Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Bringing this information over from the OTHER threads:
In interviews she claimed her mother was of Cherokee and Delaware ancestry.
People have traced her ancestry back to 1824; all declared white. However she had one ancestor who was born in "Indian Territory" meaning outside of the recognized States at that time. This may be the source of the familial confusion.
There was no Native American DNA used in the sampling for her test. Her DNA was compared to Mexican, Peruvian, and Colombian DNA. The professor surmised that those ethnic groups make up the ancestors of Native Americans that she claimed heritage. So, at best, she has .098% - 1.6% similarity to Mexican, Peruvian, and Colombian DNA. The average European-American has .18% of this same DNA.
The Cherokee have checked their genealogy registers and found none of her ancestors in their histories.
Exactly, this claim she carefully sought out does as much or more to question any claim of Indian ancestry than strengthen it.
I was listening to a fairly respectful debate this morning and both sides agreed that is most likely exactly what she did. A genealogy "expert" was part of the discussion. He said he traced back as far as he could, & Warren is 1/532nd NA. He also said almost all of humanity can be traced back to a single evolutionary migration out of Africa some 50,000 years ago. So....looks like all those songs have been right after all...."let there be peace on earth, brothers all are we"....he ain't heavy, he's my brother"....
Doesn't really matter what she is, except politically. Politically, she blows. Bad.
Since we are all related, if she shows up for Thanksgiving dinner, I'll set her a place at the table, but I draw the line at sending her off with any leftovers.
Please read the Boston Globe article.
She did NOT use minority status to gain entry to any school or to her teaching position. There are documents from the schools that show this.
She has taken a major step: releasing the contents of her university personnel files to the Globe after six years of rebuffing requests for them.
Quote:
The Globe closely reviewed the records, verified them where possible, and conducted more than 100 interviews with her colleagues and every person who had a role in hiring decisions about Warren who could be reached. In sum, it is clear that Warren was viewed as a white woman by the hiring committees at every institution that employed her.
Quote:
Among the records were some never examined before by a newspaper, including one key form that a University of Pennsylvania professor kept tucked away for three decades.
That previously undisclosed report reveals that the hiring committee at Penn, where Warren worked from 1987 to 1995, viewed her as a white female applicant. Moreover, the committee went to some pains to explain on this form why she was selected over several minorities to fill a faculty position.
Not until she had been teaching at Penn for two years did she authorize the university to change her personnel designation from white to Native American, the records show.
Do you even really want to know the truth or are you stuck up Trump's behind?
But the Fordham piece takes the description of Warren by Harvard Law beyond the boundaries of the Massachusetts school. Warren had described herself as a minority on a law professors' listing for several years, ending in 1995. She has said she wanted to meet people like herself, but stopped when she realized that's not what the listing was for.
However, she never got any advantage from that even if she did list herself in a law professor's listing. The documents from her schools and confirm that they viewed her as a white woman.
And she did not LIE. She took her family's word on her heritage. I take my family's word also. Don't you?
Do you even really want to know the truth or are you stuck up Trump's behind?
So....I was going to just snip part of your post, the part where she rebuffed six times the request for those documents. I was going to ask why. If she was so insistent, why hesitate to provide them, and then...choose now as the time to provide?
But then...I saw the end of your post...[/quote] Do you even really want to know the truth or are you stuck up Trump's behind?[/quote]
That's cute. Reasonable people don't have to be up anybody's rump - blue, red, or otherwise - to know when someone's full of it. You should try it sometime.
However, she never got any advantage from that even if she did list herself in a law professor's listing. The documents from her schools and confirm that they viewed her as a white woman.
And she did not LIE. She took her family's word on her heritage. I take my family's word also. Don't you?
That you'll believe, but I bet you also believe that Trump was involved with Russia even after no proof in 2 years and Kavanaugh was guilty even without any proof.
That you'll believe, but I bet you also believe that Trump was involved with Russia even after no proof in 2 years and Kavanaugh was guilty even without any proof.
Trump has many ties to Russia whether or not he did anything during his campaign. Why do you think he is so lovey-dovey with Putin.
What is the real story of Donald Trump and Russia? The answer is still unclear, and Democrats in Congress want to get to the bottom of it with an investigation. But there’s no doubt that a spider web of connections—some public, some private, some clear, some murky—exists between Trump, his associates and Russian President Vladimir Putin.
These charts illustrate dozens of those links, including meetings between Russian officials and members of Trump’s campaign and administration; his daughter’s ties to Putin’s friends; Trump’s 2013 visit to Moscow for the Miss Universe pageant; and his short-lived mixed martial arts venture with one of Putin’s favorite athletes. The solid lines mark established facts, while dotted ones represent speculative or unproven connections.
There’s nothing inherently damning about most of the ties illustrated below. But they do reveal the vast and mysteriously complex web behind a story that has vexed Trump’s young presidency from its start—and is certain to shake the White House for months to come.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
