PDA

View Full Version : Liz Warrens Ancestor Rounded up Cherokees!!!



Sev
05-08-2012, 06:06 PM
The paleface Cherokee farces just keeps getting better and better.

<span style='font-size: 23pt'>Elizabeth Warren Ancestor Rounded Up Cherokees For Trail of Tears </span>
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/05/08/Elizabeth-Warren-Ancestor-Trail-of-Tears
http://cdn.breitbart.com/mediaserver/Breitbart/Big-Government/2012/05/08/Screen%20Shot%2020120508%20at%20122423%20PM.png

<span style='font-size: 17pt'>For over a quarter of a century, Elizabeth Warren has described herself as a Native American. When recently asked to provide evidence of her ancestry, she pointed to an unsubstantiated claim on an 1894 Oklahoma Territory marriage license application by her great-great grand uncle William J. Crawford that his mother, O.C. Sarah Smith Crawford, Ms. Warren's great-great-great grandmother, was a Cherokee. </span>

After researching her story, it is obvious that her "family lore" is just fiction.

As I pointed out in my article here on Sunday, no evidence supports this claim. O.C. Sarah Smith Crawford had no Cherokee heritage, was listed as "white" in the Census of 1860, and was most likely half Swedish and half English, Scottish, or German, or some combination thereof. (Note, the actual 1894 marriage license makes no claim of Cherokee ancestry.)

But the most stunning discovery about the life of O.C. Sarah Smith Crawford is that her husband, Ms. Warren's great-great-great grandfather, was apparently a member of the Tennessee Militia who rounded up Cherokees from their family homes in the Southeastern United States and herded them into government-built stockades in what was then called Ross’s Landing (now Chattanooga), Tennessee—the point of origin for the horrific Trail of Tears, which began in January, 1837.

This new information about Ms. Warren’s true heritage came as a direct result of a lead provided to me by William Jacobson over at Legal Insurrection, who in turn had received the information from one of his readers. Jacobson, who has questioned Warren's explanation for her law faculty listing, calls this discovery "the ultimate and cruelest irony" of the Warren Cherokee saga.

Jonathan Crawford, O.C. Sarah Smith Crawford’s husband and apparently Ms. Warren's great-great-great grandfather, served in the East Tennessee Mounted Infantry Volunteer Militia commanded by Brigadier General R. G. Dunlap from late 1835 to late 1836. While under Dunlap’s command he was a member of Major William Lauderdale’s Battalion, and Captain Richard E. Waterhouse’s Company.

These were the troops responsible for removing Cherokee families from homes they had lived in for generations in the three states that the Cherokee Nations had considered their homelands for centuries: Georgia, North Carolina, and Tennessee.

While these involuntary home removals were not characterized by widespread violence, the newly displaced Cherokee mothers, fathers, and children found an oppressive and sometimes brutal welcome when they finally arrived at the hastily constructed containment areas. An estimated 4,000 Cherokees were warehoused in Ross’s Landing stockades for months awaiting supplies and additional armed guards the Federal Government believed necessary to relocate them on foot to Oklahoma.

Jonathan Crawford most likely did not join the regular Army troops who "escorted" these Cherokees along the Trail of Tears. He did, however, serve once more with Major William Lauderdale's re-formed Batallion of Tennessee Mounted Infantry Volunteer Militia. This group fought the Seminole Indians in Florida during the Second Seminole War. Crawford arrived in Florida in November, 1837, and served there for six months until his unit was disbanded in Baton Rouge, Louisiana the following May. (Note: It was not uncommon in those days for militia formed to serve for a limited period of time under specific commanders would reform later under the same commanders.)

Jonathan Crawford's service as a Private in Captain Richard E. Waterhouse's Company of Major William Lauderdale's Battalion of Mounted Infantry in Brigadier General R. G. Dunlap's East Tennessee Mounted Infantry Volunteers is confirmed by his appearance in the muster roll of the Brigade, taken around June of 1836. (Note that this transcription of the muster roll incorrectly lists the date as 1832.)

His service a year later (1837) in Major William Lauderdale's Tennessee Volunteer Mounted Infantry (Five companies of volunteers, one of which was led by Captain Richard E. Waterhouse) is confirmed by his widow O.C. Sarah Smith Crawford’s 1851 pension application before the Bledsoe County, Tennessee commissioners

Meanwhile, William J. Crawford (Elizabeth Warren's great-great grandfather who would, fifty-seven years later, falsely claim that his mother was Cherokee in that now-infamous 1894 Oklahoma Territory marriage license application) was born in Bledsoe County, Tennessee in 1837. This was just a few months after his father apparently helped remove thousands of Cherokees from their homes and a few months before his father went off to fight Seminole Indians in Florida.

His father, Jonathan Crawford, Elizabeth Warren's great-great-great grandfather, died in Jackson County, Tennessee in 1841. His mother, O.C. Sarah Smith Crawford, died sometime between 1860 and 1870 - most likely in Bledsoe County, Tennessee.

Neither O.C. Sarah Smith Crawford, Jonathan Crawford, nor any of their seven other children, apparently ever claimed that O.C. Sarah Smith Crawford had Cherokee heritage.

As recently as two weeks ago, Ms. Warren publicly claimed to have Native American ancestry. In Dorchester, Massachusetts on April 27 at the Bricklayers and Allied Craftsmen Apprentice Training Center she stated, “I am very proud of my Native American heritage.” Yet, decades after she first made this same claim, it now appears that it is without any foundation.

It is time for Ms. Warren to publicly acknowledge the truth of her ancestry. It is time for her to admit that she has no Native American heritage that she can prove; and it is time for her to acknowledge instead, that she is likely a direct descendant of a Tennessee Militiaman who apparently rounded up the ancestors of those who truly have Cherokee heritage, the first step in their forced removal from the Southeastern United States to Oklahoma over the long and tragic Trail of Tears.

cushioncrawler
05-08-2012, 06:11 PM
Wouldnt dna proov it one way or another.
Nowadays dna kan even show if u are full blooded GOP or only halfblooded.
mac.

Sev
05-08-2012, 06:44 PM
Could be.
Each race has specific markers.

Gayle in MD
05-08-2012, 06:45 PM
LOL. Repubs must really be desperate! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

LWW
05-09-2012, 04:29 AM
It is truly said how troubled some members are by reality, and how obediently they will lend cover to the demokrook's racist history.

Qtec
05-09-2012, 05:42 AM
apparently....most likely.....most likely did not ...

Great source.

Q

eg8r
05-09-2012, 07:24 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As I pointed out in my article here on Sunday, no evidence supports this claim. O.C. Sarah Smith Crawford had no Cherokee heritage, was listed as "white" in the Census of 1860, and was most likely half Swedish and half English, Scottish, or German, or some combination thereof. (Note, the actual 1894 marriage license makes no claim of Cherokee ancestry.)
</div></div>Seems like she has a family history of exploiting the opportunity. Back then it would not have helped them by announcing their ancestry so they went with "White". Fast forward and Warren wants a job at Harvard but knows she doesn't have the most important credential to get the job so she goes the diversity route and completely shuns her great-great-great-grandmother and calls herself native American.

eg8r

Qtec
05-09-2012, 06:54 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As I pointed out in my article here on Sunday, no evidence supports this claim. O.C. Sarah Smith Crawford had no Cherokee heritage, was listed as "white" in the Census of 1860, and was most likely half Swedish and half English, Scottish, or German, or some combination thereof. (Note, the actual 1894 marriage license makes no claim of Cherokee ancestry.)
</div></div>Seems like she has a family history of exploiting the opportunity. Back then it would not have helped them by announcing their ancestry so they went with "White". Fast forward and Warren wants a job at Harvard but knows she doesn't have the most important credential to get the job so she goes the diversity route and completely shuns her great-great-great-grandmother and calls herself native American.

eg8r </div></div>

At this point you should show some proof of this idiotic claim but you can't.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The Warren campaign has offered no hard proof that she is of American Indian heritage. <u>But neither has the Brown campaign proved that she has benefited personally from the claim</u>.

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>On Monday night, <u>officials involved in her hiring at Harvard, the University of Pennsylvania, the University of Texas and the University of Houston Law Center </u>all said that she was hired because she was an outstanding teacher, and that her lineage was either not discussed or not a factor.

“<span style="color: #990000">To suggest that she needed some special advantage to be hired here or anywhere is just <span style='font-size: 26pt'>silly</span></span>,” said Jay Westbrook, chairman of business law at the University of Texas.</span> </div></div>

link (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/01/us/politics/elizabeth-warrens-ancestry-irrelevant-in-hiring-law-schools-say.html)

Are we done with this nonsense now or do you reckon this is a conspiracy?

Q

eg8r
05-10-2012, 08:20 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">At this point you should show some proof of this idiotic claim but you can't.

</div></div>I don't need to provide any more concrete proof than what you have chosen in the past, articles from the web. There are articles on the web about her colleagues and their education and she is the only one sitting on the outside looking in. That is the level of "proof" you choose as "fact" so that is what you are getting this time around.

As far as what you chose to rebut that is as weak as you can get. Be honest idiot, do you think those people would come out and blatantly state what is blatantly obvious. NO dillhole, they are covering their butts as fast as possible.

eg8r

DickLeonard
05-10-2012, 10:09 AM
Sev nice researching now can you search the Bushes and their slave trading in Rhode Island.

Waiting for your reply. ####

eg8r
05-10-2012, 11:38 AM
LOL, one thing has never changed and that is Dick's propensity to change the subject. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

eg8r

Qtec
05-11-2012, 12:18 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">BOSTON -- Records show that the leading Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate in Massachusetts identified her race as "white" on an employment record at the University of Texas <span style='font-size: 17pt'>and <u>declined to apply for admission to Rutgers Law School under a program for minority students.</u></span> </div></div>

Got that?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">do you think those people would come out and blatantly state what is blatantly obvious. </div></div>

So you think they are all lying? Its a big conspiracy?

What an idiot.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In 2009, the Boston Globe named her the Bostonian of the Year,[7] and the Women's Bar Association of Massachusetts honored her with the Lelia J. Robinson Award.[50] She was named one of Time Magazine's 100 Most Influential People in the World in 2009 and 2010.[51] <span style='font-size: 14pt'>The National Law Journal has repeatedly named Warren as one of the Fifty Most Influential Women Attorneys in America,[52] and in 2010 they honored her as<u> one of the 40 most influential attorneys of the decade.</u>[53]</span>

Warren has been recognized for her dynamic teaching style. In 2009, <span style='font-size: 17pt'>Warren became the first professor in Harvard's history to win the law school's teaching award twice.</span> The Sacks-Freund Teaching Award was voted on by the graduating class in honor of "her teaching ability, openness to student concerns, and contributions to student life at Harvard."[54] Warren also has won awards from her students at the University of Pennsylvania, the University of Michigan, and the University of Houston Law Center. She delivered the commencement address at the Rutgers School of Law–Newark in May 2011, where she was awarded an Honorary Doctor of Laws degree and was conferred membership into the Order of the Coif.[55] </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Harvard Law School professor Charles Fried has said that any suggestion that Warren enjoyed an affirmative action advantage in her hiring as a full professor is "false" and that Warren was recruited because of her expertise in bankruptcy and commercial law. </div></div>

Keep digging.

Q

LWW
05-11-2012, 03:37 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DickLeonard</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Sev nice researching now can you search the Bushes and their slave trading in Rhode Island.

Waiting for your reply. ####
</div></div>

How about the Obama tribe and it's slave trading in Africa? (http://aconservativelesbian.com/2009/07/13/obamas-kenyan-ancestors-sold-slaves/)

What's that?

You don't have. Regime approved answer?

Imagine that.

LWW
05-11-2012, 04:54 AM
I'll bet Adick won't wnt to talk about te pedophilia f his brother either.

Soflasnapper
05-13-2012, 12:52 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DickLeonard</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Sev nice researching now can you search the Bushes and their slave trading in Rhode Island.

Waiting for your reply. ####
</div></div>

How about the Obama tribe and it's slave trading in Africa? (http://aconservativelesbian.com/2009/07/13/obamas-kenyan-ancestors-sold-slaves/)

What's that?

You don't have. Regime approved answer?

Imagine that. </div></div>

Everyone knows that this Obama family practice yielded so much money that the family were millionaires as of the early decades of the 20th century, resulting in Obama's easy ride to political office.

Oh, wait, that's not right at all, is it? That was the Bush family practice.

eg8r
05-14-2012, 07:39 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Everyone knows that this Obama family practice yielded so much money that the family were millionaires as of the early decades of the 20th century, resulting in Obama's easy ride to political office.

</div></div>Well now we know where sofla stands on these types of activities. He feels it is perfectly fine to be swept under the rug if millions were not made as a result of said activity.

eg8r

Soflasnapper
05-14-2012, 12:39 PM
No, that crap is rude.

You're supposed to hide so much rudeness by couching it as a question, which is less offensive.

Obviously, I do not support slavery, by whomever it was practiced.

However, as to its relevance today from a century or more ago, IF THAT MONEY MADE was the basis of the family's situation today, it is relevant. If it is not the basis of the family's situation today, it is irrelevant to the family members of today, and more attributing the sins of the father to the descendants, quite far removed.