My friend Geoffrey Dunn knows what's up with the Trump/Palin flirtation.

Courtesy of HuffPo: 

Donald Trump is many things -- a demagogue and a pompous blowhard, a braggart and a race baiter -- but in the end, he's nobody's fool, except perhaps his own. Thus, his recent lauding of Sarah Palin and his hiring of her former Chief of Staff reveal that Trump's campaign for the presidency is, ultimately, more of a circus act than it is a serious endeavor for the White House. If Trump were really serious, he'd be keeping the quitter governor at bay.

Geoffrey gives a number of examples to prove Trump's similarity to Palin, and that he is not serious about a run for the GOP nomination.

Ultimately he sums it up thusly:

Ever since her first announcement as John McCain's running mate in August of 2008, and the very brief honeymoon period she was graced with after, Palin's national favorability ratings have continued to plummet. Trump must know that he's facing the same ignoble outcome--the presidency will never be his. 

As with Palin, who hinted at a third-party run four years ago, Trump is flashing a similar wild card. It's a threat directed specifically at the Republican Party. He has the resources and, perhaps more significantly, the ego to do it. He will never win the Republican nomination for the presidency--bet any amount of money on that--but he might well cost them the White House in 2016 with a third-party run (and with La Palin riding shotgun). It will be a media circus like no other--yet another of their reality TV shows fueled by this country's sick celebrity fetishism. 

Trump's vicious attacks on John McCain--and Palin's implicit criticism of McCain as well--have illustrated that there is no low to which our modern-day Bonnie and Clyde will not stoop. A third-party run is not out of the question. They are both narcissists at heart--and the ongoing media attention they would receive is what really propels their egomaniacal political agenda.

Geoffrey understands Sarah Palin about as well as anybody, and much better than most.

He wrote the 2011 book "The Lies of Sarah Palin" and his research revealed things about the former governor of Alaska that ultimately proved to him, and anybody who read his book, that Palin was NEVER going to be a politician on a national level.

He still e-mails me occasionally and we commiserate on our shared battle scars and then share a laugh that this now humiliated woman was once considered by some as a viable candidate for the presidency.

Which is an indication of yet one more thing that she and Donald Trump will soon have in common.

Tomorrow's "Game Change" day! And in celebration I present a special interview with author Geoffrey Dunn.

Like many of you I have been hearing ALL kinds of contradictory information about the movie Game Change.

Some have said it eviscerates Sarah Palin, while others claim that it is sympathetic toward her and will make people feel sorry for her. 

Her people have been attacking the film, which convinced me that THEY at least think it is bad for Sarah, but then Julianne Moore has repeatedly stated that she felt sympathy for the person who she was asked to portray, which made me worry that she would fail to adequately represent the mean girl side of Palin that most of us have come to know all too well.

All in all it left me somewhat confused.

Then I received an e-mail from my friend Geoffrey Dunn, author of the book "The Lies of Sarah Palin. The Untold Story Behind Her Relentless Quest for Power," suggesting that we do an interview, since HE had already seen the movie.

Seven seconds.  That's how long it took me to type out my response, "You betcha!"

Here is that interview:

Immoral Minority: Geoffrey, it seemed you took a sabbatical from writing about Palin after your book, "The Lies of Sarah Palin" was published. It is very nice to see you back over at the Huffington Post these days, is this in response to the increased interest in Palin and the movie "Game Change," or were you always planning on taking a break and then jumping back in at a later time?

Geoffrey Dunn: With Palin, as you know Jesse, there are no plans [laughter]. And after the publication of my book I felt a need to get away from that subject for a while. I think that I wrote two really important pieces about Palin in the last six months. One for the Anchorage Press called “Palin Redivivus” about problems with Frank Bailey’s book. And another for Firedog Lake entitled “Blood In the Snow” about the shameful attack on Joe McGinniss by Janet Maslin of the New York Times . Covering Palin is a bit like swimming in a cesspool—there’s no way to avoid the stink. So I took a long shower. But with the renewed focus on Palin because of Game Change , I felt as though I needed to get back into the fray. Huffington gives me a much huger audience than anywhere else. They feature my work. And with all the pushback from Palin & Co. against Game Change (the movie), I felt that I needed to come to its defense in terms of its portrayal of Palin as an extremely disruptive force on the campaign. And I will be writing several more pieces about Palin, Game Change and some of the larger issues this all raises about what I am calling “the pornography of American politics.”

IM: There has been much talk that the HBO movie Game Change might in fact portray Sarah Palin as more of a tragic figure, or garner sympathy from the audience for how she was treated by the McCain campaign. What are your thoughts on that possibility?

Dunn: Superb read on your part. But I’ve now watched Game Change twice. One of its missteps is depicting Palin as a “victim,” which of course she was not. At best she is a victim of her own psychological pathologies and delusions. And Bristol’s and Todd’s depictions will be a hoot to anyone who has ever encountered their energy in Alaska. I will be telling viewers to re-watch that footage of the family in Homer while they were filming Palin’s unreality show or the footage of Todd and Sarah at the airport in Valdez. But let me tell you, Julianne Moore absolutely inhabits Palin — and she has her crazy-angry-delusional persona down to perfection. It took me only a few blinks of an eye to fall into her character, and like you, I’ve watched far too much real Sarah Palin footage to be healthy. But Moore captures Palin for what you and I know her to be—a dysfunctional, mean-spirited woman driven by anger and revenge who is out only for herself. That is the ultimate portrait of Sarah Palin that emerges from Game Change . It’s devastating.

IM: Is there anything that you uncovered during your research for your book that you had hoped would make it into the movie?

Dunn: Most of what I uncovered during my research for the book made it into the movie, especially about Palin’s dysfunction and duplicity and betrayal. What the film really misses the mark on is all the prelude to Palin’s selection. It makes it seem as though Palin was discovered by McCain advisors while Googling for a woman candidate. That’s such a distortion of reality that I will focus some attention in the next few weeks responding to that narrative. Sarah Palin did not fall out of the sky. She was angling for that nomination from the moment she was elected Governor of Alaska. And there were right-wingers like Bill Kristol pushing her candidacy. In June of 2008 Kristol said knowingly twice, on Fox News, that Palin was going to get the nod. People inside the McCain camp—most notably Rick Davis—had their eyes on her for a long time. I tell this story in detail in my book, far more than Game Change (either the book or film), and if readers are interested in this issue I strongly suggest that they read my section of the book that deals with this vetting and selection process.

IM: We know how Steve Schmidt and Nicole Wallace view Sarah Palin these days, however many others who participated in the McCain campaign have remained relatively silent. Why do you believe that is?

Dunn: I mean, Nicolle Wallace described Palin as “cuckoo for Coco Puffs.” We know how she feels. Schmidt is far more careful, but he has clearly stated Palin is “unfit for the presidency.” Some of those other McCain operatives, like Rick Davis, are still closely associated with John McCain. Other’s like Jason Recher are still on Palin’s payroll. And the others are simply afraid to go on the record. I spoke to several people from the McCain campaign who are afraid of Palin. As you know, Palin’s minions are a vicious lot. They have gone after Schmidt. And they will go after Game Change . But I think the film will solidify in the public’s mind how dangerous and irresponsible the Palin selection really was. That’s why the Palin pushback has been so hard. This film will seriously push down Palin’s favorability ratings even further—and they are already astonishingly low.

IM: From what I can glean from the trailers for Game Change it appears that most of the responsibility for the choosing of Sarah Palin is laid at the feet of Steve Schmidt. Do you believe this is accurate? Or even fair?

Dunn: Rick Davis was in charge of selecting and vetting the VP process. He did a shitty job. And to be fair to everyone, McCain wanted Lieberman. But when the word got out they were going with Lieberman (blame Lindsay Graham for that), the rightwing nutbags who adore Palin threatened to walk out of the convention. So Lieberman was viewed as a fool’s move. That left Mitt Romney (who McCain disliked), Tim Pawlenty (who has the charisma of cardboard), and Palin (who they knew nothing about). They wanted a woman—a “game changer”—so they went with door Number Three. They initially got a huge boost and then a huge crash with Palin. Could they have won with either of the other two? Who knows? With Palin? Never. Never ever. She’s poison to any campaign. Just ask Joe Miller. Anyway, the “fault” if you will for the selection of Palin falls squarely on the shoulders on Rick Davis. The Davis character is minimized in the film, but remember Davis was busted during the campaign for being a lobbyist for Freddie Mac? Sound familiar? Anyway, Schmidt takes the fall for this and it really is unfair to him. But he’s a big boy and he will survive and thrive. He has as much integrity as anyone I’ve ever met, inside or outside of politics. The dramatic arc of Game Change is about him confronting his conscience re Palin. He knows he helped to create a monster on the landscape of American politics. 

IM: Since you have already seen Game Change, you lucky dog, is there anything that was left out that you really wish had been addressed?

 Dunn: Hey, I do feel like a lucky dog to have seen it. And since I was worried about it, actually, I was very very pleased with the film. As I said, it contains a brilliant performance by Julianne Moore—she will receive many awards—and it goes after a deeper story about the truly vulgar nature of American presidential politics. That story is larger than Palin. But no matter how the director and writer and HBO try to spin it, Game Change presents an absolutely devastating portrait of Palin. I was moved and shaken by it. And I know this Palin turf as well as anyone. It was still a revelation. But yes, there is one thing I wish that would have been in the film. I really wish they had included the scene near the end of the campaign with the French-Canadian comedians pretending to be Sarkozy! Moore could have pulled it off. Whenever anyone makes the argument that Palin was prepared for the presidency, I ask them to go back and listen to that interview. I analyze it in great detail in my book. But, damn, it’s not in the film. C’est la vie! 

IM: What do you predict Palin will be doing in the next five years? Do you believe her political career is over, or do you think she has any hope of rising from the ashes?

Dunn: She’s done in Alaska. She certainly had her eyes on that 2014 Senate race, and now she hasn’t got a shot. Zero. Cooked. And she really has no place in real American politics, either. I say “real” because Sarah Palin has become a punch line and a laughingstock. She’s a joke. She holds a very small—albeit intense—niche in the American political discussion, and if she stays at Fox News (where my sources tell me she is not well-loved) she will continue to have a presence. But it is marginal at best. She’s had zero impact on the 2012 race. As soon as Todd endorsed Gingrich, Newt’s prospects sunk. People are interested in Palin, but they don’t take her seriously. It’s truly pathetic to watch her talk about the possibility of her being selected at a brokered convention in Tampa. That’s why she really wants the battle to go on between Romney and the anti-Romney forces. It’s all about her. She didn’t have the guts to run. She didn’t have the political traction. At the end of my book, I liken her to the Wizard of Oz, all smoke and mirrors, “hiding behind a phalanx of curtains and screens with no direct accountability, pulling her levers and turning her wheels to create a fraudulent illusion of power and influence.” She’s nothing more than a snake-oil salesman. She’s a fraud. And the American people have caught on. 

IM: And finally, on a personal note, how is your family? Is Tess's singing career starting to take off? The rest of the family doing well?

 Dunn: We’re all fine. Tess’s career has really taken off since you saw her play at that party in Anchorage [during the summer of ‘09]. She just had a new album release and has been a cover-girl on a couple of mags. Her new album is killer. She’s going to be on the Warped tour again this year. Dylan’s doing great as well, playing basketball and baseball. But they are all very tired of Sarah Palin. Very, very tired of her. Enough already. I agree. 

Well that is great to hear Geoffrey, I am VERY impressed with Tess's success, though of course I knew she would be a star when I first heard her sing in Anchorage almost three years ago now.

And thank you for this great interview my friend, it definitely went a long way toward calming any feelings of concern I, and some of my readers, had about this movie.

So folks get your popcorn ready because we are only a day away from, in Geoffrey's words, "an absolutely devastating portrait of Palin."

Sounds like "must see TV" to me!

At the Huffington Post our friend Geoffrey Dunn points out the five undisputed facts about Sarah Palin.

Courtesy of the Huffington Post:

 As part of the orchestrated pushback to Game Change, no fewer than seven of Palin's associates took to the telephone wires angrily denouncing HBO's upcoming fiilm, including her one-time mouthpiece Meghan Stapleton and her former foreign affairs advisor, the controversial neo-con lobbyist Randy Scheunemann. 

What mainstream news accounts of the conference call failed to mention is that all seven of those who partook in the denouncement of Game Change were at one time or another on the payroll of Palin's political action committee, SarahPAC, at which they were all paid handsome monthly stipends between $6,000 and $10,000. 

Never mind the fact that none of them had actually seen the film; all seven have had a significant and vested interest in Sarah Palin's post-campaign reputation. This was pushback with a fee attached. Stapleton went so far as to call the movie "sick" and described Schmidt as "abusive" and "abrasive." 

That said, there are several aspects of Palin's erratic and dysfunctional behavior during the 2008 campaign that are well-documented via video, audio tape and emails, all of which I referenced in my own critical book, The Lies of Sarah Palin: The Untold Story Behind Her Relentless Quest for Power. The he-said-she-said nature of the Game Change controversy -- all based on off-the-record sources -- creates an opportunity for pushback and denial. The uncontested documents from the 2008 campaign, however, provide no squirm room for Palin and her minions.

To read what those are you need to click the link at the top and visit Huffpo.

Though I am not usually a huge fan of the Huffington Post these days, it is well worth your visit today because Dunn absolutely eviscerates Palin with a little thing we liberals like to all "facts."

Author of "The Lies of Sarah Palin" comes to the defense of rival author Joe McGinniss.

Courtesy of Firedoglake:

Five days before a literary embargo theoretically prohibited any reviews from appearing in the mainstream media, the New York Times delivered what was effectively a journalistic hit (executed by Janet Maslin) on bestselling author Joe McGinniss and his long-awaited book-length profile of Alaska’s former governor, The Rogue: Searching for the Real Sarah Palin. 

I was nearly three-quarters of the way through it by the time that Maslin’s review was first posted on the Times web site. I was immediately appalled by its intellectual dishonesty, its distorted portrait of the book, and its unbridled demonization of McGinniss. She calls the book “dated, petty and easily available to anyone with Internet access.” Really? Then why, one must ask, has the book caused such a ruckus? Are there reports on the Internet, for instance, of Palin’s mass firing of people of color during her first weeks as Governor of Alaska or personal accounts of her dominionist religious beliefs? Is there a full-scale work that combines the elegance and depth of McGinniss’ reporting into a composite narrative? I think not. Indeed, the power of The Rogue is that the whole of its devastating narrative is greater than the sum of its parts.

I should also acknowledge that I am the author of an earlier book on the former Alaska governor, The Lies of Sarah Palin: The Untold Story Behind Her Relentless Quest for Power, published by St. Martin’s in May, and which I suppose in some people’s eyes would make me something of a competitor with McGinniss, though I never looked at it that way. I sensed at the outset that our books would be very different—and they are, told through very different eyes and voices, and with an entirely different focus—although they come to startlingly similar conclusions about Ms. Palin, both as a human being and as a political figure. While I have never met McGinniss personally, we were introduced by email last year through mutual friends in Alaska and we occasionally communicated (or, more accurately, commiserated) about the poisonous ordeal of covering Palin. But I had not seen a single word of the McGinniss book until I read the first “installment” in Doonesbury, which featured excerpts from the book (all by “named” sources, incidentally), and then received a review copy that arrived in the mail later that week.

Moreover, roughly nine months after the assassination attempt on Arizona congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords—over whose congressional district Palin had placed crosshair images on her SarahPAC website—there’s not a single mention by Maslin of Palin’s troubling behavior and commentary, both before and after the carnage that left six innocent bystanders dead and another 13 wounded; nor is there a single reference to her many demagogic (and unsubstantiated) claims regarding President Obama, with whom she is strangely obsessed (her charges of “death panels” and “palling around with terrorists” come immediately to mind). Nor does Maslin mention Palin’s troubling behavior on the campaign trail, with her ramped up rhetoric that lead respected Congressmember John Lewis to condemn Palin for “sowing the seeds of hatred and division” throughout the country. All of this is apparently forgiven, or conveniently forgotten, by Maslin, whose Sarah Palin is—once again—a victim. Poor Sarah. Poor, poor Sarah Palin.

I cannot urge you strongly enough to read the entire article by Geoffrey Dunn.  And while doing so please keep in mind that Geoffrey did his OWN painstaking research into the life of Sarah Palin, and essentially wrote about THE EXACT SAME PERSON that Joe McGinniss described in his book.

I would like all of you to also remember that this person described in Joe and Geoffrey's book bears a striking resemblance to the person also described in the book "Game Change," Frank Bailey's book, and, yes, even Levi Johnston's book.

Which by the way is the exact same person that I have been writing about for these last three years.

So why did Joe's book receive such vitriol and hatred, while others have only received what could probably be described as a simple slap on the wrist?

Well if you read Chapter Nineteen, I do believe that will answer your questions. (Oh and Glen Rice might deserve a little of the credit as well.)

Another very positive review of Geoffrey Dunn's book "The Lies of Sarah Palin."

Courtesy of The Agony Column:

Dunn's book is pretty simply constructed. We get the life of Sarah Palin, as told by those who know and knew her, in roughly chronological order. It stands in pretty stark contrast to the official version, however, and here's where Dunn shows his ability to write more than news. While carefully documenting everything he writes about Palin, he also manages to give readers a story, to put things in context. Through fine prose, a remarkable job of excavating witnesses and friends from across the years, and the ability to craft character from fact, Dunn tells us the story of Sarah Palin.

This story is not without controversy, and what Dunn presents contradicts much of the publicity associated with Sarah Palin's carefully constructed image. In a sense, this is also a book about the state of news coverage in American media, where competence and coherence compete for our attention with sheer chutzpah, while we select facts to bolster our own opinions from a buffet of boutique made-for-me outlets. Dunn's story is powerful and convincing, no matter what your political inclinations may be. Of course, you'd have to read it, and by virtue of the title alone, many will understandably be disinclined to do so. They'll certainly miss a compelling story of American politics.

Now that the hubbub over Frank Bailey's book has died down, people are really starting to take a much longer, and more significant look at Geoffrey's book.

I know that people have been comparing the two books, and proclaiming which one they like the best, but in my opinion BOTH books have something important to offer. 

In Bailey's book you get the behind the scenes 411 on what was happening in real time during Palin's campaign, her scandalous behavior while she was Governor, and her frame of mind after she returned from the McCain/Palin campaign trail.

In Dunn's book you get just about everything else.

Of course there is STILL much left untold, which leaves plenty of interesting details, and scandalous facts,  for Joe McGinniss to reveal in his book.

The important thing to note as you read these three books is that they ALL describe Sarah Palin as the duplicitous, manipulative, and deeply troubled woman we all know her to be.

Which of course is in stark contrast to the person described in "Going Rogue",  the propaganda laden "The Undefeated," and even Palin's stupid reality show.

By the way, speaking of the REAL Sarah Palin, you would be well served to take a moment and read what Andrew Halcro had to say about Snowdrift Snooki in his Anchorage Press article entitled "We Can't Make These Things Up." He is ALSO describing a woman, very similar to the one in Baily and Dunn's books.
 

Another excellent review of Geoffrey Dunn's book "The Lies of Sarah Palin."

From OpEd News:

Despite the title of the book, to his credit as a journalist, it must be said that this author tried vainly to give a balanced picture of Mrs. Palin's life and professional resume. However, it seemed that at every turn no matter how hard he tried, the facts of her life kept conspiring against a balanced view of her. On the good side of the ledger, he dutifully reported the reasons why the conservative kingmakers were all gushing over her. At first only the friendly conservative media were doing so, but then later on, the "big dog" powerbrokers inside the Republican Party took up the cause and eventually convinced John McCain that she was an "ideological rock star" worthy of being on the Republican ticket.

As the author repeatedly notes, at first glance and on paper, Palin "shows well," and did indeed seem to reflect the quintessential conservative tribal qualifications: a hockey mom who lived on a lake, ice fished, was a snowmobiler, a lily white beauty queen, who had helped her High School win the State basketball championship -- with roots in Idaho, and who was also tough and gutsy. Moreover, it was well known that she was rabidly pro-gun, pro-life, religiously fundamental, and a proponent of American exceptionalism. Along with this stellar conservative ideological resume, it did not hurt her cause at all that she was also (almost predictably) anti-gay, anti-tax, anti-black, and (even in Alaska) anti-Native American. In short, Mrs. Palin viewed herself (and was viewed by others, especially the conservative Republican powers that be) as coming from a different kind of America: the white sub-tribe of "real" Americans.

After a "quick and dirty" vetting process (that would later prove to have been disastrous), Palin was certified as "Grade A" republican material, prancing with the Republican "big dogs on the national stage as John McCain's Vice Presidential candidate. As it turns out, this would be the end of the good news in the book of Sarah Heath Palin. As McCain and others on the national scene would abruptly find out, Ms. Palin was a lot less than meets the eye. In due course, they would discover that she was a lying and deceiving politician as well as a vengeful and hypocritical human being and very much un-Christian like in her behavior -- a fact well known to Alaskans who had dealt with her well before Ms. Palin made her national debut.

This review is DEFINITELY worth the read, in fact it was so good it almost made me want to go back and read Geoffrey's wonderful book again.  And you know, I JUST now finished Bailey's book so you would think I needed a break.

I am very glad to see my friend getting some more attention.  In my opinion his book deserves to be read by EVERYONE with any interest in politics, Sarah Palin, or how the Republican party chooses their candidates.

I am no expert on pregnancy, but is it common for women to get pregnant in their shoulders like Sarah Palin apparently did?

(H/T to Brad Scharlott for the image.)

Laura Novak conducts yet another very interesting interview with Professor Scharlott over on her blog.

This link will take you the most interesting clip, where Mrs. Palin talks about “huntin’ and fishin’” and her big family. The interviewer at one point interjects: “And you have four?” meaning, children. And Palin replies, “I have a bunch of kids” before rapidly changing the subject. Was this because she wasn’t sure how many she would have in the following days, or because she wasn’t yet prepared to tell the world about a fifth? “A bunch of kids.” How maternal.

It’s not just that Palin was supposedly 7 months pregnant during this interview. It’s her behavior, posture, and her stunning announcement the next day that still mystify, dumbfound and disturb so many followers of this fairy tale.

Throughout her entire Newsweek interview, which was at least 10 minutes (judging from several YouTube clips), she remained in that forward-leaning position with her legs crossed.

LN: What an amazing woman.

BS: Amazing indeed. How late into your own pregnancy, Laura, could you comfortably assume that position and hold it several minutes?

LN: Are you kidding? I still can’t, and my baby’s now 16 and rides a BMX bike.

Now for many of us THIS is well covered ground, that we are now seeing revisited by new eyes. However the last part of Laura's answer directed my focus to something that I have not given a great deal of thought to in the past.

As many of you know I have interviewed a number of people who worked with, or around, Palin before, during, and after her "pregnancy." In one of those interviews the person mentioned that not only did Palin not appear pregnant DURING her month and a half long pregnancy, she also did not appear to have just given birth AFTER Trig was born.

Now here you will have to forgive me because I am JUST a man, so until I read Laura's somewhat tongue in cheek answer above I did not give that as much thought as I should have.

So I went back through my notes to check, and was reminded that not only did Sarah Palin not have any of the pain or discomfort you would expect during her pregnancy, she also did not seem to have ANY sign of having just given birth in the days and weeks afterward. 

Now granted these people would have been interacting with Palin in a professional setting where she might not have felt comfortable talking about her soreness, or appearing weak or needy in front of staff, so I wondered how she might have acted in the privacy of her home, when she was just letting it all hang out.

But WHO would have seen her in her home only a few weeks or days after giving birth?

Oh yeah, that's right!

So I gave my friend Mercede a call.

As it turned out Sadie and her mother were stuck in traffic here in Anchorage, and so I was able to ask both of them whether or not Sarah demonstrated ANY signs of having given birth on May 3 2008, only twenty days after Trig arrived, and the day that they both went over to Palin's house to see the new baby and to celebrate Levi's birthday.

To the question of whether she appeared sore, or had trouble moving around or sitting, they both said "No, she appeared fine."

To the question of whether or not they could have discerned that she had just given birth by her appearance, they both replied "No." "In fact," added Sherry, "she did not look like she had given birth at all!"

I then started trying to think like a woman, and asked if Palin complained about any soreness in her breasts, or whether or not they appeared milk laden or uncomfortable. Again the response was "No, not at all."

Sadie did point out that she was in a sweatshirt, so it would have been hard to see if she was swollen, but that she certainly "did not act as if she were uncomfortable."

I thanked them for their time and hung up the phone. (By the way you should be hearing more from Mercede herself later on today.)

You know the difference between pretending to be pregnant on a television show, and doing the same thing in real life, is that in a movie or television show when the director yells cut you can take off the fake baby bump and have a cigarette. But in real life you have to be prepared to play your scene 24 hours a day, for as long as the "pregnancy" (And the appropriate amount of time after the pregnancy), lasts.  Clearly Palin was just not that good of an actress.

Which is WHY we see her bending forward when she should have been seven months pregnant, and WHY her belly changed size and shape so often in that month and a half span of time, and WHY she acted afterward as if it simply did not happen.  Because, and stay with me on this part, it DID NOT HAPPEN!

Now look, one of the arguments against the idea that Palin pulled off this fake pregnancy has always been, "that's crazy NOBODY would do such a thing! Especially while in the public eye!" Which on the face of it seems like a reasonable argument, but not when it comes to Sarah Palin.

Just ask yourself about all of the crazy Palin lies that you know about.  This is a woman who has lied and said that NONE of the ethics complaints filed against her ever had merit, that the U.S. federal debt had grown more under Obama than “all those other presidents combined," repeatedly lied that she quit her job as Governor because under the laws of the state, her family was going to be bankrupt by litigation and public records requests, and apparently supported her daughter's lie that her very obvious facial surgery was really due to a dental procedure to align her teeth. (And those are only the tip of the iceberg.)

So you see what WE all might consider a lie too outlandish to tell by ANYONE, is really just business as usual for Sarah Palin and her family.  And until somebody REALLY calls them out on their lies, there is NO reason for Sister Sarah to change her tactics. None.

(By the way if you want to get an idea of just how often Palin lies, all you need to do is buy "The Lies of Sarah Palin" by Geoffrey Dunn.)

Geoffrey Dunn, the author of "The Lies of Sarah Palin," in his own words.



Geoffrey Dunn and Gryphen in Alaska

Below is my interview with author, and my good friend, Geoffrey Dunn.

I attempted to ask Geoffrey questions that perhaps others would not think to ask him, as well as those to which I already knew the answers, but thought all of you might enjoy learning about as well.

Hopefully this interview will clear up some of the misconceptions that are swirling about concerning the research done for this book, and provide some insight into just what a herculean task writing a book which reveals the truth about such a secretive person can turn out to be.

So get a cup of your favorite beverage, sit back, and enjoy the conversation.

Gryphen: What was your very initial impression of Sarah Palin, when she first came onto the scene?

Geoffrey Dunn: I felt like I saw right through her from the get-go. I never felt, to steal a phrase from Gertrude Stein, like there was a there there. I knew people in the Mat-Su who said that her mayorship in Wasilla had been a disaster. I just never bought into the hype. When she was nominated for vice-president, I knew there was trouble ahead, and I was right.

Gryphen: How long did it take for you to start thinking there might be a problem with her ability to tell the truth?

Dunn: You know, there’s a fascinating editorial from the Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman that was written in 1996. And it’s devoted to Palin’s inability to tell the truth. It’s stunning. It’s been part of her M.O. from the beginning. In November of last year my friends in Alaska all emailed me about her lying about the weather in Juneau when she was on Fox News. She lies about the weather. She lies about everything. As I say in the book, it’s a pathology.

Gryphen: When did you first decide to write a book about her, and what was the impetus of that idea?

Dunn: I had no intention of ever writing a book about Palin when I first started writing about her for the Huffington Post. None. Nada. I assumed that someone would grab a book deal about her and run with it. Plus, I didn’t want to spend a couple of years working on a book about her. But then several people started encouraging me to write a book – this was near the end of the 2008 campaign – and remember, she was coming back to Alaska to finish out her term for governor —and so the first idea for a book was that it would be a reflection on the interface between Alaska politics and the Outside. That has always fascinated me since my first trip to Alaska in 1974. Most people Outside have no clue about what is going on in Alaska. And then of course, she came back to Alaska and clearly had no interest in being governor anymore – none – she absolutely hated it. She’d seen the lights of the big city and wasn’t going to be kept down on the farm. So the book changed because her position in American political discourse changed. She became a national icon and she has stayed a national icon.

Gryphen: Did you find it easy to locate people in Alaska who were willing to go on the record about Sarah Palin?

Dunn: Nothing was “easy” about this book. Nothing. You know, Michael Paul Gross came to Alaska and said that no one would speak to him on the record. Ditto with several other reporters. I built up trust over two years with several people and the vast majority went on-the-record with their comments. But nothing was easy. And the Palin supporters have always attacked anyone who goes on the record. Viciously.

Gryphen: Did you make contact with any of the Palins close friends or associates? If you did what were your impressions?

Dunn: Yes, of course I made contact with several people who were at one time close to the Palins, and some who still claimed to be close. All good people. But it’s a fascinating river of human carnage that have been thrown under the bus by Palin—from Wasilla to Juneau to the McCain campaign, and now, even to SarahPAC. And they all draw the same portrait of Sarah Palin – and a pretty portrait it is not. Next week there will be another book out by one of her closest supporters – someone who was one of her closest confidantes, Frank Bailey. And he draws the same portrait.

Gryphen: What shocking bit of information about Sarah most surprised you while researching this book?

Dunn: The fact that she clearly and openly betrayed John McCain during the 2008 campaign. Now you can say, well, of course, everyone knew that. But when I stepped back from my book and looked at the whole story, that really hit me: she openly and willfully betrayed John McCain in the middle of the campaign. Wow. Think about it.

Gryphen: There have been some allegations from a few readers who claim that your sources were lying. How do you answer such charges?

Dunn: I checked up on the stories that were told and got confirmation from others. And I will forever stand by my sources. But look, one doesn’t need to question their rendition of events. The most devastating revelations in my book are those that are unchallenged, for which Sarah Palin is herself the source. And the most ringing is Palin’s tone-deaf and morally bereft response to the shooting of Gabby Giffords and the killing of six innocent bystanders in Tucson. Watch that tape again. It’s a shameful moment in American history. Appalling. And the commentators I cite in response to Palin’s speech are Republican and conservative commentators, not liberal ones. Watching Palin’s response made me sick to my stomach. It still does. That’s why I call the Epilogue to my book, “Crosshairs.”

Let me also add this—whenever someone attacks Palin, the minions circle the wagons and attack the messenger. They’ve done it every time. It’s soooo predictable. And when you watch it enough, the Palin inner-circle takes on all the qualities of a cult. And these people are cultish in their behavior. If you read the Bailey book, one reading is that those in the inner-circle were like cult members. It required an unquestioning dedication to Palin. The all drank the Koo-Aid.

Gryphen: Did you have to pay anybody to get them to speak with you?

Dunn: That’s a joke. No one was paid. The fact that anyone would claim that is another Palin scam and lie. Add it to the list. And it’s a very long list. The only one who has ever made money off the Palin scam is Palin herself.

Gryphen: Did anybody you interviewed have only positive things to say about Sarah Palin? And if so did they appear impaired in some way?

Dunn: Two people I interviewed only had positive things to say about Palin. And I included their comments in the book. I would like to spend more time with each and push them on their perceptions. But I like them both very much. They like me. Or they did. And they probably think my book is too hard on her. Which is funny, because a few people have thought I was too easy on her. Which proves, for anyone considering writing yet another book on her, that you need to be true to yourself in the portrait you draw. You can’t worry what anyone else thinks. And I don’t.

Gryphen: Have you had any bad experiences with Palin supporters?

Dunn: Yes, plenty. They’re entitled to their opinions. But I don’t really give them any juice and I refuse to engage it. And I’m not going to here.

Gryphen: Joe McGinniss is also writing a book about Sarah Palin, are you friends or mortal foes?

Dunn: I have to chuckle at that. It was you and other Alaska bloggers who informally introduced me to Joe last summer, through mutual emails and the like. And we have struck up a friendship that has become very important in my life. We have many things in common and he has been a mentor to me. One thing is that I’m Italian (on my mother’s side) and I lived in Italy during the mid-1980s. And he wrote a great book about Italian soccer, The Miracle of Castel di Sangro. He speaks Italian and has an Italian sensibility. Who would have thought? Two writers with Irish names speaking Italian to one another. He is il mio fratello negro. I’ll let you figure out what it means. And I think in the end, our books will complement one another. And I am really looking forward to reading his book— though I simply will never embrace his passion for soccer. But the Palin sand box is big enough for plenty of shovels and pails. And I am sure there will be more.

Gryphen: Do you think Sarah Palin will run for President in 2012? If not, why not?

Dunn: You know, several of my friends in Alaska, from across the political spectrum, made bets with me that Palin would win the presidency in 2012. Well her response to Tucson put a major damper on that dream. And I still think I will collect on that bet. Because let me say this to all her supporters: Sarah Palin cannot win the American presidency. Ever. She’s hated now Outside as much as she is hated in Alaska. Here’s my favorite graph about Palin:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/13/fav-palin_n_725513.html

The numbers tell the tale. And what’s fascinating is that ever since the Katie Couric interview, her favorability rating has been in steady descent. It has never moved the other direction once. And since Tucson it has been in even sharper decline. So the question is, even with those numbers will she run?

All of a sudden the planets have once again aligned in her favor. Trump got thrown out of the race. Huckabee dropped out, which creates a huge hole for Palin. Gingrich has self-immolated. Romney is made of cardboard. Pawlenty of recycled cardboard. Palin is the only one with any charisma or juice.

 The Gallup poll indicated that she has the most name recognition of any candidate. I mean, how many people know who Mitch Daniels is? She will no doubt see this as a sign from God that a door has opened. Also.

The fact that she just sent out 400,000 letters to South Carolina this week indicates that she is still positioning herself for a run. She can’t win Iowa—she has no organization there—and she can’t win New Hampshire –where she is disliked by Republicans (see my book, wink)—but she can win in South Carolina, so if she enters the race there, well it’s a free for all, and with Huckabee out, well she can roll in the South…she plays to the Southern conservative evangelicals who have a real problem with a black president. And she is dynamic on the stump where she has a well-scripted speech that she can deliver to the throngs. So that’s a possible scenario where she winds up running. She is the anti-Obama. And she has a shot, albeit a long one, to win the Republican nomination. But the presidency? Never.

Gryphen: Do you intend to write more about Palin?

Dunn: Right now, like most Alaskans, I am suffering from Palin fatigue. She may be suffering from Palin fatigue, too. So I may or may not. I was at work on a book about Bohemian culture in American history when I started the Palin book and I have already returned to working on it. But I am also considering writing a similar book about Palin’s buddy Glen Beck called “Snake Oil Man.” A couple of people have come to me with stories about him and I view him as a malignancy in American political discourse. So, too, do most credible Republican operatives. They can’t stand him. He and Palin tap into the same dark American sinister underbelly of fear and hatred and racism that fuels their huckster politics. And, of course, they snicker all the way to the bank. Theirs is really a disgusting presence in American political history.

Thanks for your time Geoffrey.  You are a true journalist in the best sense of the word, and you have done a great service to your country with this book.  The more light we shine on Sarah Palin the easier it will be for people to see her for what she really is, a very dangerous fraud.

Oh, and before I forget, thank you for the kind words that you wrote about me in "The Lies of Sarah Palin: The Untold Story Behind Her Relentless Quest for Power."  I felt truly honored to be included among such an impressive cast of characters.

And folks, if you have not ordered Geoffrey's book, what are you waiting for?

As of this writing it is number two on the Amazon "Hot New Releases in Political People Biographies" section. But with your help we can make it number one, as well as in a number of other categories too.