Umbridge a DE? (Was Re: Trelawney a future Voldemort Target?)

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 87813

> Athena wrote:
> 
> ACT-chually, I think that Umbridge is merely a toady and is just as 
> eager to please as Percy is.  I think she is vile and venomous, but 
> I don't think she's actually a Death Eater and I doubt she is on 
> Voldemort's payroll.  I think Fudge is someone who sold his soul a 
> long time ago to Voldemort.  I doubt there's the black mark on his 
> arm, but his soul has been bought and paid for with advancement in 
> the Ministry above his competence level.
> 
> I also think that Lucius Malfoy may have helped to further Fudge's 
> candidacy knowing that he'd have someone who would be in a position 
> to be "amenable" to hearing his supplications.  Because of course, 
> Malfoy would have blackmail material on exactly why Fudge got where 
> he is.
> 
> Therefore, I think that Voldemort is issuing orders via Malfoy to 
> Fudge who then dispatches his toady Umbridge to do whatever it is 
> that is necessary with no questions asked.  Hence the terminology 
> that Umbridge was instructed to try and get Trelawney removed.
<snip>


I agree that Umbridge is a toady (note the toad imagery used to
describe her) and that Fudge has been bought by Lucius Malfoy (which
doesn't necessarily imply that he's a willing tool of Voldemort; until
the end of OoP, he seems to believe that Voldemort was conveniently
destroyed and that Malfoy was rightly cleared of charges of being a DE
because he was under an Imperius curse). But I'm not so sure that
Umbridge was under orders from Fudge via Malfoy to get rid of
Trelawney. I think she merely saw Trelawney as an easy target, a
clearly incompetent teacher whom she could use to display her
authority and power as High Inquisitor. She tried to fire Hagrid for
the same reason. I doubt that she was under orders to fire him because
he could provide valuable information to Voldemort if he were captured
and tortured.

Carol