Trump mocks Elizabeth Warren as 'Pocahontas' in front of Native American leaders

cawacko said:
That's why I went with 3D's she's not telling the truth. "Family Lore" isn't fact. This is not comparable to the Birther thing. Obama had a birth certificate. Birthers were making shit up left and right. In this scenario Warren has nothing to back up her claim. And it's not asking her to supporter a negative.
Click to expand...

Like I said, from what I've seen, she has mainly presented it as family stories.

That ain't a lie, cawacko. She doesn't have to do some sort of blood test for it to not be a "lie." If you accuse her of lying, which you have repeatedly, you need to have evidence that what she is saying is 100% untrue - not just that there is no evidence to prove it either way.
 
Thing1 said:
Like I said, from what I've seen, she has mainly presented it as family stories.

That ain't a lie, cawacko. She doesn't have to do some sort of blood test for it to not be a "lie." If you accuse her of lying, which you have repeatedly, you need to have evidence that what she is saying is 100% untrue - not just that there is no evidence to prove it either way.
Click to expand...

I gave the you The Atlantic article. Did you read it? There is no support for her claim.
 
Sailor said:
No. Her record will do her in. She has never sponsored one Bill that has become law. Not one. Plenty of riding on others coat tails, but nothing else. Here, educate yourself: https://www.congress.gov/member/elizabeth-warren/W000817
Click to expand...
interesting.. wasn't she a big proponent of the CFPB?

The Tragic Downfall of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
Job seekers interviewed with two pairs of attorneys and most senior managers. All Office of Enforcement employees were invited to attend the weekly hiring meetings, where interviewers summarized the applicants.

Any attendee could voice an opinion before each candidate’s verdict was rendered; even a single strong objection was usually fatal. Note taking was strictly forbidden, and interviewers destroyed their records after the meetings. I never missed one. Clear verbal and non-verbal signals quickly emerged. The most common, “I don’t think he believes in the mission” was code for “he might not be a Democrat.”

At one meeting, Kent Markus, a former Clinton-administration lawyer who had joined the bureau as Cordray’s deputy, remarked that an applicant under consideration “sounds like a good liberal to me.” After a few seconds of nervous laughter and eye contact around the room, Markus recognized his slip. “I didn’t say that,” he awkwardly joked. The episode so unnerved one attorney that he never attended another hiring meeting. Applicants who had represented financial-industry clients were routinely rejected, depriving the bureau of critical expertise and business perspective. A memorable exception sought to become only the second African-American female enforcement attorney. Following an hour-long debate that would have doomed most applicants, her verdict was postponed pending additional interviews. Her prospects looked good at a subsequent meeting until someone expressed concerns over her frequent use of the F word. She survived a second excruciating hour of debate, and worked for the CFPB just long enough to become a partner at a big law firm. White men over 40 received the opposite treatment. One attorney’s résumé was so spectacular that interviewers struggled to come up with plausible excuses to reject him. Finally, someone blurted out, “For the love of God, don’t hire him!” Cordray, who always spoke last, had no choice. He asked that the rejection letter be delayed until he could call the Supreme Court justice who had left a voicemail recommending the man.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/443227/consumer-financial-protection-bureau-tragic-failures
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/443227/consumer-financial-protection-bureau-tragic-failures
 
Thing1 said:
That's what the GOP should be focusing on if they want to discredit her or prevent her from mounting a real challenge in 2020. Not overblown, outdated & false talking points.
Click to expand...

They will focus on that. And her heritage, real or imagined will also come up again. Politics.
 
Thing1 said:
And there is no support that she's lying, either.

You do not understand what a lie is. It is that simple.
Click to expand...

Ok, I won't use the word lie. She is knowingly not telling the truth because there is no evidence to back up the claim. And since you want specific meanings of words look of the definition of lore. Families can pass down many stories but it doesn't mean they are true.
 
Thing1 said:
That's what the GOP should be focusing on if they want to discredit her or prevent her from mounting a real challenge in 2020. Not overblown, outdated & false talking points.
Click to expand...

What does this have to do with 2020? This has been around since 2008. Hell if all you're concerned about is 2020 this is probably good for her, more attention to her and more name recognition.
 
So if this is all about 2020 is Elizabeth Warren going to claim she and Kamala Harris are the two P.O.C. in the race? Or would she not have the guts to do that against her?
 
noise said:
interesting.. wasn't she a big proponent of the CFPB?

The Tragic Downfall of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
Job seekers interviewed with two pairs of attorneys and most senior managers. All Office of Enforcement employees were invited to attend the weekly hiring meetings, where interviewers summarized the applicants.

Any attendee could voice an opinion before each candidate’s verdict was rendered; even a single strong objection was usually fatal. Note taking was strictly forbidden, and interviewers destroyed their records after the meetings. I never missed one. Clear verbal and non-verbal signals quickly emerged. The most common, “I don’t think he believes in the mission” was code for “he might not be a Democrat.”

At one meeting, Kent Markus, a former Clinton-administration lawyer who had joined the bureau as Cordray’s deputy, remarked that an applicant under consideration “sounds like a good liberal to me.” After a few seconds of nervous laughter and eye contact around the room, Markus recognized his slip. “I didn’t say that,” he awkwardly joked. The episode so unnerved one attorney that he never attended another hiring meeting. Applicants who had represented financial-industry clients were routinely rejected, depriving the bureau of critical expertise and business perspective. A memorable exception sought to become only the second African-American female enforcement attorney. Following an hour-long debate that would have doomed most applicants, her verdict was postponed pending additional interviews. Her prospects looked good at a subsequent meeting until someone expressed concerns over her frequent use of the F word. She survived a second excruciating hour of debate, and worked for the CFPB just long enough to become a partner at a big law firm. White men over 40 received the opposite treatment. One attorney’s résumé was so spectacular that interviewers struggled to come up with plausible excuses to reject him. Finally, someone blurted out, “For the love of God, don’t hire him!” Cordray, who always spoke last, had no choice. He asked that the rejection letter be delayed until he could call the Supreme Court justice who had left a voicemail recommending the man.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/443227/consumer-financial-protection-bureau-tragic-failures
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/443227/consumer-financial-protection-bureau-tragic-failures
Click to expand...

The 3 of you in 1 thread.

shaking my head.
 
cawacko said:
What does this have to do with 2020? This has been around since 2008. Hell if all you're concerned about is 2020 this is probably good for her, more attention to her and more name recognition.
Click to expand...

Likely the main reason Trump keeps bringing it up. He has used "little" too much, so w/ her it's "Pocahontas."

I'm not concerned either way. I'm not a huge supporter or anything. But I'm tired of bogus talking points.
 
Racist white men picking on a defenseless woman about HER heritage.........tsk.tsk...........funny, yet disgusting.

Don't you "men" have something better to do?

Cowards!
 
Thing1 said:
Likely the main reason Trump keeps bringing it up. He has used "little" too much, so w/ her it's "Pocahontas."

I'm not concerned either way. I'm not a huge supporter or anything. But I'm tired of bogus talking points.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's bogus at all but with the information we have minds have been made up one way or the other.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top