Elizabeth Warren

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., speaks at the Iowa State Fair, Saturday, Aug. 10, 2019, in Des Moines, Iowa. (AP Photo/John Locher)

Yesterday, I shared a report that provided documented evidence that Elizabeth Warren was never fired for being pregnant back in the early 1970s. It’s an anecdote she’s made a centerpiece of her campaign stump speeches, having shared it dozens of times going back to the beginning of this year. Essentially, she claims that upon the principal of her school noticing she was pregnant, he pushed her out the door.

Minutes of an April 21, 1971, Riverdale Board of Education meeting obtained by the Washington Free Beacon show that the board voted unanimously on a motion to extend Warren a “2nd year” contract for a two-days-per-week teaching job. That job is similar to the one she held the previous year, her first year of teaching. Minutes from a board meeting held two months later, on June 16, 1971, indicate that Warren’s resignation was “accepted with regret.”

In reality, not only was Warren not fired, the school board (as shown by the documented minutes) offered her an extension on her previous employment contract. Two months later, Warren herself resigned, likely because she wanted a different position which she would later admit in 2007 she wasn’t qualified for.

In short, the entire story she’s been telling in pure nonsense. So what does she do? Why, double down of course.

I’d say this is unbelievable, but what does she really have to lose? She can continue to make this false claim with total immunity. For the past few days, the mainstream media have refused to even touch the story. It wasn’t until Warren doubled down that they even decided to mention it. This only came in the context of parroting her words uncritically.

You see, it’s actually Republicans that are at fault here for pointing out that she lied. It was an affront to human decency for the Free Beacon to “challenge” Warren on the matter.

The framing here is just ludicrous. She didn’t refute anything and that “conservative news site” provided actual evidence she is lying. What’s The New York Times do? Shrug their shoulders and say there’s nothing they can do here. She denied lying and that’s that in their eyes.

Meanwhile, her defenders have spread out onto the airwaves and editorial pages to shill for her as well.

In that interview, they come to the conclusion that Warren’s story “holds water” because there’s generalized evidence that something like Warren claims could have happened. Never mind the documents showing otherwise or Warren’s own words in 2007, MSNBC is in it to win it. The “anchor” doesn’t push back at all and instead nods along and agrees.

With Warren now overtaking Biden for the national lead in the Democratic primary, you can expect the hack level to be turned up to eleven in the legacy media. There’s no lie to big, no scandal too damaging for them to actually cover if they feel like it might harm Elizabeth Warren. She is the chosen one and they are going to escort her to the finish line. Whether that works in the general election is another matter. Trump will make sure every bit of dirty laundry the Massachusetts Senator has is aired out.

————————————————

Enjoying the read? Please visit my archive and check out some of my latest articles.

I’ve got a new twitter! Please help by following @bonchieredstate.