Search This Blog


Trig Truthers vs. Trig Deniers -- more proof of a colossal waste of time.

Against my better judgment, I again published all of your comments for my previous blog post, because I do not want to be accused of preventing any debate. Even though I wasn't really ASKING for debate -- I was stating my OPINION based upon what I know and have covered in the past about the subject of our quitting ex-governor. But here's the deal and I ask you to read this VERY SLOWLY AND CAREFULLY.... you will never be able to prove or disprove the facts of this case. NEVER. Only Sarah and God know the truth. Why can't you accept that and move on?

I am not, nor do I claim to be an investigative journalist. This is a blog. I do this in my free time and nobody pays me to write MY OPINION. And you are all still missing the point. So much in fact that I'm finding myself pretty much writing the same thing again and again, now for the fourth time.

You can't prove Trig isn't her baby. You can't prove that he is her baby. Only God and Sarah will ever know for sure. My position is that it doesn't matter because I already believe her to be unelectable, deceitful, ethically squishy, etc. -- insert whatever negative statement I've already made about her dozens of times in the past on this blog. All this uproar trying to prove what we already know about the character of Sarah Palin is a ridiculous waste of time and effort for you as well as me. She isn't fit to be dog catcher. WE GET THAT ALREADY.

You can lay out reams and reams of what you consider to be proof or evidence and you know what? You will NEVER convince the  unthinking masses who adore her of your case. Because most of them, given all the evidence of what a negative person she is, still love her. They don't care. You will not find the definitive piece of evidence that wakes them up from their mindless zombie stupor EVER. They have fully drunk of the kool aid. Continuing along the path of what you feel to be the 'truth about Trig' ONLY ENTRENCHES THEM FURTHER.

The only way to stop more unthinking people from joining the enslaved Palinbot masses is to STOP TALKING ABOUT TRIG. Focus on her real instances of ethical lapses, her real instances of illegality concerning SarahPAC and the Alaska Fund Trust -- real news, not what I and many other rational people see to be salacious gossip. You just don't seem to get that. In fact, saying what I just did, in the previous post and again just now only seems to make you send more and more comments, some full of links to what you feel to be another piece of the puzzle or what you believe to be the definitive evidence that will finally solve the riddle or even sending comments full of ad hominem attack against me personally. I don't have to prove or disprove anything. Both this post and the previous post are OPINION. Some have sent demands for correction or retraction. This isn't the LA fucking Times -- it's my blog. Get over yourself. I wrote what I did because I feel that it is true to the subject matter. Yes, I've seen a signed statement from her doctor and not the one you keep sending me links to.... I am well aware of that one. What I saw was completely different. I cannot prove it or point you to it, nor will I because what I saw wasn't publicly available. You can either accept what I say as true or not. Your choice. But again what reason do I have to lie? What I saw was part of a disclosure process in a lawsuit owing to my previous job as a litigation support technician. It is a point of personal ethics that I cannot disclose all the details of this or any other case I worked on. I can't and I won't. I can only say I saw it. It looked real to me and you just have to take that at face value. It doesn't really mater to me whether you do believe me or not, but it does prove to me that I am correct in the premise of the blog post and that you continue to miss the point of it.

My point is and still remains that by continuing on this track of reasoning or trying to come up with proof for or against whether or not Sarah is Trig's mother -- IT ONLY ADDS MORE FUEL FOR PALIN TO KEEP BEING A MEDIA WHORE. What is so hard to understand about that? I gave evidence of that in the post yesterday concerning her claiming victim status yet again in the discussion over 'Journolist' in yet another one of her batshit crazy facebook 'press releases'. Once again proving my point because the issue was over whether liberal journalists should go after her on the Trig issue and the owner of the mail list told them to leave the issue alone. And they did, yet Sarah is still able to play the victim for a story about a non-story. Amazing, isn't it? Until we get on to the business of holding her accountable for ethical lapses, for breaking the law with SarahPAC and Alaska Fund Trust or when she decides to make another incendiary call to her Palinbots for violence against her perceived enemies, she will continue to use you as more fodder for her climb to the gossipy top. You are helping her become more of a monster rather than banishing the monster from the kingdom. My post is a call to focus on the real issues where she gets in trouble for breaking the law, not for you to continue to try to prove your point while proving my point. And I think I'm done here. If you aren't getting it yet, I am sorry but there is probably no hope for you.

All comments for the first blog post and probably this one may be cut off because instead of you talking about the merits of MY point, you are trying to use it as another site in your web of convincing yourselves that those on the other side of the issue are wrong. Which wasn't the intent at all. Accept my premise that you are all, on both sides of this issue, wasting your time. Perhaps if you want to send me a link to YOUR blog attempting to prove or disprove the unprovable, I may follow it just for shits and giggles.... but I can no longer allow both sides to use MY blog to further the madness. Both sides need a dose of rationality and hopefully I may have helped to provide it. Highly doubtful because of how entrenched both sides of the issue appear to be on it. But I remain hopeful that everyone learn to focus on holding her accountable for REAL issues and REAL ethical lapses and REAL violations of law while leaving the gossip to the tabloids. Or Andrew Sullivan, who frankly I believe is damaging his own credibility as a REAL journalist by continuing to focus on this issue. Good luck.



  1. Amen! And well said.

  2. Bravo for a brave post.

    I'm sorry you're taking heat for this stand. I'm sorry you have to take this stand at all.

    I'm no Palin lover - absolutely the contray. I read a lot of the Alaska blogs, and really appreciate them on the whole. Some of the research that Palingates, for instance, has done on SarahPAC's shenanigans (especially the links with NOW) has blown me away. You won't find that information anywhere else. It's investigative blogging at its best.

    Then I check in another time and it's Triggate wall to wall, and I despair. I recall when HuffPo picked up on the SaraPAC funding that PG had published. Well-meaning people from PG turned up on the HuffPo comments and immediately started plugging Triggate again rather than following up on the interest generated by the subject at hand. I'm sure I'm not the only one it's a turnoff for.

    I know feelings run strong and people get frustrated, but it's counterprodutive, and it can so easily play into Palin's devious hands.

    Thanks for your post. It needed to be said.

  3. I really appreciated reading your post. I wish someone in the know would investigate the house that "Todd built with his buddies" and where the materials came from the build that house.

    I also appreciate your honesty and not using your position to publish a letter that you have actually seen for yourself.

    I just found you recently but plan to be a regular reader.

  4. Another long "Leave Babygate Alone!!" post? Methinks the blogger doth protest too much. We get your point, you want other people to stop pursuing what they believe might bring Sarah down because you don't think it's true. I doubt that's going to happen no matter how many times you insist it should be so. You're free to do your thing, leave other people alone to theirs. I am more than happy to see her play crybaby victim. Her FB's and Tweets make her look silly. Nobody wants a crybaby victim for President.

    Just to clarify for 8:46 PM, Lazar never said he has personally seen or possesses a copy of a letter signed by the doctor claiming she saw the baby come out of Sarah Palin. Lazar said he saw a statement on an Alaskan blog. The only thing signed by the doctor published on a blog is the doctor's medical summary issued the night before the election. That summary does not state she personally delivered the baby out of Sarah Palin. If such a statement existed, it would be on C4P and SarahPAC. It isn't a good thing when a blogger makes a claim and then says " look it up yourself".

  5. From your last blog post: " are prompting me to again waste my time addressing the concerns of the unwashed 'Trig Truther' and 'Trig Deniers' masses. So I will. In another blog post."

    You just firmly put yourself in lockstep with the other Alaska bloggers who appear to be putting their careers, reputations, standing in the blogosphere, personal comfort level, and possibly even safety ahead of a plainly obvious problem that has been systematically ridiculed or ignored for no good reason by either mainstream media or most alternative media.

    I found your previous blog post completely unpersuasive. The tone seemed akin to a mental picture of someone jumping up and down in frustration shouting "why won't you all LISTEN to me??" with, really, not much else to say.

    You said above, "Yes, I've seen a signed statement from her doctor and not the one you keep sending me links to.... I am well aware of that one. What I saw was completely different. I cannot prove it or point you to it, nor will I because what I saw wasn't publicly available. What I saw was part of a disclosure process in a lawsuit owing to my previous job as a litigation support technician. It is a point of personal ethics that I cannot disclose all the details of this or any other case I worked on. I can't and I won't. I can only say I saw it. It looked real to me and you just have to take that at face value."

    Then, as a "litigation support technician, YOU OUGHT TO HAVE KEPT INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT YOU SAW TO YOURSELF, ever think about that?

    Because REFERRING TO IT WITHOUT BEING ABLE TO PRODUCE IT is as stupid and futile and without purpose as believing anything Sarah Palin has ever said -- which, of course, is the sum total of The Myth of Sarah Palin -- something not to be believed.

  6. This comment has been removed by the author.

  7. This comment has been removed by the author.

  8. (Removed above to correct spelling and grammar errors)

    First the pseudonym is 'Lazarhat'. Second I didn't say it was or wasn't true, I said essentially "what difference does it make". Third, I've seen TONS of official documents about TONS of different things in this state and I am sworn to confidentiality. So why I must be vague when reporting that first hand. No details, only I know that I know what I saw and may have read. And for the record I never will reveal THE DETAILS of what I saw and read. Only that I saw it and read it. Also, in spite of that personal point of (what some might say are my OWN squishy) ethics, I am no longer in that business. I've seen the cbj document you refer to. It isn't that document. And you will never see the document I saw because it is covered under attorney-client privilege. Which is why I won't give any more details than I have. I say it said what I said it said, convincing enough for me to believe it and it was signed. End of story. Believe me or not, I don't care. Because I'm still saying other than pointing to character, no laws were broken, so what does it matter?

    Okay? There is no "look it up yourself", the photocopy of it is IN MY HEAD as someone who has worked THAT close to this issue in Alaska.

    Further affiant sayeth naught.


  9. (and this comment removed and moved to keep it in context with the words 'see the message above')

    And thank you for your comments, KaJo. See the message above. I no longer work there. I disclosed little other than my personal impression as a disinterested third party and I have nothing to gain other than the ire of some or hopefully the awakening of others who may, for the sake of their own sanity, drop the subject and move along. I am convinced it is a waste of time and a dead end. If you find my story lacking then I assume that I am not being personally convincing enough. Sorry. To me, the proof is me and what I already know personally and now I can move on and never have to write about it ever again. Thank you.


  10. Snowing in Alaska7/31/2010 9:05 PM

    Thanks Laz! This group has gotten themselves into a tizzy and for me, it's not what they believe, it's how they act. I've been posting side by side with many of them for almost two years, and have watched them slip away into hate, denial, and personal attacks. I'm done with them and the controversy because I don't like what the group has become. They are borg like and very unpleasant as a group. They are channeling the bots as far as I'm concerned. You might as well be listening to the poor lost folks, full of anger and hatred themselves, at C4P with a few names changed around.

    I don't do fanatics, period. Especially those who turn on their own - the classic "end justifies the means". I'm tired of them bashing my friends and bloggers, and I'm tired of their weary, "in your face", "we are the special ones". In fact, I refudiate the whole damn gutteral mandation!

    Thanks for posting. Moving on!

  11. Well I understand why you no longer work there - your squishy ethics indeedy. If the document you saw is only in your head then I will consider this blog your fiction. Maybe you will let this comment post since you must have 'corrected the spelling' on the earlier one.

  12. No, Anonymous. I saw it and read it, a fact you conveniently ignore even though I've stated it at least three times now. What I said is I cannot provide YOU a link to it so you can prove or disprove YOUR case. Because again, in MY OPINION, it doesn't fucking matter. Lastly it's my blog. I get to decide what is and isn't published. Get over yourself. You have a problem with my decisions over which comments to include or not, go publish your own damn blog. Anonymous, indeed. Ha!


  13. Thanks for sticking to your guns. I'm tired of blogs being turned into weapons of mass distraction. As you point out, there's so much real, provable dirt on $P, that it's a waste of time no matter who Trig's birth mother really is.