Friday, December 30, 2011

Here's how we know Sarah Palin faked Trig's birth, and why the Palin birth hoax still matters 

Regular commenter Amy1 wrote the following in responding to another commenter:

... To me, the key piece of evidence is the Mar 14 photo (and the other photos that show SP to be not pregnant just weeks before the Apr 18 "delivery.") Even the wild ride did not seem like proof positive, to me. I can (just barely) imagine someone being deranged enough to risk such a flight as a pregnant woman, however unlikely all the info makes it. But the photos DO seem proof positive, proof that would stand up in court. At least, I have never heard ANY explanation for the flat profile on Mar 14 and a 6-pound baby 5 weeks later. Or the flat Mar 14 photo and the Gusty photo. It's either a medical impossibility or a miracle.

For me, the photos remove the need to speculate on the bioparents of Trig, how many babies were used, the relationship of Tripp's and Trig's birthdates, the dysfunctional family, the crooked police, the fake CBJ medical letter, and much else. To me (but not to everyone else), it's a matter of SP hoaxed us in that she was not pregnant.

Everything else is in the category of interesting but not essential. 

And of course, the importance is not in Palin's deceit so much as the enabling that the GOP and backers did, and the continuing suppression of the story in the MSM. It's way bigger than Palin, but it need not involve her family beyond herself. Just Palin, the GOP, and the 1%er-funders -- hoaxing us to affect an election.

I know you know all this, Ginger, but I'm long-winded so any newbies don't feel like our 3 years of data is written in code! 
While not proof positive on its own, the email with the draft of Trig's birth announcement (including the info that he was early) is certainly pretty damaging too, because that email was written before the fake birth.
 As others have said, we really don't know which detail will serve to burst the dam open. ...

Tuesday, December 27, 2011

Another open letter to John R. Lee, CEO of the Mat-Su Regional Medical Center, concerning the hospital's role in the Palin birth hoax

John R. Lee, CEO
Mat-Su Regional Medical Center
Palmer, AK 99645-8984

Dear Mr. Lee,

You know who I am by now, but for the record, I am a journalism professor in Kentucky trying to make clear to the public that Sarah Palin almost certainly faked the birth of Trig on April 18, 2008, claiming (most of the time) that Trig was born at your hospital, the Mat-Su Regional Medical Center.

You undoubtedly know whether Palin did or did not give birth there. However, as far as I can tell, your hospital has never said a word about the matter. The hospital did not list Trig as a baby born that day (unless it did so briefly on your web site, and then pulled the name, as some have suggested). And neither you nor the hospital's head of marketing, Mr. Sterling Grover, have responded to letters I have sent you, nor has anyone at the hospital responded to the numerous messages I have left using the hospital's feedback page.

In the the attached article, which I have posted at my blog, I argue that you, by refusing to comment on Palin's dubious claim of giving birth at your hospital, are tacitly complicit in a hoax that arguably violated federal law. I am going to expand that article for publication. And in that expanded article I am going to make clear that I informed you in advance of my intentions, and asked you yet again to respond to my queries. (While I am posting this first as an open letter to you at my blog, it will soon follow as a certified letter via the postal system.)

I've done a great deal of thinking, plus lots of research, on the question of what happened at the Mat-Su medical center the day of Trig's alleged birth there. I've reached the conclusion that Sarah Palin probably was not even registered as a patient.

So my first question to you is: Was Sarah Palin a patient at your hospital on April 18, 2008? If she was not, then there would be no HIPAA-related privacy issue. Your refusal to comment, if that is the case, would be truly inexcusable.

My second question is: Did Sarah Palin give birth to Trig Palin at your hospital on April 18, 2008? If she did not, then even if Sarah Palin was registered as a patient, she clearly committed a hoax, a fraud, and HIPAA restrictions do not apply in cases of fraud.

Again, if you do not respond in any way to my questions here, I will note that fact in the article I plan to publish. And that silence on your part would speak volumes about where the truth likely lies.

Please send your response to my questions to PO Box 17772, Fort Mitchell KY, 41017, or email me at brad.scharlott at, or call me at 859-426-5309.

Sincerely yours,

Brad Scharlott

Saturday, December 10, 2011

Palin Birth Truthometer Breaks $50,000 Mark!

As many of you know, I am offering a cash reward for definitive proof that Sarah Palin gave birth to Trig. The generosity of many readers sending in pledges has now moved the reward to $50,228. To add to the reward, send your name and pledge amount to brad.scharlott Do not send cash. If and when a winner appears, I will let you know.

If you have evidence that Sarah Palin gave birth to Trig and wish to claim the reward, send it to Brad Scharlott, PO Box 17772, Fort Mitchell KY 41017.

Everyone is welcome to send in evidence, including – in fact, especially – Sarah Palin herself. Easy money for you, Sarah, if in fact you gave birth.

Tuesday, December 6, 2011

Frank Bailey wrote that he saw Sarah Palin after she gave birth to Trig at the Mat-Su hospital. Can we trust him? Absolutely not!

I and several of the regulars who comment at this site think it is likely that Sarah Palin was not registered as a patient at Mat-Su Regional Medical Center on April 18, 2008, the day she claims she gave birth there. Not a single picture has ever surfaced, for example, showing her in bed holding the supposedly newborn Trig – who definitely was not a newborn that day. In fact it is hard to find compelling evidence that she was at the hospital at all.

So, how do we account for the KTUU news story and video of the Heaths holding Trig in a Mat-Su maternity suite that day? The leading hypothesis is that the Heaths somehow got access to an unoccupied suite, and the news team from KTUU, perhaps in on the hoax, was led there by one of the conspirators. Keep in mind that Bill McAllister, Palin's soon-to-be press secretary, still worked at KTUU, and that his station was the only news organization in town that got to cover the story at Mat-Su.

For any newbies reading this, if the above sounds too fantastic to be true, ask yourself this: Why was it so important for Palin to get to the Mat-Su hospital, if she supposedly started having contractions in Dallas more than 3,000 away? No sane woman who was truly experiencing contractions would have traveled that far (nor would an airline have let her board the plane). What was so special about Mat-Su? Answer: as a former board member of the hospital, she had the clout to pull off a hoax there and not be called out on it.

So who, outside of family members and Levi Johnston (whose account cannot be trusted), claims they saw Palin at the hospital that day? Not many.

One of the most perplexing accounts comes from Frank Bailey, in his book Blind Allegiance. Our regular commenter "B" helpfully provided this background information:

"p.214 of his book, Bailey says at the hospital he saw Sarah (but just a glimpse), Trig, Todd, and Bristol. He also notes a 'good-wishes carousel spinning around the governor and newborn,' which suggests other people. If he is telling the truth, Bailey's account doesn't rule out staged:

" '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. . . . I left moments later. Passing though the waiting room, I saw Bristol lying on the couch. . . . she had NOT  just given birth.'

"Wonder why it is important for us or Sarah to know that he has a picture of Todd and Trig at the hospital? At any rate, he doesn't describe entering a birthing suite and chatting with Sarah, in bed holding Trig. He goes out of his way to say he could tell Bristol didn't just give birth, but doesn't say he could tell Sarah did.

"Again, IF the account is true, the photo op was staged behind the 'double doors' through which Bailey had to be 'escorted,' which sounds like a patient rather than public area."

Thanks, B! Keep in mind that Bailey confesses in his book that he lied on Palin's behalf numerous times. Thus, there is no reason to assume he is telling the truth here. In fact, I believe he has deliberately lied about Trig. 

In the book he claims he believes Sarah's ridiculous birth story. But he makes clear that he and Sarah and other members of her staff spent a tremendous amount of time combatting rumors that Bristol was Trig's mother and notes that Sarah never did the obvious thing: produce documentary evidence such as a birth certificate. He can't truly be so stupid as to realize the reason she didn't produce such evidence was that should couldn't. He must have known her birth story was false.

But why would he lie? I initially thought it was because of misplaced loyalty to Palin concerning something as important as the birth hoax. But Leadfoot_LA , a wonderfully clear thinker and leading lighting light among the Trig Truthers, provided what strikes me as a much more compelling reason:

"Of course Bailey isn't telling the truth. In fact, I'd add him to the list of people who could be charged in the conspiracy (which is exactly why he did not, and could not tell the truth in his book.)"

Bingo! So, if he was part of the conspiracy, what was his role? Here's my guess: Who would Sarah give the task of sneaking around the Mat-Su hospital to find an unoccupied maternity suite? That's just the kind of unethical activity that she seemed to count on Frank to do. 

If Palin was at the hospital that day, she was not in a bed, she was monitoring how the hoax was proceeding. And if that was case, then maybe Bailey did glimpsed her – but note how he did not describe her. If she had looked as if she had just given birth, he undoubtedly would have written that.

Nonetheless, even if he  did see her, by saying she was with the "hours-old Trig," he still was lying by trying to give the false impression that she gave birth that day. One way or another, his intent was to deceive concerning Trig's birth.

Sunday, December 4, 2011

To Officer Dave Parker of the Anchorage PD: Are you incompetent? Or a fanboy willing to do anything for Sarah Palin? Or simply corrupt?

Malia Litman, an attorney, had Officer Dave Parker just where she wanted him: on the phone, and apparently under orders to answer all question she put to him.

And then in a awesome display of lawyerly skill, she took him apart.

Parker, the department's public information officer, had written and disseminated a press release seemingly clearing Todd Palin of whoring by rebutting Shailey Tripp's allegation that Todd had paid her for sex. The New York Daily News then contacted Parker, who told the paper: "It was just guilt by innuendo, nothing else. There's not one scintilla of evidence that Todd Palin had anything to do with this."

Litman asked Parker why he wrote that press release. Because, he explained, Sarah Palin's lawyer had asked the department to send out such a press release if Todd was not mentioned in materials relating to Tripp's arrest. Items the police had confiscated during her arrest included office calendars, her laptop computer, and her cell phone.

Litman asked if Parker was aware that office calendars had been taken, and if he had reviewed them. No, Parker said, he was not aware that office calendars had been taken, and he had not review them.

She asked if he knew that Tripp's laptop computer and cell phone had been taken. Yes, he thought those items had been taken, but no, he had not checked them for information relating to Todd.

So what did you look at? Litman asked. "Dave Parker reviewed the records regarding the arrest that were readily available to him on his computer," is how she summed up his response. He also looked at a loose leaf notebook (but of course would not know if pages had been removed), and spoke with a member of the vice unit.

Let's reflect on this for a moment. Parker told the press "there is not one scintilla" of evidence that Todd had been involved with Tripp, but he had failed to look at her office calendars, her laptop and her cell phone, and he restricted himself largely to what was readily available on his computer.

Three possibilities can account for Parker's behavior:
1. He is so incompetent he did not realize that calendars, cell phones, and computers are where one would logically expect to find evidence of who the johns were that a prostitute had serviced.
2. He is such a fanboy of Sarah Palin that upon getting a request from her lawyer, his normal mental processes shut down and he robotically did everything in his power to help her.
3. Corruption exists at some level in the Anchorage Police Department.

Tilting the odds towards option 3 is the fact that the police have refused to return the laptop and cell phone to Tripp, in violation of the judge's order in June that they do so.

However, Shailey Tripp yesterday wrote at her blog: "Judge Washington has issued an order for APD to return my property and has given 10 days for them to respond. The order was dated Nov. 30, 2011."

I think we can take it as a given that Todd's name appeared somewhere in those calendars and electronic devices when the police confiscated them. It will be interesting to see if his name is still there if and when Tripp gets her property back.

It's also a good bet that Officer Parker engaged in a form of willful ignorance by not looking in the obvious places for evidence relating to Todd. And if that is the case, then he effectively lied in the press release he sent out and the interview he gave the Daily News.

The real question is: Did Parker engage in possibly corrupt behavior on his own account, or was he following orders?

Note to Ms. Karen L. Loeffler, United States Attorney, Anchorage Office, U.S. Department of Justice: If you won't investigate likely corruption in the local police department, to whom can the people of Alaska turn for justice?

Friday, December 2, 2011

How possible misconduct by the Anchorage police relates to Todd Palin and a prostitute's laptop, and why a federal inquiry is needed

Just when things were getting dull, Sarah Palin felt a need on Sean Hannity's show Thursday to compare Herman Cain's fidelity problems with stories about Todd's prostitution peccadillos. And then she heatedly alluded to Shailey Tripp's statement that she did not appear pregnant when Tripp gave her a massage in early 2008. While Palin did not specifically name Tripp, it was clear that's who she was talking about.

For those of you new to this, Shailey Tripp pled guilty to engaging in prostitution at her massage parlor (although charges were later dropped), and she claimed that Todd was one of the johns who paid her for sex. The National Enquirer in its January 31 issue ran that allegation:

The Anchorage Police Department confiscated Tripp's laptop computer and cell phone when they arrested her. Amazingly, that department sent out a press release claiming they could attest that Todd was not a john because they found no evidence he was. That press release was the basis of the following story in the New York Daily News: 
It's odd that the Anchorage police were acting like PR agents for the Palins. What interest should the they have in rebutting stories about the Palins in a national tabloid magazine? Moreover, the police later admitted that there was no firm basis for the assertion of Todd's innocence, because the police had not examined the contents of the laptop or the cell phone.

Furthermore, the police since June have refused to give Tripp her laptop and cell phone back, despite explicit instructions from the judge that they do so. The police department could face contempt of court charges if it continues to defy the judge. Their refusal to release the property raises the question of whether the police are trying to hide something.

Possible misconduct by the Anchorage police is suggested by these articles at Malia Litman's blog:
The ability of local authorities to deal evenhandedly with events that may relate to the Palins can no longer be taken for granted. A federal investigation of the Palin-Tripp issue, plus others involving the Palins, is needed because the Palins may have compromised or corrupted the Anchorage police, and perhaps other law enforcement bodies in Alaska as well

Thursday, December 1, 2011

The genius – and the demons – of Sarah Palin

The sheer daring of Sarah Palin in undertaking the birth hoax is breathtaking. In March of 2008, she made a political calculation about a series of events that could make her president of the United States, the most powerful person on earth. With "end days" coming, which she was certain would happen in her lifetime, she could as president enable untold millions on earth to reach salvation, just as Queen Esther of the Bible had saved her people.

This was her manifest destiny. Surely God would not have provided a path to the presidency if taking that path was not His intention. And that path involved claiming Trig as her own. 

I believe Sarah faced a choice in early March of 2008. She could have convinced Bristol to allow Trig to be adopted or fostered by others until McCain made his VP pick; I imagine that was the original plan. (I'm assuming Bristol gave birth to Trig quite prematurely around January.) But once Sarah learned Trig had Down syndrome, God's mind became clear to her. As Trig's mother – a mother who chose life over abortion – she knew her appeal as a potential VP pick would increase tremendously by making her a star among the right-to-life wing of the Republican Party. 

So on March 5, she started a staggeringly ambitious hoax. As a sitting governor who already had to endure press scrutiny comparable to a that of a rock star, she had little privacy. How could she possibly hope to convincingly stage a birth? The enormity of the prospect did not daunt her. God had opened the door; he would show her the way.

A normal person, by which I mean someone not hounded by the demons of narcissistic personality disorder, can barely comprehend the thinking that would lead someone to undertake such a hoax. And that has been Palin's best weapon in keeping the truth at bay: most Americans find unbelievable the idea that Palin could be so disturbed as to try something that outrageous.

The fact that she did commit the hoax is a measure of her mental illness, of how disordered her personality is. The key to understanding someone with NPD is to realize that their inner image of themselves is grandiose, magnificent, perhaps of world-historical importance. That grandiose projection is a defense against profound feelings of worthlessness. Most NPDs suffer a tremendous disconnect between the grandiose way they see themselves internally and the mundane circumstances of their lives and the pedestrian nature of their accomplishments.

But occasionally some combination of hard work, talent, serendipity, and sheer will can allow an NPD to achieve a measure of greatness that matches the inner ideal. But doing so does not bring a cessation of the inner demons saying still more is needed. Lyndon B. Johnson probably was an NPD. He in fact achieved greatness as president of the United States and was responsible for the landmark civil rights legislation of the mid-60s. But despite his accomplishments, his press secretary Bill Moyers wrote of "the exquisite emptiness" at the center of his being. 

Sarah Palin is no LBJ. He was a master politician and clearly had a fine mind. But Palin has a shrewdness that I think borders on genius. She knows what her gifts are and how to use them. She knows how to befriend and beguile and use people – the "friendship" she seems to offer being a hook to ensnare the gullible, whom she then exploits and ultimately disposes of when their usefulness is gone. She knows she is pretty and sexy, and she has used that to great advantage with men. She knows how to promote herself ceaselessly.

And she knows how to spot the gold ring and go for it. It was her remarkable shrewdness that allowed Palin, a woman of ordinary (and largely underdeveloped) intellectual abilities, to rise from unemployed housewife to VP candidate of the United States in two decades. Time and again in her rapid rise, she saw how to use her current position as a stepping stone to the next. And she used the gifts her biblical God gave her, her physical attractiveness and personal charm, to help her travel the world-changing road He had laid out before her.

On March 5, 2008, the inner demons told Sarah to roll the dice, and that even if she needed "snake eyes" to win, God would make sure she got them. And despite astonishing odds, the hoax is still, for the most part, working. I'm in awe of her daring, and of her amazing insight that no matter how poorly disguised the birth hoax was, virtually nobody – especially not the press – would call her on it.