What exactly was the lie? Use an exact quote, please.
The Boston Globe did a fairly exhaustive and frequently cited article showing that to be completely untrue.
Ethnicity not a factor in Elizabeth Warren’s rise in law
Short version: She changed her ethnicity selection after being hired and no one hiring her thought anything other than she was a caucasian woman.
emphasis mine
Shouldn’t that be And? Logical contradictions never seemed to bother them before.
This thread has become too long to read. Let me summarize it for newcomers by quoting the best posts.
Those two posts are key. The very existence of this thread bears witness to how nonsensical American political “thought” has become.
And, most sadly:
I love Elizabeth Warren. But, with or without the Cherokee controversy, the fact that she’s seriously touted for the Big Nomination reminds me how masochistic Democrats tend to be.
Genealogy is just a fun hobby. The fact that I share 0.2% of the DNA of John Brown the (crazy?) abolitionist doesn’t make it more likely that I have humanitarian ideals (nor that I am crazy). It’s just a fun useless fact. Tracing ancestry is like stamp collecting. I’m sure this is similar for Professor Warren. So she contributed an entry to a cookbook? Gasp! Should we appoint a Special Prosecutor? Thousands of words in dozens of pointless posts in this thread are best summarized by
[off-topic] While it’s true that all humans are closely related genetically, DNA does allow interesting details of prehistory to be deduced:
Interesting that Sardinia was mentioned here. Like many isolated islands, Sardinia is a migratory cul-de-sac and preserves some haplogroups that have almost disappeared from the mainland. You can Google and find at least a dozen papers that have derived conclusions by studying Sardinian DNA specifically.