Pocahontas: When Questioned About Ethics And Biden, Ms ‘I Have A Plan’ Warren Is Suddenly Flustered
She has such strong and sweeping opinions in criticizing all things Republican, why is she suddenly so cautious in her answer when it’s suddenly asking questions about Democrats and nepotism?
Everything else is so black-and-white in her eyes, isn’t it?
Reparations MUST happen… even for LGBT, somehow.
(Whatever that would look like.)
We MUST confiscate the wealth of rich people.
We MUST pass this and that invasive law that would have untold cascading effects on culture and economy… and to HELL with any question of the constitutionality of such efforts.
But when pressed about her position NEPOTISM, she’s suddenly nuanced and circumspect?
Is that because she’s not sure which of her many liberal donors in the swamp such a strong position might inadvertently kneepcap?
She doesn’t mind throwing the word ‘corrupt’ around at people who have shown no ACTUAL evidence of corruption, but can’t quite bring herself to look nepotism in the eye?
FLAG: Senator Elizabeth Warren appears uncharacteristically flustered when asked if her ethics plan would allow her Vice President's son to serve on the board of a foreign company: "No," she said. "I don't know. I mean I’d have to go back and look at the details." #nhpolitics pic.twitter.com/EksLlMEsew
— Nicole Sganga (@NicoleSganga) September 25, 2019
Um, er, um,
Isn’t she a freaking Harvard LAW professor for crying out loud?
Is the potential conflict of interest in internationally-based nepotism really such a grey area?
Her side has been routinely freaking out about foreigners renting bloody hotel rooms, but a $50,000 a month job sitting on a board in a business where you have no experience, and you don’t even speak one of the local languages does look an awful lot like some kind of a naked attempt at pay-for-access. The trip to China with his dad on Air Force 2 looks even worse.
But perhaps she’s too busy making up reasons for impeachment to be bothered by such trivialities.
It is worth noting though, that she who has a ready answer for everything else has no ‘gut-reaction’ response to such a basic ethical question.
Wouldn’t we WANT a leader who has thought through some of the basic ethical dealings that are expected of a person in leadership?
And if she hasn’t thought these things through, doesn’t that throw up a few red flags about the reliability of her own moral compass?