YooooHooooo, HOLLYS!!!!??!!!

[decodelighted]

As an aside to our chat last week:
http://gawker.com/#!5791915/did-sarah-palin-carry-out-the-biggest-hoax-in-american-political-history

 

[AGBF]

I remember this story well. I thought that the evidence that finally put the story to rest was that Bristol was pregnant with another baby at the time that Trig was gestating. Does no one else recall it that way?

Deb/AGBF

 

[decodelighted]

This new article wonders if the dates were tweaked a bit ... and that Bristol was FOUR months pregnant at the time they claimed she was five months along and that Trig was actually born earlier than reported (no hospital will confirm the date/time of birth & no birth certificate has ever been released.)

 

[y2kitty]

I think the lack of a real media investigating stories is a huge problem in America today. We have like 50 news channels and none of them look into anything, they blindly repeat things as fact with out checking.

 

[kama_s]

I read this story last night. Has anyone looked at the pics??? Her 8 months non-photo op picture is FLAT. FLAT, FLAT, FLAT.

Even if Trig was a low birth weight baby, no way could she not be 'showing'. I personally don't think this one is a conspiracy, I have always had this nagging suspicion.

 

[decodelighted]

The ONLY thing that makes me waver about this a TEENSY bit is ... how could they keep Levi shut up about this? He is a tabloid-prone Chatty Cathy who is friends with Kathy Griffin -- who would be ALL OVER THIS in a hot flash. And even if they had him in a locked tight pay off ... he's still a KID. He would just get drunk & shoot his mouth off ANYWAY.

Otherwise I think this whole thing STINKS like last year's flounder.

 

[fleur-de-lis]

Maybe Trig's Kenyan.

 

[MonkeyPie]

...who cares who the baby belongs to? No, I mean seriously, why does it even matter?

 

[kama_s]

...who cares who the baby belongs to? No, I mean seriously, why does it even matter?

So you're okay with a potential presidential candidate blatantly LYING to the entire country? Not a simple white lie either, but an elaborate, well-thought out hoax to be precise.

 

[HollyS]

...who cares who the baby belongs to? No, I mean seriously, why does it even matter?

So you're okay with a potential presidential candidate blatantly LYING to the entire country? Not a simple white lie either, but an elaborate, well-thought out hoax to be precise.

This made me laugh out loud, but not for the same reasons you might have for giggling. Elaborate lies have ALWAYS been told to the American people by presidents and others in positions of authority.

As for the gawker article, I'll read it. But gawker has an agenda and a huge bias against Palin, so I'll take it with several grains of salt. But, I'll read it. And ruminate on it. And if I find it ridiculous, I'll ridicule it. If I find it's pretty tame and lame, I'll ignore it.

Now, if Palin really DID do this elaborate cover-up, my question would have to be "Why the hell?" But the fact that her son is Downs syndrome seems to suggest that his real mommy was a bit long in the tooth, not a youngster. I don't know the percentage of teenagers bearing DS babies, but it would have to be miniscule at best.

 

[iLander]

This is all news to me.

But I thought I would throw in these facts from the March of Dimes website:

Does the risk of Down syndrome increase with the mother’s age?
Yes. The risk of Down syndrome increases with the mother’s age (7):

At age 25, the risk of having a baby with Down syndrome is 1 in 1,250.
At age 30, the risk is 1 in 1,000.
At age 35, the risk is 1 in 400.
At age 40, the risk is 1 in 100.
At age 45, the risk is 1 in 30.
Even though the risk is greater as the mother’s age increases, about 80 percent of babies with Down syndrome are born to women under age 35.

 

[HollyS]

Unfortunately, here at work, I can't click on the articles mentioned in Gawker. So I can't really have an opinion about the 'evidence' presented. I'll try to read them at home.

What I wonder, more than Bristol having a baby and Sarah pretending to be preggers, is this: did she adopt and cover that up? But, again, why would this be something to cover up?

It does make one go "Hmmmmmmmmmmm". I'll give deco that, anyway.

 

[HollyS]

This is all news to me.

But I thought I would throw in these facts from the March of Dimes website:

Does the risk of Down syndrome increase with the mother’s age?
Yes. The risk of Down syndrome increases with the mother’s age (7):

At age 25, the risk of having a baby with Down syndrome is 1 in 1,250.
At age 30, the risk is 1 in 1,000.
At age 35, the risk is 1 in 400.
At age 40, the risk is 1 in 100.
At age 45, the risk is 1 in 30.
Even though the risk is greater as the mother’s age increases, about 80 percent of babies with Down syndrome are born to women under age 35.

Um, yeah, still . . . 80% percent may be 35 or under, but a huge percentage of that percentage is over 30. Isn't that why we have amnio tests for women over 30+, if they want one?

 

[karpouzi]

Even though the risk is greater as the mother’s age increases, about 80 percent of babies with Down syndrome are born to women under age 35.

Well, sure, because the vast majority of babies overall are born to women under age 35. The question here is, considering 1 child with Down syndrome, is it more likely that the child was born to a teenager or a 45-year-old woman?

 

[Dreamer_D]

A rate of 1/1250, or perhaps a little lower for a 20 year old, is still a very high rate for a given syndrome and by no means eliminates the possibilitly that a 20 year old could have a DS baby.

 

[MonkeyPie]

A rate of 1/1250, or perhaps a little lower for a 20 year old, is still a very high rate for a given syndrome and by no means eliminates the possibilitly that a 20 year old could have a DS baby.

This.

Also, if my biggest concern is that the POSSIBLE future president lied about being pregnant to help someone unable/unwilling to raise a Down Syndrome baby get the help they needed, and give that baby an awesome life, well...then I have to say my worries are pretty miniscule.

 

[Bunny007]

A rate of 1/1250, or perhaps a little lower for a 20 year old, is still a very high rate for a given syndrome and by no means eliminates the possibilitly that a 20 year old could have a DS baby.

This.

Also, if my biggest concern is that the POSSIBLE future president lied about being pregnant to help someone unable/unwilling to raise a Down Syndrome baby get the help they needed, and give that baby an awesome life, well...then I have to say my worries are pretty miniscule.

Bristol hardly seems unable or unwilling to raise a DS baby. She a) already has a baby, and; b) has access to all the support in the world needed to raise a special needs baby.

My guess is that, if this fake pregnancy theory is true, Palin was motivated by self interest, i.e., her campaign, not charity. I'm sure candidates lie all the time, I'm not naive. But I don't think it's an ideal and it isn't something I would condone by turning a blind eye.

 

[MonkeyPie]

I was talking about whoever she got the baby from, not Palin.

This seems like just another reason for the Palin-haters to be all angry. Alright then.

 

[princesss]

Unfortunately, here at work, I can't click on the articles mentioned in Gawker. So I can't really have an opinion about the 'evidence' presented. I'll try to read them at home.

What I wonder, more than Bristol having a baby and Sarah pretending to be preggers, is this: did she adopt and cover that up? But, again, why would this be something to cover up?

It does make one go "Hmmmmmmmmmmm". I'll give deco that, anyway.

That's what I kept wondering about, too. Is it possible she adopted from outside of the family and didn't want to bring media attention to the birth mother for whatever reason?

I don't particularly like Palin, and I don't honestly believe Trig is her biological son, and I do think that something was covered up - that said, I think that bigger scams involving more important people have been carried out (didn't FDR have polio?) and will be carried out again in the future, and I just have a hard time getting worked up over this.

It does bother me that we seem to have so few journalists covering domestic issues and causes and questions - those seem doomed to be talked over by "media experts" and subjected to the garishness of the 24 hour news cycle and soundbites rather than investigated by journalists that are passionate about digging into a story and finding out what's going on.

 

[iheartscience]

Maybe Trig's Kenyan.

SNORT.

 

[iheartscience]

Okay so I read the whole article and now I'm left wondering where the other baby came from. (Bristol Palin's kid, not sure of the name...) Any theories on that?

 

[MonkeyPie]

Okay so I read the whole article and now I'm left wondering where the other baby came from. (Bristol Palin's kid, not sure of the name...) Any theories on that?

I notice that they very deliberately ignored that part. Probably because they know they're full of it.

 

[Dancing Fire]

...who cares who the baby belongs to? No, I mean seriously, why does it even matter?

So you're okay with a potential presidential candidate blatantly LYING to the entire country? Not a simple white lie either, but an elaborate, well-thought out hoax to be precise.

they all do...

 

[iheartscience]

Okay so I read the whole article and now I'm left wondering where the other baby came from. (Bristol Palin's kid, not sure of the name...) Any theories on that?

I notice that they very deliberately ignored that part. Probably because they know they're full of it.

Eh, you can't deny that the circumstances surrounding the birth of the kid are strange, to say the least. What would possess a woman in labor to get on a plane for 20 hours?! Plus some of the pictures of her completely flat stomach in a pencil skirt are kind of nuts.

But I still don't get where the other kid came from...

 

[decodelighted]

Bristol could have carried BOTH babies if the timelines were fudged by the Palins. Is that what you mean?

 

[iheartscience]

Bristol could have carried BOTH babies if the timelines were fudged by the Palins. Is that what you mean?

Ah, gotcha. So the theory is that Palin pretended Trig was hers, but then Bristol got pregnant again and the presidential election was going on, so they had no choice but to go ahead and come out with Bristol's pregnancy?

All of the stuff mentioned in the paper/Gawker post are convincingly shady, but this is the part of the hoax theory that is the least convincing for me. I just think someone would have noticed that Bristol was preggo the first time around.

 

[iheartscience]

I was talking about whoever she got the baby from, not Palin.

This seems like just another reason for the Palin-haters to be all angry. Alright then.

Me (and most likely all of the other "Palin-haters") dislike Palin for many, many other reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with this. (Hint: for me, the reasons are all related to her political and policy "opinions".)

That said, you must admit this whole thing is verrrrrry intriguing. I love a juicy mystery.

 

[AGBF]

I just think someone would have noticed that Bristol was preggo the first time around.

Well...she wasn't the governor. Who would have noticed if she was sent off to boarding school or to Europe for a few weeks? Isn't that always how the pregnancies of "nice" girls were handled? Then they came home from abroad....

Deb/AGBF

 

[ForteKitty]

i know it's physically possible for Bristol to get pregnant back to back... but is she really that dumb?

And if she did, it's possible that she didn't show much in the first pregnancy. There's a show called "i didn't know i was pregnant" or something, and they showed pics of women 8 months along who looked completely normal. one lady was in a bathing suit a month before she delivered, and her stomach was completely flat. She delivered a 7lb baby!

 

[risingsun]

This is all news to me.

But I thought I would throw in these facts from the March of Dimes website:

Does the risk of Down syndrome increase with the mother’s age?
Yes. The risk of Down syndrome increases with the mother’s age (7):

At age 25, the risk of having a baby with Down syndrome is 1 in 1,250.
At age 30, the risk is 1 in 1,000.
At age 35, the risk is 1 in 400.
At age 40, the risk is 1 in 100.
At age 45, the risk is 1 in 30.
Even though the risk is greater as the mother’s age increases, about 80 percent of babies with Down syndrome are born to women under age 35.

The largest percentage of women having babies is under age 35.

ETA: I just noticed that another poster made the same statement upthread.