The latest poll results are in and they are no surprise to me, although the poll itself, like the photo at left, is a mysterious illusion. We know this is not Sarah Palin in this picture, and we know now that SP did not give birth in early 2008. We also know that somebody did, but outside that obvious statement, a ball of confusion has reigned over America for the past two years. Just as Tina Fey has become a symbol of something most of us were not even aware existed until August 2008, we didn't know exactly where to look for the keys to the mystery until long after the perpetrators had intentionally scrambled the evidence. Everybody went back to Saturday Night Live to see Tina imitate an idiot two years after she had left the show. Now we are all closely examining a couple or three babies to try to discover their true birthdays after the fact.
The poll question itself was strangely worded: When were the Trigs born? The poll results were easily predictable: January (41), February (65), March (16), and April (7). These represent the supposed months in 2008 in which any baby playing the part of Trig might have actually been born. The strange part is that the month is not actually as pertinent as exactly which babies are we talking about? I set up this poll at a time when I was fairly certain that Ruffles was a Trig instead of a Tripp. Now that I think it is even more likely that Ruffles is a Tripp instead of a Trig, the plot implied by this poll either thickens considerably or simplifies, depending on your point of view. From the moment I created this poll, I expected the results to show the order exactly as they have, with February being the first choice of most of my readers, and January in second place. The bigger question is what Trig or Trigs, or even Tripp, was in the mind of each voter as she made her selection in the poll? Let's assume for the moment that most of the responders were thinking of Round Ear, some were thinking of Ruffles, some were considering both, and maybe a few were even adding Elfie into the mix, but few or none were considering Tripp.
We are going to take a little detour for a moment to a right-wing blog that discussed Governor Palin as McCain's VP pick in May and June 2008. This article at Wizbang clearly delineates that hopeful Alaskan Palin fans, and some from outside the state, were keenly aware that McCain might very well unleash the pitbull. Most of the commenters were thrilled with the idea. If you read through those comments, you will begin to better understand the title of this post. Yes, I know that most of them are laughable in their naivete about Palin's personality, accomplishments, and future issues, but the time frame of these comments should send a chill through your sane mind. If the witch's Alaskan Fan Club knew this much this early about McCain's plans, exactly how much and how early did Sarah Palin know? Needless to say, this article reminds me just how much I have been singing this tune for nearly two years: it was all a plot, people!
Now the next little detour I want you to take is to go to the Tripp slideshow in the sidebar. If you have already examined it, please take another look because I added a few more photos just before writing this post. There are purposely no captions or identifying dates listed in this slideshow, but the order of the pictures is important. I have positioned each of them in as chronological a manner as I can just by looking at Tripp and ignoring all the other information. Yes, there could be a few minor discrepancies within this order. I tried to group them by subject and size just to make the slideshow flow smoothly, but the point is to closely examine the age Tripp appears to be, while ignoring whatever preconceptions you might have about the time of the shooting or publication of any particular photographs. Open your mind and you might discover a few new avenues of thought.
The poll indicates clearly that most of us think whatever babies are involved in the Babygate mystery were born earlier in 2008 than has been publicly stated. As I am sure some of you have surmised, once you have opened your mind to the possibility that Ruffles is actually Tripp, and Tripp is approximately eight months older than publicly claimed, many Freudian slips from both The Johnstons and The Palins will fall a little more neatly into place. So do many baby pictures we have seen displayed during television interviews and in many other media sources. As with your opinion of Tina Fey, who once was just another funny SNL comedienne, you might find that your opinion of the mystery of Babygate has also shifted. What seemed so obvious two years ago looks like an illusion now, doesn't it?
55 comments:
floyd, I'm not so sure that ruffles is tripp, however I do think you're on the right track. I think tripp was born in april (or ready to be released in april) of 08. I am looking forward to reading the transcript of the hacker trial to see bristols exact words about 'seeing her newborn son' in those emails. I believe airplane baby is tripp.
http://yfrog.com/fvairplanetrippj
Could you please add to the Tripp slideshow pictures of Tripp being handed to Bristol, then her holding him during the Greta interview in early 2009 and subsequently Bristol holding the drugged Tripp on her lap during the interview on the Today show (with Todd sitting beside her)? Thank you.
Sorry, but I can't open my mind to Ruffles becoming Tripp. The babies look very different to me. The airplane baby looks like RNC Trig. I don't think you are crazy for it, but I have given reasons before and won't go into them again.
My working theory is still that Bristol had Tripp after Christmas 2008 and before the Iron Dog in Feb. 2009. Someone, likely Bristol, had Ruffles between Jan. and April 2008, Ruffles was named Trig, and Ruffles' right ear was fixed to look right over the summer of 2008. Trig he was and Trig he is.
The media doesn't seem to be biting at the missing Ruffles story as they should. So we're back to The Big Story: A sitting governor faked a pregnancy and obtained a DS baby to use as a political credential. It worked.
I don't see what you are trying to get at here Floyd. I see no proof of anything in the ears. If you are making a point and you expect everyone to grab onto it then you are going to have to explain yourself. The fact that of the 4 comments so far, nobody is really picking up on what you are trying to say and what your message is, should tell you that you are making leaps that nobody else is willing to make.
Do you see how confused everyone is now? If you do then maybe you could accept that Gryphen's ear theory is what is adding to the confusion.
I think you should also seriously consider letting go of your theory that the MSM are keeping this thing going in order to make more money on it. If we who are as much in the know as anyone on Palin's deception are without firm commitment and together on the story you should be able to imagine how much more confused they are.
What are you trying to do, Floyd? All of those pictures of the baby being held by Mercedes (and in her company with Levi and Sarah) are of Ruffles aka Trig. The picture of the baby held by Keith Johnston is Trig, not Tripp, although it was printed as such in some magazine. As Ruffles/Trig is obviously a newborn, possibly premature, it seems likely that he is only a few weeks old on the date he was photographed in the Palins' kitchen in early May. That could be the cause of the Wild Ride--Bristol was delivering him on April 18th, and that would explain why Levi was there, had a hospital bracelet on, and is visiting him at the Palins on his birthday. The baby in the hall with the Heaths is just any baby held for the photo op. Again, no doctor would do such an ear repair on any baby under a few years' old. What are you trying to say here?
Well, to me, airplane Trig did NOT look like RNC Trig, but maybe the photo is just blurry.
Trig at the baby shower looks different from Trig displayed at the hospital.
Babies looks change a lot in the first few weeks. But I'm not saying that explains all.
I truly think Trig at the hospital is batwing Trig, and Ruffles and the baby at the shower were the same baby, but not hospital/batwing Trig. Ruffles has much finer features than I think the later Trig displays.
We all see things a bit differently. However, I do NOT think airplane Trig is Tripp. They look completely different to me.
And the ears ARE important. Ruffles has that nick for a reason.
Daisydem, I must not have the shots you are talking about. I have selected the photos I have shown from the files I have, of course. Could you send me the shots you are referring to, or at least send me a link or point me to them? Thank you.
Well, if there's a big leap of awareness that I was supposed to achieve, I failed.
I have no idea what you're talking about. I think you've had some kind of inspiration and you're trying really hard to get us to have the same realization you have. It's not working.
What exactly are you trying to say?
Ivyfree
In the interest of trying to find a new way of looking at this information, and off the top of my head, here are my guesses:
#1, 2, 3, 4, 5 (kitchen baby) - looks one month or less, possibly older if he was born premature.
#6 (shower baby?) - 1 month or less
#7 (announcement baby) - 1 month or less
#8 (shower baby) - between one and two months
#9 (with Keith & L.) - one month or less, and isn't he strangely wrapped?
#10 (airplane baby) - 4 or 5 months
#11 (round headed baby) - 4-5 months, but he doesn't look like Tripp to me. He looks as if he has DS.
#12 (with Levi in the black shirt) - 2-5 months, and does look like Tripp.
#13 (with Bristol at graduation) - six months, looks like Tripp.
#14 (with Bristol in the kitchen sink) - 18-24 months, looks like Tripp.
# 15 (naked with Le*i) - 5-7 months
#16 (with Levi in jacket outside) 8-10 months
#17 (with the Johnstons) - 8-9 months, maybe one year
#18 (with Bristol and Willow, wearing blue cap) - 8-10 months
#19 (black and white photo with Bristol) - 18 months
#20 (US Magazine announcing engagement) - 2 years
Re: Tripp slide show
Starting with photo # 12, all are clearly the child we currently call Tripp (with the exception of the one where Levi has the baby facing him, so we cannot see the face).
The line up of 1-11 has what I believe are a few different little guys, all being presented as Trig at one time or another. I am unclear about airplane baby.
Truly Floyd, the kiddo currently known as Tripp( the blonde one) does NOT look at all like the various early Trigs. I think you may be confusing the issue here.
This, however, is a separate matter from whether or not Bristol truly gave birth to a child in late '08 or early '09. I have serious questions about the veracity of that claim. BUT I AM SURE THAT SP DID NOT GIVE BIRTH TO ANY BABY on 4/18/08 or any other time in 2008.
Allow me to reiterate some of the basic tenets of this blog, and maybe that will clarify things for you a little better.
First of all, I have never aspired to be or claimed to be a journalist. I am a writer and commentator of psychosocial phenomena in modern America. I wish to guide and enable the conversation somewhat, but I am not here to provide the readers with that smoking gun that will get this abomination off the national stage. The effective blockade enacted by the MSM will see to it that no one of any consequence ever heeds anything I say, regardless of whatever that might be. I can only try to utilize my mature experience in psychology, sociology, and nostalgic composition to possibly help my readers better understand exactly what is going on here.
Secondly, I have generally held the same Babygate theory for nearly two years, that Ruffles was born to Bristol with FAS and that Round Ear Trig is a baby acquired purely for political reasons. There may or may not be a third Trig, but probably not. I have practically zero faith in any theories involving dolls, twins, or the short-term borrowing of any babies.
As first presented to me about a week ago, I am now seriously entertaining the concept that we have generally been bluffed into a wild goose chase with multiple Trigs, and the real secret is that Tripp is actually Bristol's first born, the same pregnancy that caused all the rumors in Alaska in late 2007 and early 2008. The simplest version of this theory, just following the KISS Principle, is that there have never been more than two babies total and that Ruffles is Tripp. There are several variants of this theory that Tripp was born in early 2008 out there, but for now, this one is the one I believe to be most likely.
There is no great secret or revelation that I have recently discovered, other than the concept that Ruffles is Tripp. Everything else I have said on this blog has pretty much just been the opinion I have held for the past two years. The link to Wizbang should show everyone the degree to which the fact was that McCain planned to possibly select SP months before most Americans ever heard of her. This allowed for plenty of time and circumstantial evidence indicating that the whole scam could easily have been cooked up in early '08, including issues surrounding Tripp's birth as well as Trig's.
As for the collection of photos in the slide show, you probably know about as much as I do. I just try to assemble concepts for you to examine and think about as deeply as you might. I always try to question any misconceptions that might be floating around, but I also try to keep an open mind about everything Babygate, at least until we all finally know the truth. There is one concept I am not backing away from: the creation of Babygate and its continued secrecy are the product of The Palins, The Christian Mafia, The GOP, and the MSM. All are guilty and none are innocent.
I think I'm going with you, Floyd. The slip-ups do fit. (sadie's and levi's adoring looks at a baby not related to them; levi's hospital bracelet; bristol's testimony that her baby was older; big jaundiced baby vs preemie baby pics,etc.)
But what about the ruffled ear?
How about posting a straight forward list (pros and cons) about what fits your theory and what doesn't?
You certainly make a good point about the ruffled ear! It is the leading bone of contention in my own mind as to the Ruffles as Tripp theory vs. the Ruffles as a separate baby theory. Like I have always told my wife, I am a lousy doctor! Several other bloggers, such as Gryphen and Palin Peyton Place have certainly delved into the ear issues at length, with neither agreeing with the other. I have had extensive contact with the owner of the Peyton Place blog, and she thinks surgery or molding could have been done on the ears, while Gryphen does not agree. As I have said, the strength of the concept of Ruffles as a separate baby is based on FAS and the ears, while the strength of the Ruffles as Tripp theory is based on the KISS Principle. I hope this answers your question, at least somewhat.
I love the pics and how they follow in the side bar but I am just not getting "it" Please also put the pics in a row(s) on another page with the point you are trying to make. Do not be myterious about your point.
"Open your mind and you might discover a few new avenues of thought." I need a clearer path I think :-)
I have to say that that is a BEAUTIFUL picture of Tina F and clearly not SP so I do get your point on that. The two babies Trig and Tripp are also by their facial features and ears clearly different.
After that I am lost although intrigued on this post.
OOps I just found out that if I click in the little slide show it goes to the album with them all in a row. Clecer. I guess I am more newbe to the technology than I thought. Ok I'll try to rethink your post.
I need more coffee.
I definitely agree that #11 looks like Trig a DS baby
Photo #11 is Trig from the campaign.
Floyd - please, please stop referring to this child as "Batwing."
Not only does it come across as making fun of an innocent child,
but, in the future, when this hoax goes mainstream (and we know
it will) it'll be the perfect "cry victim/red herring" for SP, and
will undermine your credibility at the same time.
How about "Campaign Trig"? That should be easily identifiable
to your readership, dontcha' think?
Again, thanks for the excellent work that you do!
Yes, and SP went immediately into the planned "hoax-mode" the day after McCain was nominated by announcing her "pregnancy."
Floyd,
Thanks for your blog. My husband and I get into lots of discussions because of it and it is fun. The subject matter of course is this mess called Palin but you are interesting and dedicated traits to be admired and we do.
When this Batwing issue came up earlier here at PB, I asked for suggestions, but no one responded. We cannot call him Campaign Trig because that is Round Ear. We can call him Elfie or Elf Ear or whatever else the consensus might be. Whatever we call him, I do not want to have to explain it every time he is mentioned. It must be a nickname that all the readers understand.
For a look of some of what was happening when few were paying attention (say, back in Feb., June and August 2007) see Jane Mayer's piece from the October 2008 New Yorker
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/10/27/081027fa_fact_mayer?currentPage=1
Hi Floyd, fabulous post. As you know, I am absolutely convinced of the whole Christian Mafia/Neo-Con hatching of this hoax. I am further convinced, as I have been for a while, that the GOP and the MSM know about it, too. What I had not considered, but do now, is that Ruffles may indeed be Tripp. I remember seeing Tripp knocked out cold in that Today Show interview and thinking that is one big 5 month old but never gave it much more thought ... until now. Especially when I weave together that initial reaction to his size and consider it along with the "ruffled ear" baby ... info we did not know at the time of Tripp's appearance at the Today Show. The mind reels. When is this cancer going to be excised from our national scene?
P.S. I love how you have allowed all the intelligent minds at work on this blog to freely express thoughts, think outside the box, question and even disagree. By doing so I am sure it will lead us to something we have missed.
Yes, I agree. Anyone who has not read that article should follow the link. It is one of many excellent articles that I have kept in my files.
Yes, I remember your post. I responded that I thought "batwing" sounded too pejorative, but I didn't have any other suggestions. Now, I'm even more confused, so I'm going to back off of it for a bit. Heretofore, I thought there was just "Round Ear" (campaign) and "Ruffles." Now I'm getting that there is a 3rd ... yes, I would definitely vote for "Elfie." (Actually, I think #1 and 2 of the batwing slideshow are from the campaign.)
Aside: The hoax plan was meant to confuse, and it sure worked - at least for me!
To me the airplane Tripp as you have it, continues into "batwing" (sorry TruthRocks). Ruffles does resemble Tripp, but to me, no way are they the same. Therefore, in my opinion, Ruffles is batwing.
Chubby round ears obviously can't be ruffles, and must be Trig #2- probably the same baby from the hospital.
Are there any pics of both round and bat ears taken at the same event?
Bristol gave birth to Trig. While Bristol was hidden away from the
public, former Gov. of Alaska, Sarah Palin was being considered
as a VP candidate for Senator John McCain (Rep. Presidential Candidate).
Mrs. Palin was not going to allow her underage teen daughter's
pragnacy spoil her rise to fame. So the plot was set in motion to
have Gov. Palin expecting a baby. The Palin family was already aware
that Bristol would deliver a baby with Down Syndrome. So Todd and
Sarah Palin agreed to adopt and raise the Down Syndrome child.
Some people think that a third Trig exists. He has often been called Batwing, but he has also been referred to as Elfie, although less often. As I have said before, I am just trying to go with the flow on these nicknames. The most important thing is that we all understand exactly who is being discussed. The Batwing Trig theory is one that I have certainly not ruled out, but I do not think it is highly likely. That's just one too many babies, or so it would seem. Some people think Batwing appeared first at the RNC and others particularly noticed him taking an unusually active role at one or more of the book signing stops. I am not taking a firm stand on ANY of this ear stuff, at least not yet....
The classicist speaks! Yes, this is the storyline that launched Babygate, but there have been oh so many discrepancies in such a simplistic story! Thus is not the '50's: who gives a rat's ass that a teen got pregnant? How do you explain Ruffles? Absolutely nothing about this classic scenario holds up to scrutiny. Why would the grandparents pose with the baby in the hospital hallway? How could that baby look so plump and healthy the day he was born? Why would Sarah care so little for him? Maybe you're right and the story is just this simple. Boy, that's a lot of cover-up activity from so many sources for one little DS child!
if he was really adopted - or even birthed by a Palin - there would be no problem showing a birth certificate.
I'm with you on this - Tripp is Ruffles. There was no baby born in December of 2008.
SP pulled off a pregnancy hoax with a DS child from an adoption agency or someone in her family to gain votes.
I'm open to all suggestions!
B, there would be some evidence of surgery and stitches on RNC Trig's ear if it was treated over summer 08. Redness at least, scars too, And I just have not seen them in any of the pix. In a couple of pix there looks like a prosthesis on the rim. But a) in other pix there's no sign whatsoever of anything but a congenitally normal ear; and b) if you look at other people's ears they often have that same appearance of brightness on the rim. And remember that any correction of this ear problems is recommended not before ages 4-5, I assume because of growth. I really think they're different babies.
Here's the bottom line on this story. There are people in Alaska who know EXACTLY what the facts are here. Others in Europe and parts of Alaska and Floyd I don't know where you are but I'm pretty sure it's not AK, are just speculating.
In no way do I mean to diminish the extraordinary work of Bree, Gryphen, Patrick and Co., Andrew Sullivan for a while, Floyd, Syrin, Palin Q&A and everyone else. But the bottom line is this. Nobody can prove it. We can look at pictures of batwing Trig, Ruffles, Round Ear, baby with his grandparents, baby with Mercede and an impossibly svelt Sarah, Levi's hospital bracelet, RNC kid, book tour kid, the kids that may have presented the biggested problem of Joe McGinnis moving next door and seeing their style life ("Wait, didn't she just mow that lawn with a different kid on her back?"
The only way to solve this is to get a participant to speak on the record or turn over a document. Who picked up Sarah and Todd after The Wild Ride and drove them the dangerous minutes to Wasilla?? Did it make sense to them to bypass the neonatal facility in Anchorage and drive into the dark? Who was at the desk when they admitted Sarah? Where is the paper work? Where is the birth certificate? Where is the person in the family or the posse who has a qualm of conscience and says this has gone too far?
For crying out loud, where is her doctor????
Pictures keep the story going. And that's a good thing. Facts, documents and statements will put an end to it.
I get that the Palins, Heaths and cohorts have a long pattern of scaring the shit out of people to keep them quiet. For a long time. But those of you who know the truth about this and other things, now is the time to stand up. We really need you. And you know the time is right. Help make her go away because th ecountry needs it. And at some point you know you need to get it off your chest.
Thanks.
I believe the 'ruffled eared baby' is Trigg and he was born with those ears due to FAS. I also believe that the DS baby that Paylin's mother and father were holding in the hall of the hospital was Trig and he is the child that was presented at the RNC and the one who was awoken many nights for Scarah's book tour for people to fawn all over him. [Can't help but wonder who is fawning over him these many months now that none of us have seen him.]
My problem comes in when I can't say for certain that Bristol could have gotten pregnant with her first child who had DS [Trig] in June 2007 to be handed off to Scarah in March or April 2008 while staying with Aunt Heather since she possibly got pregnant with Trigg [Ruffled ear] in February 2008 then delivered him in December 2008,
But Floyd, you blow your posts right out of the park and make us think on all the detours we have been handed. I can't fault you because you want us to think out of the box and I tend to think you already have the answer sewn up. I'm gonna stick with my thoughts since they are the only way I can stay sane. Anyone else want to help me out here as I'd really love to hear your thoughts as well. All she had to do was put up a birth certificate, but no, she always has to throw a wrench into everything she's affiliated with to jam up the works.
I came upon this pic yesterday looking for Bristol at Irondog 2009 and the supposed pillow under her jacket. To my surprise I came upon this pic of Bristol in my old hometown paper Cleveland Plain Dealer...courtesy of Fox News. Notice the date Feb 09 and look at Bristol's finger on top of the baby's left ear. here
I am thinking right now that I never have seen a pic of Tripp standing alone...I'm trying to remember if Tripp is standing in the commercial Bristol made in her condo. To get a perspective on his height.
I am beginning to believe your story and the ear convinces me.
The Doctor will not come forward. It would mean her career and reputation.. A little thing none as malpractice.
Gles - Get a screen shot immediately before that photo/article comes up 'missing'. Talk about a clear picture of the left ear!
Gles, I have that photo in my files, and I examined it before posting the articles about Ruffles being Tripp. First of all, we do not see that baby's face to positively identify him, and second, there are many unresolved questions about the ear issue. One difference between my opinion and that of certain other bloggers is that I am not automatically assuming that any photo of anything is absolute proof of anything. What if Ruffles showed the wrinkled ears only when he was a premature newborn and they smoothed out as he developed? What if the Ruffles photos are, indeed, of a FAS baby that has now been sent elsewhere? Like many others in their recent discussions of these developments, I see a pattern that is looking more and more as if Tripp is much older than claimed. We must keep in mind, that this could be true even if Tripp is not Ruffles. The Ruffles is Tripp theory is the simplest, but that is all it is.
One's a DS baby, the other isn't. I bet that some people see a batwing ear while others see a round ear in the same photo. Gryphen's ear theory is totally useless as a method of Id'ing the babies. It's only added confusion. It's time to drop it and work on something that is more easily understood and less ethereal.
You also need to rethink your media coverup theory to keep the story going for money it makes them. The left leaning media would love to blow Palin out of the water as much as we bloggers all want it.
Also, I've said it before a dozen times and I'll say it again. If the people who want to destroy Palin would get their acts together and stop doubting themselves and the obvious, this think could maybe make it to the MSM. If they don't then it never will. Neither Olbermann or Maddow or even Matthews are going to destroy their own credibility by running with more than a half dozen possible stories.
Bristol didn't go to auntie's house for six months to get over mono for fu-k sake!
I appreciate your response, but I don't see how it can be true. Babies grow more in their first year than any other. A baby born even in April of 08 is going to be twice that size by December. They slow down markedly after the first year but their morphology changes- they get taller, slimmer, the head stops growing so quickly- I just don't see how a baby of six months or more could be presented as a newborn.
I think that when people were saying Bristol was pregnant in 07, she was. And when they said she was pregnant in 08, she was. And I think the 07 pregnancy was Ruffles, who is probably institutionalized- Sarah has to be doing something with all that money. (I did get a cauld grue when a coworker, who grew up in Alaska, commented that she hoped Ruffles is alive: she said it's very easy to dispose of bodies in Alaska- just drop them off a few miles back in the woods and let the wild animals take care of them.) I don't know where Round-Ear came from, and so long as it's legal, I don't much care- but I do know Sarah didn't have a baby in 2008.
For me, the simplest explanation is that Bristol was pregnant twice. And I believe she's now pregnant for a third time, and they are having Willow appear with them, playing the role of Bristol, because another unwed pregnancy for a girl who's supposed to be abstinent is going to be a lot even for Sarah to lie about.
I am somewhat new here and so missed the ear name discussion. Yes, although I really love bats I find batwing cringy. I think Elf Ear Trig ( officially) would be good because leaving the name Trig would be helpful to sanity in the blogs and Elf Ear Trig is cuter and nicer. Then Elf Ear/Round Ear and elfie/ruffles/round ear, would be following the same nick names for logic and sanity and ease of reading and following a point.
Levi and Bristol had Ruffles/Tripp, but Sarah begged to take him and began to fake her pregnancy. Levi and Bristol refused to let Sarah have him after she had already anounced she was pregnant. Sarah had to come up with a baby and took a D.S. baby to make her look good with the right-to-lifers. At the convention, Bristol wasn't pregnant, just post-partum. Tripp was then presented later.
I don't think anyone has mentioned that Levi is wearing a McCain/Palin t-shirt in the photo with Keith holding a very tiny Tripp. Doesn't this, in itself, end the Tripp is Ruffles speculation?
It's inconceivable that the kitchen/baby shower baby would still be so tiny during or after the campaign.
That is not a campaign t-shirt. Others and I have been trying to discern exactly what it is. Look up other McCain/Pain t-shirts and you will see what I mean. This shirt is obviously for some other sort of event, such as a sporting event, charity event, or rock concert; anything but a campaign. It may have been something printed months before the VP selection was final (note the link in this post). Notice, also too, that they are dressed for spring, not winter. If someone can find out what organization that tiny little round star pattern represents, we shall have the answer. Notice that it is at the top and the bottom, and it was never on a McCain/Palin campaign shirt. The AMA and REVS on it are the main words, with Alaska printed just above them. Anybody have any ideas?
I'd like to mention a few things about that t-shirt. I have blown up a sharpened B&W version of it to better read the printing on it. I still cannot make out exactly what the graphic is supposed to be, but as I mentioned below, the main words have been partially, possibly discerned. I would love it if anyone could definitively solve this mystery. Anyone who wants to see the blowup can just ask and I shall send it to you.
Floyd, I've been searching and have no leads on the t-shirt. It does appear to be custom-made. It's certainly possible that someone made McCalin-Palin shirts before her selection was announced but I think it's very unlikely that any of Sarah's family, including Levi, would have worn it before the announcement was official. Unless we know that Levi & Keith never wear t-shirts in the winter, I don't think the time of year can be determined from that photo. I know several men that never wear long shirts indoors. Consider Piper wearing a sleeveless dress and flip-flops at the Governor's Christmas Open House.
The shirt aside, other factors that lead me to reject the Tripp = Ruffles are: 1) Their facial features don't look at all alike to me. 2) Tripp has blonde hair; Ruffles has dark hair. 3) Tripp has a fully-formed right ear; Ruffles has a malformed ear. 4) Levi has a ring on his thumb in the photo with the hospital bracelet which is consistent with Molly's comment in Esquire's feature on Todd (interview Dec '08; pub. April '09).
Fox showed several stills of Tripp when Greta interviewed Bristol, including the photo of Levi with the hospital bracelet.
http://tinyurl.com/bgbagc
The ring-on-thumb story in Esquire:
http://tinyurl.com/3xcg7ck
I don't think that convention belly looked like a postpartum belly. It was too rounded and firm. A postpartum belly is more slack.
" Did it make sense to them to bypass the neonatal facility in Anchorage and drive into the dark? "
Obviously it did, because that is what they did. It wouldn't have if Sarah had actually been pregnant, laboring and had flown back from Texas, but we know that's not true. That trip to Wasilla is exactly what they planned to do.
Floyd,
I enjoy all your posts, but I can't get into your and Blade's Ruffles=Tripp deal. I think Tripp looks age-appropriate enough in size and doesn't look anything like infant Ruffles. I have seen enough pictures of Bristol pregnant with Tripp to convince me that she was pregnant. (A commenter at Blade's directed us to another, in Seattle on the way to RNC.)
More importantly, Tripp is fairly irrelevant to Palin's Fake Pregnancy. For what it is worth, I wish the MSM and American electorate -- or even just the National Enquirer -- would pay attention to:
1. Sarah's body not being consistent with a real pregnancy.
2. The second baby she introduced as TriG, i.e. Ruffles, having ear deformities that the next baby introduced as TriG, i.e. RNC, does not, begging explanation as to whether they are not the same baby.
I also wouldn't mind someone's comparing TriG I, in the hospital and office, to Ruffles as to whether it is even possible that they are the same baby. I still lean toward Reborn. But we're in a wait state, waiting for new revelations, maybe some to come next week from Meghan McCain, maybe some next year from Dunn and McGinniss. I consider the Ruffles=Tripp discussion to be filler.
Have a closer look at photo 13 with the three pictures. Compare the one on the left with the middle one and they appear to perhaps be the same. Now compare the one in the middle with the one on the right and imagine the one in the middle being of the same profile as the one on the right. ie.- front quarter profile. Now imagine how the ear of the one in the middle could possibly be protruding at the top which would give it the same appearance as the one on the right.
Yes, this is difficult to follow but it must be to clear up any confusion. My conclusion is that the ears are most likely the same ears in all three views.
Now try this little experiment: Go to a mirror and look in the mirror at a quartering angle and slightly push the top of your ear outwards from your head. See the batwing? Now use two mirrors and look at your ear at a exact side profile with your ear pushed out with your finger the same amount. See the round ear?
The three pictures are more than likely just different angle views of the same ear.
Conclusion: Gryphen's ear theory is not a solid enough theory for any MSM to use as evidence. This socalled evidence is causing nothing but confusion and should be dropped.
Further conclusion: Palin definitely did fake her pregnancy and there are pictures of her when she was supposed to be pregnant that are very conclusive. Add to that the fact that she wore the long scarves all the time in a deliberate attempt to hide her stomach and we have the evidence that should be used to convince the MSM to do the story.
Furthermore, everyone including both Gryphen and Floyd should know that if the ear theory was presented on Huffpost as evidence, it wouldn't float. There's just not enough solid evidence to support it. And that means; give it up and concentrate on something that will sink the bitch.
emrysa, thanks for the pictures. The bottom picture is not Tripp. That picture is from the '08 campaign. And, Tripp wasn't "supposedly" born until Dec., '08. There was a lot of speculation of whether or not it was Trig. To this day, I don't know what was determined.
Now, the "TOP" picture is of Tripp! I've never seen it before. Are you sure it was taken in an airplane? Could they be in a car? Or, perhaps, it is in an airplane taken on their way to the Today Show interview. Tripp looks about the right size for that time period. (May '09)
Please notice the woman holding him. A few strands of her hair are showing. It's the same reddish/blonde color as Tripps.
Interesting, huh?
The name on the slide show has been changed, although when you open it in Picasa, it still says Batwing. The link would not connect when I changed the name at Picasa.
I came over here from Blade's blog and agree that this is the first hypothesis that pulls together a lot of the loose ends that have been floating around. I personally don't put a lot of stock in the ear variations (so much can be distorted in photographs and the angles at which they are taken). I can definitely get behind the theory that Bristol gave birth to Ruffles/Tripp in Spring 2008 and that he was affected with fetal alcohol syndrome. Sarah planned to introduce him as her own, but that physiology was unacceptable, so a search was made for a different baby. Bristol took care of Ruffles surreptitiously. When a new baby was acquired by Dr. CBJ, it turned out he had Down Syndrome, which was a blow, but okay that would give SP amazing credibility with her evangelical base. DS baby Trig was photographed at the hospital with the Heaths, but was later determined to be too big to present to the public as a preemie, which was needed to fit the narrative Sarah had spun, so she trotted out the much smaller Tripp for a few occasions. The biggest problem for me with this scenario is that Tripp had to be hidden awayfor the whole rest of 2008 while SP waited to be nominated and then while campaigning. By the end of summer, Bristol was fed up with being separated from her child and they cooked up the lie that she was just now expecting, which killed a bunch of birds with one stone: she couldn't have given birth in April and she can present Tripp to the world eventually. So Bristol takes her turn with the empathy belly, pretends to give birth in December, but denies access to the child until he would be big enough to allow confusion over his age. (The height/weight chart on Blade's site is helpful to see how this would be possible). The final problem I see is that Tripp no longer seems developmentally delayed. He would still be small for his age (if he had been born in April 2008), but otherwise seems normal. Can the effects of FAS be overcome that completely after a year and a few months?
One other thing: do you have pictures of Sarah and Trig at work? You mention pix of her with him buried in a sling. I've never seen those. Is there a link? Would be interesting to see which baby was the one she dragged to work.
I think the scenario you have presented is one of the most likely, at the very least. The problem is that no theory is truly perfect. Each leaves some issue apparently at odds with the remainder of the concept. We do not have any very good; i. e., close, photos from either the office visits or the two Anchorage events on 5/3/08, so we actually do not know what baby was present in the office or at those events. This fact is why there seems to be so much disagreement over the baby at these times, bringing up the doll issue, as well as the FAS and discussion of the actual birth dates.
Post a Comment