Elizabeth Warren is hardly a profile in courage as a politician. Warren loves to portray herself as brave for bashing Republicans, but when it is a matter of internal Democrat politics, she’s cowardly.

She sat out the Democratic primary without an endorsement until it was clear that Hillary had won. While she originally admitted the Democratic primaries were rigged after Donna Brazile’s revelations as to how Hillary co-opted the DNC, Warren walked that back.

Now, when it comes to Al Franken’s groping photo and alleged non-consensual sexual advances, Warren once again avoids being brave.

The Boston Globe reports, On Colbert, Elizabeth Warren dodges question on whether Al Franken should resign:

Sen. Elizabeth Warren is already on the record calling the alleged sexual misconduct of her Senate colleague, Al Franken, “unacceptable and deeply disappointing.” But when late-night host Stephen Colbert asked Warren directly if she thought Franken should step down during Tuesday’s episode of “The Late Show,” the Massachusetts senator went in a different direction with her answer.

“Al Franken, a comedian I’ve long admired and a politician I’ve recently admired, has been caught up in two accusations, one of which he’s acknowledged and apologized for,” Colbert said. “People are calling for Al Franken to step down. Do you think he should?”

“I was just enormously disappointed about this,” Warren said. “I knew Senator Franken long before he was Senator Franken, and his wife, Franny. These allegations are serious, and women have a right to be heard and listened to on this. Al is going to be subjected to a hearing in the Unites States Senate . . . and he’s going to go in and answer.”

In fairness, the Globe notes that Warren dodged on expelling Roy Moore, though that was a easier dodge since Warren answered the question by suggesting Moore wouldn’t get elected.

Why is Warren so hesitant? Perhaps because once past scandals from decades ago are put on the table as to whether a Senator should be expelled, where does one draw the line? Would ethnic fraud be a ground to remove a Senator? Just a *random* thought.

In related news, Warren lashed out at Trump’s use of the term “Pocahontas” to describe her.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) said President Donald Trump’s attacks on her will not stop her from criticizing his administration or the Republican agenda in Congress.

Appearing on “The Late Show” Monday night, Warren took a moment to respond to the president’s tweet from earlier this month, in which he attacked Democrats and referred to her as “Pocahontas,” a term many Native Americans consider a slur.

“Donald Trump thinks if he’s going to start every one of these tweets to me with some kind of racist slur here, that he’s going to shut me up,” Warren said. “It didn’t work in the past, it’s not going to work in the future. Give it up.”

Warren played the game she and her defenders are playing, calling the term “racist” without addressing why it’s used. The term is clearly mocking Warren’s false claim to be Native American, not to denigrate actual Native Americans. We’ve covered this issue before:

Trump has effectively branded Warren as a fraud by calling her “Pocahontas,” That term mocks Warren not for being Native American, but for her fake claim to be Native American.

It’s not a term we use (just as we don’t use fauxcahontas or other similar terms) because (i) it’s demeaning to the Native Americans who were the victims of Warren’s ethnic misappropriation, and (ii) it provides the perfect distraction for Warren and her supporters to avoid discussing the substance of what Warren did to rip off Native American identity to try to gain an advantage in the law school hiring market. But just like “Low Energy” Jeb and “Little” Marco, it’s effective at defining Warren’s personal character flaw.

As her Late Show appearance shows, Trump’s use of that term provides Warren the out she needs to avoid addressing her own ethnic deception.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.