Let's take a moment to talk Babygate.

March 14, 2008

I thought it might be a good idea to give all of you an update as to where I am on chasing my own personal white whale.

Toward that end I am pleased to report that I have three entirely separate angles that I am working right now with three entirely different sources. For at least two of these sources there is a timing component which is completely out of my hands, so all I can do is sit patiently and trust that when the time comes they will deliver as promised. 

I am of course being my usual cautious self so that I do not push too hard and frighten anybody away.

And trust me that ain't easy. But the stakes are high.

In my opinion at least two of these sources could blow the babygate thing wide open. And I mean wide open. (Oh I should mention that there is a fourth source that I am trying to locate which has information that is equally explosive, but I am not holding out much hope of locating them for right now.)

So I thought this might be good time to revisit what I do and do not know about Trig's mysterious birth.

Well one thing I know for certain is that the lady on the left did not give birth to him on April 18, 2008.

March 26, 2008.

Not really any question about that if you simply use your eyes.

I am also almost certain that Bristol did not give birth to Trig either. Not in April, nor before.

Now I am not saying that she did not have a baby before Tripp, but if she did it was almost definitely not Trig.

I base that on the observations of a number of people, most of who would love to tell me if she was the mother.

At this point my working theories are that Trig is either entirely unrelated to the family, or, as my source postulated, Todd's kid with another woman.

I have actually come to terms with the fact that we may NEVER know who Trig's real birth mother is, and have instead decided that the important thing to focus on is the false pregnancy and birth story. And that is a goal that I am getting closer to all of the time.

April 13, 2008.

Another thing we may not every know for certain is exactly why Palin did this.

I have entertained a variety of theories, from cementing her pro-life credentials, to protecting a family member, to simply trying to put gossip to rest before being tapped by John McCain. But as for definitive proof, currently there is little.

I sometimes wonder just how much proof it will take to convince the public at large that this hoax actually took place, and how much it will take to convince the MSM that it is not only news worthy, but explosively so.

I have to admit that I really thought we had just about done that back in 2011, with those Juneau pictures.  But after a couple of weeks of excitement on the blogs, it just kind of faded away.

Ultimately it is not enough that I offer the evidence here on IM, it has to go national. And it has to have real evidence that cannot be simply ignored, or dismissed as a conspiracy theory.

Hopefully, if every thing goes right, that is what I am about to come up with.

So when I do I am counting on all of you to help me get it out to the news agencies and websites that will help it to get national attention.

Boy won't that be a great day?

Cathy Baldwin-Johnson to end her career as a family physician in the Mat-Su Valley and instead work in Anchorage. Now who do I know that lives in Anchorage?

Courtesy of the Frontiersman:  

Dr. Cathy Baldwin-Johnson says being a family physician has been “a great calling.” 

Fifteen years after she opened the Mat-Su Valley’s first clinic to provide obstetric care in 1985, Dr. Baldwin-Johnson and her two other physicians accepted Providence Medical Group Alaska’s offer to buy their practice. 

“I think the reason we agreed to it is that we felt our missions were really aligned,” Baldwin-Johnson said. 

With a high proportion of uninsured and Medicaid patients, Baldwin-Johnson saw more opportunity to continue seeing those patients with Providence’s help. 

“We were able to see patients like that that other physicians might not have been willing to see when we were a part of Providence,” she said. 

But the end of an era came on New Year’s Eve. As detailed in a November 2014 Frontiersman news story, Providence decided there was no longer a need for the company to have a primary care clinic in the Valley, and as of Dec. 31, 2014, the facility at 2250 S. Woodworth Loop in Palmer will only remain open to behavioral health patients. All the primary care doctors, to the best of Baldwin-Johnson’s knowledge, have accepted positions at other clinics, most of them local. 

Baldwin-Johnson, however, decided to end her more than 30-year tenure as a family physician to work full-time for Alaska CARES, the Providence-owned child advocacy center in Anchorage, where she has worked part-time since 2005. 

And according to paperwork I have seen she was also working there on April 18th through nineteenth when she was supposed to be somewhere else entirely. 

Looks like it might be time to follow up on this.

How are you all enjoying Monday so far?

The famous "Wild Ride" interview revisited, and analyzed. Let's see what we might learn, shall we? Update!

A while back a reader sent me this rather interesting e-mail which included the original interview with Palin concerning her "wild ride" accompanied by an analysis of her words. I found it rather interesting and thought I would share it with all of you today. .

Here it is in full (With the e-mailer's name removed, of course.) 

Hello Gryphen. I know you've covered the wild ride a hundred times, but I took part of Sarah's interview and applied statement analysis to it. I hope you can use it. Statement Analysis is the most accurate way of determining if a person is lying in a verbal or written statement. A person cannot give a lengthy deceptive statement without revealing that it is a lie. This is because people will always word their statement based on all their knowledge. Therefore, their statement may contain information they did not intend to share. This is the transcript from the Wild Ride interview with Sarah Palin. The statement analysis is in italics and the sensitivity indicators are highlighted red.

(Since I tend to put everything that I don't personally write in italics I decided to use quotation marks to identify the analysis instead.)


Transcript of Palin Interview 

Reporter: I was hoping you could walk us through a little bit about kind of what happened because he came earlier that you thought and not when and where. 

Palin: And, uh, he wasn’t due for 4 or 5 weeks later and um, while I was at the energy conference. I felt perfectly fine but uh, had thought maybe a few things were starting to progress a little bit that perhaps there was an idea there that he might come early. So I called my doctor at about uh four in the morning in Texas and um I said ya know I’m gonna stay for the day here at the energy conference - have a speech that I was determined to give at one o’clock that afternoon and, um, had Todd check on a couple of flights that were earlier than we had scheduled. I decided it would be ok to, um, skip the reception that night that we’d already by that time have taken care of our meetings and my speech. So Todd checked on flights. A flight allowed us to get out a little earlier than we had planned. 

" Her use of the word "I"-- I was at the energy conference. I felt fine. I called my doctor. I said I'm gonna stay. I was determined. I decided. This is distancing between her and her husband and leads an analyst to wonder if Todd was present with her during those times she described. When she changes the pronoun from "I" to "we" it indicates when they were actually together (after the meetings and speech). By repeating twice that Todd was checking on early flights, she shows us this topic is sensitive to her, which indicates deception. Sarah says, "I was at the energy conference, I felt perfectly fine." These are true statements; there are no unnecessary words added in and no effort made by the subject to clarify them as she feels the need to do with Todd checking on flights. Reader: note that she uses "he" to refer to Trig. She does not use his name or any kind of pet name or nickname, which suggests that she is not at this time close to Trig on an emotional level."

Skipped the reception and, um, called my doctor before I got on the plane to say, ‘Yea, we think that we will come home a few hours early,’ and, uh, she said ‘OK call when you land and I’ll check you out.’ But none of my babies had been early and being my fifth child I know what labor feels like (laughing) and if I had felt at all that I was really engaged in uh, labor activities I would not have desired to fly and, um, get back uh, to deliver in Alaska. But anyway, so no real huge labor signs. Landed in, uh, in Anchorage at about10:30. Got out to the valley at 11:30 and she met us at the hospital, checked me out and said, ‘Um, Yea you look, you may have it um tonight or in the morning.’ And it was smooth, it was relatively easy, in fact it was very easy, the easiest of all of them because he was so tiny. And, um, it’s just been absolutely wonderful. It was all, it just all seemed meant to be… the logistics and everything else just worked out so perfectly and to us he’s absolutely perfect, too. 

"Note that her narration changed from her deciding, her coming home has changed to "we." Also note the missing pronoun for "skipped the reception and called my doctor." This indicates deception because she has skipped a large chunk of time. She is not being led by questions, she is free-editing her own story and for some reason decides to go straight from Todd checking on flights to skipping the reception and getting on the plane. Judging from her use of pronouns, we can determine that she was not alone when she arrived at the hospital. However, she gives no indicators as to who she was with."

"She refers to her other children as"my babies," not "our babies, which is very telling. She then refers to Trig as her "fifth child." For those well-versed in Statement Analysis, when someone uses the word "child," it is associated with risk, danger, harm, and abuse. It is not called baby abuse/kid abuse, it is called child abuse. Trig is not her baby like her other children have been, he is simply her fifth child. She starts out by describing her labor as relatively easy, and then corrects herself by saying it was not just easy, not just very easy, but very very easy. When the subject uses these qualifiers, she is telling us she wants us to believe them. From this sentence we can say that his birth was not very easy." 

Reporter: Of course you’re back to work already today and actually signed a bill that day, right? 

Palin: That day, yeah, staff came out to the hospital and I signed a bill there so I could uh make sure we transmitted that in time and then uh here today also yeah, we have some energy updates I didn’t want to miss so that was good. Look at him he’s just doing so well and it’s been easy and relaxing and again it all seems just meant to be this way. 

"Please note that any use of "so, since, therefore, because" shows a reason why something did or did not take place. This indicates sensitivity. She had no reason to explain why she signed the bill but offers us a lengthy response as to why she did. Again, Trig is mentioned using only he/him pronouns. He has not yet been mentioned with a name/term of endearment/nickname by his mother. "Meant to be" indicates that God is controlling the situation (freeing her from all guilt) and that God is the only person who can judge her alleged actions." 

Reporter: You said you felt some signs of labor, what were those signs? 

Palin: Well not contractions so much because I had Braxton Hicks contractions for months as every pregnant woman does, and nothing real painful but just knowing that, um, it was feeling like, I may not um, be able to be pregnant a whole another four or five weeks knowing that it would be not a bother to call our doctor and let her know. 

"And um she’s delivered how many babies over the year did she say? Extra words in describing that not just she, but all pregnant women have Braxton Hicks for months. This indicates sensitivity concerning her labor. She says she was not in pain and not having contractions which would have alerted her. She goes on to say knowing that she may not be able to be pregnant and corrects herself halfway through by saying it was feeling like she may not be able to be pregnant for much longer. Her first response indicates that she knew Trig was close to being delivered. She gives no indication as to what alerted her to this. This is also the first time that "my doctor" has been referred to as "our doctor," why the change? Sarah then asks how many babies CBJ has delivered over the year; it is a specific time frame (the year) that she changes to a couple of decades in her next breath. 

Todd: Lots 

Palin: A lot. It’s been a couple of decades of her delivering babies. We knew to call her and just get her advice and, um, from there we again decided to skip the energy conference reception and come on home and get checked out. 

"She says "we knew to call her" but in her first paragraph she said that she called the doctor herself. Usually the person dialing the phone makes the statement that they were the one who called. In her whole paragraph she indicated she was alone when she called to talk to her doctor. Was the decision-making in reference to phoning the doctor made over text messaging? She also says "we again decided to skip the energy conference." Who is "we?" In her first paragraph, she describes herself as making the initial decision, indicating that Todd had nothing to do with the decision. Her priorities are also telegraphed by her saying "come home and get checked out." Getting back home was paramount to her getting checked out." 

Reporter: So did your water break? 

"Readers note that this is a very straightforward question. It is a yes/no answer. The strongest statement Palin could make to answer this truthfully would be to say "Yes, my water broke" or "No, my water did not break." She does neither of these." 

Palin: Well, if you must know more of those type of details, but, um… 

Reporter: Well, your dad said that and I saw him say it so that’s why I asked. 

Palin: Well that was again if, if I must get personal, technical about this at the same time, um, it was one, it was a sign that I knew, um, could lead to uh, labor being uh kind of kicked in there was any kind of, um, amniotic leaking, amniotic fluid leaking, so when, when that happened we decided OK let’s call her. 

"This response is incredibly sensitive to Palin. She telegraphs this by repeating words: if if, personal technical it was one it was a sign, amniotic leaking amniotic fluid leaking, so when when that happened. This shows she does not want to answer the question and indicates deception. Her use of synonyms with regards to "personal, technical" also indicates sensitivity. Is the question personal or is it technical? One implies she shouldn't have to answer it and the other implies it's too difficult to answer it. She was asked, did your water break and answered that "I knew [amniotic leaking] could lead to labor being kicked in. When that happened we decided OK let's call [the doctor]." She again states that "we decided" to call CBJ, although she does not indicate that anyone was with her when she called, only that there was another person who helped her make the decision to call. 

Todd: There’s a lot of new doctors out there on the streets in the last couple of days. 

"This is a sarcastic remark. It would seem to be aimed at the interviewer, since she was asking personal/technical questions." 

Palin: Yeah, that’s significant too. Todd said, uh, after getting a couple of comments he said that he said wow everybody’s a doctor, Everybody’s going to tell us what we could have should have done and even though these folks - especially the critics- they’re not doctors. They didn’t know the situation. They don’t know the situation. They, they certainly don’t know our doctor and the consultations that we’ve had with her. So we did nothing to put our child nor anyone else in danger, uh, going through this five times I know what labor is and, uh, I am not a glutton for pain and punishment. I would have never, um, wanted to travel if I had been fully engaged in labor. 

"That's significant too, she says. What is it significant to, especially since it was a facetious remark and not intended to be serious? The timing of this remark in this interview suggests that the doctor comment was significant to what she was just talking bout: her water breaking. This implies that she does not think discussion of her whether or not her water broke is significant. She states that "they didn't know the situation, they don't know the situation;" there is only one situation being questioned which is her labor. She indicates that there is not just a past situation, but also a present situation that people are unaware of. Presumably because they are not doctors, don't know CBJ, and were not present during consults. Consultations is plural, meaning they had more than one need to consult her. A consultation is not a prenatal appointment or testing." 

"Conclusion: there is marked deception indicated multiple times throughout her story. She does not refer to her newborn as her baby, a baby, by a nickname-- only as her "fifth child" or "child." She uses pausing fillers like "um, uh, yeah" more than thirty times in this section of the interview, this indicates she is not recalling an actual memory but has to think of what she's going to say. Her ums and uhs stop entirely when she gets defensive and angry about people acting like doctors. She is genuinely upset. They start up again as soon as she mentions that they did nothing to put their child in danger. Does this interview give proof that Sarah Palin did not give birth to Trig Palin? Sadly, no. It does indicate that she is lying throughout the entire interview concerning the Wild Ride, however. Does it give proof that Sarah has a poor relationship with her husband and her fifth child by using distancing language? (Skeptics please remember that if Trig was adopted, he's legally a Palin) Yes. I know that many mothers, nurses, doctors, and Trig Truthers have already decided that the Wild Ride was a load of Palin crap. But hopefully this analysis gives us a few more clues as to certain nuances in the Palin clan."

Now I did not conduct this analysis myself, so I a cannot vouch for its accuracy, but in my opinion it makes some rather striking points that I thought would be interesting to discuss.

So what did you think?

P.S. Here is a video of the interview courtesy of Palingates for you to use for reference.

Update: Apparently this analysis has already been posted at Sarah's Scandals a couple of weeks ago. I apologize for not providing a link, or giving them credit, but I was not aware of that fact when I posted this. This does happen from time to time, and since I don't get the chance to visit everybody's blog I really have no idea.

Anyhow it certainly cannot hurt to have something like this show up more than one place.

The Wild Ride, Palin-bots, and the importance of reading comprehension.

"Good job helping with the smoke and mirrors, there Frank!"

Somebody alerted me today that there was some a NEW revisionist history being discussed over at the Sea O'Pee, excerpted from a  new Sarah Palin fanzine written by somebody named Frank Aquila.

I took a deep breath and took the plunge, where I discovered this:

Within days of my research of Governor Palin, and my consideration of other possible candidates as choices for the McCain ticket, Trig Palin was born on April 18, 2008. Sarah had been in Texas as the keynote speaker at an energy conference. She began to experience labor pains, but continued to finish her important speech. She contacted her current doctor, who had also delivered her daughter Piper. Sarah caught an Alaska Airlines flight from Dallas to Anchorage, with a stop in Seattle, where she was examined by doctors before returning to Alaska to deliver Trig. Sarah would later say, ”I am not a glutton for pain and punishment. I would have never wanted to travel had I been fully engaged in labor.” Either way, Sarah has always taken the unconventional road and, even if she does not admit it herself, she is one tough lady.

"What?" I began thinking.   "Is this some new attempt to rewrite history by the Sarah in anticipation that Joe and Fred's book  will bring her whole crazy story out to be examined by a new, heretofore unaware, audience?"

And then I got excited, because that would mean they were in a panic, and making a really stupid mistake by changing a very well known story after all of these years. As well as introducing new medical personnel who we could then attempt to contact in order to question their involvement. Of course we would fail to locate this "doctor" because, as we all know, Sarah was not pregnant and had no need to see doctor during that flight.

But then I began to wonder if even Sarah Palin would make a mistake this careless. After all of this time it did not make much sense.

And then I suddenly realized where Aquila had come up with his new version of events.

Actually it was not new at all. It was, in fact, from the earliest known version of the incident which we now refer to as the "Wild Ride."

Journey with me now to the wayback machine, to an ADN story from April 22, 2008.

Palin kept in close contact with Baldwin-Johnson. The contractions slowed to one or two an hour, "which is not active labor," the doctor said. 

"Things were already settling down when she talked to me," Baldwin-Johnson said. Palin did not ask for a medical OK to fly, the doctor said. 

"I don't think it was unreasonable for her to continue to travel back," Baldwin-Johnson said. 

So the Palins flew on Alaska Airlines from Dallas to Anchorage, stopping in Seattle and checking with the doctor along the way. 

"I am not a glutton for pain and punishment. I would have never wanted to travel had I been fully engaged in labor," Palin said. After four kids, the governor said, she knew what labor felt like, and she wasn't in labor. 

Sound familiar?  Except, as anybody with reading skills can discern, the article refers to Palin checking with Baldwin-Johnston, "the doctor" in this scenario, and NOT a Seattle based doctor during her layover.

Clearly THIS is the story that Aquila used as his "research" into Palin's delivery of Trig.

Only his lack of reading comprehension, possibly combined with his difficulty imagining anybody NOT checking in with a Seattle doctor if they were in labor, inspired him to create an entirely new scenario where Palin visited a medical professional before continuing on to Anchorage, and from there all the way to the Mat-Su Regional Hospital, where the "birth" took place.

But just to be clear the ONLY doctor that Sarah Palin was able to manipulate into putting their medical career in jeopardy to help her to fake this birth was Catherine Baldwin-Johnson. A woman who traded away every ounce of her integrity, and now lives the life of a virtual hermit, in service to a woman who abandoned her to her fate without even a glance backward once she had served her purpose.

As one time friend Catherine Mormile describes in "The Rogue: "She recruits those who feel worthless and powerless and uses them as tools. Lyda Green and I call them Zombie rats."

Pretty much sums it up, don't you think.

And this Frank Aquila is just the most recent Zombie rat, in a long line of Zombie rats,  to attempt to provide cover for a woman who would not even bother to piss on him if he were being consumed by flames right in front of her.

Professor Scharlott offers a $10,000 reward for PROOF that Sarah Palin gave birth to Trig Paxson Van Palin.

$10,000 reward poster

For immediate release: 

$10,000 REWARD OFFERED FOR PROOF SARAH PALIN GAVE BIRTH TO SON TRIG 

NEWPORT, KY (September X, 2011) – A journalism professor at Northern Kentucky University has posted a flier on the Internet offering a $10,000 reward to anybody who can provide verifiable and irrefutable proof that Sarah Palin is the birth mother of Trig, the boy she claims she delivered on April 18, 2008. 

The flier shows two pictures of Palin, one taken 23 days before the alleged birth, the other five days before April 18, 2008. The pictures show a seemingly impossible change in the progress of Palin's pregnancy in that 18-day span. 

Over the last three years, numerous Internet sites have made the argument that Palin must have faked the birth. Circumstantial evidence supporting their theory includes the fact that no hospital has verified the birth, Palin waited until her seventh month to claim she was pregnant and often appeared remarkably slender for a 44-year-old mother having her fifth child, and Palin has never released Trig's birth certificate. Palin supporters have said that pictures can be deceiving, and that it is absurd to think she faked the birth. 

Brad Scharlott, an associate professor of journalism, has read rumors online for years, and is now offering the $10,000 reward because he wishes to find the truth about the controversy. 

"The circumstantial evidence that Sarah Palin pulled off a pregnancy hoax, possibly to enhance her political standing, seems overwhelming," Scharlott said, but added that he is still open to the possibility that Palin did give birth to Trig, and would gladly give the reward money to anyone who provides proof. 

The flier says that acceptable proof would include, but not necessarily be limited to, medical records, a birth certificate, or notarized statements from hospital personnel involved in the delivery. 

For full details on how to claim the reward, the flier can be found at Scribd.com: http://www.scribd.com/doc/65089616/10-000-reward-poster or seen below. 

How is THAT for upping the ante?

You know $10,000 might even be enough to tempt somebody VERY close to the Mama Grizzly!

Bristol, Willow, Track, Todd are you paying attention?

Laura Novak interviews doctor who dissects the infamous CBJ doctor's note and talks about the strangeness surrounding the newborn Trig.

The interview is VERY interesting, and touches on a number of bizarre things about the pregnancy, the note, and little Trig. 

Here was my favorite part:

LN: So, what, if anything, leaves any doubt or questions in your mind about this letter?

DOC: It’s a rather bland, routine medical letter as it should be. I have no idea why the “FP” at the end of FAAFP is in different color. Not sure it means anything. The three things that strike me as unusual or suspicious are Dr. CBJ resigning from active status at the hospital shortly after Trig’s birth, the amniocentesis, and the fact that Trig’s birth date is not given.

LN: Let’s talk soon about the photos of the alleged newborn Trig. I have some thoughts about them but more importantly I’d love it if you could offer your own perspective as someone who has specialized in the care of high-risk and medically fragile newborns and children.

DOC: I assume you’re talking about the photos of him being held by friends and family, looking chubby and pink? I don’t see any jaundice in those pictures, nor do I see the normal “plethora” (or ruddiness) that most babies have in the first day or two of life. He also looks too chubby for a newly born baby; at least a few weeks old, but definitely not a new 6lb, 35 weeker. That looks more like one of those babies they use on soap operas who is 1-2 months old playing a newborn.

LN: Thank you, Doc! That comment alone should get everyone’s juices flowing. I’ll try to pull together the photos and we’ll dissect them.

I don't know about all of you, but that last part pretty much guarantees I will be gong back to read the next update.

New York Times columnist Gail Collins refutes Donald Trump's Birther claims one by one.

Apparently The Donald and Gail Collins have been having a back and forth which started on April 1, when Collins wrote an op-ed entitled "Donald Trump gets Weirder." (I CANNOT imagine why that upset The Donald so much.!)

This irritated Trump who fired off a rather nasty response:

Even before Gail Collins was with the New York Times, she has written nasty and derogatory articles about me. Actually, I have great respect for Ms. Collins in that she has survived so long with so little talent. Her storytelling ability and word usage (coming from me, who has written many bestsellers), is not at a very high level. More importantly, her facts are wrong!

As far as her comments on the so-called “birther” issue, I don't need Ms. Collins's advice. There is a very large segment of our society who believe that Barack Obama, indeed, was not born in the United States. His grandmother from Kenya stated, on tape, that he was born in Kenya and she was there to watch the birth. His family in Honolulu is fighting over which hospital in Hawaii he was born in-they just don't know.

He has not been able to produce a “birth certificate” but merely a totally unsigned “certificate of live birth”-which is totally different and of very little significance. Unlike a birth certificate, a certificate of live birth is very easy to obtain. Equally of importance, there are no records in Hawaii that a Barack Hussein Obama was born there-no bills, no doctors names, no nurses names, no registrations, no payments, etc. As far as the two notices placed in newspapers, many things could have happened, but some feel the grandparents put an ad in order to show that he was a citizen of the U.S. with all of the benefits thereto. Everybody, after all, and especially then, wanted to be a United States citizen.

Wow!  And people claim that I am a conspiracy theorist!

Anyhow Collins decided to go ahead and refute the ridiculous assertions made by Trump one by one:

THE GRANDMOTHER STORY “His grandmother in Kenya stated, on tape, that he was born in Kenya and she was there to watch the birth,” Trump wrote. This goes back to a trans-Atlantic telephone call that was made in 2008 by Ron McRae, an Anabaptist bishop and birther, to Sarah Obama, the president’s 86-year-old stepgrandmother. He asked her, through an interpreter whether she was “present when he was born in Kenya.” The translator responded: “She says, yes, she was. She was present when Obama was born.”

It is at this point that some of the tapes floating around the Web stop, which means that the listener doesn’t get to hear the follow-up, which makes it very clear that Sarah Obama misunderstood. The full conversation ends with the interpreter saying, for the umpteenth time: “Hawaii. She says he was born in Hawaii. In the state of Hawaii, where his father, his father was learning there. The state of Hawaii.”

THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE If only Hawaii made its birth records public, and charged people a thousand dollars a pop to look at them, the state’s budget problems would be solved by the conspiracy theorists. However, it doesn’t. If you were born in Hawaii and request a copy of your birth certificate, you get a certification of live birth, which the federal government accepts for passports. Barack Obama requested his in 2007, and his campaign posted it on the Internet.

“A certificate of live birth is not even signed by anybody. I saw his. I read it very carefully. It doesn’t have a serial number. It doesn’t have a signature,” said Trump on “Today.”

The document has the stamped signature of the state registrar. The University of Pennsylvania’s FactCheck.org made a pilgrimage to the Obama campaign headquarters, examined the document, felt the seal, checked the serial number and reported that it looked fine.

THE EMPTY PHOTO ALBUM “Our current president came out of nowhere. Came out of nowhere,” Trump told the Conservative Political Action Conference to great applause. “In fact, I’ll go a step further. The people that went to school with him, they never saw him; they don’t know who he is. It’s crazy.”

This week on CNN, Suzanne Malveaux played Trump clips of Hawaiians reminiscing about the schoolchild Obama for a documentary the network had done on the president.

“Look, I didn’t say that ... If he was 3 years old or 2 years old or 1 year old and people remember him, that’s irrelevant,” Trump responded. “You have to be born in this country.”

There, done, everything refuted and explained so that there is NO confusion.

Now here is what I am thinking.  With all of this in the news, I wonder if we could get just one reporter from the mainstream media to address those same points of evidence when it comes to Sarah Palin's fifth pregnancy. And don't be concerned about receiving the "wrath of the Palin-bots" because just the other day Sarah herself expressed total support for digging into people's birth stories.

Here I will even provide some of the questions:

• Perhaps start off by asking IF Cathy Baldwin-Johnson did in fact okay a plane trip back from Texas after the first female Governor of Alaska started leaking amniotic fluid, and having contractions, without insisting that she visit a Texas hospital first?
• Then ask why there was no birth announcement on the newspaper  Mat-Su  Hospital website (Oops I originally wrote this incorrectly.  I meant to say it was not published with the birth announcements on the Mat-Su website, NOT the newspaper.) when the sitting governor's fifth child arrived? (Even though the Mat-Su hospital was known to do that automatically, unless requested to do otherwise by the parents.)
• Another great question might be to ask WHY Cathy Baldwin-Johnson felt the need to bring her attorney with her while answering routine questions posed by the ADN about the Governor's delivery?
• You could also ask why Palin refused to produce Trig's birth certificate when the "conspiracy" stories were at their zenith at the end of August in 2008, and instead "refuted" the rumors by putting her pregnant daughter on display for all the world to ogle?
• Then you could ask why Palin is wearing a square pillow in this picture when she was supposed to be only 23 days away from giving birth to a six pound two ounce little boy?

There are dozens of other questions that are also worth asking, but if just one journalist would be willing to ask Sarah, or even Todd,  some of these questions, that would do quite a lot to finally refute the "crazy conspiracy talk" about the birth of her fifth child.

And wouldn't it be nice to finally put all of these questions behind us?

After all if people feel it is alright to question President Obama's GRANDMOTHER about his birth place, surely we could find at least one gutsy journalist willing to ask the hard questions of Sarah Palin and her family.  Don'tcha think?

A follow up post about the mystery surrounding little Trig with some new information and observations.

Here we see the first images ever taken of Trig Palin.

First in the corridor of the hospital with Sarah's parents on April 18, 2008.

And then later the next week sometime between Monday the 21st and Wednesday the 23rd.

Here let's get a better look with a closeup.

Isn't he cute? Just look at those chubby cheeks.

Now the next time we see a baby identified as Trig Palin it is in these now famous photos from the Palin's kitchen .

Some of you may remember that the caption read "Mommy InLaw Trig an Myself"

This is a picture of Mercede with Trig and Bristol and the caption read "Family Love".

Originally this picture first showed up on the Tyra Banks show. I have recently learned that all of these Palin kitchen photographs were taken by Sherry Johnston on Saturday May 3rd, which was Levi's birthday.

It was the very next day, Sunday May 4th, that the pictures from the Kristan Cole hosted baby shower were taken.

Now if you go back to the top and take a very careful look at the baby held, first by Grandma and Grandpa Heath, and later by Sarah with Todd, you may notice how chubby that baby's cheeks are. Now compare that with the pictures of the "ruffled ear" baby that appeared in the Palin kitchen. Did this baby go on the Atkins diet in the week between the hospital on April 18, and the Palin's kitchen on May 3rd?

For me this evidence is not as definitive as the cauliflower ear, but the change in weight is certainly striking and yet another clue to consider when piecing together exactly what happened in the first few weeks after Trig's "birth".

Also keep in mind that the only pictures we have that show the "ruffled" ear were taken on one weekend in May. Both before that, and after that, we do not yet have ANY other pictures that reveal the damaged helix.

So the questions remain, who is the "ruffled ear" baby? How come he does not appear in any photographs today? Was he the same baby shown back in April? And if he is not, who is THAT baby? And just how many babies do the Palin's have access to?

Gee I wonder if Meg knows?

Or maybe, like Phil Munger suggests, the person who really needs to step forward is Dr. Cathy Baldwin-Johnson.

Update: Some of you have brought up the fact that babies can lose weight after they are born and this is indeed true, so of course I asked a doctor about that during my preparation for these posts. I think the majority of you know what his response was. Don't forget that this is supposed to be a baby that is born a MONTH PREMATURE.

And for the person who suggested I am leaving breadcrumbs, you my friend go to the head of the class.

Also keep in mind that I am writing for at least two very distinct audiences. Some of the things that might seem easy to dismiss, or innocuous, to some, are freaking other people out of their minds. Count on it.

Update 2: It looks like Ozmud was already on this case back in December.