UMC suburban college student lied about background to become prestigious Rhodes Scholar

[Anonymous]

She may be a victim (unlike PPs I am willing to take that at face value with what we know now) but there is also no question in my mind that she has been treated very, very differently than if she had done the exact same thing as a young POC boy in HS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:lol I doubt she cares about reforming anything. this is a ruthless striver using a narrative to collect status badges so she can follow AOC's blueprint and run for congress in her late 20s.

Yep. The point of this was to reinvent herself as an inspirational wedge into politics. That's where the real power is. Of course, she was taking advantage of the fact that people love a good sob story. That doesn't change the fact that she is a grifter.

Tom Ripley, Frank Abagnale Jr., Anna Delvey.

"Inventing Maggie Fierceton." Why not?

I do see a lot of similarities. Fierceton is smarter though.

[Anonymous]

She just took it one step too far with the Rhodes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She may be a victim (unlike PPs I am willing to take that at face value with what we know now) but there is also no question in my mind that she has been treated very, very differently than if she had done the exact same thing as a young POC boy in HS.

Victim? Her doctor mommy was so evil she... got her a car, let her grow up in a mansion in a cozy suburb, and dropped well into the six-figures for an elite k-12 private education and various extracurriculars? That is a charmed life which set her up to be an all A student at Penn. The claims of abuse, even if I believe every single word, are not even that bad. In fact, even she knew it wasn't that bad because she was caught red-handed exaggerating (if not bald-face lying). Pretty much every poor and middle class teen in America, with parents in low-status awful jobs, no money for a car so they ride a bus to and from worthless public schools, family can't afford any ECs, and will likely end up at community college or the local community university on loans, would trade places with her in a New York minute. You think any teens in East St Louis are stewing for years about some physical argument with a parent. Maybe a few years down the line she'll realize how lucky she was.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She just took it one step too far with the Rhodes.

And with the lawsuit. I think it all would have faded away had she not doubled down with this lawsuit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She just took it one step too far with the Rhodes.

But she did win the Rhodes. And she came so close to getting away with it. And she would have if Some anonymous person in her home town who read the story hadn't written a letter to Penn and the Rhodes Committee. And the reactions here on this thread tell me she shouldn't seek a jury trial.

[Anonymous]

lol, relevant

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She may be a victim (unlike PPs I am willing to take that at face value with what we know now) but there is also no question in my mind that she has been treated very, very differently than if she had done the exact same thing as a young POC boy in HS.

Victim? Her doctor mommy was so evil she... got her a car, let her grow up in a mansion in a cozy suburb, and dropped well into the six-figures for an elite k-12 private education and various extracurriculars? That is a charmed life which set her up to be an all A student at Penn. The claims of abuse, even if I believe every single word, are not even that bad. In fact, even she knew it wasn't that bad because she was caught red-handed exaggerating (if not bald-face lying). Pretty much every poor and middle class teen in America, with parents in low-status awful jobs, no money for a car so they ride a bus to and from worthless public schools, family can't afford any ECs, and will likely end up at community college or the local community university on loans, would trade places with her in a New York minute. You think any teens in East St Louis are stewing for years about some physical argument with a parent. Maybe a few years down the line she'll realize how lucky she was.

You’re lying. And yet you’re condemning her for lying.

First of all, she didn’t grow up in a mansion. You can look up the picture on line.

Second, having a car and a fancy private school does not in and of itself equate to a “charmed life.” Pretty shallow of you to claim that.

Third, you have no idea what abuse was inflicted on her. So, mocking her for something about which you know nothing is just ludicrous.it wasn’t just “some physical argument with a parent.” Social service reports include allegations going back to before she was 8-years-old. Social services made the determination to recover her from her mother’s custody. She did not make that determination.

Regardless of a privileged upbringing in some ways, she did spend half of her high school career in foster homes. That wasn’t a lie. She did fit Penn’s first gen definition. That wasn’t a lie. The Questbridge Director reviewed her Penn application recently and found nothing wrong with it. He said that he would have approved it as is. That’s a fact.

[Anonymous]

First of all, she didn’t grow up in a mansion. You can look up the picture on line.

Darn it, you forced me to look it up. I'm actually laughing. Only a totally delusional spoiled brat who's been around SUPER rich would claim that house is NOT a mansion! It's a lavish nearly 4,000 sq. ft. home is a super ritzy suburban neighborhood full of million dollar estates with huge manicured yards in flyover country (which would all be $2m+ in the DMV). You are either the girl herself or another rich friend of hers who thinks only "RICH, rich" is rich. No, her upbringing was in fact quintessential RICH.

Second, having a car and a fancy private school does not in and of itself equate to a “charmed life.”

Oy vey, YES, IT DOES! It made her a top 0.01% rich kid in America. EVERY SINGLE TEEN in inner-city St Louis and East St Louis would have traded places with her. Every. Single. One. Because her life was CHARMED even with the alleged abuse from her mom, which the prosecutor dropped btw. Most kids in the inner-city are abused worse and live in pure squalor, attend hopeless schools, have no car and are piss poor. That is a REAL harsh life, not some charmed picture perfect rich girl life with an alleged ruthless mom (to me, if anything, the mom sounds like the book Tiger Mom). You don't comprehend this because you yourself are one of her rich friends or maybe her herself, who knows. Either way, I'm responding to some spoiled brat with a totally distorted view of the world. Zero grasp of poverty and zero appreciation for the birth lottery this girl won - a WANNABE victim.

[Anonymous]

Regardless of a privileged upbringing in some ways, she did spend half of her high school career in foster homes.

Now we're up to two years of $30,000 day school tuition mysteriously paid? Interesting. You know what would impress me about that "two years" - if she didn't get to spend it at her CHARMED $30k year day school and instead got shipped off to spend two years in a sh*thole St Louis public high school like Vashon or Roosevelt. You know, LIKE A REAL FOSTER KID. One or two days in some tough crap hole inner city public school would have had her running home to mommy's suburban mansion.

[Anonymous]

I wonder if McKenzie is getting the message from this thread people generally are not on her side? Just like with Laurie Laughlin. Her lawyers are delusional in my opinion. And who is paying for the lawsuit. Makes no sense at all to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if McKenzie is getting the message from this thread people generally are not on her side? Just like with Laurie Laughlin. Her lawyers are delusional in my opinion. And who is paying for the lawsuit. Makes no sense at all to me.

She clearly is on this thread, as are her friends, and I have been unimpressed with any of their arguments.

[Anonymous]

What makes me convinced that her mother is in the right is the lack of interviews from the mother.

She doesn't have to convince the public her daughter is lying. She has evidence.

[Anonymous]

Mackenzie: have some babies to keep the money in the family and ensure you get invited to holidays.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if McKenzie is getting the message from this thread people generally are not on her side? Just like with Laurie Laughlin. Her lawyers are delusional in my opinion. And who is paying for the lawsuit. Makes no sense at all to me.

She conned a few naive friends and a handful of gullible ivory tower professors want to believe they helped groom some poor girl when it was actually just a rich private school lifer pretending to be poor. Easy marks.