This is a follow to my post, 2 Babies, 1 Mother. 

When Gryphen, at The Immoral Minority, first posted about the evidence showing that there was more than one baby, everything just clicked into place.  It explained so much!  Including the apparent difference in the size of the babies, taken just days apart.

Since I have gone over most of the information in the post, I won't say much more except to reiterate that if there are two babies, I believe that they must be twins.  Why?

1. I believe it is too far fetched to believe that there are two baby boys, both born with Down Syndrome, born approx the same time, to two different mothers, and that BOTH of the mothers would agree to give Sarah Palin their sons to be used as one baby.  A baby she would present to the world as her biological son that she would call, Trig.  I'm not sure why one mother would allow this to happen, but I cannot believe that two different mothers would be ok with this.  Also, while it might be possible to keep one woman quiet, trying to keep two women quiet about something this insane would be extremely difficult.

2. Obviously, if there is just one mother, then the babies are twins.  I believe they are identical twins because if they were fraternal twins, the chances that they would both have Down Syndrome would be much lower.  Down Syndrome is a chromosome disorder.  Identical twins have the exact same DNA.  Also, if you look back at the pictures I provide on my posts of the baby switch, you can see on the face of the two babies that they look very much alike.  If it were not for the ears, it would be hard to tell them apart.  In fact, if they are identical twins, it may be the reason that Palin felt secure enough to switch them.  Why not?  They look exactly alike!  Of course, she didn't take into account cameras with high resolution, long-range lens!

I'm looking forward to hearing any other thoughts on the matter.
7/20/2010 01:02:23 pm

OK, let's say Palin had arranged to adopt someone's DS baby and then the baby turned out to be twins.

Why not just claim to have had twins and show the public two DS babies? Why one at a time, always having to hide one? And why show the weaker, ruffled one to the Johnstons and at the shower?

Have we ever seen both ears at the same time (e.g., pictures taken at the same event) on the baby we now know as TriG? If not, there could be just one baby with a surgically repaired right ear and a normal left ear.

7/25/2010 03:09:38 am

I have to admit that you make a very compelling argument for the case of twins with Down's Syndrome, with one twin possibly being born smaller and with an ear deformity that was not genetic. But, I had the same question as B does: why not just say "I had twins"? Pretending for a minute that for sure Bristol is the bio mom: the twins would not have been a surprise. The story could have been thought up in advance. Also assuming the twins were born premature in Jan. or Feb., I can only imagine that one twin was going to be released sooner than the other, and there wasn't time for Palin to hurry up and look big enough to have carried twins. I don't know. It complicates things so much to not only be lying about being pregnant, but also now pretending two twin babies are one baby, I'd love to hear some theories of why they would not just say "we had twins."

8/3/2010 07:47:58 pm

The twins’ face of the two babies that they look very much alike. It’s difficult to sort out the twin’s baby.
Data recovery

8/25/2010 07:13:17 am

Thanks for the great comparison pictures.


Your comment will be posted after it is approved.

Leave a Reply.