Laura Novak has part two of her interview with Professor Scharlott up on her blog.

Here is a very important part, that I want everybody to read,  where he explains that he was NOT suggesting Trig was Bristol's child, rather than Sarah's:

LN: Brad, I want to begin going through your paper chronologically. You say, in the second sentence no less, that the premise of all of this media coverage/lack of media coverage is that Mrs. Palin “faked the birth of her fifth child, Trig, in 2008 to cover for her daughter, Bristol.” Does this story inevitably have to link to Bristol Palin? Where does that come from? Why go down that path?

BS: There at the start I was merely paraphrasing what the MediaMatters columnist had written – I did not foresee that people would take that as my theory of who Trig’s mother must be – but I understand why it seems that way. So I will revise that part and take Bristol’s name out. Indeed, I will make the point more than once in that paper that I am not pushing Bristol as Trig’s likely mother. I do spend a good deal of time in the paper on Bristol’s delivery of Tripp, but not because I think she must be Trig’s mother, rather because Palin’s people were jerking the press around concerning the exact place and/or date of delivery. That in itself suggests something odd was afoot – but I don’t know what.

(You can read the rest of the interview here.)

As many of you have no doubt observed for yourselves this idea that Trig must belong to either Bristol or Sarah, and since Bristol gave birth to Tripp on December 27 ipso facto Trig MUST be Sarah's child, has been used by a number of media outlets to refute the Professor's contention that there was a cover up.

And, and as I am sure you are also aware, this SAME argument was used back in September of 2008 to kill the story in the first place.  In many ways we are seeing the same scenario play itself out, all over again.

Now this speaks to me directly because I was the first blogger to determine that Bristol was most definitely NOT the person who gave birth on April 18, any more than Sarah Palin was.  For this assertion, which I based on a number of eyewitness accounts of Bristol's appearance around that time and research I hired somebody to do on my behalf, I was attacked by some of the very people who had been major supporters in the beginning of our search for the truth. In the beginning we had all been convinced that Palin was covering for her daughter, and losing that part of the explanation for Sarah's behavior was like pulling teeth for some of us.

However as time went on that fact was reinforced by more interviews, including those with Mercede and her mom,  and more photographs we were finally able to date. 

Now this does NOT mean that Bristol did not have a baby at an earlier time, it just means that on April 18th, 2008, neither she nor Sarah gave birth. 

So who is Trig' mother, and when was he actually born?  THAT my friends is the Holy Grail of this babygate mystery, and I have not yet been able to uncover that fact.

But trust me, I have certainly not given up looking.