Boston Globe: Documents “raise further questions” about Warren’s story on ancestry

posted at 12:01 pm on May 25, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Elizabeth Warren might have hoped to scare off more media inquiries into her claims of Native American ancestry as a career boost yesterday, but today’s front page of the Boston Globe makes it clear the problem isn’t going away — and in fact might get worse.  Warren has insisted that she only cited her supposed Cherokee ancestry once at Harvard to meet others like herself, even though there is no evidence she took steps to socialize among other Native Americans at Harvard.  A Globe review of documentation suggests that Harvard and/or Warren repeatedly made those claims, and that even if Warren had believed herself to be 1/32nd Cherokee, she wouldn’t have met the definition for inclusion (via Politico’s Morning Blast e-mail):

US Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren has said she was unaware that Harvard Law School had been promoting her purported Native American heritage until she read about it in a newspaper several weeks ago.

But for at least six straight years during Warren’s tenure, Harvard University reported in federally mandated diversity statistics that it had a Native American woman in its senior ranks at the law school. According to both Harvard officials and federal guidelines, those statistics are almost always based on the way employees describe themselves.

In addition, both Harvard’s guidelines and federal regulations for the statistics lay out a specific definition of Native American that Warren does not meet.

The documents suggest for the first time that either Warren or a Harvard administrator classified her repeatedly as Native American in papers prepared for the government in a way that apparently did not adhere to federal diversity guidelines. They raise further questions about Warren’s statements that she was unaware Harvard was promoting her as Native American.

The Globe presents a balanced look at both sides of the argument, but farther down into the piece comes to the crux of the problem regarding Warren’s identification as “a woman of color” based on Native American background, whether the “family lore” was accurate or not:

The Harvard document defines Native American as “a person having origins in any of the original peoples of North America and who maintains cultural identification through tribal affiliation or community recognition.’’ It notes that this definition is consistent with federal regulations.

It is not a definition Warren appears to fit. She has not proven she has a Native American ancestor, instead saying she based her belief on family lore, and she has no official tribal affiliation. The current executive director of Harvard’s Native American program has said she has no memory of Warren participating in any of its activities.

I’ve written about the perverse incentives and ridiculous outcomes of programs that divide people by ancestry for professional gain, so I won’t revisit that here.  Suffice it to say that any program that ends up hailing the very pale Elizabeth Warren as Harvard Law’s only “woman of color” has amply discredited itself simply on the basis of common sense already.

Politically speaking, the Globe story and its prominence creates a big problem for Warren.  While the story remained the province of the Boston Herald, Warren could shrug it off as an attack on her family by her opponent Scott Brown and his allies.  There is no way to include the Boston Globe among Brown’s allies, however, and the front-page treatment of the issue and the strong implication above the jump that Warren has been dishonest will damage her prospects.  Warren will need to keep addressing this, and will eventually have to explain why she didn’t adhere to the standard Harvard put in place for claims of Native American ancestry — which was intended, let’s not forget, to help those disadvantaged by their cultural separation from mainstream America.

Harvard has some questions to answer, too.  The final paragraph of the story reveals the hypocrisy at Harvard over their claims of diversity:

Brown has called on Harvard to release records that could shed light on how Warren and the school classified her heritage. But the law school bans divulging personal information about its employees, including race or ethnicity.

Really? Let’s hear an explanation that squares that policy with their repeated and very public claims of diversity based on that information.

Update: Michael Patrick Leahy has more on the “woman of color” angle at Breitbart:

Breitbart News has uncovered exclusive new evidence that in the spring of 1993, three years before Harvard Law School first publicly stated she was “a woman of color,” Elizabeth Warren likely made that claim while teaching at Harvard, and at approximately the same time the faculty was considering her for a tenured position. Warren, now running for the Democratic nomination for U.S. Senate in Massachusetts, told Politico as recently as May 15 that she had “no idea” why a Harvard Law School spokesman called her a “woman of color” in a 1996 Harvard Crimson article and a 1997 Fordham Law Review article. However, a 1993 issue of the Harvard Women’s Law Journal suggests that she knew very well indeed.

An article, “Women of Color in Legal Academia: A Biographic and Bibliographic Guide,” which was published by the Harvard Women’s Law Journal (since renamed the Harvard Journal of Law and Gender) in its Spring 1993 edition (Volume 16), lists Warren as one of approximately 250 “women of color” in legal academia.

Looks like there was a lot of promotion of Warren’s status going on.  How likely would it have been that Warren had no knowledge of it?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

…..I don’t know about anybody else…but with over at least 70 Harvard alumni added to JugEar’s administration in the last few years… I AM MORE AND MORE IMPRESSED with a Harvard education!
…if you can pay…you get a degree?

KOOLAID2 on May 25, 2012 at 12:37 PM

*sigh*

I am REALLY going to date myself with this one but here goes …

Christmas time of my junior year in high school, a woman friend who was attending Wellesley College (it was a women only school at the time) was bugging me to apply to Harvard. I appreciated her support but told her I didn’t think I would make the cut for “Hahvahd”. I can still hear her reply to this day,

“What? Harvard? Hell, they let people in for being a Tiddlywinks champion (true story). With your grades, extracurricular activities and working 20+ hours a week for the last two years – you’re a cinch!”

So, no, you don’t have to pay to get the degree. If you are “special” in any way, they’ll give you a scholarship and it’s free.

Point of clarity: I did NOT attend Harvard.

PolAgnostic on May 25, 2012 at 2:07 PM

Enough of this!

I’m a CHEROKEE DAMMIT!!

ToddPA on May 25, 2012 at 2:09 PM

She should just own up to being a granddaughter of the Crypt Keeper and change her name to Princess Half-Dead… No further questions would be asked…
-

RalphyBoy on May 25, 2012 at 2:13 PM

A few comments above have touched on this – but I can’t get past the vile, unAmerican, un-Constitutional insanity that is ANY system of “preferences”.

Recall, kids, your father’s or grandfather’s generation fire-bombed cities, killed millions of civilians, and fought a Total War – righteously and to our country’s eternal credit – in Europe to destroy what, at its core, was an ideology of race superiority and race-sorting.

Dr. King’s core message wasn’t complicated, and is summarized in the famous quote about content of character vs. color of skin.

Yet here is this degraded, pathetic country, wrestling around with the details and inevitable distortions and manipulations of a profoundly repellent and indefensible system of state-enforced racism.

Even most “conservative” types lack the brains or character to discuss this topic intelligently and forthrightly. But it is a huge and material stain on the nation’s honor and an insane assault on the rule of law such as it remains in the US.

So no I don’t give a rat’s behind about this idiotic, illiterate, and pathetic (even by Massachusetts, Harvard, and Democratic “standards”) candidate’s absurd campaign. She’ll probably get crushed by the none-too-impressive Brown anyway. Watching the discussions around this issue, especially how the whole concept of state-based racial discrimination and lawlessness is simply taken for granted like the power to tax or the authority to enforce driving laws, would be discouraging if any additional marginal discouragement were possible after the surreal national disgrace of hysteria and cowardice that stretches back to at least 2005 …

IceCold on May 25, 2012 at 2:19 PM

My father married a pure Cherokee
My mother’s people were ashamed of me
The indians said I was white by law
The GOP always called me “Indian Squaw”

[CHORUS:]
Half-breed, that’s all I ever heard
Half-breed, how I learned to hate the word
Half-breed, she’s no good they warned
The GOP was against me since the day I was born

NoDonkey on May 25, 2012 at 2:21 PM

NoDonkey on May 25, 2012 at 2:21 PM

How about Monty Python?

I’m a Cherokee and I’m okay
I teach my class and I cook all day
I toss my greens, I poach my crabs
I run to the lavatree
On Fridays I make speeches
And dance in my Teepee

(Chorus)
She teaches class
She cooks and cleans
She “Dances with Obama”
She’s running for the Senate
While serving up the drama

spiritof61 on May 25, 2012 at 2:33 PM

In addition, both Harvard’s guidelines and federal regulations for the statistics lay out a specific definition of Native American that Warren does not meet.

I never expected the Globe to report on this story in this manner. It’s a bit of a shock! On the front page they call her and Harvard frauds. This also tells a lot of folks in Mass. they don’t have to support her.

The dems must be angling to replace her and this piece lays the groundwork.

dogsoldier on May 25, 2012 at 2:35 PM

Watching the discussions around this issue, especially how the whole concept of state-based racial discrimination and lawlessness is simply taken for granted like the power to tax or the authority to enforce driving laws, would be discouraging if any additional marginal discouragement were possible after the surreal national disgrace of hysteria and cowardice that stretches back to at least 2005 …

IceCold on May 25, 2012 at 2:19 PM

You’re right, of course. But don’t let the bastards grind you down. We have a fight ahead of us, so gird up your loins like a real Cherokee brave.

spiritof61 on May 25, 2012 at 2:44 PM

The dems must be angling to replace her and this piece lays the groundwork.

dogsoldier on May 25, 2012 at 2:35 PM

Time to roll out Patrick Kennedy, his country is calling.

NoDonkey on May 25, 2012 at 2:48 PM

There is a candidate running against Warren for the Dem nomination – another woman and I can’t recall her name.

Wonder if the Globe is setting up the base for Dem establishment to endorse or put their assets behind the challenger?

Saw Alan Colmes talking about Warren today on FNC and he was of the mind that she needed to address this problem to put it out of the way. When you’ve lost Colmes . . .

Greyledge Gal on May 25, 2012 at 2:53 PM

Democrats have no problem with liars. See United States Senator Richard Blumenthal.

ktrich on May 25, 2012 at 12:17 PM

TRUE!!! …ESPECIALLY in Massachusetts!!!

For more examples, choose any Kennedy and check the news archives.

landlines on May 25, 2012 at 2:59 PM

what’s so sad, is shameless lying is all you need to advance in the Democrat party. *Sigh*, meet Massachusetts next Senator…

kirkill on May 25, 2012 at 3:09 PM

Time to roll out Patrick Kennedy, his country is calling.

NoDonkey on May 25, 2012 at 2:48 PM

Most probable solution, but I think the dems will lose now in any case.

dogsoldier on May 25, 2012 at 3:24 PM

having been in massachusetts for many a moon and many an election of a great white father who travels to washington- this globe story and its position is really a shocker. they’ve been shielding warren for some time as they always do with democrats- the redder the better. they didn’t open up on coakley in this way despite her quite egregious actions as a DA , her outrageous long term well known hackery and the unthinkable thought of loosing teddikins’s throne.

the globe joining the sexist, racist War on Elizabeth Warren’s Family ? she sounded like a robot with a fuse or 2 blown stuck on a tape loop the other day- but this means something is up.

is that goose i smell? you know what would go good with goose- cherokee herbed tomatos.

mittens on May 25, 2012 at 3:27 PM

Howie Carr is having a field day right now with this.

Head to this link, and click on the “Listen Live” button in the upper right corner.

http://www.wrko.com/

Del Dolemonte on May 25, 2012 at 3:35 PM

Del Dolemonte on May 25, 2012 at 3:35 PM

I’m listening to Ed on TEMS. What is Howie saying?

dogsoldier on May 25, 2012 at 3:39 PM

I haven’t seen anything about it (admittedly not spent a lot of time looking, either) — the Cherokees have got to be pissed about Dances with Truth using their tribe to gain advantage like that…

affenhauer on May 25, 2012 at 3:40 PM

I must say that I really do find it amusing that a Professor of Law, at arguably the most prestigious law school in the entire country, persists to this day in pleading ignorance about both the law and the facts regarding the specific circumstances related to her own status at said University, over a period of several years, all evidence to the contrary notwithstanding!

Just for starters, notice the first sentence of the Globe story.

“US Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren has said she was unaware that Harvard Law School had been promoting her purported Native American heritage until she read about it in a newspaper several weeks ago.”

And, it is all down hill from there!

This story is now truly elevated to the status of 24-carat comedy gold.

Trochilus on May 25, 2012 at 5:10 PM

Maybe, she should buy a truck.?.

Fallon on May 25, 2012 at 1:07 PM

Doesn’t need one. She has 1/32 of a Cherokee

Wade on May 25, 2012 at 6:02 PM

This story by the Boston Globe means only one thing. Thr DNC wants Elizabeth Warren off the ticket. And they have to do it right now. The filing deadline for the primary for major party candidates is Tuesday June 5.

Look for Ms. Warren to withdraw on Monday or Tuesday.

I don’t know enough about Mass. politics to figure who will replace her, but it will probably be a Kennedy. That is if they can find one who isn’t in rehab right now.

Corky Boyd on May 25, 2012 at 6:06 PM

I love the pic.

Isn’t that where she told a Congressional panel she had an important luncheon to attend? Was it one where she could meet others like herself?

Bwaaaaaaaaaahaaaaaaaaaahaaaaaaaaaaahah!

roy_batty on May 25, 2012 at 6:23 PM

I don’t know enough about Mass. politics to figure who will replace her, but it will probably be a Kennedy. That is if they can find one who isn’t in rehab right now.

Corky Boyd on May 25, 2012 at 6:06 PM

My bet is this, it won’t matter whom they run; Brown wins. He is playing this perfectly, absolutely invisible while Warren dies of 1000 cuts.

roy_batty on May 25, 2012 at 6:29 PM

BREAKING NEWS (coming soon): Elizabeth Warren corrects the media about her statements and in so doing, saves her political career … and wins over Japanese voters to boot …

“… no, no, no – I am sick and tired of being misquoted – I didn’t say that I was part Cherokee, I said that I was PARTIAL to KARAOKE … did I mention that I’m 0.32% Japanese? No more questions please …”

Pork-Chop on May 25, 2012 at 6:39 PM

How likely would it have been that Warren had no knowledge of it?

Well of course she knew about it Ed. But, you really have to appreciate these people up close. Cambridge has its own reality & rules. Warren is probably truly bewildered that this just won’t drop and go away. People actually digging into her past and questioning her? That’s just not done. Whats worse, it’s happening outside her influence sphere and she has no way to make it stop.

Heh!

roy_batty on May 25, 2012 at 6:43 PM

Doesn’t need one. She has 1/32 of a Cherokee

Wade on May 25, 2012 at 6:02 PM

She timeshares a Jeep?

Happy Nomad on May 25, 2012 at 6:49 PM

What we need to find, is a genuine minority that applied at the same time, and was rejected – the reason doesn’t matter.

That would be the icing on the cake.

Rebar on May 25, 2012 at 1:04 PM

If there are any real Reporters who want to follow up on Rebar’s excellent suggestion, a list of the 249 other colorful ladies in legal academia they would need to contact is in the article below:

An article, “Women of Color in Legal Academia: A Biographic and Bibliographic Guide,” which was published by the Harvard Women’s Law Journal (since renamed the Harvard Journal of Law and Gender) in its Spring 1993 edition (Volume 16), lists Warren as one of approximately 250 “women of color” in legal academia.

It shouldn’t be hard at all to find out which of these ladies also applied to work at Harvard at the same time as Elizabeth Warren.

At a minimum, it would be useful to ask a few of these ladies how they feel about the very pale Elizabeth Warren faking her way into their directory.

Of course, they would have to find another source to get a list of male minorities in legal academia.

Who will be the first Reporter to take this challenge?

wren on May 25, 2012 at 8:47 PM

The documents suggest for the first time that either Warren or a Harvard administrator classified her repeatedly as Native American in papers prepared for the government in a way that apparently did not adhere to federal diversity guidelines.

It’s all an easily explained misunderstanding. Obviously, Quackagawea was appointed to the Okie Chair at Harvard Law by an ADA-compliant dyslexic administrator. A tempot in a teastorm.

Barnestormer on May 25, 2012 at 8:52 PM

She is a woman of color. Pink is a color.

Ted Torgerson on May 25, 2012 at 9:32 PM

Somehow me thinks there is a Kennedy hiding in the wings, ready to SWOOP DOWN and save the DIMocrats…

Khun Joe on May 25, 2012 at 10:41 PM

“any program that ends up hailing the very pale Elizabeth Warren as Harvard Law’s only “woman of color” has amply discredited itself simply on the basis of common sense already.”

Hhhmmm, since when has academia displayed any common sense??

Jimbobby on May 25, 2012 at 10:55 PM

Do politicians morph into “lying trash”, or do “lying trash” morph into politicians?

rplat on May 26, 2012 at 9:11 AM

Will the honest-to-goodness Cherokee whose opportunity in life was stolen by Warren please stand up?

Finbar on May 26, 2012 at 9:58 AM

federally mandated diversity statistics

There’s the big problem. She had to lie to all those universities to get ahead and they lied to the feds to meet requirements. Just another lib/prog feel good because they made a difference circle.

Kissmygrits on May 26, 2012 at 10:33 AM

BREAKING:

Warren submits video tape of her participating in the “Tomahawk Chop” during an Atlanta Braves game, and still photos of her at a Florida State University football game wearing indian facepaint.

BobMbx on May 26, 2012 at 2:00 PM

Suffice it to say that any program that ends up hailing the very pale Elizabeth Warren as Harvard Law’s only “woman of color” has amply discredited itself simply on the basis of common sense already.

Harvard is a perfect example of “thinking themselves wise they became fools.”

Christian Conservative on May 26, 2012 at 7:04 PM

spiritof61 on May 25, 2012 at 2:33 PM

Very very nice, but try for something to get rid of “lavatree”. It’s the one bit of Monty Python remaining, and it’s got to go.

Here’s help:

http://www.firstpeople.us/FP-Html-Legends/TheLegendofTheCedarTree-Cherokee.html

Even better: How about mentioning “Little Tree” — the hero of a book written by yet another Cherokee Wannabe:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Education_of_Little_Tree

unclesmrgol on May 26, 2012 at 7:23 PM

“Raise questions”? She’s a thorough-going, bogus-multi-culti, FRAUD! She should be horsewhipped. How could anyone, in good conscience, even consider voting this charlatan into the U.S. Senate? The mind boggles. I mean, Scott Brown has his deficiencies, but at least he never claimed special-status preference in his academic/professional career. Elizabeth Warren is the quintessential Ill-gotten Opportunist. She must be shamed. And she should be prosecuted. She shouldn’t be able to get away with the monstrously unfair career advantages she has enjoyed to date. She has claimed to be a Cherokee. She is no such thing. She is a Heinz-American like the most of the rest of us. She is a disgrace to our great country.

minnesoter on May 26, 2012 at 9:03 PM

the Harvard Women’s Law Journal (since renamed the Harvard Journal of Law and Gender)

teh funny…

Who is ashamed of “Women” requiring the neutering of the female into literally generic gender?

Contrast the neutered female “Gender” with transsexuals who definitely have an idea of WANTING to be gender specific, though distinctly opposite as from birth.

The same who promote tax funded abortions as the “gender’s” right.

Hahvahrd Law School, never wanted women around in the first place. Better to see them not as women, not as equal, not as anything but “Gender”. And THAT from the feminazis rather than coming from the patriarchs.

From that gesture revising Women as nonspecific (or is it monopolized?) Gender, it wouldn’t be much further to mandate the Sharia Law, clipping off the clitoris to prove that women are no longer “Women” but merely “Gender”.

maverick muse on May 26, 2012 at 9:15 PM

Mass. knows Warren is a FRAUD.

Voters know that Warren is NOT Cherokee, never was, and felt no shame but rather, was PROUD to get away with her fraud, in Bill Clinton’s words: “Because (s)he could.”

maverick muse on May 26, 2012 at 9:18 PM

Documents “raise further questions” about Warren’s story…

? – “Is she just an arrogant twit, or is she totally crackerdog?”

eeyore on May 27, 2012 at 11:44 AM

The whole issue is funny. She is going to be burnt toast, and she put the bread in the toaster, herself. We don’t want her in the Senate – ever.

Amazingoly on May 27, 2012 at 7:37 PM

[...]

I can’t get past the vile, unAmerican, un-Constitutional insanity that is ANY system of “preferences”.

Recall, kids, your father’s or grandfather’s generation fire-bombed cities, killed millions of civilians, and fought a Total War – righteously and to our country’s eternal credit – in Europe to destroy what, at its core, was an ideology of race superiority and race-sorting.

Dr. King’s core message wasn’t complicated, and is summarized in the famous quote about content of character vs. color of skin.

Yet here is this degraded, pathetic country, wrestling around with the details and inevitable distortions and manipulations of a profoundly repellent and indefensible system of state-enforced racism.

Even most “conservative” types lack the brains or character to discuss this topic intelligently and forthrightly. But it is a huge and material stain on the nation’s honor and an insane assault on the rule of law such as it remains in the US.

So no I don’t give a rat’s behind about this idiotic, illiterate, and pathetic (even by Massachusetts, Harvard, and Democratic “standards”) candidate’s absurd campaign. She’ll probably get crushed by the none-too-impressive Brown anyway. Watching the discussions around this issue, especially how the whole concept of state-based racial discrimination and lawlessness is simply taken for granted like the power to tax or the authority to enforce driving laws, would be discouraging if any additional marginal discouragement were possible after the surreal national disgrace of hysteria and cowardice that stretches back to at least 2005 …

IceCold on May 25, 2012 at 2:19 PM

This

Nicole Coulter on May 27, 2012 at 7:45 PM

Even if she is 1/32, it’s preposterous to think she deserves a special advantage over me. Preposterous and corrupt. The person should a fucking Indian. Straight black hair, dark complexion. That would actually mean EEOC laws work. As it is, this proves they DONT. Ridiculous BS.

pc on May 28, 2012 at 6:58 AM

Even if she is 1/32, it’s preposterous to think she deserves a special advantage over me. Preposterous and corrupt. The person should an American Indian. Straight black hair, dark complexion. That would actually mean EEOC laws work. As it is, this proves they DONT. Ridiculous BS.

pc on May 28, 2012 at 6:59 AM

Liberals collect minority tags like Boy Scout badges. #Warren’s earned her lesbian badge and her indian badge. She’s almost an Eagle Liberal. Hock Spit@!

pc on May 28, 2012 at 7:02 AM

Comment pages: 1 2