The general assumption regarding Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s claim that Sen. Bernie Sanders told her a woman couldn’t win the presidency in 2020 is that it was a coordinated leak by her campaign.
If that’s the case, I’m kind of at a loss as to why anyone thought now was a good time to play another round of “Who Believes Pocahontas?”
Plenty of people don’t, which seemed to confuse The New York Times’ Maggie Haberman.
In fact, she’s even curious as to why a fellow New York Times writer would say that perhaps it was a Rashomon-like situation where the 2020 Democratic candidates simply misremembered what happened during a 2018 meeting and both came away with dramatically different impressions which were mutually untrue.
The discussion happened during a thread started by Mother Jones Editorial Director Ben Dreyfuss in which he asked, “[I]sn’t Occam’s razor here that they’re both just having a very human misunderstanding about a year old conversation?”
Here’s was what Times TV critic James Poniewozik had to say about it:
A plausible scenario is
-both want to run
-he’s like, “Trump is a sexist and he will use this against a woman”
-she infers, reasonably, “He’s telling me a woman can’t win”
-she recalls the disagreement
-he insists he didn’t literally say “a woman can’t win”
— James Poniewozik (@poniewozik) January 16, 2020
Haberman was “[j]ust curious” about why Poniewozik wouldn’t believe Warren’s version, which is that Bernie absolutely, totally told her this and that Bernie “called me a liar on national TV.”
So, instead of shooting him a question on say, Slack, she decided to hit up Poniewozik publicly:
Why is the automatic assumption that her version is wrong? Just curious. https://t.co/Ra8qZVLfoJ
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) January 16, 2020
I’m sure she was “[j]ust curious,” which is the Twitter version of crossing one’s arms and arching one’s eyebrow.
Dilbert creator and notable political rabble-rouser Scott Adams probably had the best response to this aspect of the tweet:
Why assume it is automatic?
— Scott Adams (@ScottAdamsSays) January 17, 2020
If she really was curious, however — well, let’s just say she opened herself up for what happened next.
She lied about her kids going to public school. Forgot that one.
— Erielle Davidson (@politicalelle) January 16, 2020
I think mostly because of her well-earned reputation, unlike Bernie, as someone who makes up stories, including major ones about her ethnicity and career and what not. Like, all of her nicknames are based around this trait. Probably that. https://t.co/ViBg6WDwYl
— Mollie (@MZHemingway) January 16, 2020
Yeah, I’m sure it’s totally organic that this story just happened to drop the day before the debate…while she’s trailing in the polls. Plus she’s been so honest up till now, amirite?
— Jen DinNJ (@JenDinnj) January 16, 2020
@maggieNYT you’re not this dense are you?
The correct answer is that she lies pathologically. Ethnic Heritage, Oppression as Mom, etc etc.
— Kevin McCullough (@KMCRadio) January 16, 2020
A woman who famously lied about her heritage, her grandparents, her parents, her employers, her kids, and even her recipes would never fabricate an unbelievable story about her political opponent weeks before an election. https://t.co/8fYJJ04YEu
— Sean Davis (@seanmdav) January 16, 2020
I think we’re clear about what we’re talking about here, but just in case you’re recently tuning into this, a bit of an explainer.
Warren lied about being a Native American for years and then tried to transmute those lies into truths by taking a genetic test that proved she was as little as 1/1,024th Native American.
She lied about how important this was for her career trajectory, given that this self-identification came at a time when academia was starved to diversify their faculty; Warren was prominently listed as a “minority” by both the University of Pennsylvania and Harvard University during her time working at those schools.
She sent her child to private school back in Texas in the 1980s and then lied about it when someone confronted her, given the fact that Warren’s education plan would choke off funding for alternatives to public schools.
She lied about being fired for being visibly pregnant when it turns out she resigned the job on her own accord.
She even lied about where her “family recipe” for a Native American cookbook came from, with the recipe she submitted to “Pow Wow Chow” being virtually identical to the work of French chef Pierre Franey. (Perhaps he was Cherokee?)
It’s sort of unbelievable that Haberman, The Times’ White House correspondent, needs to be reminded of the fact Elizabeth Warren is a liar.
Why on earth would she stop lying now.
And, perhaps more importantly, why should anyone start believing a white woman who claimed to be a Native American?
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.