Palin SCANDAL

Taken from another message board:


I guess they didn't vet her *at* *all*. Turns out she's
already embroiled in a scandal in Alaska -- she's accused
of having the state police fire her ex-brother-in-law trooper
while he's engaged in a custody battle with her sister. She
was forced to admit recently that one of her staff had issued
the order, but insists that she knew nothing about it.

:applause:

her high school boyfriend.

Now, apparently, the rumor is that her 17 year old daughter is also pregnant and unmarried.

:shrug:

:shrug: ;)

she shall be called mooseburger by me from now on!

"On September 11, 2007, the Palins' then eighteen-year-old son Track, eldest of five, joined the Army.<68> He now serves in an infantry brigade and will be deployed to Iraq on September 11, 2008.<69> She also has three daughters: Bristol, Willow and Piper.<9>"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Palin

She couldn't have had a baby in high school if he's only 19 now, could she?

"On April 18, 2008, while in office as governor, Palin gave birth to her second son and fifth child, Trig Paxson Van Palin, who has Down syndrome.<70> She returned to the office three days after giving birth.<14> Her decision to have the baby after prenatal genetic testing revealed he had the disorder resulted in admiration from the pro-life community.<71>"

Guess that kind of blows the story about it being the daughter's baby?.... well, sort of.. it doesn't say *who* the testing was done on...

I clearly said that the rumor is that her 17 year old daughter is pregnant, that has nothing to do with SARAH having her fifth child.

As for her having a child at 17, I take that back... I misread (or it was deliberately fuzzy)...

"The two eloped shortly after Palin graduated"

but it wasn't high school, it was college that she graduated.

You had it wrong and didn't check it out for yourself. It's ok, it's not the end of the world, ya know. No one will remember it tomorrow, will they?

Instead of accusing me of "babbling", you should be thanking me for helping to make you better informed so you don't run around the internet spouting these erroneous stories to other people, making yourself look like a moron or something. We have enough people who do that. *We* usually call them 'freepers' around here. You wouldn't want to look like one of them, would you?

Oh, yeah... that daughter must be pretty loose if she had a baby that the mom covered for, and it's rumored that she's pregnant again, huh?

Come on, man... we're better than this...

:hi:

Ghost

I never said anything about Sarah Palin's baby "covering" for her 17 year old daughter being pregnant or whatever YOUR trip is.

All I said is that "the rumor is that Palin's 17 year old daughter might be pregnant" ( which I personally don't care about, but I think is highly hypocritical for the "holier than thou" wingnuts ).

Your ignorance is astounding. Go ahead, run around and spread lies, make yourself look like an ignorant fool... it really doesn't matter to me anyways as I don't give a damn what uneducated jackasses do...

Do you think this is all about you? Hint: It's not. There were *other* rumors floating around, too.. I was trying to get all of them in one post. Maybe if you had any comprehension skills at all you might have figured that out.

Come back when you have something intelligent to say (which means I should never hear from you again)....

But I don't need to prove myself to you, all you have to do is quote my post and match it to your response where you start babbling about some idiot story that Sarah's pregnancy with her fifth child was actually a false story covering for her 17 year old daughter having an out of wedlock child.

Find where I stated that and I'll never post on DU again.

Try reading my last post again, but this time try to actually comprehend what you're reading. You *are* capable, aren't you?

I see what you're all about... just another disruptor caught in their bullshit and trying to spin your way out of it...

You really shouldn't post bullshit if you don't want to get called on it. Is it a habit of yours to just spout off bullshit without actually knowing what you're talking about, or was this a rare exception??

I've been around DU a long time.

And it's against the rules to accuse another DUer of being a disruptor.

And, btw, you never actually did the small thing that I asked you to do, because you can't.

The rules say you can't call someone a "freeper" or a "troll"... *anyone* can disrupt a thread, as evidenced by your continued posting.

More proof of your lack of comprehension skills is evidenced by the fact that you apparently missed where I said "Do you think this is all about you? Hint: It's not. There were *other* rumors floating around, too.. I was trying to get all of them in one post."

Once again, sir, your ignorance is astounding....

Thanks for playing though...




Damn... you didn't even qualify for a door prize....

:hi:

This investigation is a huge distraction that the corporate media uses up here to avoid talking about the obvious blatant corruption of Don Young and Stevens. She is not a corporate crony so they are not happy with her. I can tell you it is a bit bizarre to hear these guys overlook what we all consider the most corrupt congressmen in the US, they don't appear to know or care that Stevens and Young are the laughing stock of the net and the most used examples of corruption. They have them on air all the time giving them free air time and making jokes about the accusations made against them.

see here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o46YdvT3lwQ

I read somewhere this morning that he was fired because he tested his taser on a 10 year old kid (stepson or something like that).
Don't tase me dad!

Assholes like that SHOULD be fired.

firing someone. She may have overstepped her boundaries by possibly getting involved. There's an investigation going on at this point, and if there were not enough facts to support an investigation, they wouldn't be having one.

supossedly he wouldn't fire her Brother-in-Law.

That's the scandal.