Laura bravely wades into perhaps the most controversial story I have ever posted on IM, and discusses the strange "Trig Palin" ear malformation with her friend the neonatologist.
From Laura's blog:
LN: You mentioned the “ear.” Perhaps nothing rocked the Palin-watching blogosphere quite like Gryphen’s Tale of Two Babies post in February of last year.
His discovery of Trig as a newborn with a deformed ear was stunning. I believe this is a tight shot from this photo at the baby shower (same occasion as the right hand photo above.)
And as Gryphen pointed out, the deformed ear is also visible close-up on the Sadie-in-the-kitchen photo.
But the discovery but it led to further speculation that the infant with a cauliflower ear could not possibly be the same baby presented to the world at the Republican National Convention and then later at the presidential debate.
In fact, following that amazing post, the Internet began collectively calling the baby, Ruffles. What’s your initial response?
DOC: I'm not sure what I can add to that excellent Gryphen post other than agree with the general principle that the “ruffled ear” is unlikely to ever look normal.
At first glance, I thought the hole in front of the ear was a preauricular pit which occurs in up to 1% of newborns. It's not particularly associated with Down syndrome and usually doesn't cause any serious problems, besides getting infected.
But then I looked at a close-up of the ear and thought that the hole in front of the ear may actually be the ear canal itself, because it's way too big to be a preauricular pit, which are tiny. What I don’t see is any evidence of a “tragus”. That’s the piece of cartilage that sits in front of the ear canal opening, partially covering it.
LN: I know that you and I both want to delve further into this, but for now, you agree with the assessment of the doctors Gryphen interviewed?
DOC: Yes. There's no way that these small, low set, posteriorly rotated and deformed ears in picture #1 could look relatively normal several months later. But I’m not an ENT and I’d really like to hear what one would say before I’d definitively call these different babies.
My first response to this VERY complimentary article is, "Aww shucks, tweren't nothing."
However my second response is to say thank you Laura, and thank your doctor friend too, for being courageous enough to give this bizarre twist in Sarah Palin's crazy pregnancy and birth story another look.
I have to say that it took me over ten months to determine that I had done enough preparation, and had enough evidence, to present this story. And EVEN THEN I had to be convinced that it could withstand the scrutiny which we all knew would come once it was posted.
I had hoped that once it was out it would catch fire and have a real impact on the pregnancy story.
But other than the duo "coincidences" of Todd Palin dropping out of the Iron Dog the day the story broke, and Meg Stapleton SUDDENLY quitting as Palin's spokesperson two days later, there really wasn't that much of a response. But hey, those two incidences don't MEAN anything, now do they?
I had high hopes that Andrew Sullivan might take the ball and run with it, but he was just never sure enough about the subject to take that risk. I have to say I really could not blame him, it really IS one of the craziest aspects to the whole babygate mess.
So once again I want to thank Laura Novak for looking at this story again with fresh eyes, because even thought I have every confidence that whoever looks at this evidence will reach essentially the same conclusion that I reached, it is nice to have that validated by other people trained to look at evidence with a skeptic's eye.
And before I end this post I should add that we had tried repeatedly to find NEW pictures of "ruffled ear" baby in order to do follow up posts, and were unable to do so.
That is until today.
THIS picture is from Frank Bailey's book, Blind Allegiance to Sarah Palin.
Notice anything?
Now the only thing new that we can learn from these pictures is that, since they were taken sometime in May, Palin continued to present THIS baby as Trig at least few more times in public.
It is also my opinion that, since the baby in this picture appears plumper than in the previous photographs, that this was probably a few weeks after the pictures taken at the baby shower and in Palin's kitchen.
So then the million dollar question remains. Just when DID Sarah swap the baby pictured above....
....for THIS baby?
And who do these babies belong to?
ReplyDeleteThis whole thing is just so bizarre. I am NOT a conspiracy theorist in the least, but I look at these pictures and the ones of SP "pregnant" - which do not lie - and I think, "What the hell?" What exactly is going on?
And where is Trig? She'd pimp him out if she could, so why can't she?
I'm leaning towards twins.
ReplyDeleteSometimes it takes repetition for something to catch on. Since there has been some recent activity with the Babygate story, this 2 baby story may get more notice.
ReplyDeleteI imagine that you have a lot of things that you are juggling right now, but if you could add Laura's Blog to your list of other valuable Palin websites, it would be appreciated. I have found that Laura's gets a lot of traffic and is compliments your work well. There have been some good discussions taking place over there. One recent post got over 500 comments. This story needs all the help it can get to keep moving.
Maybe Ruffles has ears like my German Shepherd. They used to be floppy and folded over and then started standing up on their own when she was a couple months old. lol
ReplyDeleteOn a serious note, even if the ruffled ears did unfold naturally, they still would not look like the rounded ear Trig at the convention. The ruffled ear would have more of a straight edge on the top slope.
And the "toddler" that Willow is pictured with is allegedly 4-5 months out of the womb (of someone other than sarah, of course)?
ReplyDeletePhoto evidence does. not. lie.
The truth about Trig will soon berevealed, despite the "daily" Palin stories/subversions that she purports to the media she so loves to loathe . . .
If Huma Abedin Was My Daughter...
ReplyDeletehttp://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/06/07/982850/-If-Huma-
Abedin-Was-My-Daughter?
Maybe Frank chose to put that picture in his book BECAUSE of your 2 babies anglle in the hopes that it would get noticed. Maybe he feels most comfortable about addressing it that way.
ReplyDeleteWeird. Just weird. The Tale of 2 Babies post fascinated me from the get-go. Clearly two different babies - I am glad this is being revisited.
ReplyDeleteGo Gryph!
G,
ReplyDeleteYOU did it. You noticed the strange ear and YOU published. I believe that the ear will be the key fact in Sarah Palin's exposed fake pregnancy.
I think babygate is close to MSM. Get ready for the flying monkeys. Be very careful.
Please if possible I would like to hear that little ruffles made it and is being loved and cared for.
ReplyDeleteThanks.
First, Gryphen there was no picture at the end where you say "for this baby ..." but I am assuming you meant to attach a pic of "Trig" at the RNC. I know there has been more than one baby ... I can just feel it. Second, looking at those pics from Frank's book, which I have not read yet, so have not seen the pics, Sarah does look comfortable having this baby perched on her shoulder. I carried or sat with mine in this position, many times. The baby looks so sweet and very much like the one Mercede and Levi are holding in the kitchen "Triggy Bear" pictures. Could this be Tripp? Tripp ... but born as Trig and born in 2008, not 2009? Just asking. Something about the profile of the picture (the cheeks) as he is laying on her shoulder. When oh when is the truth going to manifest itself ... I know there has to be such a story there.
ReplyDeleteThe thing is, the original whopping lie has now turned into a whole series of whoppers. No one wants to get close to anything this bizarre. Reluctance to inquire is perfectly understandable at this point.
ReplyDeleteSo many of the scenarios laid out here and at Laura Novak's site are so plausible, it's dizzy-making.
I'll just stay tuned...
Anon at 7:43: that's an interesting thought.
ReplyDeleteI'm glad you revisited this, Gryphen. When I got Bailey's book I immediately noticed the baby pics.
ReplyDeleteAnybody still trying to claim that there is only one baby because "Ruffles'" ears were modified before the convention, forget about it.
It's not just the ear shape that is different, the ear size and position are also different.
Unless Ruffles' original ears were removed and replaced with completely different ears, those are two different babies.
So, bots, that particular game is up. Here's my new challenge to you. Explain why Sarah and her family are pictured with (at least) two entirely different babies who are both identified as being the same one, i.e. Trig Palin.
This ought to be good.
a couple of things stand out in these photos - the haircuts in the Oct. baby photos grew amazing, and I'm not even sure THOSE TWO babies ears are the same or are the same child
ReplyDeletethe Bailey photo looks like the thick necked child in the Palin pool photos that were seen November 2008. Is that also a cleft palate/lip?
very strange re: multiple babies, but with SP it's probably normal
Where was this new picture from Bailey's book taken?-
ReplyDeleteA multi story building looks like at least four floors up.
...After being plucked from relative obscurity by an impetuous and panicking John McCain in 2008, Palin found herself overmatched by the prospect of a traditional vice-presidential campaign and brilliantly turned her campaign into something else, a celebration of her brash and charismatic style and her status as a self-described maverick. After that campaign, Palin could have spent a few years learning the issues and building a real political organization in preparation for a presidential campaign in 2012, but instead she focused her attentions, with enormous success, on being a celebrity. Now that the campaign is here, Palin is a weaker candidate than she could have been, but, even as an entertainer cannot afford to let the campaign go by without having a presence. This is now both her dilemma and that of her party as well.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/lincoln-mitchell/sarah-palin-the-entertain_b_872418.html
>>>"And where is Trig? She'd pimp him out if she could, so why can't she?"
ReplyDeleteI don't think she has been the primary caregiver for this child. Maybe she is worried about Trig embarrassing her. Maybe she knows how wrong it would be to use her child to sell herself.
You know....Something that's always struck me as funny....The Paylen's never had any pets. Almost all family's have a dog...couple of cats...Why? no compassion for God's creatures?
ReplyDelete7:43
ReplyDeleteI think I read that AKM mentioned that many photos were submitted to the publisher, who then chose which to put in the book.
Call me crazy, but I think I see differences even between the 10/2 (I'll call picture B) and 10/18 ( I'll call picture C)...
ReplyDelete1. The space between the outer & inner cartilage rings is greater in picture C.
2. In picture C, the inner cartilage ring appears more vertical & less horizontal.
3. In picture B, the tragus appears smaller than in picture C.
Normal growth & development of baby #2, or a possibility of baby #3??
Any neonatologists reading?
Ruffles seems to have a very large floppy mouth too in the new Bailey picture--and that does not resemble the other baby presented as 'Trig' either...
ReplyDeleteI live with a bunch of scientists who roll their eyes at most conspiracy theory stuff. When I told my daughter I thought there were at least two babies passed off as Trig she started her resistive attitude and her dad stepped in and said "she's even got me convinced there are two babies." I've now got her convinced too. If you can win those guys over, it's an impressive story.
ReplyDeleteMy theory is that during the period this baby made a few appearances (around the baby-shower), the real Trig was perhaps looking a little too big for his supposed age. So, she borrowed one from her coven.
ReplyDeleteEspecially at a baby-shower where the infant would be the center of attention among a group of women. The photo here may also be from the baby-shower based on the card displayed on the ledge behind Sarah.
7:45, ditto. I pray for both Trigs and for poor little Piper, especially.
ReplyDeleteSince I know she is reading here, I wanted to post this comment again:
Sarah, You may not realize this but if you would come out with the truth or a shortened version of the truth that at least admits the lie, this issue will eventually go away. Your family needn't be subjected to this godawful debate and speculation about ears and birth weights, amniotic fluid and pitosin, baby swaps, inbreeding and family secrets. There actually are some things in your family that are private and you can turn the switch on hastening their return to privacy by doing the right thing and admitting that you did not "make the choice" to continue your pregnancy with a down syndrome baby after you learned of his diagnosis from an ultrasound. You can give a short explanation and ask that your family's privacy be respected, just like Arnold Schwartzenegger and a host of other celebrities and politicians caught up in scandals. You can free your family from this awful speculation. The email release is bound to stir things into a further frenzy. Now is the time to do the right thing. You have the power.
Nobody is going to touch this story. I wish the people who are in the know would step up and speak out! Don't you think that Bailey knows the true story? He says he doesn't but I find that hard to believe.
ReplyDeleteI have an ear ache after reading this
ReplyDelete??????
ReplyDeleteThat baby in the b&w photo looks like no other baby I've yet seen identified as Trig!!! what a freakin' rabbit hole.
now hold on a second. both kids - all pics - have that potential "pit" thing...hard to beleive they'd get a replacement with that same unusual feature...any chance the ear just sort of ..unfolded?
ReplyDelete@ 7:17
ReplyDeleteThere are numerous charities that specialize in the adoption of DS babies/children (and some have photos of the babies available for adoption, which I thought was kind of strange). Wasn't Sarah acquainted with a woman (Loudin?) who had adopted a DS baby? Can't quite remember the details, but wasn't this woman's son once mistaken as Trig in a photo? There could be a connection between the two but who knows for sure.
" Warrior89 said...
ReplyDeleteAnd where is Trig? She'd pimp him out if she could, so why can't she?
7:17 AM"
She thinks he is gettin' too big for his britches & he has been acting like a diva from his starring role on Sarah Palin's Alaska.
I´ve noticed the palinbots response to the Tale of Two Babies is pretty darn similar to their response to sarah´s version of Paul Revere´s Ride.
ReplyDeleteWhere there´s truth, there´s flying monkey tales.
holy shit. that pic from bailey's book doesn't look anything like the baby pics we have seen before. where is she getting these babies???
ReplyDeleteWell, no, Downs kids aren't as cute as they get older. I know a family with a daughter who has Downs, and it is not fun to have a fourth grader who is barely potty trained.
ReplyDeleteBut they love her. She's not hidden.
Where has Granny LuLu hidden Trig? Is she now embarrassed to find that he is a human being and not a cute toy? Is he in Wasilla or in Arizona?
And shouldn't a bot come on right now to tell us that all of the Palins had dinner at Applebees last night, and Trig was a perfect angel, and they were laughing and laughing at us? Has the Palin family gotten too strange for even the bots to lie about?
The baby Willow is holding at the convention is supposed to be 4 months old. So why isn't she supporting his back? She's holding him the way someone would hold an 8- or 9-month-old. He's heavy (and older) hence she needs both hands clasped under him. That's one big 4-month-old, if you ask me.
ReplyDeleteThe switch happened during the RNC 2008.
ReplyDeleteThe Switch
Here is a link to the picture that shows 'Ruffles' at the RNC being held by Bristol.
Picture shows why I believe this is 'Ruffles'.
The bots and fairy tale trolls can deny, spin, lie, and pretend all they want, but the fact is that these are clearly two different babies...not only does Trig #1 aka Ruffle Ear appear much smaller and has different facial features, BUT HE HAS A HOLE OUTSIDE OF THE EAR CANAL!
ReplyDeleteWhere does Sarah get all the babies? Is there a Down Syndrome Rent A Baby store in Wasilla or something?
And I forgot, the post of why I believe the boys are twins.
ReplyDeleteTwins!
I commented this on a previous post that I came across this on page 214 of Bailey's book regarding babygate. Bailey writes that:
ReplyDelete"The morning of the birth, when escorted behind the hospital double doors, I caught a glimpse of Sarah and hours-old Trig. Dazed, I later joyously snapped a photo of Todd cradling Trig, his sparkling eyes fixed on the infant's face. Todd, for all his faults, unquestionably loves his children deeply."
I am wonering why that photo was not put in the book? Fear of Todd?
Also where is that photo now?
8:08 Anon: that has made me curious too. Five kids and no pets is strange. A couple of dogs could have been loving companions for the children.
ReplyDeleteSame Trig. The ear is just unfurling itself after birth. Mother was probably Bristol.
ReplyDeleteIn the past few days this woman has presented a fantastical version of Paul Revere's ride and convinced a large portion of society that her version is correct! She rewrote American History!!! Her wild ride is small potatoes in comparison. Two babies, three babies...does she really even have a baby? I haven't seen Trig in Lord knows how long. This woman is insane and I wouldn't put anything past her.
ReplyDeleteThis was already discussed thoroughly over at Laura's blog with over 500 posts. You need to find your own new material asshole.
ReplyDeleteSarah and Bristol, I hope Ruffles is doing great with a caring family.
ReplyDeleteWould hate to hear something bad happened to him because you ignored him like you are currently doing with the current Trig.
If Ruffles is no longer with us, I hope you did not dispose of him along the freeway you pieces of shit.
To me, the MOST important question in this entire sordid little soap opera surrounding the birth of the Trigs is, "what happened to Baby Ruffles?" Is this child even still alive? I am quite concerned about this innocent child's welfare. Is this child still even alive? I would put NOTHING past Palin if she thought that she had something to gain or that her reputation were at stake. It appears that the publicly pro-life Palin was quietly supportive of an abortion for Bristol, so she has no principled stance on anything. At best, Palin is utterly indifferent to the welfare of any of the Trigs.
ReplyDeleteTHE most disgusting aspect of Palin's affected personae is the feigned devotion to children. She uses them like they were nothing but props. She is so indifferent to their welfare that she views the various Trigs as if they were so unimportant as to be interchangeable.
If Palin does decide to run, we need to make sure that people show up to her campaign appearances with signs which read "Where is Baby Ruffles?" and "How Many Trigs Are There?"
Being a moronic, self aggrandizing, venomous, Narcissistic grifter is one thing, but being the indifferent exploiter of children that she is is something else entirely. I suspect that Palin's pimping of the various Trigs could lead to criminal charges of child abuse.
Palin, you are a classless, ignorant, child abusing bitch. I will relish the day you have to account for ALL of the Trigs.
Is the pic from Bailey's book useful to the babygate book author?
ReplyDeleteAny chance that Frank Bailey will unleash any more of his "many" photos. Especially because Frank is convinced that Sarah Palin WAS pregnant and DID endanger an unborn infant by boarding a transcontinental flight after amniotic fluid leak and avoiding a bunch of NICU equiped hospitals.
You'd think that Frank Bailey is so committed to Sarah Palin boasting of her wild ride, that he would be anxious to prove to the world that she was in fact pregnant. Frank being a good Christian and all, he's probably convince God would intervene to prevent Sarah Palin's horrific risk of an unborn infant.
Frank's book says that he took a picture of Todd Palin and a baby in the Mat-su hospital. Why mention that he has such a picture but not publish it. Is he issuing a mild threat to the Palin clan?
I posted at 7:51, and I think that my potential theory can not be. The opening of the ear is SO FAR FORWARD, I believe that the doctors Gryphen spoke with earlier, are correct. That combination of ear deformities did not just "correct" themselves.
ReplyDeletePerhaps the shower and "kitchen" pictures are mis-dated. Maybe it wasn't Levi's birthday celebration in May, in the Palin kitchen. The small group of attendees at the shower are Sarah's VERY close friends/supporters/partners in crime. A small group may believe that Sarah is covering for Bristol and that they are supporting a friend whose daughter went astray, "Could happen to any of us, right?" The real story, I believe, is much darker.
It would make sense that those who know the truth are willing to go to great lengths, to see their religious fantasy, of which queen Sarah is a key player, come to fruition.
Anything is possible.
This was already discussed thoroughly over at Laura's blog with over 500 posts. You need to find your own new material asshole.
ReplyDelete8:45 AM
--------
you have it backwards. Gryphen produced the original blog post months ago. Laura is still catching up.
Palin used other babies with down syndrome, to fill in for Trig, as part of her stage act, when she had speaking engagements. Piper would push out the baby in a stroller and Sarah and Todd would wave to the crowd. Sarah befriended a women that had a DS baby, the same age as Trig, and it was her baby that appeared on stage with the Palin family. However the crowd was completely oblivious to the fact that it was not Sarah Palin's baby on stage and the reporter had to later correct his story because he had misinformed the public. I thought it was funny that reporter got flak and was accused of not having all the facts etc. He had to print a retraction correcting his mistake. But the major revelation that no one seemed to care about was the fact that Palin deceived the adoring crowd at that event! She never announced to anyone that baby on the stage was not her baby, it was her friend's baby. HELLO BRING IN THE STAND IN BABY, TRIG IS TOO FUSSY!
ReplyDeleteIn the Palin's world
ReplyDeletewhy doesn't 1+1=2?
There are questions on how the red Palin house got built, who built it, who paid for it, why are the materials of the red house the same as the hockey rink?
Who is Trig's mother? Where is Ruffles? Who is Ruffles mother? Who is involved with Ruffles / Trig conspiracy? Who are the daddies of these two babies?
8:45
ReplyDeleteBristol? Toad? Who could it be? Obviously someone who is reading and reporting back to Sara.
I have a bad feeling about pursuing this line of inquiry. I would bet my house that SP did not give birth to Trig, but I do believe the baby in all the picture is the same. Trig has a very distinctive rectangular shape in his ear created by the cartilage. It is present in all the pictures. I can't explain the ruffled outer ear, but I think the picture in Bailey's book looks less ruffled than the picture from the shower.
ReplyDeleteThat Bailey picture doesnt look like any of the babies we've seen so far, except for the deformed ear.
ReplyDeletePoor little baby's features are all deformed from trying to sleep while Palin does work , oblvious to the comfort of the infant she is propping.
Love it! Ed Rollins right on the ball, and has Sarah Palin's sized up right.
ReplyDeleteMichelle Bachmann's new top consultant, Ed Rollins, began his tenure with scathing criticism of potential Bachmann rival Sarah Palin.
"Sarah has not been serious over the last couple of years," Rollins told Brian Kilmeade on his radio show, Kilmeade and Friends. "She got the Vice Presidential thing handed to her, she didn't go to work in the sense of trying to gain more substance, she gave up her governorship."
He suggested that the contrast would favor Bachmann.
Rollins has long been skeptical of Palin, but his new role with Bachmann suggests that criticism will become part of her campaign, though she has publicly praised the former Alaska governor.
Next Chapter, THANKS for all your work on this matter. You've done a great job.
ReplyDeleteCali Pygian and Next Chapter, I agree that the 10/2 and 10/18 babies are not the same. The ear of the 10/18 baby matches "Ruffles" ear. There in so "hole" in front of his ear. It is simply the space under the two pieces of cartilage that slightly overlap each other. As the baby grew, the ear grew into what is shown as the 10/18 ear.
The 10/2 ear is similar, but not identical to the 10/18 ear.
As said earlier, the more times this issue is discussed and the more blogs that carry a story on it, the more traction it will get.
Thanks to Gryphen, Next Chapter, and Laura, for posting on this.
Anon 8:45, who are you calling asshole? If it's Gryphen, I'm laughing about the commentary. Whose material do you think Novak is talking about?
ReplyDeleteThe baby from the Sarah pictures looks African American!! Remember when a young AA man from Wasilla was claiming he was the baby's father? Maybe the baby got too dark, so had to be switched?
ReplyDeleteI keep thinking that the first baby had Fetal Alcohol Syndrome, not Downs. That would actually make more sense if the mother were a hard-partying teenager. Did it die? Is it locked in the cellar? Did Granny LuLu find a baby with Downs to fill in?
ReplyDeleteAlso, does Alaska have institutions for severely disabled children? Is it possible that Ruffles and Trig are now living in an institution?
Anonymous said...
ReplyDelete>>>"And where is Trig? She'd pimp him out if she could, so why can't she?"
I don't think she has been the primary caregiver for this child. Maybe she is worried about Trig embarrassing her. Maybe she knows how wrong it would be to use her child to sell herself.
8:05
That didn't not bother her in the slightest on her moneymaking book tour. That Tri-G was drug out into the cold sans pants or hat at all hours of the day and night in all types of weather. Sometimes he was obviously woken up and carrried out like Simba the lion king to Palins bots
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteYou know....Something that's always struck me as funny....The Paylen's never had any pets. Almost all family's have a dog...couple of cats...Why? no compassion for God's creatures?
8:08 AM
PETS?
Dogs and Cats have 4 legs and fur! Up here in Alaska we eat therefore we hunt!
PETS?
I like my dogs and cats next to my mash potatoes and gravy... Thank you very much!
-Sarah of Alaska via Arizona
Um, Anony at 8:45am? Laura, properly, credits Gryphen with the original Tale of 2 Ears story. She *reprinted* Gryphen's story from a year ago...... so don't ya seem just a LITTLE silly calling Gryphen an asshole?
ReplyDelete(Or is that you, LouSarah, in which case, never mind. Can't argue with crazy)
Yellowgirl
Looking at the third graphic in the post, the one that has the three pictures side by side, it is absolutely clear that those are three different babies.
ReplyDeletePicture #1 is obviously Ruffles. Pictures #2 and #3, however, appear to be different babies as well.
Look at pic #3. That ear appears to contain a lateral piece of cartilage that defines the upper terminus of the concha (the largest cup shaped portion leading to the ear canal) and extends from just above the tragus (the little cartilage nub in front of your ear canal) to the anti-helix and possibly the helix itself. This bit of cartilage seems odd, almost like it is an extra bit bisecting the normally much larger concha. I do not see that same bit of extra cartilage in pic #2.
Just how many Trigs have there been? I'd say at least a minimum of three.
THIS is the story that the media needs to focus on. If they get to the bottom of this "team" of interchangeable Trigs, the rest will come out on its own.
The Doc points out that both Trig and Bristol have "bat wing" shaped ears. That last photo in your series here shows the nice lovely shaped ear we see sometimes.
ReplyDelete@8:08 AM "The Paylen's never had any pets. Almost all family's have a dog...couple of cats...Why? no compassion for God's creatures?"
ReplyDeleteGood question. How long does an animal have to be alive to count as a pet? Perhaps the Wasilla Hillbillys tell the children that the caribou, moose, wolves, chipmunks, squirrels, eagles, etc are their "pets" before they kill them?
"Hey, young'ns, hurry y'selves up and name that there rabbit afore ah shoots it!"
@ anonymous 7:51. I'm a NICU nurse - here's some comments about the development of the ear (reposted here):
ReplyDeletePREMATURE INFANT EAR
DEVELOPMENT
Part of the process of determining gestational age can be made by
examining the level of development of the external ear of the
newborn. Before 34 weeks, the cartilage is not present in any part
of the ear, and the pinna is flat, formless and remains folded. At
34 to 37 weeks, the pinna will be curved, soft, and able to recoil.
At 37 to 40 weeks, the pinna will be fully formed, firm, and able to
recoil instantly. After 40 weeks, there will be thick cartilage, and ear will be stiff."
You can tell a huge difference in developmental age based on many areas, including the ears. The biggest thing to note is that the structure of the ear does not fundamentally change. At very premature ages, the consistency is almost like a thin pie crust - very pliable and movable (but it doesn't break like a pie crust). As the child approaches term (37-40 weeks), it thickens and becomes larger, but does not change shape. We use it to gauge gestation based on how moveable the pinna is. By the time an infant is ready to be discharged, this process is concluded. Sometimes on very premature infants, the ear becomes wrinkled or folded due to problems in positioning. This is because it is so thin that it folds on itself. By the time they go home, this is not possible, due to the thickening of the cartilage.
Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteSame Trig. The ear is just unfurling itself after birth. Mother was probably Bristol.
8:43 AM
And the whole was plugged with bubble gum, juicy fruit, then a little make-up applied.
Give me a break.
Honestly, that Bailey book baby looks like Trig today and the Trig in SPA and the book tour. There were a couple incidences on the campaign I thought she may have used a sub. Perhaps trig was sick? Idk but if you examine the face and trigs face today, you'll see too many similarities.
ReplyDeleteI agree, same Trig. My daughter's ear looked like that at birth and now looks fine. Camera angles and resolution do matter.
ReplyDeleteI have FB's book and just noticed that too. Same ruffled ear. So, when you thought that there wouldn't be anymore pictures of baby Trig's ear, this one shows up in FB's book. I don't believe in COINCIDENCES.
ReplyDeleteWow, there is no doubt these are two different babies. But, why?
If this story can be proven, SP is going to have to explain to a nation why she lied, and misrepresented herself, and her family as a family values, truthful, honest candidate. All the monies and proceeds from her books, speeches could place her as criminally liable for profiting off of a lie. Not to mention the abuse, misrepresentation of a child or children.
Anonymous @ 7:51 AM, that's an interesting finding you posted. I hope Laura and her MDs can follow up on it.
ReplyDelete-------------------
Regarding the comparison of the May shower picture of "Ruffles", I found it easier to compare pictures if I tried to re-orient the angles in the pictures if possible.
Thus, Gryphen, you might take a look at the May vs. October 2008 pictures with this slight change I made...
http://bit.ly/k64xC8
-------------------
Also, for anyone else interested in the appearance of "Trig" as he matured in these 3 years, look at my album collection at
http://bit.ly/ld4Tnr
To me, there appear to be two distinct different Trigs: one with a "squarish" face, and another with a narrower chin.
The hair color, texture and direction of growth for each of the 2 Trigs seem to be slightly different, too.
Perhaps analyses like this are one reason why we don't see Trig in public any more, except in blurry distant videos (last September 2010).
-----------------
Lastly, I'm with "Next Chapter" in all her findings seen at PalinPeytonPlace in the links shown above @ 8:38 AM and 8:40 AM. I believe they're 2 different Trigs, and that they are twins.
http://www.palinpeytonplace.com/the-switch.html
http://www.palinpeytonplace.com/2-babies-1-mother.html
Evidence for two babies is even stronger than the evidence that Palin wasn't pregnant!!
ReplyDeleteI just went over to Palin Peyton Place..they have the best photo comparisons.
To Gasman: I totally noticed that too. Pictures 2 and 3 of the ear are different. I always thought the Trigs at the RNC and rallies always looked interchangeable - one looked more girlish and the other boyish.
ReplyDeleteOthers have commented that the picture of the baby in Bailey's book is not the same baby as Ruffles (or any others we have seen). I do so agree.
ReplyDeleteIn the black and white shot there is no pronounced opening at the ear canal as there is with the delegate looking Ruffles. This baby has 100% different lips too.
I feel like an oddball since I think there are three babies involved. And I've been very worried about all three ever since Gryphen first posted the story. Does anyone out there care about these children? If you know something, even if it's to say they are accounted for and in good health, please do so.
ReplyDeleteIt's true as some have noticed here that the healthy-looking Trig with rounded ear sometimes would have a more square-looking ear and at other times the full-rounded ear.
ReplyDeleteBy square-looking, I mean that the ear is anvil topped a bit, then goes downward, not completely round.
In the photos of the square or round eared Trigs, they also had differences in their foreheads, nose, and eyes, mouth; on Trig's neck would be thicker, whereas another Trig's features were softer.
Is it just me guys, or does it feel like this really might be it? I find myself half expecting Sarah to clumsily call a press conference a la her Shit on Alaska/I Quit on Alaska speech and twitchingly, manically explain why she faked her pregnancy.
ReplyDeleteGryph...I think this pic points to Frank indeed knowing...whatever there is to know!
Gryphen...or anyone who can do this-I think it would be very beneficial to update the post with one of the OTHER pics from blind allegiance...the one on the opposite page from this photo-where Bristol is touching the baby's EAR.
I'm thinking maybe Frank couldn't bear to spill the one story he knew Sarah was desperate to keep hidden. But he also couldn't just "let it go". Thus the contradictory photos displayed in such a plainly obvious format. .
Don't know if you will post this but here goes: I know I am in the minority here, but I still don't find the May 4, 2008 photo conclusive and I don't think any doctor would make definitive conclusions based on a photograph, especially that particular photograph. Light and shadow do alter the way things look in photographs. In the May 4 photo the ear is partially obscured and the baby is positioned at a different angle than in the other photos used for comparison.(i.e. It's not an apples to apples comparison) Lastly, infants can have long hair on and behind their ears that could also contribute to tricks of light and shade. That hair falls off as the baby matures.
ReplyDeleteAgain, I know I am in the minority, but I urge you to keep an open mind that it's possible it really is the same baby/same set of maturing ears.
I hope Sullivan will pick the 'ear' story up this time. Journalists need to stop shying away from asking her questions, no matter how 'icky' they seem.
ReplyDeletePerhaps Bailey will show you more photos and throw a little more light on the mysteries during your interview.
I finished Blind Allegiance last night. I'm not sure that Bailey sees the extent of Sarah's personality and cognitive disorders but the book really shows how she operates. This woman will lie about anything and everything and will step on anyone. I was especially blown away that she knew David Letterman's joke was about Bristol and yet injected Willow's name in conjunction with the word 'rape'. I know she used her kids as props and shields and that she made up the gang rape scenario as an excuse for not staying in Juneau, but reading her own words about intended deception really set me off.
She'd probably steal a baby from a hospital if she thought it would benefit her and could be pulled off without getting caught. I believe it's very likely that Sarah started the rumor that Bristol was pregnant. If the pregnancy hoax was exposed, she needed a cover that would elicit sympathy.
Thanks for all you do, Gryphen.
The picture from the Bailey book is very significant.
ReplyDeleteWhy? It appears to have been taken in Sarah's governor's office. Thus, it removes the possibility that the ruffled ear pictures taken at the baby shower were pictures of an unrelated baby that just happened to be in attendance at Trig's baby shower.
So confusing. The items on the window sill suggest to me that this picture was taken in a hospital room.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous @7:51 am - As I am reading Bailey's book with all the "made up" fraudulently signed writings there is no way I believe Cathy Baldwin-Johnson wrote that medical report.
ReplyDeleteHowever, Dr.CBJ has done our country a great disservice by not coming forward to claim forgery. And where is she? She apparently no longer has staff privileges at Mat Su hospital and never was an OB-Gyn specialist.
Given the "mysterious" (never followed up by ongoing investigation) timing and circumstances of Dar Miller's fiery death in her home, ask yourself if there is some connection to Miller. The prenatal diagnostic language contained in the medical report would likely be everyday basic jargon for a former NICU nurse practitioner.
Malia Litman at her blog is doing a yeoman's job of calling authorities to account on their charade of "protective coverups" for the Paylin family. It seems to be a standard procedural disease for those exposed to, or scared to death of the extent of retribution and harm that comes from anyone willing to displease a Paylin.
Exposure, exposure, exposure to end all this stupid coverage of one of the dumbest families in America that are an insult to the respectful, thinking citizens of this country.
That baby in her arms from the Bailey book is as big as the baby shown in the hospital picture with the Heaths. It is NOT the same size as the baby shown in the Mercede picture!
ReplyDeleteAlso, too: Do the earlobes of the baby with the white hat with the doggie applique (pic #3 in Lauras blog) look the same to you as the ear lobes of 'Trig" in the October pics?
Somehow, I do not see ANY earlobes in the October pics, but I DEFINITELY see an ear lobe in picture #3...
Anon @ 8:98 am & Elizabeth @ 8:42 am Yes the absence of pets in a family with children is curious. (Sorry, I cannot remember who the e-mail was from.)
ReplyDeleteWhat is even more curious is that about 2 years ago, when Palin's first batch of e-mails were released, there was an e-mail to Todd I believe, about the puppy being ready for pick-up.
And curiouser still, a couple of times on his blog Gryphen has displayed a photo of Sarah & Todd, with baby Trig held between their faces. On Trigg's woolen cap is a little puppy applique, with the caption "My Little Puppy".
"Puppy" sound like code to me.
To 8:08, the Palins have had plenty of puppies including one currently named Charlie that Willow watches for Bristol when she's not home.
ReplyDeleteSo, Gryphen, how many besides me emailed you to point out the discrepancy in the picture in the Bailey book?
ReplyDeletePalin's Pathetic Facade
ReplyDeleteNo Bar's Hold For Power
Sarah Palin's Fake Pregnancy
Palin's Profitable and Contrived Pregnancy.
Sarah: A Classic Sociopath
OK, 'Gasman' brings up our old question of whether 'Ruffles' is still alive.
ReplyDeleteCan someone up in Alaska ask the child welfare department if they could check into that? I mean, we have photographic evidence that that baby EXISTED, but we do not know what happened to it. It simply 'disappeared from the surface of the earth'. Wouldn't you THINK that some authority would be interested in that?
Ok Gryphen. I have a task for you who has working internet currently and photo software. Look at the first candies psa and "grab" the picture of willow sitting with tripp and trig. Now compare trigs slight profile there with the trig bristols holding in blind allegiance. I'm aware that down babies have similar characirstics, but those profiles are pretty dang similar.
ReplyDeleteAre you saying that the photo in Bailey's book is showing a younger or older baby than shower photo?
ReplyDeleteIt looks like the photo in the Bailey's book shows Palin sitting in the hospital, possibly with the nursery behind her. That would make that baby older than the one from the shower.
Help, I'm confused. But, I agree this is not the same baby she trotted out later.
Sarah Palin has stated she hid her pregnancy from everyone except Todd for 7 months and then she announced her pregnancy in March and had the baby in April. So if that is indeed the case and Sarah started utilizing a padded baby bump immediately following the announcement then it would be impossible for Frank Baily or anyone else from her staff to blow the whistle on babygate, unless they saw her naked or they had documented proof. You can bet your life Sarah Palin would not include any member of her staff in on a secret of this magnitude. So Frank Baily would not have emails about this issue. He may have an opinion about babygate but he does not have proof and therefor it would be stupid for him to address this topic in his book. That would undermine his credibility, and he's already fighting an uphill battle there, thanks to Sarah Palin making him her fall guy for troppergate.
ReplyDeleteI'm leaning towards something bad happening to little "Ruffles" and the RNC Tri-G being substituted. But it might be twins and if it were twins, then why not say so? Who knows? That's the question - WHO actually knows?
ReplyDeleteSharon1943
I feel like Sarah thinks that if she just stops talking about Trig and pretends he does not exist, the public and media with it's short attention span will just forget about him and then all the Babygate stuff will go away.
ReplyDeleteI hope that the anonymous 4:32 poster will return with some more information. (You don't have to identify yourself, just fill in some of the details, Please!)
ReplyDeleteFor example, 4:32 wrote that the Trig that was born at the end of January (prematurely?) is not the Trig that was put on display at the 2008 convention or the 2009 book signing tour.
When the baby was born, it was feared that he could be deaf, blind and/or have cerebral palsy. DS was diagnosed later. That makes it sound as if the baby was not only premature, but in a risky situation for weeks, until they knew if he would survive or not.
We don't even know if the original Trig did survive. Anything could have happened to the baby with the ruffled ear. I agree with someone who hopes that Ruffles was placed in a good home or an institution. It is also possible, given everything wrong with him that he did not survive. But, Sarah had already announced that Trig had DS, so a DS child was adopted (liked Gina Loudon did). What a pity that the church fire burned the adoption records.
Please, 4:32, tell us more about the little baby that was born at the end of January. Do you know what happened to him? Who was the pediatrician who gave him check ups in the hospital, and did her survive? Also, would you know anything about Sarah's tubal ligation, which would prove (as you say) that Sarah was not present when the first Trig was born. There are several places collecting this information that also offer total and complete privacy and protection. You need not disclosed anything that would endanger your identity, your job, your family or your life.
Sarah Palin is such a danger to this country. I know, you said that arguments "do it for your country" don't work. But, if the truth is told about Sarah and she loses her political clout and following, your life will be safer and more people will breathe a sigh of relief because they have been bullied for too long.
Mimi...I have the book, and it is dated May 2008, as a photograph by Frank Bailey, and it is captioned "Trig helping Governor Palin review the 2008 capital budget". It could be her Anchorage office, seems to be a few flights up, overlooking a parking lot. Sarah's not wearing a hospital bracelet, for what that's worth.
ReplyDeleteI also found the preceding two pics interesting, one with Bristol holding Trig, and one of Bailey's son holding hi, dated June 08. Bristol is actually touching Trig's left earlobe in the picture.
The photo contained in Bailey's book shows a very plumb baby. Contrast that with the photo taken in an airplane with Willow's funny cross-eyed look but holding what was probably Ruffles - and he looked very frail, not plumb at all. That particular photo was the one that Bristol complained about during the trial of David ?? whats-his-name, who went to prison for hacking Palin's email account. Bristol said she "..was very upset about HER newborn son's photo being spread around the internet..". (paraphrased)
ReplyDeleteWhat was going on with those little babies?
Sharon1943
Warrior89 said...
ReplyDeleteAnd who do these babies belong to?
~~~~~~~
Perhaps, the little tikes are linked to the Palins through the Wasilla church that "mysteriously" caught fire shortly after Sarah was defeated and returned to AK (with her tail between her legs).
KaJo: That 'Trig in the July 4, 2010 picture is yet ANOTHER Trig! The ear is deformed, but DIFFERENT - it has a big hole in the middle - kind of like a 'normal' ear, but the ear-outline is severely cut!
ReplyDeleteDumb questions: baby at shower being given a bottle. Why wasn't he breastfed as Sarah has referenced? Was the bottle full of breast milk? Was it one of those special breast milk bottles that come with the pump? Anyone know? Doesn't anyone think that, if she were the real mother of that baby, she would take great pleasure in whipping out her tit to breast feed him? At a shower with friends in attendance? Of course, there are ways for a woman to breast feed discretely, but, would a breast-feeding mom go through the trouble of pumping breast milk if she were going to be with her baby all day anyway? Just a few dumb questions from a non-mom.
ReplyDeleteThe bizarre nature of all this is as overwhelming as the credibility of the photos, but we all seem unsure of what it shows. What it doesn't show is a normal DS baby, normal development, same baby, same ears. No.
ReplyDeleteRecently so many aspects of this sad hoax have been revisited. At the outset, on Audrey's blog, the far-ranging discussion of many of these points seemed worthwhile because it helped us understand what seemed real and what was bogus (like the bogus SAT scores and report card for SP).
Conclusion? Something is very wrong here, but it's hard to know how to approach it. In part because the various data points never add up right, and in part because SP is a documented liar.
My suggestion: the most easily proved part of this is that SP WAS NOT PREGNANT WITH TRIG. The flat-profile photos tell us that beyond doubt. Even the Trignostics NEVER explain how such photos could be possible if the pregnancy was real.
All the MANY other things we suspect to be true (fake CBJ letter, multiple babies, odd/sad motive for the hoax, weird family dynamics, and more) will probably never be proved. And we don't need to know the truth of them in order to be sure that SP did not give birth to Trig.
Neither do we need to know who Trig's bioMom is. It would answer a lot of the weird questions that arise out of this Palin hoax, but it is not necessary to know who gave birth to Trig in order to know that SP did not.
If we can get the MSM to explore and acknowledge that SP lied and hoaxed us -- or explain how a flat profile can yield a 6+ pound baby in 5 weeks -- that will be enough. The other contradictory facts will come out in time, but let's pick the low-lying fruit first: SP did not give birth to Trig and hoaxed us all.
For Gasman and others who see three Trigs:
ReplyDeleteWhen the ear revelation came up last year, I also thought there were at least 3 Trigs. I stood in front of a mirror and looked at my ear from several different positions. Ear characteristics look different with even slight changes of position. This goes for the inside ear structure as well as the overall shape. Try it.
Also, I looked for several shots of Trig taken on the same day to compare to similar shots on different days. My conclusion was that it appears more likely that there was only one baby during the campaign and book tour. Certainly, I could be wrong and I don't suggest not questioning if there was babyswitching on the campaign trail; but I'd be cautious about stating it as fact.
Anonymous @9:38 AM said: To Gasman: I totally noticed that too. Pictures 2 and 3 of the ear are different. I always thought the Trigs at the RNC and rallies always looked interchangeable - one looked more girlish and the other boyish.
ReplyDeleteNow THAT'S something the rest of us haven't thought of!
If the at-least-2 Trigs are indeed twins -- and I'm correct in believing one has a more squarish, coarser face, and the other one has a more pointed chin and delicate features, those characteristics could be easily explained by them being boy and girl twins.
No wonder Trig is fading from public view, if gender facial characteristics are making their differences more apparent.
Yet another reason why the birth certificate(s) are not being presented as proof.
I really think that photo of palin holding the baby looks like it was taken in a hospital room. It looks institutional with a card and a Teddy Bear on the shelf behind her. Is that a parking lot out the window? It looks rather high up (more than a few flights of stairs.
ReplyDeleteHow many stories is the hospital where she claimed to give birth?
How about Anchorage....when she "forgot" where she said she had given birth and said Anchorage. How many stories is that hospital?
you people are something else! flippin crazy! babies ears when they are born can be crumbled up and then a few months later look completely different.
ReplyDeleteif you had babies and weren't a man writing this article you would know that
more hogwash from the haters
do you guys every give up?
Everybody would be serving the purpose a lot better it they would just stop wasting time on this ear theory. As the recent NICU nurse has told you people, ears develop over time with newborn babies. Try to be objective and look at the shape the ear has taken on in areas where there is a similarity. Then go look at lots of ears and see how the ear can be used for identification nearly as reliably as finger prints. Then note the similarities where gurfen thinks there shouldn't be any. For fukk sake you lemmings, think for yourselves for a change!
ReplyDeleteBut beyond all that, why does anybody want there to be more than one baby? What the hell difference does it all make. The fact of the matter that too many people on these blogs refuse to accept is that there is no doubt that Palin wasn't pregnant and also no doubt that Bristol took a hike to auntie's house to hide her pregnancy.
So now all that's lacking is someone to come out and tell the truth for Palin and get her out of her mess she's created for herself. Well folks, that's not going to happen but what is going to happen is that the truth is going to come out in the next few days and it's not going to come from Palin's enemies. Now go see Laura and wait patiently.
Can the FBI be brought into this case?
ReplyDeleteI'm very serious, there are pictures of two different babies being portrayed as one and one of them is missing? I don't care if you hate Sarah Palin with a passion or you are willing to give your right arm for her, there is a missing child here!
I do not understand why Alaska's Dept of Law is not looking into this case? I've heard of parental or family wellness checks by the law, how about the law checking into the ruffled ear baby? Where is he? Where is his mother? Dr Cathy Baldwin-Johnson, tell us what you know? Bristol Palin tell us what you know?
You know and I know Gov Parnel has heard about the two Trigs and you know he reads The Immoral Minority since he is involved with Palin's past crimes.
Yes we know you know Parnel. Where is the ruffled ear baby?
I'm not worried about the Palin's insurance fraud, I'm worried about the life of a little baby!
THE FBI NEEDS TO GET INVOLVED ALASKA!
PalinPeytonPlace has long been on the ear case (as well as the ruptured uterus case).
ReplyDeleteSarah's Scandals blog did a poster based on concern for Ruffles' whereabouts:
shesnohockeymom.blogspot.com/
2010/08/
new-missing-child-poster.html
excellent. and sad.
ReplyDeleteMaybe there should be an APB for missing persons . . . perhaps by the FBI?
ReplyDeleteAnon @ 9:51
ReplyDeleteAre you talking about an actual canine? Or are you implying a baby or boyfriend of Bristol's named Charlie?
And Bristol is grown up and moved out -- out of state in fact. How long is Willow going to "sub" for an adult sister who ain't coming "home," whether it's dog, baby, or boyfriend care?
I don't know when or how the babies might have been swapped. But, my daughter was born with a 'ruffled' ear and at 32 years of age she STILL has the 'ruffle'. It isn't something that one 'grows out of'.
ReplyDeleteI have to say this about the "twins" theory
ReplyDeleteFirst, if Sara was having twins and knew at least one was DS how could she have even possibly thought to take the wild ride?
Second, I've seen women carrying twins and there's no way she could have pulled that one off and have one of them be over six pounds at birth. She would have been bigger than a house. We already have seen photo's of her carrying Trac and she is HUGE, how could she barely show twins at seven months, then pop right out in two weeks and give birth to TWO babies?
I could go on put what's the point?
I'm guessing she's getting nervous and her writers and explainers are trying to come up with a plausible explanation for what really happened. Anyone want to bet she creates some "poor me" explanation. Trig passed away and she didn't want to expose her grief while running for VP - something like that. It's going to have to be a doozie. Then she can get her writers to crash Wiki and rewrite her bio to include the tragedy of Trig.
She can't keep this up much longer, the ears tell the tale and sooner or later it's going to case a wider net and start getting picked up by the LSM. She made a huge mistake dissing them as she did on her vacation
I had not noticed this before, but baby 10/2 has had its hair cut while baby 10/18 has never had its hair cut.
ReplyDeleteIf only Palin cared about her family...
ReplyDeleteWarrior89: Trig's contract probably ran out and his real family took him back. :)
ReplyDeleteLOL The ear just "unfurled" itself??? I've been around babies all my life and never saw an ear unfurl itself. That's as hilarious as Bristol's chin unfurling itself.
ReplyDeleteBTW, was the mystery of why Tripp was named Tripp ever explained?
Also after Sadie's big announcement haven't heard a peep. Is she being threatened? Check out one of the last comments on her recent blog from the other day.
" Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteThis was already discussed thoroughly over at Laura's blog with over 500 posts. You need to find your own new material asshole.
8:45 AM"
WTF? She is the one just now getting into the discussion.
All I can say is that is one HUGE 5 month old 1-2 month preemie baby, especially since down syndrome babies are supposed to be smaller. Looks more like a 7 or 8 month old. Can we do a photo comparison of babies meant to be the same age as Trig with different aged Trigs to see if he looks a lot bigger/older than other babies supposedly his age?
ReplyDeleteThe fun begins, Top Bachmann aide goes after Palin for not being 'serious'
ReplyDeletehttp://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/gop-presidential-primary/165139-bachmann-aide-goes-after-palin-for-not-being-serious.
"Sarah has not been serious over the last couple of years," Rollins said on Fox News personality Brian Kilmeade's radio show. "She got the vice presidential thing handed to her. She didn’t go to work in the sense of trying gain more substance. She gave up her governorship."
O/T
ReplyDeletePalin's BFF Gov Nikki Haley finds herself in hot water!! They're two peas in a pod! "She's just impatient and wants it now and thinks she's got the supreme power to order us to come back and do what she wants,"
That statement could be used for either one and both of them. It's also clear like Palin, Haley has no knowledge of politics, laws, the Constitution........and they both believe themselves above all those.
"The South Carolina Supreme Court ruled Monday night that a move by Republican Governor Nikki Haley to force legislators back to work was an "unconstitutional violation of separation of powers."
"The court voted three to two to stay the governor's executive order."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/06/nikki-haley-unconstitutional-south-carolina-court_n_872226.html#comments
I wonder if Haley ever paid that $100,000 to Palin for showing up to endorse her.
Anon 8:08
ReplyDeleteIt's likely the Palin's have had no pets because having pets means someone in the house has to be responsible.
eom
There needs to be a criminal investigation into the missing Palin ruffled ear baby!
ReplyDeleteWhatever you do, do not call the Anchorage Police Dept! We know how those crooked bastards does business.
Do not call Gov Parnel to investigate the missing child, he'll ask for a two year extension and blackout the birth certificate!
@8:45: "....over at Laura's blog with over 500 posts."
ReplyDeleteThey are called COMMENTS about Laura's POST. As already mentioned, she was giving her take on an old subject. Certainly, barking is not going to help, but maybe that's your goal.
Anonymous said...
ReplyDelete" Anonymous said...
This was already discussed thoroughly over at Laura's blog with over 500 posts. You need to find your own new material asshole.
8:45 AM"
That Willow, she always had that trailer park trashy mouth.
Haven't read all the new comments but to anonymous at 10:37, if you can find them on the various blogs, go look at pics of "Trig" on the first book tour: there were (to me anyway and others did mention it) differences in the color, length, and general appearance of the baby's hair at times for different places on the tour. Sometimes the hair looked longer and darker; sometimes lighter and shorter - like there were 2 (or more) but probably only 2 book tour Trigs.
ReplyDeleteTodd should write a book about the missing baby and make his own millions of dollars.
ReplyDeleteI forgot those ignorant Palins can't write or read a book. They need ghost writers.
Hey Sarah, are you sure you meant to text "The Statute of Liberty" you dumb bastard.
Anon 10:59
ReplyDelete"Sarah has not been serious over the last couple of years," Rollins
------------
To me what was more surprising was to read that Ed Rollins has signed on to advise Bachmann's campaign.
WTF?? Guess he's going senile in his old age!! Add despiration for $$$ and his willingness to sell his soul to a devil
It's interesting that more and more bloggers / posters are daring to ask the question
ReplyDeleteout loud
that many of us wonder privately.
Could Palin have hurt Trig ?
Or something even more heinous.
He's seems to have vanished
into thin air which is even more telling since Palin's decision not to abort Trig
was a major part of her VP resume .
She presented him like a religious icon
to the faithful.
The Casey Anthony trial reminds us of how some women can so callously
discard their children
and continue on their merry way.
We have never seen a photo of Palin and Trig
where she displays normal maternal
affection for her child.
He's an appendage while she does something
more important
like using her Blackberry.
She never gazes at him with love.
The fact that the last anyone saw Trig was almost a year ago
during her reality show
should strike everyone ( including the media !! )
as odd.
The fact that Palin never spoke of him at all last week
when she promised to make the disabled
her priority was very peculiar.
What better way to demonstrate how disabled children
can have a normal life
than to bring them on a public family vacation ?
The conflicting infant photos and her wild ride fable are equally disturbing .
Something is very, very wrong with this woman.
And with those who enable her
and cover up for her.
I do wonder what it will take for this faked pregnancy to turn into stories like John Edwards, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Tiger Woods, President Clinton, Eliot Spitzer, Chris Lee, Anthony Weiner, and soooo many other scandals that have been exposed.
ReplyDeleteAre there essential common threads for those stories that are missing for this one? I think that this a crucial question and wonder if anyone has any ideas.
Also OT, but Piper will be so steamed when she hears this: Michelle, Sasha, and Malia Obama snuck into Chicago to see some friends:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.suntimes.com/5761360-417/first-lady-michelle-obama-daughters-made-secret-trip-to-chicago.html
Apparently, if you don't travel in a bus plastered with your name on it, and if you don't issue press releases about your plans, you might be able to have a quiet family trip.
OK, here's an idea totally from left field. I haven't read all the comments, but skimming through I recalled that when a TV show or movie is shooting and a baby is required, producers opt to go for twins--while one works, the other rests, and so on.
ReplyDeleteCould these two or three "Trigs" have been "rented" or "leased" from someone--an individual or agency--to pose as SP's baby for the period of time needed so the Queen could prop out her little prize for the press? No birth certificate(s), no adoption papers, no problem. Could this be why there's been NO coverage of Trig for quite some time? It's like he disappeared. Hey, time to rent another kid!
If this type of theory has already been posed in the past, please disregard. Let's hope all the alleged "Trigs" are safe, sound and happy.
"...including one currently named Charlie that Willow watches for Bristol when she's not home." 9:51 AM
ReplyDeleteIsn't that hard when Bristol lives in AZ?
"MimiC said...The items on the window sill suggest to me that this picture was taken in a hospital room." 9:47 AM
I've always thought so, too.
8:20 "Nobody is going to touch this story."
ReplyDeleteIt's gotten so that I feel it would take evidence of criminal activity for this to get attention. If it is true that there was arson involved and someone can provide a lead to the right law enforcement agency, that might be what is needed. Otherwise, I don't know where this is going. It would be one person's word against another's and could fizzle just like Shailey's story has, or at least like it appears to have fizzled.
I had not noticed this before, but baby 10/2 has had its hair cut while baby 10/18 has never had its hair cut.
ReplyDelete10:37 AM
I have always noticed that and didn't know what to make of it. Very strange and really not possible for hair to look like that.
stupid question....are we sure one baby didn't have only one bad ear and one good ear?
Video is the best place to look for Trig ears. I saw damaged ear trig in SPA, episode where Todd is outside in Wasilla near some tree swing. Check out those ears.
ReplyDeleteCLEAR CASE OF TWO BABIES in Oct.2008!!!
ReplyDeleteSomeone mentioned the 'Trig' pics on 10/2 and 10/18/2008: on 10/2, the baby CLEARLY had a (bad) haircut. Notice the straight cut in the back of the head, and also the hair missing in front of the ear (as if shaved off).
Somehow, by 10/18 (16 days later), the bad haircut miraculously has grown out - the straight edge is gone, and the hair in front of the ear is longer also, too. (Besides, the ears are also different - no matter what people say about different angles and different lighting!)
Anon 10:26 said:
ReplyDelete"you people are something else! flippin crazy! babies ears when they are born can be crumbled up and then a few months later look completely different.
if you had babies and weren't a man writing this article you would know that
more hogwash from the haters
do you guys every give up?"
Look y'all! Grandma Lulu's in the house...I can tell it's her cause no one else uses "flippin" like Sarah does....Sarah you give yourself away every. single. time. We read Baileys book, and this post is classic Sarah syntax, bad grammar, and no capitals or punctuation.
Learn a lesson from Weinergate , Sarah, the truth ALWAYS comes out.
My theory is that ruffles was Bristol's first and had FAS (fetal alcohol syndrome) caused by a mother drinking during pregnancy--no other cause. I think Samaritans Purse, the Grahams hooked Sarah up with a replacement , thus, the short faked pregnancy. Whatever happened to Ruffles? I don't know, he either died from lack of care or Samaritans purse has him dumped somewhere.
ReplyDeleteI agree with 10:17 AM. While all of the many sad and sordid facets of this enigma deserve to be looked at, the most important aspect is that the proof points to SP not being pregnant and that is the angle that should be bolstered.
ReplyDeleteOn a side note, one question I have myself is after all is said and done, what will count as validation of this whole scenario? In other words, what will have to happen for this hypothesis to go fro conspiracy theory to truth, so we can all put this crap behind us?
Broad recognition from the MSM? Eye witness testimony from a family member, friend or doctor? Presentation of a birth certificate or other relevant documentation that proves she was pregnant? Or an admission from Palin herself that this is all true?
I think we can all get so caught up in the minutia of the evidence that it is easy to overlook the need to define a limit for what we should consider a successful outcome in this scenario, with a successful outcome being that this mystery is solved definitively (with Palin either being pregnant, or not pregnant).
I expect Trig to be trotted out shortly for a photo op..too many people asking the same question..WHERE'S TRIG???
ReplyDeleteHey Anon 10:32AM - are you god's little helper from Laura's Blog?
ReplyDeleteTo Anon@8:18a.m., yes, absolutely. If she had just admitted soon after the fakery that she was only trying to cover for her daughter, anyone with a heart would have understood this. But time has shown that admitting to being wrong isn't a possibility for the WGE.
ReplyDeleteIf you look at the ear structure of triggybear and trig now, they are identical.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
ReplyDelete" Anonymous said...
This was already discussed thoroughly over at Laura's blog with over 500 posts. You need to find your own new material asshole.
8:45 AM"
WILLOW! Your mother took you out of school so you wouldn't be a bothersome to her Me Me Me Tour! Now git off the computer and your boyfriend and read up on Paul Revere's ride. It is now obvious all the school books in the world is wrong!
Don't let the Anchorage Police Dept get involved.
ReplyDeleteWe need the FBi.
@9:51
ReplyDelete"...plenty of puppies." Really? Do they raise them to eat? Where is the evidence of any pets? They have never been mentioned by any family member or friend. There have never been any pet paraphernalia seen in the numerous pictures of their house and yard. There have been no pictures of anyone holding or petting a pet. I call bullshit.
For all of you who are posing possibilities of where the hospital pictures of Trig were taken, one of the Alaskan bloggers recently matched pictures of the maternity rooms at Mat Su hospital to the picture of the Heaths holding Trig. The Curtains, furniture and general decor matched exactly. I forget who did it, but I think it was someone on Gryphen's blogroll as those are the only ones I usually read.
Everybody would be serving the purpose a lot better it they would just stop wasting time on this ear theory. As the recent NICU nurse has told you people, ears develop over time with newborn babies. Try to be objective and look at the shape the ear has taken on in areas where there is a similarity. Then go look at lots of ears and see how the ear can be used for identification nearly as reliably as finger prints. Then note the similarities where gurfen thinks there shouldn't be any. For fukk sake you lemmings
ReplyDeleteThanks anyway anon 10:32, but i'll take the word of pediatricians, neonatologists, my 26 years of pediatric nursing experience and that of being a mom of a kid with deformed ears to believe that ears like ruffles' don't fix themselves. Unless......
Praise Jeebus it's a Mirakl
@7:24AM:
ReplyDeleteMe too. The baby on her shoulder has a very different face than the 'earlier ruffles'; much thicker.
Anon at 11:32 -
ReplyDeletePalin gets a pass because she is a woman. No one wants her calling them sexist.
Ed Rollins is Michele Bachmanns campaign manager. He is one of the only Republicans on CNN I have liked. So I am disappointed he went to work for Michele crazy eyes of all people. ED! You could have done better. But I guess it is a job - he is an older gentleman. If he slams into Caribou Barbie, I'll be happy.
ReplyDeleteAbout the Peyton Place website, there is one VERY BIG MISTAKE!
ReplyDeleteThey do not do repair surgeries on babies! Any ear doctor who did that could lose his license. It simply is not done. The child has to get to an older age before it is even considered so if she wants to be taken seriously she better removed the "repaired" ear section of her site. It does look like two babies but having that makes her lose all credibility to anyone in the medical field.
"So Frank Baily would not have emails about this issue. He may have an opinion about babygate but he does not have proof and therefor it would be stupid for him to address this topic in his book."
ReplyDeleteFrank Bailey had no problem giving his opinion that Bristol had not recently given birth when he saw her at the hospital. He's involved himself in babygate already.
"do you guys every give up?"
Are bots REQUIRED to speak English as if it were their second language?
Gryphen, I was wondering if you or anyone else have checked out any footage of Trig from SPA? I have not watched the show and refuse to ever do so, but perhaps Trigs' ear on the show if it is shown would be revealing.
ReplyDelete11:32: I think there are lots of commonalities (a pattern of lies and decption) but there's one big difference. It seems that sordid details of sex is fair game, but when it involves a birth story, that's off limits as being too "icky."
ReplyDelete@ 1032:
ReplyDeleteNICU nurse again. If you read my comment, you would have seen that I stated, over and over again, that this ear flexibility/shape change does not happen once the child is old enough to leave the hospital. It is a developmental state that occurs only in very premature infants. The fundamental shape of the ear does *not* change.
Thanks @1253 for quoting them so I could reiterate my points. I don't get to the comments section that often, but when I make a comment I try to follow up to make sure that my words aren't twisted around.
Hello everyone, I have some opinions I thought I might pass along, and while they are "just" my opinions, I do have the advantage of years in neonatal care and research to form the basis and structure for my thoughts.
ReplyDeleteI admit to not really paying attention to the "two babies" theory. When Gryphen first posted it, I didn't even read it. Over the next weeks and months, I did of course see multiple comments referencing two babies and "ruffles".
I usually just skim the comments anyway as I've been really busy this last year traveling for work. I noted the occasional mentions of "batwing shapes" and "cauliflourr ear"...and as a medical professional (RN LIII NICU 18 years, CCRN LIII NICU 7 years) who has authored numerous articles and given several keynote presentations concerning the advancement of care and treatment for micropreemies via skin to skin therapy, among other things...I admit I felt a bit of smug superiority: This is just silly, everyone knows premature infants are prone to undeveloped or underdeveloped cartilage- I can't believe they are thinking this sufficient to even SUGGEST two babies!
And here is where I put my tail between my legs and apologize to Mr. Griffin as well as the readers here. Today when I saw the post referencing Two Babies, I decided to go back and read it.
To say I am "stunned" would be saying Sarah Palin has "a bit of an ego"; it's a massive understatement.
I had incorrectly assumed the ear "deformity" was a minor and possibly self-repairing issue such as folded ear. Seeing the photos today almost literally took my breath away. That child's ear has a major, severe degree helixical malformation which (and I believe this to have a high degree of medical certainty) can only be repaired when the child is much older, YEARS older, and has significantly larger amounts of cartilage as a support base.
This is not "cauliflour ear" or "folded ear" or some vague defect which can be attributed to prematurity. Google some preemie photos, even babies on the very cusp of viability (22-24 weeks gestational age) and you will see tiny, tiny ears, sometimes seeming paper thin or impossibly red-- but still perfectly shaped.
I would categorize this defect as severe. There is not enough base material to splint or pin the ear; were a parent to choose vanity over safety and locate a pediatric ENT who WAS willing to forsake his oath and all sound medical basis for delaying treatment...the results of any type of corrective procedure on a baby this small with such a severe defect would yield a horrible result...the tissue might be stretched enough to make more of an ear but it would be pitted and crimped so badly it would likely appear worse than when started.
I cannot of course say it's "impossible". There are always going to be odd medical maladies and issues which simply can't be explained. But given the severe nature of the defect, the perfect ears of 'convention baby', the extremely dissimilar facial features of the infants, and the complete lack of medical evidence relating to ANY child born on ANY date...I would say in this case it CAN be explained: easily so- by the existence of (at least) two infants having been presented as Trig Palin.
The baby's ear in the Frank Bailey photo looks nothing like the 'ruffles' ear.
ReplyDeleteMore then 2 babies? With $arah, I wouldn't be surprised.
-GypsyGirl
My 5 weeks premature baby (now 30) has the same shaped ears he was born with. They didn't change shape. at. all.
ReplyDeleteanon @ 9:51
ReplyDelete"the Palins have had plenty of puppies "
Do they ever make it be full grown dogs?
I feel like if we say "Sarah's never been seen with an elephant", you bots will tell us there's proof on Facebook that she has been seen with an elephant, many times.
Every little thing we say about Palin doesn't need to be defended. It's almost like a game for you bots. I thought she was a strong grizzly mama. Why does she need you to keep defending her? How would she feel about you telling us details about her children, like who's watching the dog?
Why don't you go hang out on a pro-Palin cult site and send her a check for her new bus tour.
"To 8:08, the Palins have had plenty of puppies including one currently named Charlie that Willow watches for Bristol when she's not home."
ReplyDeleteYou're saying they have had "plenty of puppies" yet no dogs. Can the palins not even raise a dog? How sad.
We all know you're lying by the way.
How commonly are so-called "back-up babies" used by celebrities? Didnt this once used to be routine? I'm pretty sure I read about this somewhere... If a celebrity had an unattractive or unsuitable baby or simply didn't want to wear out the primary infant they would secure a back-up baby for public appearances. Seems like a good idea, no? Nothing on Wikipedia...
ReplyDeleteMaybe it's just a high society concept that us little people arent familiar with but perhaps it's all the rage among nouveau riche rap stars, sports figures, and Alaskan fishing folk who've hit the jackpot?
I also meant to touch on this issue-- while it doesn't directly connect to the helix defect, I think it might be germane to the overall theory of more than one infant having been called Trig.
ReplyDeleteThe infant being presented as Trig in the photos from early May 2008 (a 12-14 day old preemie, correct?) cannot be the large, extremely developed infant of the 2008 campaign photos. That's a time differential of approximately sixteen weeks between photos. A fragile, sallow, slim to the point of nearly appearing malnourished infant cannot transform into what can only be described as a 'hulking' twenty pound bruiser without benefit of much more time than 16-18 weeks. I'm sure there will be someone who says "FOUL! I had a five pound preemie who weighed 19 pounds by his 12 week well-baby visit!" ...but my point is that is MANY years of working with premature infants in three different metro-city hospitals...the one and ONLY time I have seen an infant gain such a substantial amount of weight in a short time was due to a tiny baby having a huge, multiple arterially compromised sacrococcygeal teratoma. Of course once the bulk of it was removed, he no longer had such a drastic weight gain on paper. Even babies who are so sick with liver and kidney issues, whose poor bellies and faces and extremities rapidly retain fluid...do not go through such a marked transformation.
Just consider...have you ever heard of a baby quadrupling his birth weight in four months? If that actually happened, we'd be seeing all manner of 20-40 pound four month olds!
It normally takes two months of "out time" to surpass each month of prematurity. And I should point out that is in the BEST case scenario; many babies do not place on the curve until well into toddler age.
If Trig was born 2-3 month premature, he would need 6-8 weeks of out time (at least) to surpass the deficiencies from every 2-4 weeks of prematurity. Of course this is a generalization, but it's an extremely common and accepted one- it's one of the reasons why we use "adjusted age" for the first year of life in most preemies. Another common one- many preemies go home around their original estimated due date. (this only refers to release from NICU to step-down or home- NOT having surpassed all the issues associated with prematurity)
My point is this: if a hundred people took one of the baby shower photos and one of the convention photos and emailed them to a random pediatrician or neonatologist whom you found online...and asked them how long it would take for baby A to "turn into" baby B...I will eat my hat if ONE of them says less than eight months.
Ear issues notwithstanding, that child at the convention is twice the age they are saying he was at that point. I would bet my career on it.
The new baby shown on Scarah's shoulder may have an ear similar to Baby #1, but the mouth and nose are different. Baby #1 has rather delicate features while the New Ruffles has larger more pronounced nose and lips.
ReplyDeleteAbout the new ruffled ear picture. Was Mat-Su Regional Medical Center (claimed destination of the 'Wild Ride') the location of the picture? Judging from the view out the window I don't think it was. Does this look like a second story view?
ReplyDeleteThe Mat-Su Regional Medical Center was built with three floors. When it opened the third floor was left unfinished for later completion. I remember seeing somewhere that completion of the third floor was underway, to be done in 2011 or 2012.
About the new ruffled ear picture. Was Mat-Su Regional Medical Center (claimed destination of the 'Wild Ride') the location of the picture? Judging from the view out the window I don't think it was. Does this look like a second story view?
ReplyDeleteThe Mat-Su Regional Medical Center was built with three floors. When it opened the third floor was left unfinished for later completion. I remember seeing somewhere that completion of the third floor was underway, to be done in 2011 or 2012.
About the new ruffled ear picture. Was Mat-Su Regional Medical Center (claimed destination of the 'Wild Ride') the location of the picture? Judging from the view out the window I don't think it was. Does this look like a second story view?
ReplyDeleteThe Mat-Su Regional Medical Center was built with three floors. When it opened the third floor was left unfinished for later completion. I remember seeing somewhere that completion of the third floor was underway, to be done in 2011 or 2012.
I think the 2 ruffled ear babies (shower and Bailey) are the same. The shower photos look as if the baby's ear lobe is bent up due to his shoulder. It makes it look like the ear opening is very anterior.
ReplyDelete" Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteAbout the new ruffled ear picture. Was Mat-Su Regional Medical Center (claimed destination of the 'Wild Ride') the location of the picture? Judging from the view out the window I don't think it was. Does this look like a second story view?
The Mat-Su Regional Medical Center was built with three floors. When it opened the third floor was left unfinished for later completion. I remember seeing somewhere that completion of the third floor was underway, to be done in 2011 or 2012.
2:43 PM"
Someone (I think on Palingates) compared the photo of Chuck/Sally/Trig with photos that were taken in the MatSu hospital & the curtains/backgrounds matched.
Can plastic surgery account for this change in the ear?
ReplyDeleteAbout the new ruffled ear picture; was it in Anchorage?
ReplyDeleteProvidence Alaska Medical Center in Anchorage has a NICU (Neonatal Intensive Care Unit).
At that hospital some of the buildings have as many as five floors. The Maternity Center with patient rooms,the delivery rooms, and the NICU are all on the first floor.
Various medical offices and patient rooms are located on upper floors. It might have been taken there.
To East Coast S:
ReplyDeleteand
To NICU nurse
Thank you, thank you, thank you!!!
Please get in touch with "Business Insider," also, too!
The picture from Bailey's book was taken in the Governor's office in Anchorage.
ReplyDeleteNOT in a hospital.
3:07 PM
ReplyDelete>>>"Someone (I think on Palingates) compared the photo of Chuck/Sally/Trig with photos that were taken in the MatSu hospital & the curtains/backgrounds matched."
I remember this. I don't remember anything identifiable outside the window like this picture has. I don't remember the discussion of the location based on clues outside the building either. I will go and find those posts just to be sure.
@10:26am So nice of you to join in the fun SARAH! Or do you prefer Queen Esther. We know how you like titles :)
ReplyDeleteThanks for the photo location Gryphen. I missed seeing that info somehow.
ReplyDeleteEast coast, obviously you might know some baby doctors, do you think any of them would make an objective report on the pics? I know there people who think if we've heard from one doc we have heard from them all and no amount of any "analysis" will help this cause.
ReplyDeleteBut I think if doctors would be willing to go ON the record, people who have dismissed babygate entirely might listen.
I have toyed with the idea of trying to write to "Jen", the well known and respected baby doc from the tlc show The Little Couple. Before we moved to sulpher springs we visited my brother's new baby at TCH and she (Jen) wasn't my nephew's doctor but she stopped to talk for a moment when I gave a little wave and mouthed the words "big fan"
She also gives speeches and does baby doctor training, basically just seems like a super nice and VERY smart person. Would you or anyone else here who writes really well (PCG & Sharon in TN & B come to mind) consider writing to her and asking if she might do an objective analysis of the pics?
Oh and next time you mention something like the terratoma thing (I already forgot the first word, sorry) maybe you could give a little warning...like DO NOT GOOGLE THIS term!!!!! I hate to say "gross" about something that effects little babies. But holy moly, that is disgusting. I feel so bad for anyone who has to go thru that with a newborn baby!
@Karen. I wondered about the idea of one baby with a ruffled ear and a normal ear, and wondered if some photos were reversed so the right ear looked like it was the left ear. But Floyd Orr knew that some of the pictures were not reversed so I gave up that idea. Still, I don't recall one picture showing both ears.
ReplyDeleteGryphen I forgot to ask this in my post I just wrote. One, can you comment just on your OPINION if Frank B is trying to "say something without saying something".
ReplyDeleteI know you are doing an interview w/him but I am sure you could say whatever you think, respectfully.
Two, what do you make of Mercedes posting all these comments that say "Sadie knows everything" or "watch your back" and most especially, the questions (which have seemed very polite to me) about Tripp's exact birth date? But not answering any of them? She has to know people will be scared for her, I wish she would not say things like OPEN SEASON, I'm telling all I know!!! and then not make a peep except to put through what I can only guess are just SOME comments.
Mercedes, people want to know the truth but we would REALLY like to know you are ok and aren't being threatened or silenced.
The location of the photo of SP with baby on shoulder from Bailey's book: I propose that it's her Atwood building office in Anchorage, 550 West Seventh Street. If someone in AK can identify what one sees on the ground, multiple stories below, we would have a match.
ReplyDeleteThe chair SP is sitting in might be one of the wood ones shown in this photo. The sofa has a different fabric and back style. The window ledge looks right, but hard to tell for sure. Could someone go there and take a photo of that ledge + vent?
I'm pretty sure that in Going Rogue Sarah says the Menards gave the family (the kids) a dog as a present and when they returned from Juneau they gave the dog back to the Menards. (If GR had an index, I would have looked it up. But that would have been real work for the "author.")
ReplyDeleteThe "Twins" scenario on Palin Peyton Place is thoughtfully done and not implausible. Not at all. Trig could be a twin. Twins are born every day. We all know sets of twins. But, Sarah couldn't announce she had twins because everyone would have had serious doubts about twelve pounds of premature babies hidden by tight abs. Nope, not gonna fly. So only one baby is announced, only one seen at a time. Lately, none have been seen at all. Goes to show that they can keep a kid hidden very well. GRYPHEN - one time, long ago, you said someone had told you there was ANOTHER baby in the Palin compound. Not Trig and not Tripp. A THIRD BABY. I don't remember that you ever had a follow up to that. It doesn't take much for me to believe it was (and is) the other twin.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous - 3:17 PM
ReplyDelete"Can plastic surgery account for this change in the ear?"
No! Gryphen had two (or more?) follow-up posts to "Two Babies" that might help you. Also see the comment from East Coast S.
@East Coast S
ReplyDeleteWELCOME. I'm not a medical type but for my work, I talk to that type a lot. You sound EXACTLY like them.
Also, in my opinion, although I was in the habit of calling the triggy bear baby, "ruffles". After reading your post, I will restrict myself to "severe ear deformity" baby, because it much better characterises the infant.
I'm sure Michelle O's quiet vacation to Chicago with her girls must just grind Sara to no end and leave her Pipette able to look at her mother and say - "see you fucking moron! They can take a nice vacation without dragging those Asshat reporters around like you did. I want to go live with them, it's the only way I'll ever see the inside of the White House"
ReplyDeleteI hate to say it but I think it is the same baby.
ReplyDeleteNotice in the B&W photo that the opening of the ear canal is not outsize the circumference of the ear and that there is the normalish gap at the lower front of the ear that is missing in the earlier Ruffles' photo where the circumference of the ear is almost continuous.
So I'm thinking plastic surgery to either close over that opening present in the earliest photo and to open the front lower part of the external ear, or, if it is the ear canal, to wrap the circumference of the ear around it in a more normal arrangement.
Also notice that the center area of all the ear's is square in all the photos.
The pattern of the folds of the ear are as characteristic as finger prints.
So if plastic surgery was done to either close that pre ear opening or to enclose it within the folds of the ear, why not fix the Ruffles?
And Sarah's chin, and eye brows, and destroy Bristol's perfectly normal nice looking anglo-Alaskan face?
I've always believed that Ruffles was Trig with deformed ears and that they were fixed. The Palins are not exactly unfamiliar with plastic surgery. (I'm suggesting that Sarah either winked or threatened or rewarded someone to do something unethical, or it was Todd's bullying - either way, why would IM readers rule that out? )
ReplyDeleteReading Jeffrey Dunn's book LIES OF SARAH PALIN, something on page 219 jumped right out at me. (I've never heard anyone else mention this.) He quotes Sarah in her Charlie Gibson interview, the part about the Bridge to Nowhere:
"It has always been an embarrassment that abuse of the EAR FORM --- earmark process has been accepted in Congress." (Emphasis mine.)
She said it smoothly and easily. It was a verbal gaff and she recovered quickly. But WHO has a two word phrase "EAR FORM" in their everyday vocabulary? I don't, do you? I checked on YouTube, and yes, that's what she said.
I did a quick Google search on ear deformities and treatment in newborns. Below is one that looked interesting. "Putty Soft, a vinyl polysiloxane impression material ...used for early molding of the auricles" could be something Sarah is familiar with. Something she might call Trig's "ear form."
Ruffles may be alive and well an living with repaired ears thanks to those earmarks, er, I mean ear forms.
http://journals.lww.com/plasreconsurg/Abstract/2002/03000/Early_Nonsurgical_Correction_of_Congenital.13.aspx
@10:06anon
ReplyDeleteI am not going to hold my breath for 4:38 to be the one who breaks this. From her tone, she obviously was terrified of her identity being exposed. I'm sure we can all agree this is most likely not due to fear of Palinical retribution...but fear of job loss. She did mention she was the main or only financial provider of her family, I think.
The crux of babygate has always been...it really doesn't matter WHO houses the womb Trig gestated in, only that it definitely did NOT belong to Sarah. Would I like to know who gave birth to Trig(s) and when? Sure. But do I HAVE to know that info to be sure Sarah didn't give birth to him on 4/18/08? Nope.
So putting myself in 4:38 shoes...would I risk my job? No. I would really love for her to be guaranteed enough protection for her to feel she could contact G or the guy from BI. But she knows she would have to show a copy of the two-bull record...or even just a surreptitious cellphone photo of the screen. And once it came out IM or BI had laid eyes on the records, the facility where she worked would check to see who accessed the file or files. And I'm betting it wouldn't be too many people, as in...very easy to find out who peeked. With HIPAA laws being what they are now, I think you can sustain major fines and definite job loss for even LOOKING at a file even if you do not do anything with the information therein.
Also, too,...and this is so pitiful it's almost funny...4:38 came right out and said she hadn't posted until now because she was so scared of being identified. And of course right away, her comment is "front page news" at BI...when I saw it I was thrilled for the coverage but felt so bad for 4:38! Can you imagine- finally posting and thinking you can fly under the radar, then being put on the front page, top line story of a major national daily! Poor 4:38! Sweetie if you are reading this, I am SURE even if you were to lose your job, people in the valley who have been victimized by Sarah Palin would definitely give you a job. I know it sounds trite but I sincerely think it is true.
@10:26anon
'Sup, granny Lou Lou! You sure are making it easy to pick you out these days. Couldn't even leave the "flippin" home for ten minutes could you! So are you shutting down your handlers who are trying to get you to agree to a pre-emptive strike about your "pregnancy"? Do you think ignoring it like you've done so far is going to work? I personally hope you DON'T release any kind of speech or statement about what a "good reason" you had for doing it. That way the emails speak for themselves! See ya Friday, GRANDMA!
In January, Blade at Sarah's Scandals posted a picture that shows Sarah holding a baby that could be an older Ruffles. You can't see the ear in the picture, but the face looks like an older Ruffles. Also, the baby in the picture is dressed in pink.
ReplyDeleteSee: http://shesnohockeymom.blogspot.com/2011/01/another-puzzling-picture.html
I believe the ear deformity is common in children with severe form of Fetal Alcohol Syndrome...high rate of this in Alaska...on SPA(never watched-caught a clip of this part) there was a child who was said to be a downs child but even before it was said that he has downs...I thought ooooo...he is a FAS child(worked in chemical dependency field for 20+ years)....severe FAS...I don't believe he was a Downs child....
ReplyDeleteOk, here's my best attempt to make sense of this crazy fraud. Perhaps Bristol got pregnant and the baby had a problem as FAS or DS. That baby is long gone, adopted out by the church whose records burned. That gets Sarah thinking of what would cinch her choice as the nominee--a DS baby that she "didn't abort". So she finds one through her dr. but has a little trouble finding just the right baby. It has to be cute as well as handicapped to really tug at people's heartstrings. Ruffles may have failed the audition so they found another one who had his first showing at the RNC convention. So the pregnancy was faked but the ever fertile Bristol is a distraction. They watched the Desperate Housewives to get ideas of how to do the con. IWantTheTruth
ReplyDelete1:13: They do not do repair surgeries on babies! Any ear doctor who did that could lose his license.
ReplyDeleteWhat would happen to a GP who advised her 44-year old pregnant patient in premature labor to fly cross-country, bypassing all hospitals with NICU's to give birth in a family clinic?
Like Rove said, the rules do not apply to Sarah.
4:17, that was hilarious! I think we all could use a good laugh.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said...
ReplyDeleteI do wonder what it will take for this faked pregnancy to turn into stories like John Edwards, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Tiger Woods, President Clinton, Eliot Spitzer, Chris Lee, Anthony Weiner, and soooo many other scandals that have been exposed.
Are there essential common threads for those stories that are missing for this one? I think that this a crucial question and wonder if anyone has any ideas.
11:32 AM
Great question. It has to be because she is a woman, only the second woman to run for VP, and the repubs want to protect McCain from his fuck up .
Anon 4:29 - I heard the 'ear form' gaffe, too. Having it on her mind -- something she'd researched, perhaps, or that someone had suggested to her -- and actually fixing Trig's ear are separate. I don't think an 'ear form' could fix the deformity we see in the photo where there doesn't appear to be enough cartilage to fix.
ReplyDeleteSo if plastic surgery was done to either close that pre ear opening or to enclose it within the folds of the ear, why not fix the Ruffles?
ReplyDeleteAnd Sarah's chin, and eye brows, and destroy Bristol's perfectly normal nice looking anglo-Alaskan face?
4:21 PM
Physiology, growth, development. Peditric ear surgery (corrective plastic) is not considered by surgeons until at least 4 years old at a minimum.
did a quick Google search on ear deformities and treatment in newborns. Below is one that looked interesting. "Putty Soft, a vinyl polysiloxane impression material ...used for early molding of the auricles" could be something Sarah is familiar with. Something she might call Trig's "ear form."
ReplyDeleteBut you have to have something to mold, something to work with. It doesn't appear to me that there is enough tissue to try and mold. Perhaps in consultation on the issue, Palin had been told of ear forms, but I don't think they would work on those ears.
And it could just be a coincidental misfire as Palin searches for a coherent sentence and gets word salad.
I posted elsewhere but I wanted to again say something to the poster at 4:32 who was mentioned on Business Insider.
ReplyDeleteI can only guess at your fear but I would like to respectfully say, that the most dangerous time is when you know something damaging/dangerous but you have not gone on record with it. Once you are known and your information is out there it is very risky for the Palin people to go after you. While you are mulling over what to do, I would put copies of your evidence in envelopes and send it to multiple very trusted friends. Or maybe secure copies in locked places and let a very trusted person know where. I'm sure the possible notoriety and harassment that could result from going public are unpleasant to think about but it sounds like thoughts of Dar Millar are causing you great understandable anxiety. As the election heats up you will be in more danger, in my opinion. We are praying for your safety and release from this burdensome dilemma. Thank you so much for speaking up.
Anon 4:29 -- an amazing catch! Wow! The ear form vs earmark Freudian slip!
ReplyDeleteI think 4:32 should write a book about what he/she knows.
ReplyDeleteThey could call it simply:
4:32
I can assure you I'd know what it was about and buy it
East Coast S @2:13,
ReplyDeleteI agree completely that the baby at the RNC was much older that his given age. I spent last fall babysitting an infant. He came to me at 1 mos. and my last day with him was right before Christmas on his 5 mos. birthday. During his time with me he had a couple of well baby dr. appointments. His mom was so cute when she came in bragging about his placement in the 95 percentile for his age. After his 6 month appointment I ran into them and she bragged again how much he had grown and how he was 95 percentile. That baby from the RNC would have made 2 of my buddy. I saw him at a party a couple weeks ago, he is now 10 1/2 months, and he looks about the size of RNC Trig.
To anon @ 1:13
ReplyDeleteAbout the Peyton Place website, there is one VERY BIG MISTAKE!
They do not do repair surgeries on babies! Any ear doctor who did that could lose his license. It simply is not done. The child has to get to an older age before it is even considered so if she wants to be taken seriously she better removed the "repaired" ear section of her site. It does look like two babies but having that makes her lose all credibility to anyone in the medical field.
To answer this comment:
While the ear deformity appears severe, the picture of 'Ruffles' ear at the RNC could be done without major surgery being done. I will repost the picture at the end of this comment. Any other comment or question I will be glad to address.
It appears that the opening to the external cannula opens outside the tragus. My theory is that opening was covered by a very small piece of skin taken from another area of his body. This could be done quite easily just using a lidicaine injection. This would not have to be a major surgery where anesthesia would be used. This would serve two purposes. One, it could help prevent ear infections from occurring due to having an abnormal opening to the inner ear, also, it would serve an esthetic appearance.
If you don't think a doctor would do a procedure like this for appearance sake, just ask yourself how many male babies are circumcised.
The helix can be reformed simply by using simple sutures, molds and taping. If you actually click on the links I provided, it explains all of this in detail.
Any other questions you might have, I will be happy to address.
Repair of 'Ruffles' ear.
Here is the picture.
'Ruffles: From newborn to RNC