Donald Trump Meets Elizabeth Warren:

2015 08 21_3000Those who heard Donald Trump’s Soviet-like acceptance speech of the nomination for president of the United States at the Republican Convention in Cleveland could not but be reminded of a dictator, especially a Communist one, who is accountable to no one but himself. You know how long those dictators liked to talk when given a platform – Fidel Castro for one holds the UN record for the longest speech of four hours and twenty-nine minutes and once gave one that ran seven hours and ten minutes.

Among the top eight longest speeches  we have Muammar al-Gaddafi, Hugo Chavez, Fidel, and Joseph Stalin. These give you a view into the type of person who is speaking. He is one who believes the sun only shines on him.

Lengthy speeches are very much like the lengthy appellate court decisions – they stretch out so long because they use the length to try to hide the vacuousness of their thoughts. I recall the Florida appellate judge’s dissent on former FBI Agent John Connolly’s appeal ran about forty pages as she tried to show that even had John Callahan been strangled John Connolly was correctly convicted of murder by gun when he was 1,500 miles away.

I say all this because it is what caused Senator Elizabeth Warren to have a chat with Donald Trump after he left the podium and was standing in the VIP reception room. Many were shocked to see her there but like one of her idols Bill Clinton did when he boarded the attorney general’s plane in Phoenix she just plowed through the security with a “you know who I am” look and walked up to Donald Trump.

He looked up in surprise but immediately turned his attention to her. When she saw she had caught his eye and his attention she smiled, raised her right hand to her shoulder level and said what to Trump sounded like: “How!”

Trump immediately thought that is something that Pocahontas would have done and wondered if she was doing that to show that she in fact had some Native American blood running through her veins. In his delight over the congratulations that poured down on him by all the Trumpeteers Donald decided to go along with it – no use diminishing the mood of ecstasy – and raised his right hand to shoulder level and returned: “How!”, believing that was the proper way to return the greeting.

The smile molted. Elizabeth grimaced and said: “Making fun of me again?”.

Trump recognized she was offended. He said: “Liz, I wasn’t doing that, I was returning your greeting. You said How! You know how much I love you.” As you know Donald tells people he loves them as often as a clock tells the time.

Senator Warren replied: “I did say how – it was not How! – the one used in a greeting – it was How? – the one used in the question. I was asking how are you going to do the things you said you were going to do. You told us of all the changes you were making but you never told us how you would go about doing it in any part of the 76 minutes of your speech. Your speech was a big con job. You reminded me of one of those Kickapoo Indian Medicine Company pitchmen selling sagwa.”

Donald, not wanting to start bickering at this moment and resting content that all the Trumpeteers did not pick up that he has no solution for any of the nation’s problems responded. “Poca, I mean Liz, give me a call in a day or two and I’ll explain how. Right now – as you can see I’m busy accepting the praise of my followers.”  He turned away from her and pointed to another person and went over to her.

Senator Warren was left standing alone. No one approached her. She knew now she would never get an answer to how Trump planned to accomplish any of the marvelous things the Trumpeteers are waiting to see and what he promised them. She thought of her Native American heritage and the Indian Summers eating Indian apples and how she played with the tom-tom and how Trump’s speech as much substance in it as one of them.

Strangely, I thought the same thing.

30 thoughts on “Donald Trump Meets Elizabeth Warren:

  1. Using investigative techniques I learned under the guidance of MTC at Norfolk, I located the plagiarized Warren recipes in May 0f 2012 and took it a step further to identify her Oklahoma land flips later that month….I was surprised she did withdraw and went on to win that Senate election that year…How, I ask, did that happen?

    Elizabeth Warren’s Pow Wow Chow ‘Cherokee’ recipes were word for …
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/…/Elizabeth-Warrens-Pow-Wow-Chow-Cherokee-rec...
    Daily Mail
    May 18, 2012 – Massachusetts Democratic Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren is yet … But it appears that at least three of the five recipes featured in the book were fakes, … Carr Show » Bill Fitzgerald finds two Granny Recipes ¿ same paper …

    1. Bill Fitzgerald By your explanation I suppose that my mother, God rest her soul, who was born in Ireland, her Irish bread would be considered well not quite Irish as her recipe is not in any book. Further anyone that tastes my mother’s bread would easily agree that it does not even nearly resemble any Irish bread anyone has ever tasted. She must be a fraud. I might add it is a bit dry. But it is one that she knows and remembers from being a young girl. It’s funny how as kids we remember what we’ve been taught or told by our trusted adults. Now you get me thinking perhaps she wasn’t Irish at all. She really didn’t look Irish because we all know Irish have red hair and freckles and she didn’t. Maybe her bread is not Irish either…..

      1. Simply because a trusted adult tells a child that he or she is of a particular nationality doesn’t give that young person the right to check off any certain nationality box on an application for education or employment later in life. Elizabeth Warren committed fraud and gained something that she was not morally nor legally due. The democrats have come to accept any and all levels of political and commercial corruption as has many republicans. People who accept this are helping to destroy the United State of America.

        1. Yeah sure Bobby like you didn’t listen to your family lore. Give me a break. And this is this fraud? Sounds more like you’re suffering from a bruised ego.

          1. I never would have fraudulently said that I was someone that I wasn’t to further my education or employment. Warren is a fraud no matter how you paint her. My ego is fine, sky. Too scared to blog with your true ID or did your parents name you sky?

      2. Hi Sky….Had your mom taken, word for word, a 1979 article for two recipes written by Pierre Franey that reports those two recipes, favorites of Cole Porter and the Duke of Windsor, and printed them in a 1984 book as her own Cherokee ones, your heritage would remain what you had been told but you would, no doubt, be ashamed of her.

    2. Bill:
      Great detective work tracing down Warren’s pilfering of other’s work. I missed you doing that . The reason that type of fraudulent behavior is so low is that it need not have to be done. Some people steal because they are hungry or covetous to fill a desire. Others engage in fraud to better their pocketbook. Why would Warren steal recipe’s and then pass them off as her own? She did not have to do it since she could easily have passed on her cousin’s request but her insatiable desire to be something she isn’t, in this case a woman familiar with cooking, caused her thievery. Just like her faking her way into Harvard with her native American background and then justifying it by saying her grandmother told her that. Good work in coming up with that.

      1. Matt…the amazing part of finding the two recipes, verbatim, in a 1979 Virgin Islands newspaper, was the article by the New York Times French Chef about those recipes being favorites of Manhattan socialites…and the fact that her campaign had proffered the Pow Wow Chow book as proof of her purloined heritage was icing on that cake. I truly believed that after that, and the Oklahoma land flips, that she would drop out of the race.

        1. Bill:

          I thought the Duke and Duchess of Windsor had some Cherokee blood and if that is the case thes Warren also must have had some. I agree that only in Massachusetts could one involved in so much fraudulent activity get elected. That’s why unless Hillary is found to have abused Cherokee children when she was First Lady or opposed the legalization of marijuana she will be a big winner in MA.

  2. Elizabeth Warren, a phony like Hillary Clinton. The democrats have no people with any credibility, morals or shame. The spin doctors just keep spitting it out day after day. A lot of people are angry and fed up with the Clintons, obamas and Warren types. Yes there is a cross over into the republican party of these same phonies. The corrupt media and democrats all laughed a year ago when the primaries began, Trump was called all sorts of things. Funny how the media never name called him or laughed at him as he built a billion dollar business and ran a very successful TV show. The ridicule began with his announcement. They were scared of Trump, now that he is the nominee, they are terrified. Ha, well election day will bring us the rest of the story. I’m looking forward to November, no matter who wins, it will be the most exciting and interesting election during my life time. Oh ya, I’m voting for Donald Trump, so bring it on!

    1. You live in a bubble if you think ‘we’ collectively as a group didn’t know or have any thoughts about TRUMP before the last 8 years. Some of us don’t give idiots any amount of time in our lives.

      1. sky, I like how you anonymous bloggers personally insult others. Would you toss you crap around under your real name?

    2. Bobby:

      The only time almost all the media cared about Trump was when he decided to run for president. There were articles about him from time to time but what he did affected his private interests and not the lives of all the people.

  3. Matt,
    Name me the last President who actually kept their campaign promises.
    I can’t think of one, and I’ve seen a few come and go.
    Now, this is an issue that cuts across party lines, they all say anything to get elected…..it’s par for the course,…I don’t hold that against Trump.

    I think Trump will get things done, in a way that has never been seen before.
    He’ll take it as it comes, just like they all do…..
    despite the campaign rhetoric.

    1. Rather:

      1. There is some hyperbole in runnning for president since much that one wishes to accomplish is controlled by another body of people. Read what I say about Trump’s speech tomorrow and you’ll see what is really wrong with the man –

      2. Trump’s only ability to do something will be to work with Congress and he is so unpopular there that he will accomplish very little. The danger comes in his use of the military. He is going to tear up the Iran treaty – will that lead to war?

      3. You don’t know Trump when you say he’ll take it as it comes — he is a veangeful bully who likes to get back at people.

  4. Matt,

    Who do you think?

    Our enemies would instantly have more fear and respect for?

    they would be more afraid of negotiating with?

    would put them off-balance more and shake things up in our favor?

    Change is good.
    Our reputation is shot and our system is broken and corrupt.
    We have a once-in-lifetime chance to fix it.
    Outside-the-box candidates that have the potential to really CHANGE our country like this , don’t come along every day, just once every 70 years or so (R.I.P.- FDR, HST).

    What’s not to get?

    1. Rather:

      1. A better question is who do you think our friends would have more fear of? Mr. Go-It_Alone or the Wicked Witch.

      2. Trump talks like negotiations are one sided – they may be in the real estate business but between countries they are not. If countries cannot get good agreements with America they will go other places.

      3. Not all change is good. Change can bring about horrible conditions which should have been foreseen. Our reputation is not broken nor is our system corrupt. We are doing well considering what is happening in the western world. If it is not broke then don’t try to fix it. Outside the box candidates rarely have come along so with Trump we know nothing about how he will govern. There is a great difference between being a president and a boss. You mention FDR and HST – both Democrats – both experienced in government – one a combat military captain – all the things Trump is not.

      4. What is not to get is you have a hot head with his hand on the nuclear button.

  5. Matt:
    1.William Gladstone, no tyrannical slouch, spoke before Parliament for 4 hrs 45 mins; William Henry Harrison’s Inauguration speech ran 1 hr 55 mins; and Edward Everett’s Gettysburg Oration lasted 2 hours.
    It’s a quibble: Trump spoke for 75 minutes, Bill Clinton for 65 minutes; George W. Bush for over 60 minutes. Bill Clinton routinely gave hour long state of the union speeches, as I recall.
    I would not put the label “Dictator” on Gladstone, Tippecanoe, Everett, Clinton and Bush.
    2. I often wondered “How” Obama was going to “heal the earth” and “stop the oceans from rising” and end our military ventures in Iraq and Afghanistan. I wonder “How” Hillary is going to make college “free”.
    3. Politicians speak in platitudes.
    4. Matt, your blog provokes thought and gives us all a chance to vent. Thank you! I learn a lot from you and your contributors. Diversity of opinion makes America great.

    1. Someone posted a photo of Trump with duct tape over his mouth…….I countered with this:

      The American Library Association (ALA) defines intellectual freedom as “the right of every individual to both seek and receive information from all points of view without restriction. It provides for free access to all expressions of ideas through which any and all sides of a question, cause or movement can be explored.”[3]

    2. Bill:

      1. The Communists came to power in Russia around 1917. Since that time they have been the ones who have given the longest speeches and Trump is the only one who acts like them when he talks.

      2. You have to remember that Obama did not get us involved in any other military adventures outside of Lybia which was done to prevent a massacre of people in Benghazi and cost no American lives. He inhereted Bush’s wars where over 4,000 died. Obama was a man of peace which was important. Hillary can make state run colleges – not all colleges – less expensive by providing the states with additional funding so that poor kids can have a better chance to advance themselves.

      3. Yes, some politicians speak in platitudes while others outright lie.

      4. The theory behind the First Amendment is that it is better people talk out their grievances than fight them out. No one is hurt by this blog since I have been lucky that almost all the people who comment have refrained from labeling or attacking others but they merely give their best comment regardless of what I or others think.

  6. Matt, if you read Trump’s speech, it takes about 15-20 minutes. http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/full-transcript-donald-trump-nomination-acceptance-speech-at-rnc-225974
    It’s written very well.
    NBC’s fact check essentially confirmed the speech as factual, with some minor qualifications. For example,Trump cited a 58% unemployment rate for Black youths (age 16-19), NBC said it was 27%, but the Bureau of Labor Statistics data for June 2016 says 38%. Anyway, it’s high! 58 may have been a typo.

  7. I do hope that the media remind everyone that the Cherokee tribes were owners of many black slaves and they fought for the Confederacy. Senator Warren, if Cherokee, may rightfully wear the Confederate flag in her war bonnet when she campaigns.

    1. More

      If Poca is truly a “Native American” – Cherokee – as she claims, she ought to prove it.

      Lending money to relatives in Oklahoma to buy rental homes doesn’t count.

      As far as I know, Poca does not meet any criteria for enrollment in the Cherokee tribe, much less any other tribe.

      https://www.doi.gov/tribes/cherokee

      About 200 years ago the Cherokee Indians were one tribe, or “Indian Nation” that lived in the southeast part of what is now the United States. During the 1830’s and 1840’s, the period covered by the Indian Removal Act, many Cherokees were moved west to a territory that is now the State of Oklahoma. A number remained in the southeast and gathered in North Carolina where they purchased land and continued to live. Others went into the Appalachian Mountains to escape being moved west and many of their descendants may still live there now.

      Today, individuals of Cherokee ancestry fall into the following categories:

      Living persons who were listed on the final rolls of the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma (Dawes Commission Rolls) that were approved and descendants of these persons. These final rolls were closed in 1907.
      Individuals enrolled as members of the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians of North Carolina and their descendants who are eligible for enrollment with the Band.
      Persons on the list of members identified by a resolution dated April 19, 1949, and certified by the Superintendent of the Five Civilized Tribes Agency and their descendants who are eligible for enrollment with the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indian of Oklahoma.
      All other persons of Cherokee Indian ancestry.

      Category 1

      After about a half century of self-government, a law enacted in 1906 directed that final rolls be made and that each enrollee be given an allotment of land or paid cash in lieu of an allotment. The Cherokees formally organized in 1975 with the adoption of a new Constitution that superseded the 1839 Cherokee Nation Constitution. This new Constitution establishes a Cherokee Register for the inclusion of any Cherokee for membership purposes in the Cherokee Nation. Members must be citizens as proven by reference to the Dawes Commission Rolls. Including in this are the Delaware Cherokees of Article II of the Delaware Agreement dated May 8, 1867, and the Shawnee Cherokees of Article III of the Shawnee Agreement dated June 9, 1869, and/or their descendants.

      P.L. 100-472, authorizes through a planning and negotiation process Indian Tribes to administer and manage programs, activities, function, and services previously managed by the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Pursuant to P.L. 100-472 the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma has entered into a Self-governance Compact and now provides those services previously provided by the BIA. Enrollment and allotment records are maintained by the Cherokee Nation. Any question with regard to the Cherokee Nation should be referred to:

      Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma

      P.O. Box 948

      Tahlequah, OK 74465

      (918)456-0671 Fax (918)456-6485.

      Category 2

      The Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians of North Carolina is a federally recognized tribe and has its own requirements for membership. Inquiries as to these requirements, or for information shown in the records may be addressed to the BIA’s Cherokee Agency, Cherokee, North Carolina 28719, (704) 497-9131, or

      Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians

      P.O. Box 455

      Cherokee, North Carolina 28719

      (207) 497-2771, Fax (704)497-2952

      ask for the Tribal Enrollment Office.

      Category 3

      By the Act of August 10, 1946, 60 Stat. 976, Congress recognized the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians in Oklahoma (UKB) for the purposes of organizing under the Oklahoma Indian Welfare Act. In 1950, the UKB organized under a Constitution and Bylaws approved by the Secretary of the Interior. Members of the UKB consist of all persons whose names appear on the list of members identified by a resolution dated April 19, 1949, and certified by the Superintendent of the Five Civilized Tribes Agency on November 26, 1949, with the governing body of the UKB having the power to prescribe rules and regulations governing future membership. The supreme governing body (UKB Council) consist of 9 members, elected to represent the nine districts of the old Cherokee Nation and four officers, elected at large. Information may be obtained by writing

      United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians

      P.O. Box 746

      Tahlequah Oklahoma, 74465-9432

      (918) 456-5491 Fax (918) 456-9601.

      Category 4

      Information about Indian ancestry of individuals in this category of Cherokees is more difficult to locate. This is primarily because the federal government has never maintained a list of all the persons of Cherokee Indian descent, indicating their tribal affiliation, degree of Indian blood or other data. In order to establish Cherokee ancestry you should use the same methods prescribed in “Indian Ancestry” and “Genealogical Research” material. (Reference directories ” INDIAN ANCESTRY” and ” GENEALOGICAL RESEARCH”)

    2. Henry:

      The poor Cherokees seem to have been on the wrong side all along. Warren, I believe, has discovered she is not a Cherokee so she cannot wear the Confederate flag; however she has discovered she is related to Warren Spahn who was a pitcher for the Boston Braves which was considered somewhat of an Indian tribe.

  8. Donald Trump’s RNC address could mark the start of an American revival

    “As befits an acceptance speech, the promises flowed like water, yet the important things stand out. This one, from his prepared remarks, was especially powerful: “On January 20th of 2017, the day after I take the oath of office, Americans will finally wake up in a country where the laws of the United States are enforced.”

    He was blistering on Hillary Clinton, saying her legacy as secretary of state was “death, destruction, terrorism and weakness.” Nor did he spare President Obama, accusing him of using “the pulpit of the presidency to divide us by race and color” and saying he “has made America a more dangerous environment for everyone.”

    “If he wins, and can deliver on his vision, remember this speech. Like Ronald Reagan’s in 1976, Trump’s 2016 address could mark the start of a desperately needed American revival. As he said near the end, “America is back.”

    http://nypost.com/2016/07/21/donald-trumps-rnc-address-could-mark-the-start-of-an-american-revival/

      1. Matt: Back in 1964 I voted for Barry Goldwater. One of the few Republican votes he received in Charlestown. The guys at the Morning Glory told me that if I voted for him the country would soon be at war. They were correct.

        Speeches are for effect.

        1. Without a doubt, this has got to be one of the best political comments of all time. Now we know that Henry’s vote for Goldwater caused the war.

          You knew in your heart that Barry Goldwater was right.

          So were the guys at the Morning Glory.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *