In a column entitled "Make. It. Stop", Anchorage Daily News reporter Julia O'Malley has debunked the theories suggesting that Sarah Palin is not the mother of Trig, and that somehow it was really Bristol Palin or someone else. O'Malley decided she'd had enough after reading a Gawker post entitled "Did Sarah Palin Carry Out the Biggest Hoax in American Political History?". She all but calls Northern Kentucky University professor Bradford Scharlott a liar, noting that while his paper contains lots of innuendo and some widely-circulated photoshopped pictures, conspicuous by their absence are any actual facts.
This is what O'Malley reports:
The journalists, including me, who covered Palin at the time believed she was pregnant because she was pregnant. Even before the announcement, she seemed to be putting on weight. She wore baggy jackets and scarves. Before the announcement, she acted nervous when photographers tried to take her picture. Later on, her face filled out. Her fingers swelled. She had a noticeable belly. And it wasn't made out of foam.
Palin also ran all the time at the gym in Juneau. People I know saw her on the treadmill sweating in workout clothes. She had a belly. I repeat: she had a real pregnant belly. Are you going to tell me she was wearing a prosthetic abdomen on the treadmill? After the birth, we interviewed her doctor who talked about it. Why would the doctor lie for her? That's right. She wouldn't.
There's also a reason why the hospital didn't publish a birth announcement: Birth announcements are OPTIONAL. Scharlott failed to mention that in his screed, entitled “Palin, the Press, and the Fake Pregnancy Rumor”.
So who would know more about the situation, a local reporter who covered Sarah Palin during the period, or some egghead professor thousands of miles away who never laid eyes upon her? My money is on Julia O'Malley. I commend her for setting her political biases aside and setting the world straight on this issue.