birth mother and relish the opportunity to tell her to her face that she did not fool me. When I heard she was coming to my city, I bought a ticket and gave up tickets to a very important skating event so I could hear her in person.

I went to the Phila airport yesterday, guessing at the flights she could be taking. I guessed wrong, although she said in her speech she did fly in on 4/4. I wasn’t going to wait around all afternoon. Had I run in to her, I had a speech all prepared. I am passionate about exposing her hoax. I think because I am in healthcare, I have some anger about the role medical professionals and institutions played in the hoax. I know there is not much you can do about stupid people who believe her, but I definitely expect more from the medical community.

I got dressed up in a cocktail dress, drove downtown alone and observed the event. There were about 380 people – 38 tables of ten. The crowd was lily white – I did not see Adrienne Ross there, but could have missed her. The only person of color I saw was the foster child of a couple from Washington with whom I chatted for a bit by the bar. Everyone was well dressed, very nice and very, very Catholic. Many professional couples, doctors, lawyers, many families, MANY families with DS children attended. All age groups were represented but the majority were older couples. There were Catholic school girls in uniform who directed you up the escalators to the cocktail reception. They were also selling some book someone wrote about Terri. AND they were auctioning off these really bad pictures that they say Teri had drawn. I thought it was comical that the totally amateur drawings of a nobody were framed and being auctioned off. However, since I went to the shindig alone, I did hang out by the drawings for a while to kill time.

I had actually purchased a pen that records audio and video, but it turns out I did not need it as cameras and cell phones were allowed and were used freely by many people.

I left the official program on my table , so I am sorry I forget the hosts name. She is a woman who works in Hollywood, was second runner up for Miss America. She made a really inappropriate comment before we said the Pledge of Allegiance: something to the effect that she can’t say the Pledge in Hollywood, or Hollywood people won’t. Some drivel. Then, a very disappointing video of Gary Sinese was played. Sinese apparently is involved with the Schiavo Foundation and WAS going to be at the event, but his band was playing a show , so he did a video instead. Damn! I’ve really liked him since he played in Apollo 13. I had no idea he was so uninformed.

Palin was the keynote speaker. She wore a suit with an appropriate length skirt. I couldn’t see her shoes. I don’t think she looked terrible emaciated in this suit as she has in many recent pictures. Her hair looked awful – uncombed with a big birds nest in the back. I think she was a tad late getting to the room as the emcee lady kept looking over to her right and ad libbing until Palin got there. I did not see Todd. Palin’s 40 minute screech was one that we all have heard ad nauseum over the years. It seems she stuck with the birth version from Going Rogue. She talked about the ultrasound tech noticing a thick neck and CBJ calling her a few days later and delivering the DS diagnosis over the phone at 2:22 one cold winter afternoon. She talked about keeping the” pregnancy” a secret until 7 months, wearing layers of clothes, etc, etc. She said she held Tri-G as soon as he was born. Yeah right. Doubling down on the fantasy high risk premie delivery . If you listen to the videotape, I apologize in advance for my sighing and other vocalizations of disgust and incredulity…but I did not curse! I stared Sarah down the entire speech.

My face told a story every time she spoke about the pregnancy and birth. I had my camera and Iphone up and recording the entire speech. I was pretty close to her and perhaps it is wishful thinking, but I think she saw my scowl and quizzical looks and got unnerved. She would look down at her notes A LOT .

The crowd obviously had not heard many of her jokes before, because they earnestly laughed at the “my kid has more chromosomes than your kid” and other old, old, old recycled same- old jokes. Since she was talking to Catholics she mentioned she was a Catholic and then went to Assembly of God church. She talked about God a lot. I absolutely see her becoming the next Tammy Faye Baker. These people, even though many were obviously successful in life, lapped up her bull@#$% and asked for more.

Her speech ccntent was disjointed, and she took up a lot of time making doctors, clergy, veterans, Terri’s parents all stand up individually for applause. Then she read some of the Constitution She went on and on about death panels again and I saw a lot of people nodding their heads in agreement. I stopped looking at the crowd then because I can’t fix stupid. She talked about Philadelphia which made me laugh because although the Marriott is 5 minutes from the world famous Art Museum, the Reading Terminal Market , our beautiful City Hall and other exciting parts of the city, we pretty much know she spent her time in the hotel room. I wonder if Todd moseyed over a few blocks to Arch St. to check out the working girls?

After milking the speech along for exactly 40 minutes, she ended and got a standing ovation…I only stood to take some more pictures. Palin was then given a Life and Hope Award from the Foundation (which will probably get dumped in a dumpster somewhere like she ditched the empathy belly in Texas) and then she excited stage left….not sure if anyone signed up for a $25,000 Meet and Greet or not.

After she spoke, I excused myself from the table and hightailed it out of there. There is only so much a girl can take. There was some literature distributed at the event in case people needed to learn some more about Palin. There were some laminated business cards and some posters in the bathroom stalls. Someone has a sense of humor. I sent the blogs a picture of the items. 

Drawings by Terri Schiavo which were auctioned at the event - 

Photo taken by our reader "ComeOnPeople"

More pictures of these drawings can be found on the Corbis-website.

+++

By Patrick:

Many thanks to ComeOnPeople for this excellent report, and for making the effort to go to the event in the first place!

These were the items which ComeOnPeople cleverly left at several place during the event:

From our "special friends" at C4P we learn that Sarah Palin also told her standard "I was not a spring chicken any more" and "Todd is not Abraham" story again, which she recycled word-by-word from old speeches:

When it comes to personal experience with life issues, Sarah Palin has more clout than most. Fittingly, she discussed them at the Schiavo event. Palin recalled her pregnancy in 2008 and how she kept it out of the public eye until she was seven months along even though she was in the daily spotlight as governor. She said in Alaska it’s easier to hide a pregnancy than in most states because you can always add layers. But eventually folks started wondering if she was getting “chunky”. Palin had just become the youngest governor in state history and the first woman to serve in the high office. The last thing she needed was the good old boys pointing the finger at her for getting pregnant. Finally she let the press and America know she was in fact expecting. She had been thrown a “curveball”. Palin pointed out that she was no spring chicken at the time and she prayed about her new addition. She joked that even though her name is Sarah her husband’s name is not Abraham!

Once doctors determined the new Palin baby would have Down Syndrome, they were overcome with a slew of feelings and emotions. Many in this country immediately suggest abortion in cases like this. Todd and Sarah Palin chose life. A new baby boy was born. “Trig melted into my arms,” Palin said. “What a blessing he is.”

Yes, what a blessing! Unfortunately, Sarah Palin did indeed fake her pregnancy with Trig, so this story is made up just like myriads of other Palin stories.

Sarah Palin told her audience the same "spring chicken/Abraham" story for example at an event in Texas in September 2010:

So why not pay $ 90,000 plus expenses for up to three people for lame recycled speeches in which the old lies are repeated over and over again. Because $ 90,000 plus expenses is still Sarah Palin's standard speaking fee, as we discovered yesterday, thanks to the help of a young overly enthusiastic Palin-fan.

"Dissent" to Sarah Palin's appearance at the Terri Schiavo Gala comes from an unlikely source, the comments at C4P. There, commenter and Palin-fan "colint" left two long comments, defending the actions of Terri's husband Michael Schiavo - and ultimately criticizing Sarah Palin's participation in the event. Let's see whether this comments stays up. Excerpt (h/t Older_Wiser):

"TERRI the truth" author Michael Schiavo, 360 pages, published 2006. I obtained this book from my local library in Vancouver, Canada. It is an excellent book. After reading it, I am convinced that anyone's opinion on the Schiavo case is worthless without reading this book. I wish someone like CHUCK HEATH Jr would read it and he might see that Sarah should not again be involved with this charity created by Terri's father as he was not a nice or honest person.

(...)

Michael also faced the abusive power of Governments. Florida and the state government with Jeb Bush and later the US House and Senate (signed by POTUS Bush) passed UNCONSTITUTIONAL laws to stop Michael from allowing Terri's body to die as has been done under law in thousands of other cases involving Persistant Vegative State.

Michael declined several large offers based on giving control of Terri to her parents. Google "Gloria Aldred Michael Schiavo" for story re $1,000,000 offer.

Many people at the time were MISLED by seeing on TV a 2 minute clip of Terri Shiavo where she appears to be responsive. This two minutes (collection of reflex movements not thought directed) was cut from 4 HOURS of film made for evidence for the court with the rest containing 238 minutes of NO movement. About 5,500 days passed between when Terri's mind died and when her body was allowed to die. While she did not know it, in those years she was fed a paste like nutrition and liquid through a tube in her abdomen to her stomach. Each day she expelled urine and feces requiring several adult diaper changes each day. She acquired diseases. There were records of Michael (after dressing her etc) taking her in a wheel chair to a doctors office over 100 times. There was also a record that, due Michael ensuring her care, she NEVER had bed sores.

Some on this site have called this Schiavo event a "Gala" to celebrate Terri's life. Apart from the years between meeting Michael and her collapse, she had a ROTTEN life. At high school she weighed 250 lbs. She was ridiculed by her father. This may have caused an obsession with weight that resulted in her bulumia . They were trying to have a baby and consulted a doctor. She had been purging (making herself vomit). She was down to 115 lbs when she collapsed.

(...)

This article is based on an interview with Terri's brother, Bobby Schindler. He said that Terri's diagnosis, her prognosis, her wishes, her autopsy are no longer that important to him. Neither he or his father, who died in 2009, were ever interested in Terri's wishes or the well documented medical facts of the case. Until the media showed up the father and son had rarely visited. Without a doubt her husband, Michael, based on visitor records kept by the institutions caring for Terri, spent over a thousand times more hours with Terri than these two. In the early years her mother did visit but that declined.

It is in the record that the Schindlers tried to get control of funds held in trust for Terri. The Terri Schiavo Life & Hope Network was formed supposedly to help others but it is providing a good extra income for the Schindler family. In 2011 Bobby got $47,062, the mother $23,250 and the sister $39,042. The son says his father died "broken hearted" that he was unable to save his daughter. When Terri weighed 250lbs in high school she was ridiculed by her father which may have caused bulemia that later resulted in her collapse. In a deposition and in court he testified that if his daughter had limbs with gangrene, if it was up to him, he would have authorised amputation to keep keep her body alive. Terri's soul would have been welcomed in heaven. I doubt the father's soul ended up in the same place.

Schindler said "when the autopsy came out, showing the extent of her injury, he thought people used it as justification for her death". He accidently made a true statement. The autopsy did show that the destruction of critical areas of her brain prevented any recovery. He said that "he thinks that people like his sister are a "blessing". How we care for them is in a way testing us, a reflection of our culture" What a phony. These people are tragedies. He rarely visited his sister. Schindler failed the test.

Michael Schiavo did become the best example of caring for someone.

I found this comment by a Palin-fan quite remarkable. We are dealing here with very complex ethical, medical and human issues which should not be open for quick "law and order" solutions and for political exploitation. Read also this thoughtful article about the subject, which raises good points.

Due to technical issues, we will publish the video by ComeOnPeople from the event at a later point.

+++

UPDATE:

Our commenter "Andi" was also at Sarah Palin's speech yesterday and told us the following additional points:

I was there last night at the Schivo Banquet...just a few things to clarify from ComeOnPeople's great post.

1. Adrienne Ross was there. She and a few other "Palinistas" ran out of the ballroom to catch up with Palin. After Palin greeted the parochial school girls, they trailed off after her to the elevator.

2. You are right about Palin flubbing things. She was really subdued, not her normal histrionic self.

3. She actually left Philly Saturday Morning. Mark Lamont hill said she came up to him at the PHL airport and said hello. It's on his twitter feed.

4. I am betting those big gulp cups came from the 7/11 right across the street from the Marriott. They are so pathetic.

5. Best story was I spoke with the Getty and Corbis photographers after Palin's speech. They were wrapping up. Some Palin person came up to them and said, you can't publish these pics until Palin's person approves of them. She does not want any unflattering pics out there.

You can imagine how that went over with the Pro's. They were also not allowed to video much of the speech.

Oh no! That's the "freedum of the press" the US troops are apparently dying for, according to Sarah Palin! She has her own version!

Many thanks for the information, Andi! We really appreciate it!

The Getty photos from the event can be found HERE.

The Corbis photos can be found HERE.

I have asked Getty and Corbis for a statement whether "pre-approved photos" at public events are an acceptable policy for them.

Imagine president Obama doing such a thing! The outrage...

+++

UPDATE 2 - Correction:

Our reader "Andi" clarified his/her comment and would like to make it clear that he/she does not know whether the Getty and Corbis photographers at the event followed the request for the approval of the pictures. Andi commented:

To clarify Patrick, They were asked by a Palin Person to have the photos approved. I don't believe they did get approval as both photographers were ticked about it and were packing up to leave. IDK what happened after as I went back into the banquet.

Therefore we do not know whether Getty and Corbis followed the request. I have also changed the headline of the post accordingly.

+++

UPDATE 3 - NEW VIDEO:

Our wonderful reader ComeOnPeople has now uploaded the video of the speech. It includes some very interesting parts. Funny that no Palinbot found the words of their goddess worthy enough to record them, but that our crowd had to do it! :-)

The edited video is now online! What I have done is, with the permission of our reader ComeOnPeople, to "crop" the video in a format that looks more like "typical video-size." The content is identical, nothing has been cut. 

Watch the new video:

The original video by ComeOnPeople is also still online.

Palin-biographer Joe McGinniss gives remarkable, refreshing new interview for Australian newspaper "The Sydney Morning Herald", in which he also discusses the issue of Sarah Palin's pregnancy with Trig - UPDATE!

By Patrick

Palin-biographer Joe McGinniss, whose excellent book "The Rogue" most likely was "the last straw which broke Sarah Palin's political ambitions", gave a remarkable new interview for "The Sydney Morning Herald."

I was pleased to see that the "mystery of little Trig", as "The Sydney Morning Herald" calls it, doesn't seem to be "no-go" issue in Australia. The controversy regarding the question whether Sarah Palin's pregnancy was faked or not is only briefly discussed in the article, however, and most importantly in my opinion, it is discussed without the usual "it's just a nutty conspiracy" warning which is "standard procedure" for virtually all American media outlets who mention this issue.

The interview is refreshing to read as Joe McGinniss doesn't mince words. He very nicely explains some aspects of the simple and ugly truth about Sarah Palin.

Excerpts from the article in "The Sydney Morning Herald":

The Palins built a three-metre-high fence. He had death threats. The publicity boiled along all summer. The market was panting by the time The Rogue appeared in September last year.

"Palin did everything she could to stop it," says McGinniss. "She threatened. She had a lawyer announce she was considering a lawsuit." That didn't happen. But within weeks of publication, Palin announced she would not be running in 2012.

McGinniss is far from claiming sole responsibility. As he sees it, Palin faced two problems running for the Republican nomination this year: she didn't have a hope of winning and any attempt would expose her to the sort of scrutiny that would put at risk her lucrative new career as a political celebrity.

"These people worked out a way to game the system," McGinniss says of the Palin family. "I don't blame them. They are just grifters who suddenly saw a chance at the main chance and they were clever enough and canny enough to take it. The American media was so gullible and the right wing was so desperate for new heroic figures that they basically got a free ride. She knew she wouldn't get a free ride this year in 2012."

His attack on Palin is full throttle. "I think everything about her is false. I think her claims of super Christianity are as false as everything else. She discovered who she needed to be to play to a very small audience in her town of Wasilla and she has calculated her way every step of the way. There has been an opening for a woman of the extreme right. She saw that.

"Even in Alaska there were no openings for educated, intelligent women of the left because Alaska - part of the anomaly that is the state - had a number of those already. What they needed was a militant crusader for evangelical values. And she combined - and we can never underestimate this - raw sex appeal with Christian platitudes. The Anchorage Daily News called her 'The Joan of Arc of Alaska politics'. There was nothing subtle about it."

What followed in his eyes was a tale of cunning and vengeance; high ambition and lazy performance; bobsleds and cocaine; a toxic marriage that saw Todd sleeping on the couch most nights and the kids roaming the neighbourhood looking for a feed. Then young Track was shunted off to the military after the high-school bus fleet was mysteriously vandalised one winter.

(...)

McGinniss devotes hilarious and scurrilous pages to the mystery of little Trig, the Down syndrome baby born soon after Palin won John McCain's endorsement. "The story she tells of her pregnancy and the birth simply can't be true," says McGinniss who wonders if the "birth" was designed to make Palin the poster child of the Right to Life.

"It would be the most cynical ploy and the greatest hoax ever pulled off in American politics," he says. Pursuing the story with him are bloggers and the influential columnist Andrew Sullivan. But McGinniss despairs of the failure of the "establishment media" to take the story seriously. He doesn't believe the issue is yet settled either way: "I remain Trignostic," he says.

Joe McGinniss took a huge risk in extensively discussing the "unresolved" question about Trig's birth in his book. Discussing this issue without slamming it as a "conspiracy theory" puts an author firmly outside the mainstream in the USA. Including this issue in the book probably harmed Joe McGinniss, as it most likely encouraged some reviewers to harshly criticize the book. This is also evident from the most "infamous" review of "The Rogue", published by Janet Maslin in "The New York Times", where she wrote on September 14, 2011:

With the same imprecise aim he cites conspiracy theories that Ms. Palin may not be the mother of her youngest son, Trig, and questions the circumstances under which he was born. Mr. McGinniss puts forth a provocative case for doubting Ms. Palin’s account of Trig’s birth, which involved a round trip between Alaska and Texas while she was supposedly in labor. But then he comes to an indefensibly reckless conclusion: “It is perhaps the most blistering assessment of her character possible that many Wasillans who’d known Sarah from high school onward told me that even if she had not faked the entire story of her pregnancy and Trig’s birth, it was something she was eminently capable of doing.”

I have written about the pathetic attempts by the US media to bury the "Trig question" many times, for example HERE, HERE and HERE. The problem is that not only did Sarah Palin fake a pregnancy - but that the US media also did fake a "debunker" of these claims. Given the fact that several major liberal or progressive journalists are publicly committed to the idea that Sarah Palin's faked pregnancy is a nutty conspiracy theory, it is unlikely that new facts will surface anytime soon, as it could virtually destroy a journalistic career to touch this issue. This is a sad state of affairs, and I guess that we now have all learned that there definitely are areas where the US media is just not willing to go, that there are scandals that will never be revealed because for one reason or the other it appears to be inappropriate "to go there."

It is hard to imagine how many scandals have never been explored by the US media because touching the issue on hand was simply "too inconvenient." When I had contact with journalists, I was told several times that hard proof is needed in order to report about the allegations concerning Sarah Palin's pregnancy with Trig. However, "hard proof" curiously never stopped the media to report for example about the allegations that President Obama was not born in the USA.

Therefore I have the greatest respect towards Joe McGinniss - as well as towards Andrew Sullivan. As far as I am aware, Joe McGinniss didn't plan to investigate the "private scandals" of Sarah Palin in greater detail when he started to research his book. It appeared to me, being aware of some backgound conversations, that he wasn't keen to delve into this material. However, along the way, Joe McGinniss changed his mind - and this was a brave act. He reported in great detail in his book about for example the pregnancy, and made it absolutely clear that this issue is not a "conspiracy theory" at all, but an important question which needs to be taken seriously. He also wasn't shy to talk about this topic in the interviews following the publication of his book - and he still is not shy to talk about it, and that demands the greatest respect.

Joe McGinniss gave several very good interviews after the publication of his book, and one interview which was particularly revealing was his conversation with Joy Behar from September 21, 2011, as they talked in length about the pregnancy. For unknown reasons, the video clip of this interview doesn't seem to be available online, but the transcript can be found on the CNN-website.

From the transcript:

BEHAR: Now, the one big allegation in the book that I think is a problem is that the rumor that Trig was not her baby, this Down syndrome child, that you and Andrew Sullivan are putting this out there, right?

MCGINNISS: No. No. No. All Andrew`s been doing for two years is asking why the mainstream media has not looked at the story she has told about the events leading up to her birth, the hours before Trig`s birth ...

BEHAR: What`s the implication?

MCGINNISS: Because the story -- because if that story, which really defies belief, if you look at it step by step by step, if that story isn`t true, why would she make it up? Why would she be telling it and why would she be claiming that this was happening?

BEHAR: Why would she? Why would she?

MCGINNISS: I have no idea.

BEHAR: OK, let me tell you what her son-in-law said.

MCGINNISS: Good.

BEHAR: He was just here and I asked him that question. And he said, she was in the hospital, he was in the hospital, he went to visit her when she gave birth to Trig. She was on IV and the baby was there in the hospital. He was there ...

MCGINNISS: He got there -- he didn`t witness the birth.

BEHAR: Oh, no. How many people witness a birth?

MCGINNISS: I witnessed the birth of all five of my children.

BEHAR: Yeah, but that`s your children. He was not the father of the child. He was just a guy who slept with her daughter.

MCGINNISS: The point is she was in Dallas, Texas. Her water breaks. She waits nine hours, she doesn`t go to a hospital in Dallas, Texas. She`s a high risk mother ...

BEHAR: Yeah.

MCGINNISS: having a high risk pregnancy, having a special needs child, she`s thousands of miles away from home, she doesn`t do anything once her water breaks and she goes -- starts having contractions, what does she do? She`s having contractions, she makes a speech.

BEHAR: But how do you know she`s having contractions?

MCGINNISS: She makes up political speech.

BEHAR: How do you know?

MCGINNISS: She said so.

BEHAR: So, then you`re saying that she then got on a plane, went to Seattle and gave another speech or something, or -- right?

MCGINNISS: She waited -- she flew for hours, she stopped, she changed planes, she waited for hours, she flew more hours, all the while getting closer and closer to birth bypassing major medical facilities with neonatal intensive care units to get to a tiny little backwoods hospital in Wasilla ...

BEHAR: Yes.

MCGINNISS: ... where all of a sudden the next day here is this baby, and here is Sarah and this is her story.

BEHAR: This is kind of a bombshell allegation or theory or rumor whatever you want to call it.

MCGINNISS: It is not -- Listen, I don`t want to call it an allegation, I don`t make an allegation.

BEHAR: Yeah.

MCGINNISS: I say that the mainstream media has been very derelict in its duty to inquire into this, because this is a woman whose political candidacy was based on her proving that she`s a right to lifer. And how does she prove it? She proved it by giving birth to a Down syndrome baby yet there are a whole series of unanswered questions surrounding the circumstances of that birth.

BEHAR: Well, that -- why don`t you investigate this?

MCGINNISS: And I`m only one person ...

BEHAR: You`re an investigative reporter, go investigate more.

MCGINNISS: I`ve been up there -- You know what, I have to write a book. I wrote the book. Now, the media can pick up from where my book takes them. I take you right to a point where I say, I don`t know what happened. Here`s what I do know. Here are the facts, now, let somebody else investigate.

Sooner or later, we will get to know the truth. History proves that at some point, the truth will always be revealed. However, in the case of Sarah Palin's pregnancy, I assume that the truth will only be revealed "later", as courageous investigative journalism seems to be virtually dead in the USA - because from an investigative journalist, I would expect also to touch inconvenient issues, not just the "popular" and "safe" ones.

However, there is another excellent clip which fortunately is available online - Joe McGinniss discussing the issue of Sarah Palins pregnancy on "The View" in September 2011:

Bonus clip, just for the fun of it, unrelated to the pregnancy - a very funny Joy Behar together with a very witty and funny panel of guests talk about Sarah Palin's book "America By Heart":

+++

UPDATE:

Our reader maelewis left a very good comment, which I would like to add to the post:

Please allow me to adjust my tinfoil hat because there could be secret devices trying to capture what I type on my computer. I'll have to put tinfoil around my computer for protection, too. Do I believe in conspiracies and media avoiding some subjects because they are too "touchy?" Yes, I do. I'll give a different example. GWB.

When Bush was running for President, an author named J.H.Hatfield (James Hatfield)  published a book, "Fortunate Son,," George W. Bush and the making of am American president. The book was published in 2000 by Soft Skull Press which was a small independent press at the time. (It has since been sold). The book is not all that well written and it is in want of good editing, but Hatfield told stories about GWB's wild youth that have covered up in as many places as possible. Hatfield even mentioned George H.W.Bush's experience in the CIA as assisting in the coverup. One story that always impressed me as believable was the one about GWB being involved in an auto accident. Because of the accident, the police had the right to search his car, and they found cocaine. Later, when GWB wanted to run for political office, this would be part of his driving record. No problem, his attorney, Alberto Gonzalez (future Attorney General) suggested letting GWB's driver's license expire. Then, when Bush applied for a new license, a new number would be issued. When it came time for the political vetting and background checks, they would run the new number; the old number would be lost and gone forever, along with his record. (The accident was resolved with 6 months of community service).

Hatfield's book was panned and trashed. I found it in the sale bin of a book store, greatly reduced. Hatfield's personal life went from bad to worse, accumulating credit card debts, drinking, drugs and he eventually committed suicide in 2001. The wikipedia entry for Hatfield blames the book as much as the other things. A year later, HBO aired a documentary about Hatfield, "Horns and Halos." Whatever stories Hatfield had to tell about Bush had been discredited. Dan Rather tried to expose Bush's preferential treatment in the Air National Guard, and he received the same treatment because some documents appeared forged. No one disputed the facts of Rather's report, just the photocopied and faxed documents.

The bottom line is that I know someone in the newspaper business. I have told him about these stories, and he won't touch them. Once Hatfield was discredited, no one would touch him or his stories. Ditto for Rather's rather suspect documents. As far as the truth about George W. Bush, his record as President speaks for itself and is more damning than cocaine, an auto accident and the Air National Guard.  He was a failure. His invasion of Iraq was a disaster, with consequences that are still being felt today. Would he have been elected if Hartfield and Rather's stories exposed Bush? Probably, because the sad truth of the 2000 election is that Ralph Nader took away just enough votes, and Gore didn't help himself against the formidable Poppy Bush connections (and Karl Rove). But, I do believe in a conspiracy of silence regarding some stories that deserved investigation and are brushed aside.

Sarah Palin? I believe that the media has adopted an unspoken hands-off attitude regarding Trig and the story of his birth, as unbelievable as the story is. Like Bush, Sarah is seen as a failure because of larger, more serious issues-- her lack of qualifications, her lack of intelligence, her inability to learn anything, her nasty style of speaking, her thin skinned reaction to the slightest criticism.

This is my response:

Hi maelewis,

many thanks for your comment. I fully agree with the conclusion that the media in the USA has adopted an unspoken hands-off attitude regarding Trig and the story of his birth. I can also understand the reasons. However, what concerns me is the fact that journalists in the USA apparently see themselves in a way that they...how shall I put it...that they are also political players - when in reality they should in the first place be independent observers, and above all, should feel a duty to control the actions of politicians, and report the truth, as inconvenient as it might be. It's very unhealthy for a democracy if journalists are mainly partisan players. It's their duty to report about scandals, regardless whether this might "damage" their political "friends" or not. Of course I am describing an "ideal" here. But as far as I can see, journalism in the USA is driven far too much by partisanship. This cannot be good.

I had not heard about Hatfield's story. That is very tragic indeed. It's painful to see that there seems to be a "tradition" in the USA that there a "issues" which simply cannot be touched - and that you might get "punished" if you cross that line, that you are in danger of being "expelled" from the community of the self-declared good and decent folks. There are definitely parallels to the issue of the faked pregnancy, another "no-go" subject, which one should "better not touch." That is all very sad. I can say from experience that this is not the same in every country - but it's a question of "journalistic culture." Such a culture develops over a long period of time.

I am lucky to live in a country in which the standards of investigative journalism are high. But that is mainly due to the fact that there was one new publication after WWII - the "Spiegel", founded in 1947 - that completely changed journalism in Germany, adopting right from the start a radical anti-authoritarian, modern approach, relentlessly exposing the failings and scandals of friends and foes alike, in a way the Western world probably had never seen before. Journalism in the USA could use a dose of that spirit.

I have observed US journalism closely since 2008, as a "newcomer", and I am very disappointed. What I have seen is far from exceptional. It's no big surprise to me that there have been too many bad politicians in power in the USA, and GWB was not the first one, as we all know. Journalists in the USA obviously let politicians get away with far too much and apparently don't take their role seriously enough - with a few exceptions, but it's too little, and sometimes too late.

+++

UPDATE 2:

In the comments, we have a very lively discussion about the shortcoming of the US mainstream media. There seems to be a consensus amongst our readers that the US media doesn't do their job properly, to put it carefully.

There is something I would like to add to the discussion:

In January 2011, while I was blogging for "Palingates", I had a lenghty email-discussion with a respected MSM-journalist. This discussion shines some light on the mentality of MSM-journalists. I am not saying that any MSM-journalist has exactly the same thoughts, but I guess many MSM-journalists would in general agree with the statements which their colleague made in this email exchange in January 2011 (bearing in mind what we already know about the thoughts of MSM-journalists regarding the pregnancy issue, having seen for example the contents of the leaked JournoList emails) .

Some parts of this email-conversation contained confidential information, and of course I won't give any hints regarding the identity of the journalist, but he was working for a major MSM-organisation. It is basically just a "real life case study" as far as the thoughts of MSM-journalists are concerned, the identity is not important.

I can publish some of the messages without redactions, and they provide interesting insights for example into how this journalist perceived the pregnancy issue, and for example what he thought about the role of the bloggers (and about my work at Palingates in particular).

What follows are excerpts from this email exchange - these messages are not edited, just the name of the reporter was deleted.

Message 1:

(REPORTER)
1/19/11
to me

Your contempt for "the media" is so strange to me. You rely on the media. You share information back and forth. But in your blog you adopt this pose of being anti-media. Who is that exactly? Oprah? The New York Times?

It just seems so, well, rigorous.

You're an advocate. And you're dismissive of those who are not advocates.

It seems so strange.

Message 2:

(REPORTER)
1/19/11
to me

I'm just saying that your complaining that the media doesn't reflect your reality sounds a lot like which politician in America?

You're saying you've spent two years investigating Sarah Palin. But your blog doesn't convey that. It conveys ridicule of Sarah Palin. There may be some investigation mixed in, yes, but the main message that your Web site conveys is ridicule.

I'm not basing this on what you suggest: some sort of contempt based on my being a professional, and you being an amateur. No, I'm just looking at your work. Take a step back, if possible, open your Web site, and look at it! It's not providing news, but opinion and ridicule. You can't be surprised if you present yourself that way and then are surprised that you are perceived that way. You can say, oh, that's just because (fill in something about the viewer) -- no, look at the work and how it's presented. It's camp. It's mockery. It's ridicule. Most of all, it's advocacy. You can't seriously pretend that you haven't taken sides on the question of Sarah Palin?

Again, thanks for the chat.

Finally, the following exchange:

(REPORTER)
1/19/11
to me

No, you're not "just a sarcastic  blogger." If you were a mainstream journalist and you were off on the same tangent, mixing fact and innuendo freely,  I'd tell you the same thing.

But you're obsessed with Sarah Palin's pregnancy, the public policy implications which are nil.

(Please don't send a note telling me why the pregnancy is important. I've read every page on your site, I believe. I've read why you think it's important.)

Thanks again,


patrick palingates
1/19/11
to (REPORTER)

I am not sure which "innuendo" I am mixing.

Do you think that facts have a "lower value" just because bloggers have
discovered them?

I note that you don't think that it's important that a sitting female
governor and vice-presidential candidate and possible future candidate
for the presidency faked a pregnancy and then not just lied about it
repeatedly, but even exploited the child for political gain.

All I can say is that the huge majority of our readers think it's a
big deal, and they are not stupid, we have a very diverse readership.

I am not obsessed with the pregnancy. But how would you feel if you
knew about such a big secret and the media then completely ignores it?

I believe it's very relevant, and that's why we will continue to blog about it.

(REPORTER)
1/19/11
to me

Patrick,

I stopped here:

"Do you think that facts have a "lower value" just because bloggers have discovered them?"

Please, please, get the chip off your shoulder. I keep telling you that I'm not critical of you because you're a blogger. And you keep saying, hey, it's because I'm a blogger, right? There's no need to be so insecure.

No, I don't think much of the site because it's unable to distinguish fact from implication, or what's true from what "a lot of people in Alaska know to be true," etc.

Again, thanks.

+++

Read all posts at Politicalgates about Sarah Palin's faked pregnancy with Trig - FOR THE COLLECTION, CLICK HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE,HERE AND HERE.