Elizabeth Warren Ancestry Thread

[theprestige]

No.

But it does turn out that her family story is consistent with the DNA evidence.

Who TF cares about her family story?

 

[phiwum]

For me, it's nothing to do with Trump and everything to do with the silliness of "diversity" in this country. That Warren ended up in this situation at all. That anyone at Harvard ever for a moment thought it was a good idea to tout her as a person of color. Even if Donald Trump never existed, this situation would still be tragicomedy gold.

Not quite the gold you suggest, but certainly regrettable.

 

[phiwum]

Yes. She's a person of color.

Ha ha. Funny

 

[acbytesla]

I searched for legal age to marry in OK in the 30's but was unable to find anything specific. I suspect it was about 18 in the 1930's, too.

It was 18 for a woman in 1905. But It may have been 21 for a man.

I couldn't find precisely when the law was enacted. But I found this court case about Common Law marriage in Oklahoma. This case which took place in 1905 in Guthrie Oklahoma.

In the statement of facts in the case.

"1st. On and prior to the 25th day of June, 1890, the deceased H. H. Reaves was an unmarried man, over the age of twenty-one years, and able and competent to contract marriage and a resident of the city of Guthrie, Oklahoma Territory.

"2nd. On and prior to the 25th day of June, 1890, the appellee, Frances A. Reaves, was a widow, unmarried, over the age of 18 years and competent to contract marriage, and was a resident of Guthrie, Oklahoma Territory.

https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4067824/reaves-v-reaves/

 

[smartcooky]

Who TF cares about her family story?

She and her family likely do, and pretty much any reasonable, thinking person who understands this subject does.

Do you not understand that her family story is the beginning and the key to everything about this. Without the family story...

No ticking of the boxes at Harvard or any other time
No dragging up of the story by Scott Brown
No racist taunts by Dear Leader
No DNA test

...which would all Equal NO STORY

You can delete any of the above and there is still a story. Delete the family story, and everything goes away.

 

[Shalamar]

Who TF cares about her family story?

Conservatives? They're the ones attacking her.

 

[Foolmewunz]

Don't judge others by your own standards.

Just because you are a fanatical democrat rationalising the behaviour of a democrat presidential candidate, it does not logically follow that those who can see her antics for what they are are Trump supporters.

Logic is not your strong point, I see.

You are, not surprisingly, wrong.

This thread has very little to do with whether Warren verified her family dinner table chat legend. You haven't figured this out, yet.

It has to do with conservative bootlickers girding themselves for the 2020 election. They see a potential soft spot and know that Warren has a big bankroll and is preparing to run in 2020.

They don't have to LIKE Trump. But they support him to the tune of disparaging anyone from the nearer right, middle or left. The primary Warren attackers are all, for the purposes of this board, conservatives and Trump enablers.

 

[jimbob]

That would apply to a very large number of Americans according to the DNA experts. Most Americans have more NA DNA than Warren.

No. the Washington Post fact check corrected themselves. She has ten times the average for Utah, and amount consistent with an ancestor 6-10 generations previously.

Which is consistent with her family lore.

 

[smartcooky]

No. the Washington Post fact check corrected themselves. She has ten times the average for Utah, and amount consistent with an ancestor 6-10 generations previously.

Which is consistent with her family lore.

I find it remarkable that Trumpsters like Vixen, TBD, BrooklynBaby etc, are still trying to perpetuate and regurgitate the lies and misrepresentations that have already been so thoroughly debunked.

- "Warren has no more NA DNA that anyone else" - a lie, she has over 10 times the amount she should have!

- "Warren claimed to be a Cherokee" - a lie, she never made any such claim.

- "DNA evidence can't tell if you are a Cherokee" - a misrepresentation. No-one ever claimed that it could.

- "Warren used her claims of NA ancestry to land a plum job at Harvard" - a lie. She was hired BEFORE she ever indicated NA ancestry.

The facts have been proven over, and over, and over; the lies have been debunked over, and over, and over; but the Trumpsters tell lie, after lie, after lie about them. When called on this, they still lie. When taken to task on it, they double down on the lies.

 

[Foolmewunz]

I find it remarkable that Trumpsters like Vixen, TBD, BrooklynBaby etc, are still trying to perpetuate and regurgitate the lies and misrepresentations that have already been so thoroughly debunked.

- "Warren has no more NA DNA that anyone else" - a lie, she has over 10 times the amount she should have!

- "Warren claimed to be a Cherokee" - a lie, she never made any such claim.

- "DNA evidence can't tell if you are a Cherokee" - a misrepresentation. No-one ever claimed that it could.

- "Warren used her claims of NA ancestry to land a plum job at Harvard" - a lie. She was hired BEFORE she ever indicated NA ancestry.

The facts have been proven over, and over, and over; the lies have been debunked over, and over, and over; but the Trumpsters tell lie, after lie, after lie about them. When called on this, they still lie. When taken to task on it, they double down on the lies.

Yeah, but they've got an election to win. They all hate Trump to hear them tell it, but the amount of energy they will devote to spreading lies any time a contender from the Dem side is embarrassed is a thing to behold.

As I said earlier, the pattern is pretty clear in this thread and historically. Remember the pearl-clutching over Al Franken grabbing a butt? The same month Bush I was caught doing the same thing to no pearl-clutching at all. How's that work?

As I mentioned up-thread, this should be re-named Elizabeth Warren is Done; it's the exact same trash-talking electioneering. But, no, they don't really like Trump. They like him running the government because they support the hair-transplant industry.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

Are you sure that is the ONLY reason?

Wouldn't the hope of Warren getting her hand's on Trump's $1m be the most salient one?

I thought the wager was $1m to charity?

Even winning $1m to your favourite charity is a big adrenaline rush.

So is dodging your speeding goalposts. You claimed she wanted to get her hands on Trumps money, not get an adrenaline rush.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

You really don't know what your talking about as usual.

Elopement:

an act or instance of running off secretly, as to be married. Dictionary.com

elopement is often used to refer to a marriage conducted in sudden and secretive fashion, usually involving a hurried flight away from one's place of residence together with one's beloved with the intention of getting married. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elopement
tpedia

to leave home secretly to get married https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/elope

1. To run away with a lover, especially with the intention of getting married.
https://www.thefreedictionary.com/elopement

This, my wife and I went away and got married secretly because both our sets of parents had circumstances that made travelling extremely difficult for them and they lived at opposite ends of the country. Rather than upset or offend one set of family we went off and got married by ourselves (thus offending and upsetting everyone!). In the 'abstract' (heh) everyone in the family refers to our wedding as an elopement.

 

[phiwum]

Context is everything. In certain cases it is perfectly technically OK to refer to 'in-laws'. Only a rule-bound American would be unaware of just how flexible the English language is.

You can end a sentence with a proposition and you can treat a hyhenated word as one word, with its concomitant snytax.

You can refer to six mother-in-laws if it is within a context of a group of them, if you wish, and it would not be incorrect.

When you are schooling folk about English, perhaps you should learn how to spell "preposition". (And "hyphenated" and "syntax", but I'll presume those are typos.)

 

[acbytesla]

I find it remarkable that Trumpsters like Vixen, TBD, BrooklynBaby etc, are still trying to perpetuate and regurgitate the lies and misrepresentations that have already been so thoroughly debunked. - "Warren has no more NA DNA that anyone else" - a lie, she has over 10 times the amount she should have!

- "Warren claimed to be a Cherokee" - a lie, she never made any such claim.

- "DNA evidence can't tell if you are a Cherokee" - a misrepresentation. No-one ever claimed that it could.

- "Warren used her claims of NA ancestry to land a plum job at Harvard" - a lie. She was hired BEFORE she ever indicated NA ancestry.

The facts have been proven over, and over, and over; the lies have been debunked over, and over, and over; but the Trumpsters tell lie, after lie, after lie about them. When called on this, they still lie. When taken to task on it, they double down on the lies.

I agree with 95 percent of this post except Vixen isn't actually a Trump fan. She has made many negative Trump posts. She is just someone who jumped into the thread believing she understood what was going on and keeps doubling down because she hates being wrong.

 

[The Big Dog]

Conservatives? They're the ones attacking her.

Warren? She was the one who pulled this silly and totally misguided racist stunt.

 

[ahhell]

When you are schooling folk about English, perhaps you should learn how to spell "preposition". (And "hyphenated" and "syntax", but I'll presume those are typos.)

To be fair, you can totally end a sentence in a proposition.

 

[d4m10n]

Turns out Warren is a person of color after all.

We can all agree she was wrong to lie about that, but I cannot be bothered to dig up the exact quote right now. [emoji12]

 

[Dr. Keith]

Who TF cares about her family story?

I assume the people calling her a liar and racist for repeating and relying on these family stories. Which turned out to be true.

But you are right, they probably don't actually care about what she said. They keep making up odd interpretations of what she said and then burning down those straw men.

 

[Dr. Keith]

Protip; her "family lore" wasn't that they had an insignificant amount on DNA, her alleged made up "family lore"* was that they were Cherokee
*not shared by much of her family of course

how do you not know this?

Again, "part Cherokee". Surely you have quoted this line enough to know it by now, so, what are we to assume about your statement above?

 

[Dr. Keith]

Hoo boy, you really need me to break that down there for ya? try again, and aspire to comprehension, there is always a first time.

TBD: part Cherokee and part Delaware = 100% Native American

EW: Have you seen me or my mother? Clearly she is mostly something else you ******* moron. But the racists pricks in my father's family, and really in a large part of the US at that time, only cared about that one drop of native American blood to treat her like less than human.

Unless you have some other statement by Warren that you would like to point out as a lie.