Doubts seem to linger that Bristol Palin was really pregnant in the fall of 2008. Palin Deception of which I was a regular reader and still use for reference did a very detailed post on this subject.
I must admit when I first heard the news that Bristol was pregnant, I thought no way. Much too convenient that she is 5 months pregnant thus proving she couldn’t have given birth on April 18, 2008. I kept expecting the announcement of a miscarriage but it never came.
The birth was announced in a strange way, though. The news came from a relative in another state who reportedly received word via an e-mail. Different dates for the birth were reported. Then there was the prolonged absence of any photographic evidence that the baby had actually been born when stated. Tripp Johnston wasn’t seen publicly until the February 18, 2009 interview with Greta Van Susteren.
So what do I think all this means? Bristol faked the pregnancy? No.
I do believe Bristol was indeed pregnant, just not 5 months pregnant, in September 2008.
Think about it. Rumors were swirling that Bristol was Trig’s mother, not Sarah. What better way to dispel that notion than to announce that Bristol was 5 months pregnant? Just pregnant enough that she couldn’t have given birth on April 18, 2008.
There has been a lot of speculation about these pictures from September 3, 2008.
There is obvious padding of the chest region. Some think that Bristol was lactating and the pads were to prevent leakage. My thoughts are that the padding was to make her appear more pregnant than she was at that time. After all the talk about how Sarah didn’t appear pregnant earlier in the year, they wanted to emphasize Bristol’s condition.
So where is all this leading?
My thoughts are that Bristol gave birth to the first baby known as Trig probably in late February which corresponds with the missing pages of Sarah’s travel schedule. The first few days were touch and go plus Sarah was waiting to see if McCain got the nod before announcing her pregnancy. When McCain sealed the nomination the fake pregnancy was a go and the rest is history.
Bristol decided that she would try to get pregnant again after her ruffled ear baby was replaced. In Going Rogue, Sarah says that Bristol was a little mother. That she was always wanting to babysit, very nurturing and that she wanted Sarah to rent her a baby for her 8th birthday. Bristol was probably heartbroken when her first born was taken from her. I would bet that Bristol had planned to name that first baby Tripp but Sarah had a different name in mind.
She probably became pregnant again in late May. Although, I firmly believe that the ruffled ear baby was born much earlier than April 18, 2008, even if that birth date is correct, Bristol could still have gotten pregnant again in late May. Click here to visit a page where women are discussing how soon they got pregnant after giving birth. If she did get pregnant in late May, she would have been 3 months pregnant when it was announced on September 1, 2008.
Click here to see Halle Berry when she was 3 months pregnant.
Halle’s dress is loose but you can see her baby bump. The dress Bristol was wearing in the pictures above was plainly too tight. I think it was deliberately chosen to make Bristol look bigger than she really was.
Tripp could have born at the end of January 2009 or prematurely in late December 2008. Here is a link to some risk factors for preterm labor and birth.A previous pre-term delivery which I believe Bristol had is listed.
If Tripp was born prematurely that could explain why he wasn’t seen until February. A premature infant would not have helped quash the rumors that Bristol was the real mother of Trig. It would only have added fuel to the fire.
Blade
5 comments:
Are you having problems with your comment system? Maybe you should ditch those ancillary comment systems other than Google? I made my system simpler and my readers happier when I did that at Palin Babygate.
http://palinbabygate.blogspot.com/
You are correct.
At the time of the GOP convention, Bristol was was supposed to be disguising the pregnancy, not exposing it, as she obviously did.
They said that the McCain campaign personnel didn't even know.
The picture of Levi and Bristol holding whatever baby it was at the convention and looking so lovingly at it shows that THEY were the parents not the sister with her boyfriend.
It was obvious to me at the time.
Bristols absences from school are in a timely lock step with both pregnancies.
I'm sure that publicly Levi's sister is not telling the truth about this either.
Anyone who loves children as much as she says she does would never miss that ruffled ear...please.
There isn't an adult OR child I have known that would "not notice" THAT.
Hi Blade,
I agree with your analysis and am glad that you are posting this blog. Bits and pieces from me:
I too think that B was probably not as pregnant as five months as was announced, which makes it likely that Tripp was actually born later than that funny late December birth announcement, or he was premature as you speculate. I recall that Mercede has corroborated the late December birth date, for whatever that is worth although I don't see a reason for her to corroborate unless it is just to protect Levi. Even a two-three week discrepancy in Bristol's due date would have made the "she can't be Trig's mother" logic fit. I think B was closer to 4 to 4.5 months along at the convention.
Additionally, someone mentioned, perhaps on Palin Deceptions, that Tripp seemed to have the reflexes of a baby younger than his age during the Greta interview.
Consider too Bristol's bust size on the tarmac with McCain, before the announcement of her pregnancy, was not as extremely large as it was in the 'sausage dress' at the convention. It also wasn't very large in photos of her the weeks after the RNC; especially, the photo of her in October 2008 in a Walmart with Sarah in the checkout line. That Walmart photo is the one that convinced me that B was indeed pregnant and probably about 6 to 6.5 months then.
I don't believe there was any breast feeding going on with Trig. That was just breast and belly enhancement to make the five months pregnant statement stick. It doesn't appear that B even breastfed healthy little Tripp. There were bottles everywhere. I know that is not evidence but I just don't see Bristol being into breast feeding. Funny and not fair but I cannot imagine Sarah ever breastfeeding a baby.
What I cannot resolve yet is the Trig vs. Ruffles identities. As Martha says above, that tender kiss Levi gave Trig really convinced me that B and Levi are his parents BUT then came Ruffles and two to three sets of ears, and possible a blue-eyed and a brown-eyed Trig. IF B gave birth to twins in early 2008, it could account for this but I find that difficult because where is Ruffles now? (I know your last post was about the two Trigs and I agree with your analysis there too except that I cannot resolve whether Ruffles went somewhere or whether he is around somewhere or - the simplest explanation - that there is one baby, who had ear surgery prior to the convention .... but many claim that such surgery on an infant is never performed.)
reddog
Hi again. Just saw this comment by curiouser at Mercede's blog:
Also, on Dec. 31, Sarah was interviewed by Canadian tv personality, George Stroumboulopoulos. Somehow, she managed to forget about Tripp’s birth just four days earlier and left him off her list.
“Pretty amazing year. A couple of personal things that have happened to me…havin’ a baby…my son going off to war in Iraq…my oldest son…..and just a lot of things personally that have happened and then…yeah…and then you throw in there, also, the run for the vice presidency of America.”
I had forgotten about that. Does it add to the possibility that Tripp was born in January?
reddog
Thanks for that info, reddog. Seems pretty strange that SP failed to mention the birth of her grandson. But then with her narcissistic tendencies she is always focused on herself so that might not mean anything. Everything Sarah says and does defies logic.
Post a Comment