The Boston Herald is the paper that launched the story about everyone's favorite fake Native American, Elizabeth Warren. Today the Herald's Howie Carr recounts the facts, and in the process, gives a nice hat tip to the work done here at Breitbart News:
As late as Monday morning, Granny was still using the Society’s fable as her shield, brazenly telling CNN, “I’m proud of my Native American heritage.”
Nobody on CNN is going to question a reputed “minority” who brags that she supplied the “intellectual foundations” of the Occupy movement. Not if they know what’s good for them.
Now the Globe informs us, days after the truth emerged on Breitbart.com, that “the document, alluded to in a family newsletter found by the New England Historic Genealogical Society, was an application for a marriage license, not the license itself.
Michael Patrick Leahy really has done excellent work on the genealogical aspect of this story. If you've missed any installments, you can find them here, here, and here. And when you're done with those, he's got a nice reflection on the importance of new media as it relates to this story as a whole.
The claim that Elizabeth Warren is Native American has been thoroughly debunked. There is no documentary evidence whatsoever for this claim at present. However, Warren seems to have decided that her best play is to double down on her pride in her "heritage." Ultimately, she can always claim that she had a good-faith belief in her Native American background, even if it's not true.
However, that's not the only aspect to this story that deserves scrutiny. The other aspect is that this wasn't just a bit of family lore. Warren gave this information to hiring authorities at two different law schools, Univeristy of Pennsylvania and Harvard. The normal Department of Labor practice to gather information about race or ethnicity involves self-reporting, i.e. checking a box on a form. And yet, Warren has claimed she had no idea that Harvard was aware of or, more to the point, using her minority status to defend itself against claims it was insufficiently diverse. This is almost certainly not true.
We now know that Harvard considered Warren Native American for reporting purposes at least as far back as 1999 and, it appears every year since then. We also know that spokesperson Michael Chmura referenced Warren's minority status at least one time in the Crimson, once in the NY Times and once more in an article for Fordham's Law Review.
Is it really believable that Warren could have been unaware of these references, i.e. that Harvard used her confidential information without her permission? And even if Harvard had done so, would it have remained a secret from her once it appeared in the campus newspaper (twice!)? Warren had friends and fellow faculty and students, any one of whom would have mentioned seeing her name in the campus paper. Is it believable that Harvard Law faculty were unaware they were being attacked in the pages of the NY Times even as an official Harvard spokesman was drafting a response?
The ignorance defense can only take Warren so far. It may shield her from the fact that she is not, so far as we can prove, really Native American. However, it can not shield her from the use that false information was put to by Harvard during her tenure. Her story about that still doesn't add up.