Addressing charges of "sloppy" research conducted for my "Two Babies" post.
As I am sure many of you are no doubt aware there has been a little controversy stirring as of late. Specifically directed at my February 2010 post, "A Tale of Two Babies."
Now before I begin, I must confess that I have not actually read all of the information posted attacking my reporting (I make it a policy NEVER to visit that particular part of the internet) so I cannot defend each allegation individually.
Instead I will focus on the research that went into the writing of that post, and my attempt to gather as much info as possible before posting it.
As I mentioned in this post, in May of 2009 Tank Jones, manager for Levi Johnston and my Private Investigator at the time, told me that he had witnessed Levi picking up a one year old child from the Palin household whom he referred to as Tripp. This led me to believe two things.
One, that the infant presented to the world by Bristol was either NOT Tripp Johnston, or that he was not the ONLY Tripp Johnston.
And two, that Bristol could not have given birth to Trig on April 18, 2008. This may sound like a small thing today, since now the majority of us don't believe she gave birth in April, but back then it was a huge departure from the working theory. (Since this epiphany I have also seen pictorial evidence and heard first hand reports which confirm that she was certainly not visibly pregnant around March and April of 2008.)
It was right around this time, and while I was stilling trying to make sense of what I had heard, that I received this picture.
At first, like a lot of people, I did not notice anything particularly odd about the picture.
Then I was prompted to look closely at the ears.
"Oh, now I see" said the blind man. Well, I thought, THAT ear certainly does not match THIS ear.
So I decided the first child MUST be the one that Tank was referencing. Made sense right?
But no, according to Tank the baby he saw had no ear defect. (Of course he, like many of the people who saw and even held this "ruffled ear" baby, might have missed it.)
Back to square one, I thought. But not entirely.
Because now we did seem to have evidence of TWO completely different children. Not to mention an eye witness account confirming either the existence of this mystery baby, or yet a second mystery baby.
So I began to look for physicians who could explain this ear defect away.
But after consulting four doctors, two of them pediatricians, and one an Ear, Nose, and Throat Specialist, I realized that there were no simple explanations. As one doctor said, "There is an approximately zero percent probability that these two sets of ears belong to the same infant."
At that I realized that I needed to put the information out there for others to read, hopefully new information would present itself, and we could all figure this out together.
But I was very hesitant. I realized that this could cause quite a lot of consternation on the internet, and possibly even blow up in my face. So I held off for over ten months.
Finally, with the assurance from one of the doctors that we were definitely on solid footing, I wrote and published the post.
Afterwards, as expected, the blowback was withering. I was inundated with messages from people who had, or knew, or were children that had a similar defect that had either repaired itself, been fixed by "earforms," or had been taped into place until healed.
This went on for about a month I guess.
However at the same time I also received e-mails from physicians, and at least one nurse, who said that my post was spot on and that there simply was NO way without surgery for this ear to have repaired itself. And of course as pointed out in my post, surgery could NOT be performed until Trig was four or five years old.
Much later we came across even more confirmation of the existence of the ruffled ear baby in Frank Bailey's book.
The findings of the post managed to survive a GREAT deal of scrutiny, and in fact were even supported by Laura Novak's physician friend in a post she wrote in June of this year.
Now my "Two Babies" post proved to be IM's MOST visited post, and received well over 100,000 hits. It was looked at, and criticized, by truckloads of people, and in the end the consensus was that it was a VERY solid post and in fact did prove the existence of another baby.
So recently, when it was challenged, I admit I was not terribly interested in rehashing an old post that I had written two years ago. Especially since the information being used to challenge it was the same old ear taping, and ear form argument used back in 2009.
As most of you know my reticence was taken as arrogance, and the criticism was then posted on two other blogs.
So since this issue has been broached, and opened for discussion, let me explain why my point of view remains unchanged.
As I explained in a private e-mail that I sent early in this discussion, it is important not just to consider what is possible, but also what is probable.
Now the first thing to consider is what did Trig Palin symbolize in Sarah Palin's world?
Well he was at the center of Sarah Palin's pro-life credibility. His existence, as an imperfect baby that Sarah chose to carry to term (well almost) and give birth to, provided proof positive to the Republican electorate that she not only "talked the talk" but that she "walked the walk."
His very imperfections made him invaluable to her image.
So ask yourself WHY would she bother to fix an imperfect ear, on a soon to be famous imperfect child? To what benefit would that be to Sarah Palin? And have no doubt, if it was NOT in her best interest, she could not be bothered.
Now if you can get past that, then ask yourself if any known intervention would have repaired the damage that we see in the first baby's ear?
I asked the ENT that very question. Was there any procedure that could repair that ear and make it look like the ear we see at the RNC?
"Not without surgery." I was told, "And even then it is unlikely there would not be scarring still visible on the ears."
Do you see scars?
We asked again if there were any other methods outside of surgery, that could account for the dramatic change in the ear and he said no, because what you are seeing is missing cartilage in the upper helix of the ear. Nothing except surgery, very expensive surgery, would fix that.
So even if Palin did decide to use ear forms, or conned some unethical surgeon into performing surgery on her Pro-life Down syndrome prop, it STILL would not result in the perfect ear that we see on October 18, 2008.
But let's pretend that it COULD, just for shits and giggles.
From what I read the ear forms should be applied starting in the first fourteen days of the baby's life, while the ears are still malleable and the cartilage has not yet hardened up.
But is there ANY evidence they were applied?
Here are two different pictures taken on May 3rd, two weeks after Trig's "birth."
Do you see anything in, or around, his ears?
And once again here is the picture from Bailey's book which was taken even later. Are there any signs of corrective measures applied to these ears?
I have spoken to a couple of people who saw the baby right around the six week to two month period and NONE of them reported seeing Trig with anything on his ears.
Sarah wrote a book where she went on and on about her mothering abilities. Did she mention daily treatments for her little boy's damaged ears so that he could appear normal to the other children? No she did not. (And let us not forget that this is a woman who does not even bother to make sure that Trig has the glasses and hearing aids he needs to successfully engage with the world around him. Yet we are expected to believe she would care for this ear malformation on a daily basis?)
So that should put to rest the idea of correction through the use of "ear forms" or ear well treatments.
What about a surgical intervention?
Well first Palin would have to find yet ANOTHER doctor who would willingly put their medical career in jeopardy. (I don't believe CBJ moonlights as a plastic surgeon, do you?)
Then she would have to be willing to PAY for it. Now remember this is the woman who charged the state of Alaska a per-diem to stay in her very own home! Cosmetic surgery is NOT covered by most medical insurance plans, so she would have to pay the entire cost out of pocket.
You people probably know Sarah Palin just about as well as anybody at this point, how likely do YOU think it would be that she would pay thousands of dollars out of pocket for an unorthodox, medically unnecessary, surgery like this?
Yeah that's what I thought too.
Like I said, it might be "possible" to correct the malformation we see in that little ruffled ear baby. But it is highly, and I do mean HIGHLY improbable! As hard as it is to swallow, the more likely scenario is that we are looking at two different babies.
Look I understand that the "Two Babies" post, and my post about the information Tank Jones provided to me, have made it difficult to embrace a simple narrative to explain what Sarah Palin did in order to pull off this hoax. But was the solution that I simply keep the information to myself, while watching people jump to conclusions, or make false assumptions that I believed were not based on reality?
And is that confounding complexity reason enough to attempt to discredit the information in order to return to a simpler, easier to digest storyline?
You know the really disheartening thing about this is that it is just the latest example of people investigating Sarah Palin turning on each other. We saw it happen with Joe McGinniss and the authors of "Blind Allegiance." We also saw it happen with other bloggers and even Joe taking shots at me. And now we are seeing it happen yet again.
It is almost like whoever Palin brings together, must eventually tear each other apart.
Well like I said, I am in this for the long haul. So hopefully this post will provide a little perspective, and answer any doubts, because I would like to return my focus to what is ahead, and hopefully leave the past in my rear view mirror.
In the immortal words of Robert Frost.
The woods are lovely, dark, and deep,
But I have promises to keep,
And miles to go before I sleep,
And miles to go before I sleep.
Now before I begin, I must confess that I have not actually read all of the information posted attacking my reporting (I make it a policy NEVER to visit that particular part of the internet) so I cannot defend each allegation individually.
Instead I will focus on the research that went into the writing of that post, and my attempt to gather as much info as possible before posting it.
As I mentioned in this post, in May of 2009 Tank Jones, manager for Levi Johnston and my Private Investigator at the time, told me that he had witnessed Levi picking up a one year old child from the Palin household whom he referred to as Tripp. This led me to believe two things.
One, that the infant presented to the world by Bristol was either NOT Tripp Johnston, or that he was not the ONLY Tripp Johnston.
And two, that Bristol could not have given birth to Trig on April 18, 2008. This may sound like a small thing today, since now the majority of us don't believe she gave birth in April, but back then it was a huge departure from the working theory. (Since this epiphany I have also seen pictorial evidence and heard first hand reports which confirm that she was certainly not visibly pregnant around March and April of 2008.)
It was right around this time, and while I was stilling trying to make sense of what I had heard, that I received this picture.
Then I was prompted to look closely at the ears.
But no, according to Tank the baby he saw had no ear defect. (Of course he, like many of the people who saw and even held this "ruffled ear" baby, might have missed it.)
Back to square one, I thought. But not entirely.
Because now we did seem to have evidence of TWO completely different children. Not to mention an eye witness account confirming either the existence of this mystery baby, or yet a second mystery baby.
So I began to look for physicians who could explain this ear defect away.
But after consulting four doctors, two of them pediatricians, and one an Ear, Nose, and Throat Specialist, I realized that there were no simple explanations. As one doctor said, "There is an approximately zero percent probability that these two sets of ears belong to the same infant."
At that I realized that I needed to put the information out there for others to read, hopefully new information would present itself, and we could all figure this out together.
But I was very hesitant. I realized that this could cause quite a lot of consternation on the internet, and possibly even blow up in my face. So I held off for over ten months.
Finally, with the assurance from one of the doctors that we were definitely on solid footing, I wrote and published the post.
Afterwards, as expected, the blowback was withering. I was inundated with messages from people who had, or knew, or were children that had a similar defect that had either repaired itself, been fixed by "earforms," or had been taped into place until healed.
This went on for about a month I guess.
However at the same time I also received e-mails from physicians, and at least one nurse, who said that my post was spot on and that there simply was NO way without surgery for this ear to have repaired itself. And of course as pointed out in my post, surgery could NOT be performed until Trig was four or five years old.
Much later we came across even more confirmation of the existence of the ruffled ear baby in Frank Bailey's book.
 |
| Some have speculated, based on the baby's size, that this is either late may or early June. |
Now my "Two Babies" post proved to be IM's MOST visited post, and received well over 100,000 hits. It was looked at, and criticized, by truckloads of people, and in the end the consensus was that it was a VERY solid post and in fact did prove the existence of another baby.
So recently, when it was challenged, I admit I was not terribly interested in rehashing an old post that I had written two years ago. Especially since the information being used to challenge it was the same old ear taping, and ear form argument used back in 2009.
As most of you know my reticence was taken as arrogance, and the criticism was then posted on two other blogs.
So since this issue has been broached, and opened for discussion, let me explain why my point of view remains unchanged.
As I explained in a private e-mail that I sent early in this discussion, it is important not just to consider what is possible, but also what is probable.
Now the first thing to consider is what did Trig Palin symbolize in Sarah Palin's world?
Well he was at the center of Sarah Palin's pro-life credibility. His existence, as an imperfect baby that Sarah chose to carry to term (well almost) and give birth to, provided proof positive to the Republican electorate that she not only "talked the talk" but that she "walked the walk."
His very imperfections made him invaluable to her image.
So ask yourself WHY would she bother to fix an imperfect ear, on a soon to be famous imperfect child? To what benefit would that be to Sarah Palin? And have no doubt, if it was NOT in her best interest, she could not be bothered.
Now if you can get past that, then ask yourself if any known intervention would have repaired the damage that we see in the first baby's ear?
I asked the ENT that very question. Was there any procedure that could repair that ear and make it look like the ear we see at the RNC?
"Not without surgery." I was told, "And even then it is unlikely there would not be scarring still visible on the ears."
Do you see scars?
So even if Palin did decide to use ear forms, or conned some unethical surgeon into performing surgery on her Pro-life Down syndrome prop, it STILL would not result in the perfect ear that we see on October 18, 2008.
But let's pretend that it COULD, just for shits and giggles.
From what I read the ear forms should be applied starting in the first fourteen days of the baby's life, while the ears are still malleable and the cartilage has not yet hardened up.
But is there ANY evidence they were applied?
Here are two different pictures taken on May 3rd, two weeks after Trig's "birth."
I have spoken to a couple of people who saw the baby right around the six week to two month period and NONE of them reported seeing Trig with anything on his ears.
Sarah wrote a book where she went on and on about her mothering abilities. Did she mention daily treatments for her little boy's damaged ears so that he could appear normal to the other children? No she did not. (And let us not forget that this is a woman who does not even bother to make sure that Trig has the glasses and hearing aids he needs to successfully engage with the world around him. Yet we are expected to believe she would care for this ear malformation on a daily basis?)
So that should put to rest the idea of correction through the use of "ear forms" or ear well treatments.
What about a surgical intervention?
Well first Palin would have to find yet ANOTHER doctor who would willingly put their medical career in jeopardy. (I don't believe CBJ moonlights as a plastic surgeon, do you?)
Then she would have to be willing to PAY for it. Now remember this is the woman who charged the state of Alaska a per-diem to stay in her very own home! Cosmetic surgery is NOT covered by most medical insurance plans, so she would have to pay the entire cost out of pocket.
You people probably know Sarah Palin just about as well as anybody at this point, how likely do YOU think it would be that she would pay thousands of dollars out of pocket for an unorthodox, medically unnecessary, surgery like this?
Yeah that's what I thought too.
Like I said, it might be "possible" to correct the malformation we see in that little ruffled ear baby. But it is highly, and I do mean HIGHLY improbable! As hard as it is to swallow, the more likely scenario is that we are looking at two different babies.
Look I understand that the "Two Babies" post, and my post about the information Tank Jones provided to me, have made it difficult to embrace a simple narrative to explain what Sarah Palin did in order to pull off this hoax. But was the solution that I simply keep the information to myself, while watching people jump to conclusions, or make false assumptions that I believed were not based on reality?
And is that confounding complexity reason enough to attempt to discredit the information in order to return to a simpler, easier to digest storyline?
You know the really disheartening thing about this is that it is just the latest example of people investigating Sarah Palin turning on each other. We saw it happen with Joe McGinniss and the authors of "Blind Allegiance." We also saw it happen with other bloggers and even Joe taking shots at me. And now we are seeing it happen yet again.
It is almost like whoever Palin brings together, must eventually tear each other apart.
Well like I said, I am in this for the long haul. So hopefully this post will provide a little perspective, and answer any doubts, because I would like to return my focus to what is ahead, and hopefully leave the past in my rear view mirror.
In the immortal words of Robert Frost.
The woods are lovely, dark, and deep,
But I have promises to keep,
And miles to go before I sleep,
And miles to go before I sleep.
Related Articles:
-
--> Bristol Palin, daughter of conservative political firebrand and former vice presidential... Read Full Story » -
Bristol Palin Reality Show to Revisit Infamous Heckling Incident Bristol Palin's new reality... Read Full Story » -
Bristol Palin Reality Show to Revisit Infamous Heckling Incident Bristol Palin’s new... Read Full Story » -
HollywoodNews.com: Bristol Palin’s new reality TV show, ‘Bristol Palin: Life’s a Tripp,’ will... Read Full Story »
Bristol Palin Pictures and Style
Related People
Comments
