Main Menu

Palin birther faux pas creates media blip



As anyone close to the Obama Conspiracy scene knows by now, Sarah Palin offered some peculiar words during her appearance last Thursday (December 3, 2009) on Rusty Humphries’ talk radio show:

Would you make the birth certificate an issue if you ran?

Palin: I think the public, rightfully, is still making it an issue. I don’t have a problem with that. I don’t know if I would have to bother to make it an issue ’cause I think there are enough members of the electorate who still want answers. …

I mean, truly, if your past is fair game and your kids are fair game, certainly Obama’s past should be. I mean, we want to treat men and women equally, right?

Palin: Hey, you know, that’s a great point, in that weird conspiracy-theory freaky thing that people talk about that Trig isn’t my real son. And a lot of people say, “Well you need to produce his birth certificate! You need to prove that he’s your kid!” Which we have done. But yeah, so maybe we could reverse that and use the same [unintelligible]-type thinking on them.

The suggestion that Palin had finally joined the birther movement set off major media alarms across the country, as did her Facebook “retraction”:

Voters have every right to ask candidates for information if they so choose. I’ve pointed out that it was seemingly fair game during the 2008 election for many on the left to badger my doctor and lawyer for proof that Trig is in fact my child. Conspiracy-minded reporters and voters had a right to ask… which they have repeatedly. But at no point – not during the campaign, and not during recent interviews – have I asked the president to produce his birth certificate or suggested that he was not born in the United States.

–Sarah Palin

The Los Angeles Times wrote:  We’re still scratching our head as to what exactly Sarah Palin meant by her four-sentence blog post Thursday night on Facebook.

Me?, I’m not scratching my head. What I see is a political opportunist, happy to encourage others to smear the president, while being too cowardly to take a position herself. In my opinion, it was this very dishonesty and lack of integrity that lost her and McCain the last election in favor of a very inexperienced candidate, who was elected against all conventional wisdom.

, , , , ,

40 Responses to Palin birther faux pas creates media blip

  1. avatar
    zzazzeefrazzeee December 5, 2009 at 6:00 pm #

    Andrew Sullivan notes:

    “Palin has never produced Trig’s birth certificate or a single piece of objective medical evidence that proves he is indeed her biological son. A child with Down Syndrome must have a pile of such records, tests, assessments and ultrasounds that conclusively prove that he is Sarah’s biological son. It seems bizarre to me that neither the public nor the campaign (so far as I can glean) has ever been given one of them.”

  2. avatar
    G December 5, 2009 at 10:10 pm #

    Geez. I don’t support the crazy obsession of the “Trig Truthers” any more than the “Birthers” or “9/11 Truthers”.

    I just wish all this silly conspiracy nonsense would stop.

  3. avatar
    Mary Brown December 5, 2009 at 10:42 pm #

    Amen. The principle is the same. If people recall some birthers claim Obama could not be Ann Dunham’s child because she did not look pregnant in the summer of 1961. Again, the principle is the same.

  4. avatar
    jvn December 5, 2009 at 11:09 pm #

    It’s funny to watch her trying to run away from the birthers now. I hope she stays tight with them…

  5. avatar
    Gordon December 5, 2009 at 11:50 pm #

    She went back to her hotel and attempted to walk back her original statement on FaceBook at 1 am. I’m not surprised she’s a Birther.

  6. avatar
    Black Lion December 6, 2009 at 12:15 am #

    This is a hot topic over at the ROSL website…The birthers feel that she is the one to “have standing” to get a case against the President. The wingnuts are out in force…Actually one of the posters brought up the fact that Leo Donofrio is now supposedly working with the infamous Steven Pidgeon to file a QW suit on behalf of the GM and Chrysler dealers that were closed…Check it out…

    “Dianna Cotter of the Portland Civil Rights Examiner wrote a posting today having to do with how Chrysler and GM dealers lost their franchises practically overnight through what they saw as an unlawful federal government intrusion into the automotive industry (where some creditors alleged to have been threatened by the White House over the deal).”

    Neil Cavuto welcomed former Chrysler dealer James Anderer to his show on Fox Business News Daily to talk about a case that has been filed by a group of dealers who lost their businesses in the Washington D.C. District Court. Lead Plaintiff Anderer mentioned a team of legal experts while describing the case to Cavuto, and an anonymous source has named Leo Donofrio and Steve Pidgeon as having been retained by a group of Chrysler dealers who lost their franchise in the Chrysler bankruptcy sale. They have been retained to bring two actions:

    1. A motion to reconsider the Court’s approval of the dealer rejections.
    2. A quo warranto in the D.C. District Court pertaining to Obama and his administration.

    This case may initially slide under the MSM radar; however, it may be the single most serious case to be brought against The Obama Administration and the President himself to date.

  7. avatar
    misha December 6, 2009 at 12:24 am #

    “I just wish all this silly conspiracy nonsense would stop”

    Sounds like you’re in on it, too. What’s your game? You’re not fooling me.

  8. avatar
    G December 6, 2009 at 1:25 am #

    WTF? What on earth is that supposed to imply?

  9. avatar
    aarrgghh December 6, 2009 at 1:30 am #

    i don’t believe that sarah’s a birfer. it’s taken her well over a year to opine on the subject and that was only in response to a question. she’s just another cynical opportunist still trying to figure out how to tap the awesome power of the birfers without getting burned like lou dobbs.

    even the nation’s biggest blowhard, rush limbaugh, still hasn’t figured it out, which is why he hasn’t uttered more than a lame joke or two on the subject, much to the ongoing frustration of many a birfer. even those meager crumbs weren’t offered til last june and sadly, on that very day, only minutes after opening his mouth, he became a victim of his own bad timing as reports of the holocaust museum shooter flooded the airwaves. oops.

    i do enjoy watching these hustlers squirm though.

  10. avatar
    Slartibartfast December 6, 2009 at 2:19 am #

    I can’t wait for one of these cases to get in front of a jury and get laughed out of the courtroom. It sounds like Leo might have standing here… too bad quo warranto can’t be used to remove the president… 🙁 Otherwise, it would be a great idea.

  11. avatar
    misha December 6, 2009 at 3:26 am #

    “What on earth is that supposed to imply?”


  12. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy December 6, 2009 at 7:13 am #

    I think Palin’s comment shows that she doesn’t have a mind of her own, but let her be led to say what she thought the interviewer wanted to hear. She was making it up as she went along. This points out what a disaster she would be as President: George W only moreso.

  13. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy December 6, 2009 at 7:18 am #

    Palin claimed in the interview that she produced a birth certificate.

  14. avatar
    Scientist December 6, 2009 at 7:43 am #

    Trying to decide which of those 2 lawsuits has less merit is like trying to decide whether the Cleveland Browns or the St Louis Rams have the leasser likelihood of winning the Super Bowl.

    1. Chrysler management was inept and put the company in a position where they had to find a savior. When you go begging hat in hand for a rescue, the rescuer gets to dictate terms. The case would be no different if the rescuer had been a private equity group or Carl Icahn or whomever. Ford Anyway, the court has already ruled on this and there are no new facts or law, so they aren’t about to change their minds.

    2. As noted, quo warranto can’t be used against a President. In case anyone wants to see the “warranto” it was signed in November 2008 by 69 million voters, signed again by the Electoral College in December 2008 and signed without objection by Congress. As warrantos go, that’s about as strong as you can get.

  15. avatar
    kimba December 6, 2009 at 7:44 am #

    “Neil Cavuto welcomed former Chrysler dealer James Anderer to his show on Fox Business News Daily to talk about a case that has been filed by a group of dealers who lost their businesses in the Washington D.C. District Court. ”

    Can anyone look and see if there’s a case filed in DC? If Leo or Steve actually filed a case, wouldn’t they be crowing about it?

  16. avatar
    Scientist December 6, 2009 at 8:31 am #

    I find it hard to believe that Donofrio is any good as a poker player. If he were, he would have noted the fact that Chief Justice Roberts administered the oath to Obama on 1/20/09. In the poker world, that is called a “tell”.

  17. avatar
    BlackLion December 6, 2009 at 11:29 am #

    Definately…The better question would be why would a bunch of dealyers, who probably have funds, hire Leo and Steve to represent them when they could hire any other competent attorney? Especially ones that are corporate law specialists? It doesn’t make sense on many levels…But I could be wrong about it…

  18. avatar
    G December 6, 2009 at 1:23 pm #

    I get it now, Misha. You intended your post as satire.

    At first, I took your response as mistaking me for someone else, as none of my posts support these wacky conspiracy ideas.

    I’m here like many others to investigate such things and help debunk anything that is not based on evidence or fact. I feel it is important for us to be here and shine the light on this stuff and call it out for what it is, because paranoid conspiracies based on fear & hate can become dangerous when not properly challenged and squashed.

    At times, they can also be quite entertaining and silly. But it the end, I’d rather they went away and I’d be quite happy getting my entertainment elsewhere if there were no crazies to monitor.

  19. avatar
    misha December 6, 2009 at 2:50 pm #

    First, Federal loan guarantees were started by Nixon, with Lockheed, so it’s not some flaming liberal idea.

    And Reagan approved still tariffs on Japanese big bikes, to give Harley a recovery.

    Those conservatives are a bunch of hypocrites.

  20. avatar
    misha December 6, 2009 at 2:56 pm #

    True story: my mother once said to me that my jokes are far too subtle.

    I once managed an optical store in DC, at Farragut North. We had an awards dinner, and I was given a plaque for customer service of the year. I was called to the lectern, and the DM said “say something inspirational.”

    I leaned into the mic, and said “Wausau,” and left for my seat. The DM stopped me and said “are you crazy?!” I had to explain the commercial. When I got to my seat, my table mate said “I got it.” The only one of 100.

  21. avatar
    misha December 6, 2009 at 3:01 pm #

    She never did.

    And Palin is a bigot. Unless she proves to my satisfaction otherwise, I will not change. And I speak from personal experience in Alaska.

  22. avatar
    Hob December 6, 2009 at 8:50 pm #

    A case of the transcript being more accurate than the original: Palin suggests the use of “[unintelligible]-type thinking.”

  23. avatar
    Slartibartfast December 6, 2009 at 9:52 pm #

    As a Detroit fan, I have to thank you for not using the Lions in your analogy.

  24. avatar
    Black Lion December 6, 2009 at 10:51 pm #

    To follow up on my earlier posts I guess according to the ROSL and the link that I posted earlier Leo is joining up with Pidgeon regarding using QW and the GM and Chrysler dealer closings to get at the Presidents…

    Sunday, December 6, 2009 9:30pm et update:

    An associate of Mr. Pidgeon has taken a number of questions from me regarding the logistics, process and expectations of both the bankruptcy appeal and the quo warranto petition. I expect to have then posted as another update and/or posting after I’ve received and reviewed them.

    Stay tuned…

    Sunday, December 6, 2009 update:

    In what has become the first exclusive for The Right Side of Life blog, I have been able to confirm specific details of the excellent work that Dianna Cotter of the Portland Civil Rights Examiner began.

    My communications with attorney Leo Donofrio can now reveal that he, attorney Stephen Pidgeon, and lead Plaintiff James Anderer will be collaborating on the cases for multiple dealers for a Chrysler Bankruptcy appeal as well as quo warranto:

    The story is true. The lead plaintiff James Anderer announced it on Fox Business News on Friday night. He also spoke to the Wall Street Journal on Friday and gave them a legal memo we prepared.

    Mr. Anderer originally contacted me after somebody asked him to read my blog. I then took a long look at the entire Chrysler Bankruptcy and found strong grounds to appeal. We found problems with the Bankruptcy Court’s handling of the Rejection Motion that had not been previously pointed out to the dealers.

    Based upon Mr. Anderer’s lengthy discussions with other dealers and various attorneys, everyone was very impressed with the concepts raised, not just quo warranto but the actual Bankruptcy Court Rejection Order and Opinion as well. I then suggested we bring in an experienced litigator to partner with me on this. Steve Pidgeon was the best candidate for the job. So the three of us put this together. I prepared legal memos. Steve checked them and added his thoughts and then we brought our case to the dealers through Mr. Anderer.

    And so we’ve been retained going forward from here. It is not a pro bono case.

    We anticipate having papers filed next week for the bankruptcy action and quo warranto to follow the week after.

    Steve and I have formed a law office as a result.

    Ms. Cotter also followed up with me — she is apparently an avid reader of my site (shameless plug; many thanks to her!) — concerning some overall details of the story. She communicated with me that there could be upwards of 50 to 100 dealers involved, depending on how many wish to take part in the suit. She also mentioned that the bankruptcy case will be filed in the Southern District of New York and the quo warranto will be filed in DC.

    I want to once again thank a concerned citizen who originally brought this story to my attention as well as Ms. Cotter and Mr. Donofrio who, to date, have provided the additional details.

  25. avatar
    GeorgetownJD December 6, 2009 at 11:46 pm #

    Under Title 11 (the Bankruptcy Code) a debtor-in-possession (such as Chrysler Corporation) may unilaterally terminate an executory contract (such as a franchise agreement). I wonder what part of this law Leo Donofrio does not understand.

  26. avatar
    nbc December 7, 2009 at 1:23 am #

    You have an hour or so?..

  27. avatar
    Lupin December 7, 2009 at 2:13 am #

    BREAKING!!! (as they say)

    Irrefutable proof that Obama used a fake ID!

    Notify Orly at once!

  28. avatar
    Black Lion December 7, 2009 at 9:05 am #

    Georgetown JD, I was wondering the same thing. I couldn’t see how Leo thinks he has a case in this situation. It just didn’t make sense. I saw you post your reply over at tROSL. You know that since Leo is the greatest legal mind for the birthers that they will not understand the points you brought up. They can’t seem to understand that Leo and Pidgeon are not really good attorneys and they don’t really understand the law.

  29. avatar
    Gordon December 7, 2009 at 11:34 am #

    Almost as compelling as finding out Palin might be a birther is this part of her interview.

    Palin: “Hey, you know, that’s a great point, in that weird conspiracy-theory freaky thing that people talk about that Trig isn’t my real son. And a lot of people say, “Well you need to produce his birth certificate! You need to prove that he’s your kid!” Which we have done”.

    I personally find the flap about the circumstances of her child’s birth as unseemly as the flap about Obama’s. But the thing about her statement is it’s a lie. She NEVER made a pubic release of Trig’s birth certificate at all.

  30. avatar
    Black Lion December 7, 2009 at 12:26 pm #

    The bigger point was how she made it into the issue about her son. There was no need for her to go there and rehash that old and irrelevant issue…It seemed like she wanted to continue to make it an issue…

  31. avatar
    Dan December 7, 2009 at 2:08 pm #

    The fact of the matter is that Sarah Palin was asked to prove that Twig was her son and she produced the birth certificate.
    In 2000 when John McCain ran for president his legal ability was put in to question because of his birth in Panama. Ironically the left seemed to not care that both of his parents were US citizens but use Obama’s mothers citizenship as proof that he is a US Citizen regardless of where or what country he was born in.

    If Sarah’s has to prove that she is the mother of her son and has to produce a birth certificate to prove it then why shouldn’t Obama have to prove, with a certified copy of his birth certificate.

    You guys seem to forget that during Sarah’s interview she never asked Obama, she said that she did not think that she would have to ask because so many were already asking the question.

  32. avatar
    Dan December 7, 2009 at 2:11 pm #

    Black Lion,
    It is not that she felt she had to drag Twig into this issue, she was calling it “that weird conspiracy-theory thing” and used her son as an example.

  33. avatar
    Black Lion December 7, 2009 at 3:42 pm #

    Yes but she is the one who brought it up…So she is admitting that the whole thing about President Obama’s BC is a weird conspiracy theory thing…Plus Dan she never released her son’s BC. I personally can care less but she is the one bringing it up. Drop the conspiracy crap and attempt to run for President. I want her to win the GOP nomination…If she is the candidate there is no way Obama can lose…No one would seriously vote in a half-term governor over an incumbant President…

  34. avatar
    Gordon December 7, 2009 at 5:17 pm #

    No Dan, she only SAID she produced Trig’s birth certificate. She never did. Not that it was a condition for her to be VP. You must be new here, Obama released a certified copy of his BC, and it’s all over the Internet. Additionally what she did, and what I have seen you do is engage in the politics of innuendo.

    Palin’s PalsSarah Palin’s brand of populism is dangerous and deceptive.
    By Christopher Hitchens

    “At no point have I asked the president to produce his birth certificate, or suggested that he was not born in the United States.” Sarah Palin on FaceBook

    Well, exactly. Of course she hasn’t. She just thinks it’s a good idea for others to do that, in their “rightful” way, since, after all, it is “a fair question.”

    Could anything be more cowardly and contemptible? Alexander Pope came up with a few lines about this sort of second-hand, third-rate innuendo-mongering:

    Yet let me flap this bug with gilded wings,
    This painted child of dirt that stinks and stings:
    Whose buzz the witty and the fair annoys
    Yet wit ne’er tastes and beauty ne’er enjoys.
    So well-bred spaniels civilly delight
    In mumbling of the game they dare not bite.

  35. avatar
    dunstvangeet December 7, 2009 at 5:59 pm #

    Dan, the reason that we questioned the definition of Natural Born Citizenship is that we have never had a President, or a Vice President that has been born outside the United States (and it’s territories).

    In reality, we knew we had 2 VPs who would go greatly into McCain’s favor. 1. Al Gore, who was born in the District of Columbia (not a U.S. State). 2. Charles Curtis, who was born in the Territory of Kansas.

    Both of those two strongly suggest that anybody born a U.S. Citizen would be a Natural Born Citizen. However, it doesn’t guarentee it. I thought that McCain was eligible, but since there is no historical precedent, and no cases that I know of (even in lower courts) that definently called the Natural Born Citizens.

    Obama, on the other hand, would be eligible, no matter who his parents are. I can name 2 Lower Courts (one Federal, where the Decision was written by a sitting U.S. Supreme Court Justice, who was riding circuit) that directly say that someone born to aliens is a Natural Born U.S. Citizen. Those cases are U.S. v. Rhodes, and Lynch v. Clarke.

    Throughout the years, though, while not being explicitly defined, there has never been a case that has said that Citizen at Birth is anything but a Natural Born Citizen.

    Two, by using the same logic as we did to say that McCain was eligible (he was born a U.S. Citizen), we used that same logic to say that Obama was eligible (he was born a U.S. Citizen). We have continually argued that there is no difference between U.S. Citizen at birth, and Natural Born Citizen. Furthermore, we have had even more historical precedent that someone born to Non-Citizens are eligible for the U.S. Presidency, and even more precedent that someone born with dual citizenship would be eligible as well. Chester A. Arthur was born to a non-citizen Parent. This was known at the time, and ignored. For the Birthers to prevail, they must believe that 100 years ago, there was some grand conspiracy to get Chester A. Arthur into the Presidency by hiding his parents, despite his political enemies knowing this at the time. They also argue that he knew he was not eligible, despite the Supreme Court of the State he came from ruling 40 years earlier that anybody born in the United States was eligible for the Presidency (with exception of Diplomats and Foreign Armies).

    Lynch v. Clarke and U.S. v. Rhodes were both quoted very favorably in a case that ruled that anybody born in the United States was a citizen from Birth (U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark).

    In reality, the birthers have nothing. They lost in court on the merits of their “2 parent theory” in Indiana, and still can’t accept that the courts have ruled on this, and said, “You’re crazy.”

  36. avatar
    SFJeff December 7, 2009 at 6:12 pm #

    I always thought the whole issue of her son’s Birth Certificate was waaaaay off base. It was an attempt to smear Palin just like all of these requests for Obama’s documents are meant to embaress him. The people asking for either birth certificates never cared about the truth, only about causing harm to Palin and Obama respectively.

    I don’t like Palin and don’t want her elected to Dog catcher. But the idiots who were asking for her son’s BC were wrong, as wrong as the idiots asking for the President’s BC.

  37. avatar
    Gordon December 7, 2009 at 6:22 pm #

    I totally agree.

  38. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy December 7, 2009 at 7:44 pm #

    Dan: You guys seem to forget that during Sarah’s interview she never asked Obama, she said that she did not think that she would have to ask because so many were already asking the question.

    That’s sort of like “I didn’t throw rotten tomatoes at Obama because folks were already throwing enough.”

  39. avatar
    misha December 7, 2009 at 9:32 pm #

    Yeah, and the guy who threw tomatoes at her missed. I’d like to see someone throw a pie in her face. That would make a great video.