A reader writes:
I still think that the most likely explanation is that Sarah Palin simply lied about the story of Trig's birth. My private speculation: she went to that event in Dallas and then flew home for a planned induction, for the reasons outlined in your other reader's comments, that being, DS children have a lot of potential health risks and for optimal health and should be born in as controlled an environment as possible. All of this would have been contained in a medical record, so of course, the record could never be released.
She simply made up the story about being in labor along the way.
It's not like anyone could or would know for sure. Women have contractions beginning as early four months into a totally normal pregnancy. If you have been pregnant a few times you know exactly what works to bring on those kinds of "benign" contractions.
Remember, she made this up well before she was a VP nominee, so of course she can't admit to having lied about something as seemingly inconsequential as the timing of labor anymore than she could admit something as outrageous as Bristol being the real mom. It would be too emblematic of the extremely unpleasant truth about her character.
I don't know, but this seems perfectly plausible to me, and slightly more plausible than that she never had the baby at all. Another writes:
Thank you from deep in my gut for taking Lisa Miller to the mat over her shocking lack of respect and interest in truth. I don't even mean journalistic interest in truth, I mean basic human right-from-wrong-something's-funny-here-gee I wonder...interest in truth. She is an intellectual slacker and there are many like her out there - the reason that Palin gets a pass day after day on the greatest of her lies, Trig, and countless lesser ones. Palin's as dangerous as an oil spill now because of this collapse of curiosity and integrity. Thank you, thank you taking your stand.
What has driven me nuts is that almost no real person I know takes what Palin has said about this at face value, and yet it is the avowed policy of the MSM to take this story at face value and never inquire into it. Newsweek has gone even further, publishing as fact without any independent confirmation, not only the gist of the story but the details Palin added in her insane book. If Miller had simply noted the power of this story as mythology, she would be on very solid, even important ground. But simply accepting every detail of this indisputable fabulist as fact is not journalism.
I should add that Lisa Miller's point that "leftists" don't understand Palin's power does not apply to the Dish. I am not a leftist and have long believed that Palin is immensely powerful and the apotheosis of her party at this moment in time. My question is simply an empirical one: is her account even faintly plausible or true? Only MSM journalists and gaga fundies seem to take the whole fantastic story on faith.
Yes: Newsweek is for sale. Ever wonder why?