Saturday, March 13, 2010

Why is Alaska HDTV lying about Sarah Palin -- Update

In late February of 2008 Alaska HDTV filmed the now infamous "Hiking in Juneau" video featuring our former half term, half Governor, Sarah Palin. The "podcast" was filmed 2 or 3 weeks before Sarah decided to inform anyone that she was pregnant but from what we know now, she was "supposedly" 6 months along into a high risk pregnancy, while strolling the ice covered streets in high heeled boots with coffee in hand. To me she doesn't appear to be 6 months pregnant, and she certainly doesn't act like it but viewers can decide that for themselves.

The state of her alleged pregnancy is only one of the controversies surrounding this video though and what seems to have been overlooked, is the strange behavior by those at Alaska HDTV after it's release. They have repeatedly changed their story as it relates to the events of that day, which raises a lot more questions than it answers. So let's take a look at what has been said by the folks at AHDTV since this video was released, add to it what we now know in 2010 as facts relating to all things Sarah, and see if any of this makes any sense.

It seems that the controversy began over this video shortly after it appeared on Vimeo in late February of 2008. People obviously started asking enough questions about it that Scott Slone (the person who is "hiking" with Palin) decided to respond to them on the Vimeo site, and again in the comments section. You can view the video and read his comments here. (Update. I must have hit a nerve, after no updates to the AHDTV Vimeo page for 2 years, within hours of this posting the Vimeo page was changed removing the comments I have listed below. However, you can still see the original cached page here nice try Scott, haven't you learned about cached pages yet) The only date given for these comments is rather vague, (2 years ago) but we can assume they were made in February or March of 2008, where he states:
"We even brought her a White Chocolate Mocha from Heritage Coffee"
"We have footage she was pregnant"

"No, Palin never drank the coffee"

"I do have b-roll from the shoot of Sarah. In reviewing the footage, yes she is pregnant"
Hmmm. So Scott is unequivocally stating that by March of 2008 he has at the very least, reviewed the tapes and found something on the "b-roll" that has convinced him she is pregnant. He doesn't offer to show this mysterious "b roll" (more on this later) tape so we'll just have to take his word for it I guess. Fair enough, but wait.... It seems he forgot to tell the cameraman what he found on the "b-roll" and what was in that coffee cup. On August 30th of '08 (one day after Sarah was tapped for the VP slot) the cameraman addresses this controversy on the "blog" portion of the AHDTV site, which conveniently disappeared not long after it was posted. Fortunately we have a google cache of that page, which Audrey at PD was clever enough to discover and post for all of us to read. Here's what Kevin the cameraman had to say:

"Regarding her pregnancy, all I can say is that it was not obvious to the three of us who were there during the filming"

"Sarah did not drink much of the caramel latte we brought her, which if I recall was decaffeinated"

"As for me and for the rest of us who visited Sarah back in February - I’m fairly certain we can say that we had no idea she was pregnant"

Well now isn't that interesting, three of them spending all that time with Sarah and they had no idea she was pregnant. They seem to be confused about a lot of things, whether she appeared pregnant, what kind of coffee it was, whether she drank it or not, whether it was caffeinated. Wow. You would think the A or the B roll might clear some of that up, since they shot footage in the coffee shop too, but I guess not. Don't feel too bad guys, as this isn't unusual for anything surrounding Sarah Palin, she confuses the hell out of everyone. In fact, there were 2 other tapes known to have been made of her after yours, and the folks involved with those were quite confused also. 

Two weeks later a Newsweek video was made on March 3rd of 2008, where she is on stage with Karen Breslau and Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano, two very smart and seemingly observant women. They didn't notice she was pregnant either probably because she sat cross legged and leaned far FAR forward during most of the long interview. Here's what Karen Breslau had to say about that strange day:

" At the time, I didn't know that Palin, clad in a loose, dark dress, was seven months pregnant with her fifth child. An aide called me the next day to tell me that Palin would be announcing the pregnancy at home in Alaska and that she had wanted me to know as a courtesy. She was sorry she hadn't mentioned it the night before."

Wow again. So she managed to slip her pregnancy past an experienced journalist and a female Governor. Well I guess if you view the video it's easy to see why, she certainly isn't acting like she's 7 months pregnant, with her tightly crossed legs, high heels and all that leany forwardy stuff. But hey, she was only 7 months along in a high risk pregnancy, it might be possible to move like that and fool the Governor of Arizona.. But wait.. Now we have the video shot by Elan Frank who followed her around for 3 days in April of '08, just 10 days before she gave birth and 4 days before the infamous "gusty photo", surely she couldn't put one over on that video crew. Yet once again, Elan Frank has stated he had no idea she was pregnant and was also contacted by an "aide" after the video was shot notifying him that Sarah was pregnant at the time.

Is it possible that all of these people were just too busy shooting video at the time, or trying to figure out her word salad to realize she was pregnant? Anyone who has ever listened to her speak knows it takes a tremendous amount of brain power to try and absorb, much less translate the crap that is coming out of her mouth. I guess it's possible she could have slipped her pregnancy by all of these folks that spent anywhere from a few hours to a few days with her. But wait... How about Erika Fagerstrom, (Assistant to the First Gentleman/Executive Residence Manager) who was living with her in the Governors mansion at the time? She would see her everyday in various versions of WalMart pajamas, bathrobes etc. Surely she would notice that she was pregnant, I mean after all, Scott noticed after simply reviewing the "b-roll."  She seemed just as surprised as everyone though on March 6th when it was announced. Her congratulatory email can be seen here. The fact is NONE of her staff was aware she was pregnant until she announced it as reported by ADN.

It sure would be great to see thisl "b-roll" footage that shows something no one else at the time saw wouldn't it. Did she pull up her jacket and flash some cars going by exposing her belly that Scott and the cameraman somehow didn't remember? Did she flash Scott while the rest of the film crew was on break and his back was turned while the camera was mounted and running on a tripod? This is exactly the type of footage I would like to see, so I contacted the folks at AHDTV about it a few weeks ago.

In the response I got, Scott has now added a new line to the story he hadn't revealed before, Scott states:
 " I'm not going to debate whether she was pregnant or not, or if she was wearing something to make her look pregnant. Footage is footage, and her handler knew."
Yikes. Now you're saying her "handler" knew? Well why didn't you just tell us that 2 years ago Scott? Could it be because it would be hard to explain why her handler would also tell you to bring a white chocolate mocha (or was it a caramel latte'), to a 44 year old woman who was 6 months into a high risk pregnancy? I mean, how else would you know what to bring her, if her "handler" didn't tell you what she liked to drink? It couldn't be because you were trying to keep a secret, she had already revealed her fake pregnancy by the time you made the comments on Vimeo. By the time your cameraman made his comments on the blog, she had already adopted Trig and showed him off to the world.

Did she fire this mysterious "handler" after your interview? It seems strange that you would have been informed, yet the people at Newsweek weren't 2 weeks later. Maybe she didn't bring her "handler" along for that appearance. It would seem that this "handler" would have told Elan Frank about it sometime during the 3 days they spent together in April though, but apparently not. You're stating now that you were informed of something that none of her staff knew about, say much less anyone else in Alaska. That must have been a very special moment for you, too bad it never happened.

Scott also informed me in his response that this "b-roll" footage would cost 200 dollars per second. Wow. That's $720,000.00 an hour for "b-roll" tape. I shudder to think of what the "a-roll" goes for, or perhaps they just don't want anyone to see it. In making sure he has all of his bases covered concerning this footage he also notes:
 "the rate for a frame capture is no different then entire clip so please don't request proof or a single frame capture."
So I can't just "request proof" or take the cheapskate way out and pay for the "single frame capture", or a few frames that could supposedly exonerate Saint Sarah and prove to the world that she was indeed pregnant. No, I would have to purchase the entire clip at 200 bucks a second. Did you have your lawyer write this up for you Scott? Sarah has a lot of money now, perhaps you should make that offer to her, so she could prove it herself without having to provide that pesky birth certificate. Oy vay.

This video was a big deal for AHDTV, they scored time with the Governor when even the legislators couldn't find her. It was SO unusual for an obscure podcast to be given this opportunity (when everyone else was looking for her) that rumors immediately began that Scott was having an affair with Sarah. Nobody could figure out how they were granted access to her, when everyone else was running around Juneau wearing "Where's Sarah" buttons and plastering the bumper sticker version onto their cars.

To my knowledge she's by far the most famous person AHDTV has ever had in front of their cameras. This video is far and away their most watched clip and is in fact, the video that put them on the media map in Alaska. It was their launching point into the mainstream media from just being a podcast company. Yet incredulously, they can't seem to remember much of what happened on that day. They can't keep their stories straight. They have clearly embellished the story as time goes by to make it seemingly more plausible, and they have removed webpages regarding their contradictions. AHDTV is obviously lying about at least some of the things that happened that day. The question is why?

Were they bought off by Sarah or the Governors office? Were they threatened by the McCain legal team that swooped in on this state the first part of September '08, when the blog page disappeared? Were the rumors right and Scott Slone was indeed having an affair with the Governor? Did their new affiliation with KTBY Fox in Anchorage have something to do with it? Until someone from AHDTV begins to tell the truth here, we may never know. Which brings me to the last part of Scott's "note to the controversy" on the Vimeo site:
"Scott is available for interviews and appearances to qualify this production with Sarah Palin"
I'm certainly hoping that talking to Scott directly about this will be cheaper than 200 dollars a second. I'll be seeing you at your "appearance" in May Scott, and you can bet I'll have some questions for you.  

UPDATE

Since my post on this issue yesterday, the AHDTV Vimeo page has been changed twice. For 2 years these comments from Scott on this issue remained on the Vimeo page as it appears here:
Note to controversy:
Yes, we have B-Roll footage of Palin for purchase. We have footage she was pregnant. There was no affair with Scott Slone, and is not the father. No, Palin never drank the coffee. and Alaska HDTV is not Owned by FOXNews. Scott is available for interviews and appearances to qualify this production with Sarah Palin.  
Sometime last night, Scott removed those comments and changed it to this:
"Regarding Palin being pregnant during this filming - Interviews will only be accepted by qualified media and top level Bloggers. No amateur and conspiracy bloggers."
In a move right out of the Palin playbook, after throwing up a few smokescreens that didn't work, Scott is now taking his ball and going home. He doesn't want to play anymore. Today the Vimeo page was changed yet again and now says this:
"Unfortunately due to mounting emails, abuse, and conspiracy surrounding this episode with former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin. No interviews, comments, or video will be will be given. This video is simply what it is"
Wow... So he's decided nobody is ever going to see the infamous "b-roll" that he so emphatically stated shows that Sarah was pregnant and he isn't going to talk to anyone about it anymore either. I guess that video you claimed to have, wasn't really what you claimed it to be was it Scott? Because you see, just like Sarah, it would be so easy to show us the proof and make this "conspiracy" go away. Instead, just like Sarah, when you're called out on it, you try a few tricks and when that doesn't work, you play the victim and use that as your excuse for not backing up or standing by anything you've stated.

The fact remains that Sarah Palin did not give birth to Trig until proven otherwise, and you don't have any proof whatsoever.

39 comments:

  1. Well Well - congrats I cannot tell you how wonderful this is going to be and how much we have been looking forward to your blog!!!

    Have at it!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Great post, Barb!
    $200/second? That tape must be made of gold...fool's gold.

    jk

    ReplyDelete
  3. Nice, clean, lotsa white-space blog. J-school would give you good marks. Hope you post often and have fun doing it.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Barb, this is a terrific post. Thanks so much for following up on this story. The lies just seem to take on a life of their own.

    I'll be very surprised if Scott is willing to talk to you about this in May. Maybe you should go incognito and wear a McCain/Palin visor (scratched out of course).

    ReplyDelete
  5. Congrats Barb, I'll be visiting often. So glad you have your own blog. It's about time!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Good luck with your blog.

    I'm especially looking forward to your follow-through when you meet up with Scott in May.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Congrats, Barb. Looking forward to visiting your blog frequently. Have always been so impressed with your knowledge of all things Alaskan.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Barb, Thanks for keeping the pressure on about the phony pregnancy. I just don't understand how she can continue to maintain the teflon veneer with all the skeletons in her closet.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Good job, Barb! Looking forward to more.

    Did you ever find any sort of connection with all of this to the buy-out of AlaskaHDTV by the local FoxNews affiliate?? It seems the video went underground right around that time?

    Dunno. . .

    MicMac

    ReplyDelete
  10. Congrats Barb, on a terrific site! Love the post, AND the exposure for Scott and Sarah;they both deserve NOTHING less. And so much more.

    I'll be back often. You betcha!

    ReplyDelete
  11. Wow~
    Great first post and I know there will be more. Your site is on my favs list~will be checking back often.



    Scorpie~

    ReplyDelete
  12. Mac and Cheese WizMarch 13, 2010 at 7:34 PM

    I'm sold already, your first post knocks one out of the ballpark. Can't wait for the followup with Scott.

    Good Luck with your new blog!

    ReplyDelete
  13. Great write-up Barb, and I am so grateful that you are giving that Juneau video the scrutiny it deserves. Well done!

    A Dylan verse came to mind after reading this:

    "Then you better start swimmin'
    Or you'll sink like a stone
    For the times they are a-changin'."

    The weight of all Sarah Palin's lies WILL sink her. Thank you for helping to tell the truth.

    ReplyDelete
  14. This will not bring her down until the MSM decides that it is a story that is timely enough to make the bots question her validity.
    We all know she wasn't pregnant with Trig, many people that have journalistic cred have this story filed away until it becomes useful.

    The woman did not give birth to that child, at least in the timeframe and with the story that she has put forth regarding his origin.

    Only time will tell regarding whether national media outlets finally decide that this story should grow legs. It will only be if she decides to seek national office, and if she doesn't, it will be one of many folk tales associated with the half term AK Gov.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Great blog - I've added you to my Google home page, and look forward to reading your posts often.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Well, we all know ONE PERSON who DOES have the moolah to pay $200 per second: Keith Olberman. Can't wait til he gets wind of this post! LOL.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I figured this day would come. Great to see another blog to drive "those people" crazy. And great pic of the crazy woman.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Let me start off by saying that I like your arguments. Although something does not add up in all your efforts. Have you watched Scott Slone's shows? In his defense he appears to be genuine man with a passion for Alaska, it's obvious.

    Investigating further no one has interviewed this guy to the best of my knowledge. Has he? Perhaps no one has shown him the respect he may deserve, so his defenses are on high alert. How would you be with mounting gossip and conspiracy blogs, which all pin you against the wall?

    Your sarcasm about the "b-roll" rate indicates you might just be scared to do an interview and need something to blame. My investigating shows from simple Google searches that "stock footage" or "b-roll" ranges between $125 to $350 per second as an industry standard. Regardless though, you'd have to understand what he claims to have is in fact valuable.

    I don't think you've done your job at demonstrating good journalism. Rather it appears you're hiding behind your blog like everyone else has done. Why haven't you asked him for an interview?

    Basically nothing in your blog contains anything I haven't already read. While I fear you've burned your bridge with AHDTV, why not at least try and be different and get Scott to talk with you in a trust type setting.

    Ann T.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Ann T:

    I'm not a journalist, I'm just a citizen of Alaska that's tired of being lied to by every single media outlet up here. Scott may have a passion for the Alaska Outdoors but his main passion was to bring his fledgling company from podcast to mainstream. He was conveniently able to do that with the help of the Anchorage "Fox" affiliate which he lied about on the Vimeo page also by stating they weren't involved with Fox.

    It's interesting that the Vimeo page with his responses, was just changed today, removing the comments he made I posted above. Go look at it now. The fact is they are obviously still scrambling to cover all of this up. If they weren't involved with covering something up, they could simply stand by their remarks. Instead they keep removing them. The people of Alaska are sick of the lies and this kind of behavior. I'm going to call them out on it when I see it.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Congrats, Barb! I see the Palinbots have already started attacking. "Ann T" or "Auntie" or whoever...they're so transparent.

    Keep it up!

    Older_Wiser

    ReplyDelete
  21. Bravo! You go girl!

    ReplyDelete
  22. Everything you say is still speculation. I'd like to see someone interview him in person.

    You said: "I'll be seeing you at your "appearance" in May Scott, and you can bet I've got some questions for you."

    I just did some digging on Google, what appearance is Scott doing in May 2010? I'd like to go, maybe we can get others to go and help get answers. Because my bet is he won't talk to you or be allowed to talk to you just based on your approach.

    BTW the change on Vimeo message isn't much different:
    "Note to controversy:
    Regarding Palin being pregnant during this filming - Interviews will only be accepted by qualified media and top level Bloggers. No amateur and conspiracy bloggers."

    What obviously bothers you is: "No amateur and conspiracy bloggers."

    Consider the results from your blog post. That is they probably had contacts resulting your post, or saw web visits come from you blog. So someone cleaned up the vimeo message is about all. I mean goodness I even emailed them asking what it would take to get an interview with Scott to clear the air on his Palin show.

    I still can't seem to find the Fox purchase, or affiliation jive. Where is the factual information located? The affair topic remains suspicious gets avoided. In one case squashed from the APRN website and had to close the comments. http://aprn.org/2008/08/29/take-a-hike-in-juneau-with-governor-sarah-palin he looks like a better version of Todd.

    Ann

    ReplyDelete
  23. What bothers me is that they felt the need to change their remarks at all. For 2 years they stayed on that page unchanged until today. I disagree that the change isn't much different from this,

    "Yes, we have B-Roll footage of Palin for purchase. We have footage she was pregnant. There was no affair with Scott Slone, and is not the father. No, Palin never drank the coffee. and Alaska HDTV is not Owned by FOXNews. Scott is available for interviews and appearances to qualify this production with Sarah Palin."

    It's significantly different. Once again they are removing statements they made previously, just like the purging of the blog page from Kevin. If they're not trying to hide something, why do they keep removing their statements? It seems very suspicious to me and yes, much of this is speculation, since we can't get the truth.

    I can guarantee you Scott will talk to me in May, because he doesn't know who I am. I have dealt with him for 4 years directly at the same event and his company will be there again. I never said he would answer my questions, just that I would have some for him. If he has film that exonerates Sarah, then it needs to be seen because the fact remains, Sarah did not give birth to Trig until proven otherwise.

    His cameraman has said the three of them had no idea she was pregnant. Scott says we have footage she was pregnant. That makes NO sense. Where were the 3 of them when this footage was shot? By having different stories about that day, removing their remarks and entire webpages, that only suggests even more strongly that something isn't on the up and up about this whole scenario. Why do you suppose the Vimeo message need "cleaning up"?

    For the record, I don't believe he had an affair with Sarah. I'm simply saying that was a theory that was out there. You can follow the link in my post above to the Fox "affiliation jive" which is right on the AHDTV website

    When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.

    Sherlock Holmes

    ReplyDelete
  24. Good luck...and stay safe, Barb.

    Dangerous business, being an Alaska blogger in Alaska, writing about the Palin Mafia.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Ann T, me thinks you doth protest too much. If there was nothing to hide, there would be no need for all the smoke and mirrors. Scott would be doing his friend Sarah a huge favor by providing the footage showing she was pregnant with Trig. Heck, Sarah should buy it from him and release it herself since it is obviously the only piece of evidence in existence that can prove she was indeed pregnant. If there was any other way for her to put a stop to this ridiculous conspiracy theory, surely she would have done so by now. Shouldn’t Scott be showing some gratitude for the boost she gave to his career? Or perhaps that’s exactly what he’s doing.

    On another note, I wonder if Andrew Sullivan would be interested in having a chat with Scott. He's "top level" but wait, isn't he also a "conspiracy blogger"? Scott may need to change his blog yet again to say that no interviews will be granted without the prior approval of Sarah Palin herself. That ought to cover all his bases.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Barb- You have really done it now. You have desecrated the Queen’s photos. The minions from Golden Pond will be after you for sure. Love it, Barb.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Barb, this was a wonderful summation of “THE Hike”!

    However, please make a vital correction:
    "Two weeks later a Newsweek video was made on March 6th of 2008" should be corrected to March 3rd of 2008.

    It is vital to correct the date because the Newsweek interview on 3-3-08 was made in the later afternoon or evening after this video on 3-3-08:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_BMG3UV-Oc
    Sarah also met with Elan Frank in his Hollywood office on 3-3-08. He later made a statement that he didn’t even realize that she was pregnant.

    These two events followed on 3-4-08:

    http://www.crivellawest.net/docs/privlog.pdf
    On page 30 of the privilege log:
    03/04/08 11:29 a.m. From S. Leighow To Governor Palin, T. Palin
    E-mail message re: strategy for responding to questions about pregnancy
    Withheld – executive/deliberative process privilege; Alaska Const. art. 1, sec. 22

    Although this email was withheld from MSNBC's FOIA request, the subject line still tells a lot:
    It shows that Sharon Leighow is among the few that would have knowledge about the faked pregnancy, before Sarah “announced” her “pregnancy”. Why would one need a “strategy” to respond to questions about a pregnancy, except for the fact that for the past 7 months, there was no indication whatsoever that Sarah was pregnant. Why would a pregnancy have anything to do with executive/deliberative process privilege, except as proof that the executive is a fraud.

    3-4-08 is the same date that McCain wins the Republican nomination.
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/mar/05/johnmccain.uselections2008

    In the late afternoon of the next day, 3-5-08, Sarah announces to a few reporters that she is 7 months pregnant.
    “Gov. Sarah Palin dropped a day-ending bombshell Wednesday. She's pregnant.”
    http://www.seattlepi.com/local/353927_governor06.html

    ReplyDelete
  28. Comeonpeople said:

    Great blog Barb. I favorited it and will visit often. Your proximity to "ground zero" for all things Palin gives your blog a needed edge.
    Thank you!!

    ReplyDelete
  29. My only question: Why would they change the remarks only after this came out, when they haven't changed them for 2 years?

    That's a bit weird and actually makes NO sense if they have nothing to hide. If they really were truthful, they'd have left everything alone.

    The fact that the 'bots have arrived is an indication that Barb has hit a nerve (there is an entire nervous system in Alaska, obviously). In one day, she has become a legend in her time.

    Keep poking these people. Keep asking questions they cannot and will not answer. I believe the Palinistas figured we'd all go away. If anything, the people who want all her nastiness and illegalities exposed are fired up more than ever.

    Keep going Barb. You hit the bulls eye on your first blogpost!

    ReplyDelete
  30. Congratulations Barb!
    What a great addition to the blogging community! Your very first posting and you already have drawn blood.

    Boots on the ground! Foward!

    ReplyDelete
  31. Hi Barb. Congrats on your inaugural post. I've always enjoyed your selective comments over at "The Gates". Also too thanks for taking the high road by including ALL fellow bloggers on your blog list, UNITED in bringing down one of the greatest frauds of our time. (Looks like john edwards is going to learn the hard way by illegally using non-profit funds,sound familiar?) Good luck and God speed.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Thanks for the fix, Barb ;-)
    I could not see an email address to let you know otherwise.

    I am a big fan of yours on Palingates. The number of comments at Palingates is sometimes overwhelming for my limited time, so I will search for certain commenters that always have great info. You are one of those. Congrats on a fantastic start of your own blog!

    ReplyDelete
  33. Thanks for alerting me to the earlier date for that video PCG. You're always right on top of those kinds of things. I'll get my email posted on here

    ReplyDelete
  34. Hooray and thanks for your blog and Babygate post. Amateur Conspiracy Blogger is a badge of honor.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Now that Bree is gone, you are filling a much needed niche in the Palin sagas.

    And certainly you are the perfect person to do so.

    Good luck.

    I always got a kick out the the Valdez tar and feather story.

    Watch out for those nasty palinbot trolls, and the all the best from

    lilly

    ReplyDelete
  36. Great post, Barb. You write very well and it's fun to read more than a comment on another blog.

    RE: the anonymous comments. They're so similar ;). The gameplan, it seems, is to pretend to be concerned about the lack of evidence, but at the same time eager to find evidence. So clever! I'm surprised this person didn't add that she/he "is no Palin fan, that's for sure". So transparent.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Great Post, Barb'D!!! out here in Librul UnReal 'Murikun Left Coast Land, I am boggled daily at the things i learn about AK.

    This is the first I'd heard that back in March '08 the people of AK were rockin' the "Where's Sarah?" buttons and stickers.
    hmmm

    ReplyDelete
  38. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete