Wednesday, July 28, 2010

Would Trig’s Birth Certificate Be Proof Positive?

 

thumbnail Lately there have been renewed requests for Sarah Palin to show Trig’s birth certificate. What would that really prove? To me, nothing.

There has been speculation over the past 2 years that the reason Sarah won’t show the birth certificate is because the date of birth won’t be April 18. 2008. I believe that is true. The original birth certificate will show a birth date earlier than that. But does anyone really believe that Sarah doesn’t have another birth certificate with all the i’s dotted and the t’s crossed?

So why won’t she show the birth certificate? In a word. Ego.

How dare anyone question her word?!

So what would it really take to prove that Sarah Palin is the biological mother of Trig?

The only thing that would convince me would be if a trusted person obtained DNA from Sarah and Trig and had testing done without the parties involved being identified. That would be the only conclusive evidence for me.

So readers, tell me what would it take to convince you that Sarah gave birth to Trig?

Would a birth certificate be enough for you or would you need harder evidence?

 

Blade

26 comments:

Floyd M. Orr said...

A birth certificate would have been adequate back in September 2008, but now she would have to verify the birth information for at least two Trigs to shut me up.

Blade said...

I agree, Floyd. She could have avoided all of this had she shown a birth certificate then. It's too little too late now because we know so much more than we did back then.

themom said...

Slick Sarah would have to provide DNA test via an impartial lab before it may be accepted.

moose pucky said...

I would settle for evidence of prenatal visits (from the doctors and from her schedule while Gov.), accompanied by a sworn statement from CBJ that CBJ was present at the birth and delivered Trig from SP's womb.

SME131 said...

Why is it no one understands that a birth certificate will still show Sarah and Todd as the "birth" parents regardless of whether she adopted him or not. Forget the date he was born that means nothing in regards to whether she gave birth to him.

Birth certificates mean very little in a case like this.

You need a DNA test or the second second best thing is her medical records showing 5 LIVE births and 2 miscarriages/abortions.

Nothing short of those two items will prove anything.

Anonymous said...

dna from sarah, toad, and tri-g

Anonymous said...

I'm with Moose Pucky. At this point, that's what it would take to convince me too.

Anonymous said...

There is nothing that would convince me that Sarah Palin birthed a child in April 2008.

Conscious at last!

Blade said...

moose pucky, anonymous and sme131 - Medical records can be falsified too easily. Even a sworn statement by CBJ wouldn't do it, IMO. I still have doubts with anything less than anonymous DNA testing.

Debra said...

DNA proof, and ONLY DNA PROOF!

That will be the ONLY way to convince me.

Anonymous said...

The birth certificate for a date other than 4/18/08 may not prove that she did not give birth to Trig, but it would be proof positive that she's a bald-faced liar. Once that is established beyond a shadow of a doubt, who would really trust her word about anything? Even her 'bots would be shaken that her "founding myth" is a lie.

carol from Minnesota said...

I agree that the birth date other than 4/18/08 would be all the proof that I would need that her whole story is a big lie. If the date was before she showed up in the fake pregnancy outfit it would really be hard for her to convince anyone that she did nothing but fake the birth.

Elizabeth said...

I don't think the 'bots' would be shaken. All she would have to do is say that it is Bristol's baby and she, like the good mother she is, tried to cover it up to save Bristol. They would consider it another proof of how wonderful she is.

Ivyfree said...

Only DNA evidence.... gathered under legal "chain of evidence" controls and done by an impartial lab.

I think the birth certificate could be forged too easily. Heck, Sarah still has friends in Alaska: somebody might be willing to hand her a real birth certificate with false information. Remember, with Sara: if she's breathing, she's lying.

Anonymous said...

My thought is that the Palinbots already know that Sarah did not give birth to Trig. They are just in denial. Pay close attention to their comments and you will see.

pat1755 said...

DNA.

I'm assuming that with her money and connections, SP could easily fake an appropriately dated birth certificate. Actually, I'm a little befuddled that she hasn't already.

Anonymous said...

Let's set her paranoia level even higher. It should be easy to access hair or saliva DNA from Bristol, Levi, Sarah and Trig. Hairdressers, hairbrushes, restaurants (get glasses, forks, etc. with DNA).

It can be collected if someone puts their minds to it.

Anonymous said...

I agree with Mr. Orr.

Blade said...

Anonymous - Getting the DNA wouldn't be that hard as you say. The only problem is that it wouldn't be convincing. Sarah would just say the DNA isn't theirs and it would be hard to prove without a legal chain of evidence.

Ginger said...

Here's an interesting thought...

Since I think Dr. CBJ planned and orchestrated the fake pg, she made sure the birth certificate was in Sarah's name. Do you people really think she would run for..."Vice President of the United States"...and not be able to prove she was the mother of Trig?

There is an e-mail from the SOA, Benefits Div., that tells us Sarah sent invoices to her insurance company for Trig's care/birth. They were requesting a b/c. And, I think she has one, compliments of Dr. CBJ.

Now, fast-forward to the present. Her handlers are trying to get out of this mess. As Elizabeth just said, "they could say Sarah was covering for her daughter and she just did it to save Bristol." Nice, but where does that leave Dr. CBJ?

If Bristol did give birth, and Dr. CBJ showed the patient as..."Gov. Sarah Palin," how can they undo the b/c? In the SOA, twenty-four hours after the birth of a child, the doctor/hospital must (it is mandatory) enter the birth information to..."The Bureau of Vital Statistics"...which prints out a b/c. If the b/c shows her and Todd as the parents, where does that leave Dr. CBJ?

Granted, Sarah has thrown a lot of people under the bus without any remorse. However, when it comes to the good doctor, there is something that tells me she will draw the line.

Nothing on T.V. compares to this soap opera..

Stay Tuned...

Anonymous said...

Frankly, the moment Dr Disappearo opens her mouth I will believe her.

Anonymous said...

Have her take a lie detector test.

And subject to DNA testing.

End of story.

LMK said...

Excellent question, and one I struggle with.

I am a birther follower. I have been tracking and arguing with birthers for 2 years now. I do not believe that Trig came from Palin's womb. She may be related to Trig, but I don't believe that she gave birth to him.

SME131 stated:

"Why is it no one understands that a birth certificate will still show Sarah and Todd as the "birth" parents regardless of whether she adopted him or not. Forget the date he was born that means nothing in regards to whether she gave birth to him.

Birth certificates mean very little in a case like this."

Exactly. This is the difference between Obama's BC and Trig's BC. If Trig was legally adopted, his BC would show Trig as the Palin's child, regardless of who birthed him.

The federal government considers a BC as the ultimate proof of citizenship. If a child is adopted by US parents but is from China, the child's BC would list the place of birth as China but would list the adoptive parents as the parents of the child. In this case, there is no reason to believe that the place of birth would be different that where the Palins live, so we can't depend on a BC to be proof of Trig's birth mother.

So, here is my dilemma. How do I keep from being birtheresqe as a "Trigger"?

If I understand DNA and genetics correctly, and am interpreting the below info correctly, which I may not be, testing maternal DNA to see if Trig was born to Bristol instead of Sarah wouldn't be effective.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genealogical_DNA_test : This mtDNA is passed down by the mother unchanged, to all children. If a perfect match is found to another person's mtDNA test results, one may find a common ancestor in the other relative's (matrilineal) "information table", similar to the patrilineal or Y-DNA testing case above. However, because mtDNA mutations are very rare, a nearly perfect match is not as helpful as it is for the above patrilineal case. In the matrilineal case, it takes a perfect match to be very helpful.[6]

Maternal DNA tends to be identical. So, every one of us caries an exact copy of our Maternal DNA on our X chromosome. It is the father's DNA that isn't passed down as an exact replica, so we would need to test Todd and Trig's DNA.

But there is a problem with that. If Trig is Todd's biological child but born to another woman, we couldn't assume that Trig was born to Sarah. We would need both parent's DNA tests.

As long as both parents have DNA tests compared to Trig's DNA, we would have the answer we need. But testing Sarah, Bristol and Trig wouldn't help. And, we will never get Palin's DNA.

Then there is a problem with Dr. CBJ. She already stated in the letter she presented on the eve of the election that Palin gave birth in 2008. Any answer received by Dr. CBJ could be suspect. If she states that Palin did give birth, how can we account for the photographs and other contradicting info? Most think that Palin convinced Dr. CBJ to lie about the birth. If Dr. CBJ says that Trig wasn't born to Sarah, can we believe her after she already said he was born to Palin?

I guess for me, I want the initial paperwork provided by the hospital to the Dept of Vital Records right after Trig's birth. That would show the name of the birth mother. Adoptions take time, and the birth mother's name and the DVRs should still have that info.

The reality is that we will never get any of this info. The Palin's will never try to answer these questions.

Alaskan Dave Down Under said...

DNA and full medical records. Sorry if this post appears twice.

Anonymous said...

Medical Records: Verified and signed by physicians and the clinic and hospital heads. Especially the hospital birth records where the patient's identity must be checked against the wristband, etc. Include Trig's medical records to the same standard.

Then if anything is fishy, go for the DNA analysis. Yes, DNA testing must include chain of custody of samples and informed consent. A strategy could be to perform a mitochondrial DNA test on Trig and Sarah to rule out Sarah as mother. If she is not ruled out then testing Bristol (and Levi and Todd) could be done.

This plan does not solve the question of multiple Trigs though.

reddog

EngorgedBristol said...

Birth certificate, medical records and Dr. Cathy Baldwin-Johnson answering questions at a press conference - might have been enough.
But...with the questions many people have been asking about what happened to the baby with the ear deformity, DNA and an explanation of how the ear deformity disappeared from a pediatric expert is needed.
The ADN had this story and dropped it; IMHO, they'll never redeem themselves unless they follow up and publish what they found during Lisa Demer's investigation.