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:
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:
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:
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:
The fact remains that Sarah Palin did not give birth to Trig until proven otherwise, and you don't have any proof whatsoever.
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:Sometime last night, Scott removed those comments and changed it to 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.
"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.
