Wednesday, August 11, 2010

Dolls, Twins, Borrowed Babies…Oh My!

 

Do I truly think that Sarah Palin presented any of the above as Trig? I honestly don’t know the answer to that question myself. At times I think Sarah wouldn’t have attempted anything as risky as presenting a doll, twins or a borrowed baby as her son but then I think but she risked pretending to be pregnant. Who knows what goes through the mind of that woman?

 

The Pros and Cons of Using A Reborn Doll

Pros

  • A reborn is no trouble to care for.
  • A reborn can be custom made with any features wanted.
  • A reborn can be made using a picture of a real baby as a guide so a family resemblance is possible.

Cons

  • Someone might discover the charade.

Conclusion

Do the pros outweigh the cons? I think in this case, yes. Using a reborn could be an easy option in certain situations where the baby would not be closely scrutinized such as in this video. Notice how she seems to squeeze the baby before she gives the audience a quick peek at Trig? He never makes a peep even though Sarah is bounding around. I don’t think a reborn was used all the time but I do believe it’s possible one was used at times.

(Thanks for the link GinaM.)

 

The Question of Twins

I don’t believe twins were presented as one baby known as Trig simply because I don’t think Sarah would pass on the extra attention and sympathy she would  receive as the mother of two special needs babies

I think she would milk that opportunity for all it is worth.

 

Borrowed Baby

 

I think a borrowed baby is possible but not likely. Someone may have been willing to rent Sarah a baby for the right amount of money but I think it would have cost more than a custom made reborn baby. The borrowed baby would require care and Sarah would have to worry about the baby not being available every time she needed it.

 

I still haven’t answered my own question but I just can’t totally dismiss the reborn possibility. There’s one picture that bothers me because something just looks odd. I think it was taken in June of 2008. Does anyone else find this picture weird? Sarah_Palin_--_Shopping

 

Blade

40 comments:

Heidi1 said...

Well, for starters (1) $arah looks incredibly fat. (2) where is the "baby's" left arm? (3) the infant's right arm looks entirely too long, and doesn't seem to be 'attached' where an arm usually is. (4) I don't see anything for legs much, although we do know that Tri-G has short legs. (5) The baby's head is unnaturally cocked and (6) the baby is being smothered.

The only thing "real" is see about the picture is that $arah is genuinely trying to pretend to be interested in the other lady's comments. That is a look we all are very familiar with.

leu2500 said...

Yes, the baby in the picture with Sarah in the pink whatever does look odd. The first thing I noticed is that she should be supporting his head with one hand. (but really, almost always she's holding Trig like his a sack of potatoes, not a baby. And she pays no attention to Trig - except when the camera is on.) But then I noticed his right arm - it bothers me.

GinaM said...

I noticed that the lady has A LOT of hot dog buns in her cart!! Just kidding....The baby's body is off. And how come he looks smaller here then he did when he was suppose to be a "newborn"? Oh yeah, thanks for the HT :D

Anonymous said...

Totally weird. Something's not right.

Anonymous said...

Very interesting video: notice at about the 2:40 mark, she takes her hand away from his head and waves her arm around for four or five seconds. That's a tiny "baby" she showed us. No mother would have done that; the sling gives absolutely no support. Even a normal infant that size needs constant head support. The sling she is wearing is not meant to be used this way as a carrier. It's a nursing sling. Sometimes she looks as if she must be smothering him. Why not use a proper carrier?

A doll would explain the strange use of this nursing sling all the time in public: the way it presses the doll up against her breasts, no one would attempt to touch him.

I came to the conclusion she had a doll in that nursing sling even before I learned that these incredibly realistic dolls existed.

I do believe she had a real baby sometimes, such as when he was displayed at the hospital and taken to work. But every time you see her with that sling, I bet it's a doll. Babies can poop (with a preemie it leaks around the legs of the diaper, especially if it's breast fed) or spit up all over you at any moment; she wouldn't take that risk. There's a reason you don't see women in suits hauling infants around with them!

WakeUpAmerica said...

If that is a real baby in the video, it was smothered while she was on stage. The picture is off in that it almost looks like it was taken with a fisheye lens. That's why Sarah also looks like she is shorter and wider than usual. The food around them is somewhat distorted as well.

Maria said...

The baby is only wearing the lower half of the babygrow which is merely pulled up over his back and head. The left arm is probably tucked away with the right arm stretching out. And I agree with WakeUpAmerica about the fisheye lens.

Anonymous said...

Notice how in the video, as SP climbs the stairs, the baby's arm FLOPS around, as if it's a stuffed doll's arm. Being a mother, I can't imagine my babies' arms flopping back and forth like that, as a baby pulls his extremities inward at that age. And, how she clasps her nails onto Trip's head before she turns him around for the audience to see.

Also, the clip shows a mom who is just not into her baby as she speaks, she's not even supporting his upper back, neck and head together. A mom knows how to hold a baby's neck and head correctly, with total support on part of it's back.

In the grocery store photo, yes, that baby looks odd, it's legs are almost too short, and the arm again flops outward, where a mom would tuck it back in, so the child's arm wouldn't lose circulation. Does this woman have any maternal instincts?

Anonymous said...

Just wanted to correct the Anon. 5:42 post, where I wrote Trip by accident. I meant Trig.

Anonymous said...

Her failure to support his head in the supermarket picture has always bothered me. It's bad for a baby's neck to let the head dangle backwards like that.

Anonymous said...

Notice that the baby doesn't seem to breathe? You think you'd see a little movement of some kind - startle reflex, sling movement from the baby breathing, something. The arm doesn't move when she goes up the steps, then I think she tucks it in so as not to draw attention - the babies hand never moves! Even when she shows his face, there's no movement of any kind or reflex from the "baby." That clip definitely looks like a reborn doll. And she does have her nails in his head!

Anonymous said...

I always thought it was a doll too because of how the arm just hung and swayed when she walked and the head squeezing, but at about 31 seconds, you can see the baby's arm move and see Sarah react to the movement. You have to look closely because of the bright lights. This explains why the arm is tucked in later in the video. I would have actually felt better if it was a doll because of the way she smothers it and squeezes his head.

Merry said...

About the still photo: It has been identified as taken in Barrow AK on June 30, 2008. The version you have posted has been stretched. That is, everything is wider and longer horizontally. So SP looks fat, and so does everything else.
You can find a better version if you Google: Palin Barrow and the date.
It is an odd picture. With her outfit Sarah is possibly hoping to identify herself as one of the locals. I don't know what the temp was that day in Barrow. It could have been cool or cold, and so baby, if there is one there, may have on a few layers.
By June 30, Trig would have been between two and three months old, and possibly older. Will we ever find out?

Gles said...

Besides the arm hanging lifeless, Sarah has the baby's cap pulled down over his ears. I'm thinking this is a tossel cap that folds upward.

I thought I had recently read that a mother had to be careful with certain baby slings due to suffocation. It appears to me that she is holding the baby's face right against her chest... I thought a sling allowed you to free your hands. But what do I know since I never used one but did breast feed for 6 months.

BTW, the last time I held a young baby, I was surprised at the amount of movement when being craddled in my arms...let alone the noises.

Anonymous said...

Sarah was dressed in authentic clothing for a Native American event in Barrow. Can't blame her appearance on her; can blame way she holds "baby."
-B

merry said...

I think, upon rereading my earlier post, that I sound offensive to the native people of Barrow. I apologize. It was not my intent.
What I was trying to get at, and should have said directly, is the way SP treated the concerns of native people during her reign. On issues of subsistence and native hunting and fishing rights, on language and on sovereignty, she had a deplorable record. And so, in my opinion, for her to appear in native dress seems insincere at best.

Anonymous said...

Re the sling-wearing (which is so NOT SP).... you may be on to something. Check out this link

http://www.hotslings.com/Babywearing_Safety_s/135.htm

on how to safely wear a baby in a sling. I think she violates every one of their "don't"s.

Yellowgirl

LisanTX said...

At about 1:45 on the video Sarah squeezes the baby's head to a degree that is impossible with a human baby. Watch her thumb press inward about an inch or so. No way can you do that on a human without causing injury. After seeing that, I believe that she is holding a doll.

She never supports the baby's head; instead she uses her hand to hide/cover up his head and neck area.

On top of that, it is not believable that the baby never cries or needs a bottle or diaper change in all the videos and pictures of her with the sling. She never pulls him out of the sling or lets others hold him in order to give her back a rest. Post-partum mothers have extremely sore muscles due to holding the baby constantly.

AKPetMom said...

I really feel bad for Sarah watching that video dedicating Alaska to her god. She was trying so hard to come to terms with having this less than perfect infant; she had to bring up the "my kid is better than your kid because he has an extra chromosome" thing. She looks sad when she says it, but this little quote helps her as she thrives on being better than others; if an extra chromosome puts her kid above others, she will use that as a talking point.

This video almost convinces me that Palin did give birth to Trig. It may have been a very, very premature birth in February of 08 or even March. He was most likely not expected to live, but goshdarnit that little critter lived and thrived and she had to start faking a pregnancy to account for his existence. Then she had to make him better than other children by talking about his extra chromosome. And think about it, if her father would not have begun the "Wild Ride" story, perhaps Sarah would not have had to have jumped on that bandwagon. Her dad spilled the beans about it and Sarah decided to make it another example of what a tough 'sumbitch she is.

Oh Sarah, your lies are so deep and your justification is so shallow.

Anonymous said...

OK- Now I am thoroughly convinced-- it is a baby DOLL.

Conscious at last!

Ginger said...

To: AkPetMom...

Please, help me understand why Sarah, if she gave birth to a premie, would have to fake a pregnancy? This doesn't make any sense to me! If she gave birth to a premie, all she had to do was announce to the press she was pg and had given birth to a premie. What was there to hide?

You do not mention the verifable rumors that Bristol was pg from Dec., 2007, on. And, the most important, and only, piece of evidence available in this whole saga. The MSNBC e-mail, from the SOA, Benefits Div., dated May 21, 2008, that tells us Sarah sent invoices/bills to her state insurance for Trig's birth/care.

You can read this e-mail over at Palingates. They state there is no proof Sarah sent in a b/c. This fact is totally inmaterial. The fact she sent claims to them to be paid is all the evidence needed. The e-mail was requesting a b/c. They said if they did not receive it within 60 days of Trig's birth, they would not pay "anymore" claims.

Dr. CBJ was in charge and entered Sarah as the patient in the computer. That was the key to get all the invoices/billings in her name. There is no other way to explain how this happened and she was able to get her state insurance to pay for Trig's birth.

If you disagree with me, and find fault with my analysis, please let me know...

Thank you!

conscious at last said...

HI THERE GINGER -

I agree with your comments above.

Are you the same Ginger who has also expressed doubts about TRIPP (not TRIG)-- when he was born, whether BP actually was preggers during the '08 campaign, etc.? If that was you, can you please share more of your thoughts with us? I have questions about this too (see my comments on the previous post here). We need to try all angles to get at babygate and BP's "second" pregnancy must be looked at more closely, as Audrey and Morgan(not the PD moderator) tried to do.

HELLO BLADE-- I think this issue may be something for you to explore-- in case you haven't already-- check out Audrey's multi-part post about it--close to the end. Cheers!

Gles said...

Evidentally when a baby is born there is a form called the Birth Certificate Worksheet that needs to be filled out by parents(10 days to get info)after that time the hospital fills in known info. The hospital then sends this completed form to bureau of vital statics for that state. I wonder if anyone has a copy of the Mat Su Hospital form so that we can see data requirements or if this is a standard/universal form. Also to get a "certified" birth certificate copy you have to pay whatever the state charges at bureau of vital statistics.

Did Sarah's insurance company request a certified copy of the birth certificate?

Anonymous said...

Neither of the "bundles" shown with Palin look like real babies. The way they are carried and the shaped of the bundles don't look realistic. Can we compare images of real babies carried in that cloth sling-thingy with this picture? As well as pictures of mom's holding sleeper clad babies with the other image? Of course, the mother's attitude toward her child makes a tremendous difference in how any baby is carried or held. Which in Palin's case has always been oddly impersonal....except for a recent image showing Palin apparently kissing a small bundled baby.

Anonymous said...

I agree with the comments about the video and still photo. When the subject of reborn dolls was brought up on another site, someone posted information on the deluxe models who breathe, have a heartbeat, are warm, etc.. It was suggested that a reborn could be used until enough time had gone by that a real baby could be shown to the public. If you watch the video without looking at Palin, the expressions on the face of the pastor in the video are very interesting - quizzical, to say the least. I think he was close enough to see that something wasn't right or he was worried that the baby might not be able to breathe.

Anonymous said...

For one thing, she doesn't have a cart. Sorry, but not uncommon to has a car seat type sleeper, to put in cart, while you shop. The still picture looks, staged. The wide photo, so she would appear, post-partum. Barrow, because few people would know or recognize her.

The video, looks like she was about to suffocate the child. The child would be fighting to get some air. Most of all, someone else could of held the child. If it was a child?

Ginger said...

To: Gles

For some reason, they did ask for a b/c in the e-mail. Since all the paperwork was in her name, I don't know why they needed one.

The reason I keep posting about the e-mail is my fear that if the invoices are in her name, there isn't any reason the b/c wouldn't be too.

We should be aware of the possibility...

To: conscious at last

No one wants to talk about the e-mail. Especially the people who have worked so hard to perpetrate the "two baby" theory. We on the blogs know she faked a pg. They push the "two babies" on the net and say Bristol gave birth to a premie in the early part of 2008. Then, as the story goes, she was mad at her mother for taking Trig and turned around and got pg again! That's how they account for Tripp.

The problem with this theory is it has most people in the lower 48, who don't read the blogs, think Sarah did give birth to Trig because Bristol was five months pg during the campaign. Then, son-a-gun, she supposedly pops out a baby on Dec. 27, 2008.

I've been studing, researching, watching videos for l-1/2 years. In all this time, I have not found one sliver of evidence Bristol was pg a second time. The MSNBC e-mail was the final nail in the coffin for me.

Do you realize how important it is to keep this "two baby" story going? If people found out Bristol faked her pg too---a lie to cover her mother's lie---can you imagine the implications? And just think of all the money they have made from using Tripp for PR purposes.

It wasn't Sarah's idea that Bristol be pg during the campaign. That was the RNC's idea to get rid of all the rumors Sarah faked a pg.

The Palins and the Johnstons have been putting on the biggest "dog-and-pony show" possible. All the phoney legal papers filed with no intention of ever going to court. Another thing, I haven't found any evidence Levi is the father of any child...let alone a Palin Grandchild.

Levis only "claim to fame" is he fathered Tripp. Other than that, there's nothing. That's why he and his family are so important to the Palins, and the Palins to them. Levi says he was at the hospital when Sarah "had" Trig. Then, he was also at the hospital when Tripp was "supposedly" born.

When I heard Levi and Bristol's reality show fell through, I immediately thought it had to do with Tripp. If they borrowed him, with a contract I'm sure, I think his mother (father?) are getting a little fed up with the circus around him. If you've noticed, he only seems to be used for photo ops. As he gets older, Levi looks uncomfortable around him. Me thinks, little Tripp is a real mama's boy and the mama "ain't" Bristol.

I taped an Ent. Tonight show on March 25, 2010. It was a film of her photo shoot with a magazine taken in her apartment. After they got Bristol ready, a woman very gently handed Tripp to Bristol. Her hair was the exact same color as Tripps. Darker at the roots with the same reddish blond ends. She didn't have any makeup on and her hair looked very natural...not bleached.

This story is so unbelievable no one will listen to me. Just think about it and pay attention to the e-mail.

Does anyone know if Trig Palin or a Tripp Johnston are collecting PFD checks? I just asked Gryphen if he knew...

Anonymous said...

Yellowgirl, I think you may have struck a nerve! The Hotslings site giving sling wearing safety instructions has now been closed!
http://www.hotslings.com/Babywearing_Safety_s/135.htm
You can Google hotslings safety and click on cached to get to it however. Save a screenshot! The two most important safety rules...Visible (baby's face must be visible, not turned in against wearer's body and in view with no need to move the sling or the carrier) and Kissable (you must be able to kiss the top of your baby's head).

Wow.

conscious at last said...

Ginger- Thank you. Yes, I've been considering some of these ideas for a while, but without all of your great research. Yes, I understand that need for 2 babies for the GOP campaign. But what, exactly, is it in the e-mails that you feel is so important?

TRULY, Ginger, I think you are onto something BIG. If we keep at it, from varied angles, eventually, the truth will come out.

I SURE HOPE THAT OUR BLOGGER FRIENDS, HERE AND ABROAD, WILL PURSUE THIS !!!

conscious at last said...

AGAIN, just for those who may be new to this adventure--

Some of us are questioning whether Bristol actually gave birth to a second child called Tripp-- WHY?

See Ginger's comments above

See Palin's Deceptions blog next to last Long Series of posts about Bristol's Pregnancy-"The Cornerstone"

Remember the cluster of strange events around Nov-Dec '08- Jan '09:

Bristol is rarely seen

Sherry Johnston is arrested for a minor drug offense, but has been under surveillance for ages before this

There is a fire at Sarah Palin's church which destroys records of adoptions and other items, but happily, no-one is injured

Tripp's birth is announced by Bristol's great aunt in Washingston state-- the Palin's make some weird statement about privacy. (dec.27 ?)

Tripp is not seen on camera for a few months (very strange for the media whore granny)

There is another fire in Wasilla that kills a woman named Dar Miller -- who just happened to be a hospice nurse, but was formerly a Neo-Natal-ICU nurse.

There is lots more, but this is enough to get the creative juices flowing. Remember, it was essential to SP and the GOP '08 campaign that BP was 5 mos preggers in Sept so that it would make it impossible that she could be Trig's
(phony d.o.b. 4/18/08) birth mom.

I completely agree with Ginger about the Bristol-Levi-Mercede-Sherry-Sarah dog and pony show. It is all complete B.S.. These characters don't need a reality show, their ridiculous carrying on already IS a reality show(which means that it is TOTALLY scripted).

Ginger said...

To: conscious at last...

There is only one MSNBC e-mail that I am talking about. It is from the SOA, Benefits Div., dated May 21, 2008. What is so important about it?

Good grief, the e-mail tells us Sarah sent invoices/bills to her state insurance for payment of Trig's birth/care! You have to read it carefully. The key words are "continued care."

Since we all know Sarah faked a pregnancy, I was baffled for a week trying to figure out how she got the invoices in her name. I posted the e-mail over on Gryphen's blog because it came from Juneau. I just knew there was something in the e-mail that was very telling.

Gryphen didn't respond but I think Bree saw it. She did a thread about it. When I did a post to thank her, something just came over me. I realized to get the invoices in her name, Dr. CBJ had to enter Sarah's name, in the computer, as the patient. Then, I described a hypothetical scenario:

On Thursday, April 17, 2008, at 4:00 a.m., Sarah did talk to Dr. CBJ. However, she didn't call the doctor, the doctor called her to tell her Bristol went into labor. Sarah wanted to stay and give her speech at noon. She probably knew Bristol would give birth before she got back. I think she did.

Bristol was taken thru the back door at Mat-Su and into a private room. I'm sure the hallways were cleared and no one saw her. Later that night, Sarah and Todd entered the same way. A woman in the hall saw Todd there but not Sarah. Then, they announced the next day that Trig was born at 6:30 a.m., on Fri., April 18th, and weighed 6lbs. 2 ounces.

Dr. CBJ not only adjusted the names of the parents, she fixed the date--to coincide with Sarah's arrival--and the weight--Trig was suppose to be a five week premie.

Remember, we didn't see Bristol until the end of April. I think she gave birth to a full-term 7 lb + baby. And, I don't think anyone knew he was going to be D/S until he was born. I'd always thought Bristol got pg the last week of July, while Sarah was in Kuwait.

This situation, as I said, is purely hypothetical. I did this post on Bree's blog and shortly after...she was gone. The whole blog was taken down. At least, Audrey was able to keep her PD blog up for us to reference.

For months, you can see my posts over at PD and Palingates, I tried to tell Audrey and Regina that Bristol was not pg a second time. I'm more convinced now, then I was back then.

I've told my theory to all the bloggers but they either ignore me or stick to the "two baby" theory. There are so many trolls on the blogs, it's almost impossible to try and solve this mystery.

You are the only one that has responded and shown any interest.

I just want people to be aware and think of other possibilities...

Ginger said...

To: conscious at last

I just saw your 4:15 p.m. post. It was great!

The only way we can make any progress on the Babygate issue, is through Bristol's "supposed" second pregnancy.

Andrew Sullivan dropped his coverage of Sarah's faked pg...I think...because of the e-mail. If I'm right, and she does have a birth certificate, she could show it at any time.

There would be "no way" you could ever get her to do a DNA test. And, another thought, how does DNA work between a mother/daughter?

Can't you just see her, running for office, and pulling the b/c out? I can just hear the bots screaming..."I told you so!"

I say, keep your eye on Tripp...

GinaM said...

Ginger....I really think you are on to something. The lightbulb moment for me was the coincidence that Audrey's website was around for a long time with a lot of good information being posted. Nobody every bothered her...but as soon as she posted about Bristol's "shapeshifting pregnancy" during the convention....then (RNC?) sent nasty-ass The Other MCCain and Riehlworld guys after her. POOF, she was gone. The same thing happened to the Photo Morgan...as soon as she posted pics of Bristol's "Convention Boobs" with photo analysis....POOF, she was gone to. Hmmmm and now to hear this about Bree....interesting. Oh Floyd I think you might want to weigh in on this and Blade.....BE CAREFUL!!!!

GinaM said...

Wasn't finished with my thoughts...Tripp....now that is interesting too. I read somewhere...I think on AOL...a comment was posted about 2 or 3 weeks before "Tripp" was (allegedly) born that the Palins were looking for an infant baby boy to "borrow" with the same blood type as the Palin's. The person who posted this said that the girl who was going to let them use her child changed her mind....so they were frantically looking for a replacement child.

IMO...I'm with Ginger on this....something smells about "Tripp" and I think Levi knows. I think the child support is for Trig...the amount is very HIGH, which would be about right for a "special needs" child. Now with this new business posted on IM about Levi's custody agreement....again something stinks about this whole thing.

Floyd M. Orr said...

Sarah may not be the brightest bulb in the room, but why on earth would the Governor of Alaska take a DOLL into the supermarket? She wouldn't.

http://palinbabygate.blogspot.com/

Ginger said...

To: GinaM 10:15 PM

No one knows who the father of Trig is. Levi has stated that he and Bristol did not have an exclusive relationship.

Wasilla High gave out condoms. From what I've read about Levi, I'm sure he had his pockets full. His ex-girlfriend, Lanesia Garcia, went with Levi for three years and said..."she was shocked when she heard Bristol was pg because Levi would never have sex without a condom."

This isn't proof of anything. Levi and Bristol had been friends since grade school. I think she got pg and Levi felt sorry for her. He was trying to help and support her during a difficult time. Let's not forget, she was the governor's daughter.

Besides, who Trig's father is doesn't matter. If Sarah got Dr. CBJ to list her and Todd on the b/c as the parents, they would be so legally. This has to be the case because the e-mail requesting the b/c was sent to..."Gov. Sarah Palin."

All the child custody battles are staged. They file legal papers but it's all B.S. Did you notice over at Gryphen's blog on his last post about Levi's custody case, the news came from--"TMZ?"

Van Flein and TMZ...what a pair...

Agnes said...

Floyd, you wouldn't, and I wouldn't, but Sarah Palin would. She thinks she IS the brightest bulb in the room, and that everyone she talks to is a fool. She enjoys brazenly waving the evidence under our noses, not unlike those serial killers who taunt the police. Most people aren't paying very close attention, and the ones that do notice anything can't believe their eyes. Their own decency and sanity tells them no one would try to pass a doll off as a child. She was supposed to be a governor, a model Christian mother, and a possible VP candidate, and she was behaving as if it was an episode of I Love Lucy. All that aside, I'm not positive that dolls were used. It might have been just a heavily drugged baby. I like the doll theory better.

Floyd M. Orr said...

Agnes, I think they are drugging the daylights out of the babies at most of the public events.

Gles said...

Okay on the email request for the birth certificate...Sarah would be primary on the insurance policy and if "Bristol" was the patient and a minor maybe this is the norm. I would think that a Pediatrician, which should be standard at baby birth in hospital, billed for services rendered as well as the hospital for nursery bed/care. I have no idea when the Native Alaska Indian fund picks up the care as supposedly Trig has heritage.

Since the hospital is responsible for sending birth information to state Vital Statistics Dept where certified birth certificate is issued
I don't see how the doc can fudge this by altering birth mother.

Anonymous said...

There is something wrong with the picture of the baby in the market. It is dressed appropriately. Even though she was to stupid or lazy to put him into the outfit completely. The other thing babies are susceptible to illness at this age and shouldn't be around a lot of people. She should have left her prop at home. And finally you don't hold a 1 or 2 month old baby like that.