@blatham,
WAPO FACT CHECKER
NATIONAL REVIEW
THE ATLANTIC
There is no smoking gun evidence, but then Warren is far too clever a lawyer to have left any around in plain sight.
it is without question that for the nine years between 1986 and 1995, she listed herself as a
minority in the Association of American Law Schools Directory of Faculty. That directory was used by Law School recruiting faculty:
Quote:The former chairman of the American Association of Law Schools, David Bernstein, told the (Boston) Herald that the group’s directory once served as a tip sheet for administrators. “In the old days before the Internet, you’d pull out the AALS directory and look up people,” he said. “There are schools that, if they were looking for a minority faculty member, would go to that list and might say, ‘I didn’t know Elizabeth Warren was a minority.’”
During that period of time and subsequent to her initial listing as a minority, Warren was recruited and hired by the University of Pennsylvania Law School and Harvard Law. Both schools publicized her minority status and Harvard included her in their 1992-1993 and 1995-1996 federal affirmative-action reports. Both schools, and particularly, Harvard were under heavy pressure to diversify their faculty at the times Warren was hired.
Warren explained her reason for listing herself as a minority as a desire to connect with people
like her. She added that it never worked (although she gave it a full nine years) and so she removed in 1995..after she landed the highly coveted spot at Harvard.
She also explained that she provided information to her employers concerning her Indian heritage (which they used in their PR) after it just happened to come up during lunches.
I'm quite sure that it will not be as clear to you as it is to me and a great many other people that Warren deliberately listed herself as a minority in a directory that she knew faculty recruiters for schools like Penn and Harvard relied upon to provide herself with an extra edge. It is the case that Warren might have landed positions with these schools based upon her professional CV, but she wanted an edge and during a time when there was considerable pressure on these schools to diversify their faculties, it worked.
Harvard vehemently denies her minority status was a factor in hiring her, but then, of course, they would. First of all, she left them on good terms and secondly they were not very likely to admit she got the job as a token that allowed them to release some of the pressure under which they were laboring. I completely believe their folks that Warren's minority status was not discussed during her interviews. That would be tacky.
What I don't believe for a second is that she listed herself in the directory as a minority because she wanted to connect with people
like her. Who were these people? White Bread Women Lawyers claiming a 1/32nd Cherokee heritage? I also don't believe for a second, that Warren provided her employers with her Cherokee bonafides as a result of a casual conversation in the school cafeteria.
Her claimed status was almost certainly not the only reason Penn or Harvard hired her (there was no shortage, after all, of qualified candidates with a much more substantial genealogical claim - and who actually looked the part), and it's possible (although highly unlikely) that it truly didn't influence their hiring decision. It's even possible that she actually has Cherokee ancestors although her claim is not sound enough for her to be accepted as a member of that tribe. All these things are possible, but are they probable?
Not enough evidence to convict her in a court, but you'll note that WaPo gave the Brown Campaign only two Pinocchios and that was largely due to its implications and innuendo that Warren somehow obtained entry into college or law school under an Affirmative Action program and that she "checked a box" on applications to Penn and Harvard. There is no evidence at all that she did such things.
But she did some
other things like plagiarizing Chef Pierre Franey's recipes for a cookbook entitled
"Pow Wow Chow." (And Pocahontas is offensive?), and manipulating facts and figures for academic studies claiming that medical bills were responsible for an extraordinary share of American bankruptcies. The later was so flagrant, it prompted Megan McArdle of the Atlantic to write:
Quote:Does this persistent tendency to choose odd metrics that inflate the case for some left wing cause matter? If Warren worked at a think tank, you’d say, “Ah, well, that’s the genre.” On the other hand, you’d also tend to regard her stuff with a rather beady eye. It’s unlikely to have been splashed across the headline of every newspaper in the United States. Her work gets so much attention because it comes from a Harvard professor. And this isn’t Harvard caliber material — not even Harvard undergraduate.
As David French points out in the above-linked article her signature legislative achievement; the brain-child she birthed and helped develop, led to the following opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in their ruling that the thing was
unconstitutionally structured:
Quote:The CFPB’s concentration of enormous executive power in a single, unaccountable, unchecked Director not only departs from settled historical practice, but also poses a far greater risk of arbitrary decisionmaking and abuse of power, and a far greater threat to individual liberty, than does a multi-member independent agency.
In short, when measured in terms of unilateral power, the Director of the CFPB is the single most powerful official in the entire U.S. Government, other than the President. Indeed, within his jurisdiction, the Director of the CFPB can be considered even more powerful than the President. It is the Director’s view of consumer protection law that prevails over all others. In essence, the Director is the President of Consumer Finance.
Warren is a darling of the Left because 1) She is a strident critic of capitalism and financial institutions, 2) She is a strident critic of Donald Trump and 3) She is a darling of the MSM
Maybe it's also because she's 1/32nd Cherokee on her Mee-Maw's side, but I doubt even her supporters put much stock in that claim.
You might get the impression that her Cherokee heritage hasn't prevented her from
speaking with forked tongue when you recall how she abandoned the candidate who most would have assumed was her philosophical soulmate and threw her strident support to the equally strident candidate whom she had only recently stridently criticized for being a shill for Wall Street Bankers.
There's a great line in the linked Atlantic article that's worth highlighting:
Quote:"There's a running joke in Indian country: If you meet somebody who you wouldn't necessarily think is Native, but they say they're Native, chances are they'll tell you they're Cherokee," said Lenzy Krehbiel-Burton, a spokesperson for the Cherokee Nation in Oklahoma, which with more than 300,000 citizens is the largest Cherokee tribe.
I got news for Lenzy, this joke has made its way to
White Eyes Country.
