Another Black Eye for Penn

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The New Yorker article notes that Mackenzie made some mistakes and I think there is even room to believe her mom over her, although I don’t, but even if you did Penn comes off horribly for the way they treated her (not that I expect it to affect Penn’s admissions— if you want to go to be management consultant something like this isn’t going to discourage you).

I disagree. Penn should have expelled her and tried to claw back the over $300,000 in aid the rich brat looted.

Also interesting we have so many profiles of this rich white girl but zero mention of her SAT score. And her transcript had at least some Bs on it; she was NOT even valedictorian or salutatorian at her tiny high school! Clearly SAT is never mentioned because it was mediocre and it would expose she is a midwit only at an Ivy, for free no less, because of all these falsehoods. She was an unimpressive dime a dozen rich white girl from St Louis who ought to have ended up at Missouri or maybe a Wake Forest tier private school if her rich doctor mom would have paid for it. I believe she cooked up this crap to get into an elite college.

Whoa, are you her mom?

First of all, I haven’t seen anyone doubt she was on her own by the time she was attending college so she wasn’t rich and she earned the Questbridge scholarship. Did you even read the quote from the leader of the FGLI group at Penn— it’s wrong on multiple levels to stereotype FGLI as one thing.

Second, it seems crazy that you are posting her grades here and complaining no one is reporting her SAT scores. You sound obsessed with tearing her down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Any mother who *laughs to investigators* when asked about her BF molesting her daughter has a screw loose. I cannot take the mom seriously at all after that. Then the BF denies it happened? Even though there’s contemporaneous evidence that it did? And he’s been reported to police *twice* previously by girlfriends? And yet the mom blew off her daughter’s concerns about him? This is a ducked up family.

Also, what was the bit about her mom calling police when the BF showed Mackenzie his gun? It was sort of dropped in there with no context.

Exactly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP - what do you mean by “another” black eye? What were the previous black eyes?

OP? What is the other black eye at Penn?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP - what do you mean by “another” black eye? What were the previous black eyes?

THIS. If referring to DJT, he graduated in 1968. 54 years ago or 3 years before UVA officially became coed.

[Anonymous]

Is there a pattern of aggressively criticizing people who question this narrative, as claimed by MF?

[Anonymous]

There is nothing in that article to suggest the Rhodes Committee made a mistake in revoking her scholarship.
They received the same info Penn did and conducted their own investigation.
I think Penn was ethically obligated to make known the information they received; imagine how much worse it would have been for them if they tried to keep it quiet once they learned of Fierceton's true background -- and they had every incentive to do so, as they could have claimed a Rhodes scholar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP - what do you mean by “another” black eye? What were the previous black eyes?

OP? What is the other black eye at Penn?

http://www.thedp.com/article/2021/09/penn-castle-fraternity-assault-party-severe-injuries
https://pennepistle.org/2021/10/01/the-castle-frat-party-incident-is-a-symptom-of-our-own-depravity/

[Anonymous]

I'm brand new to the story and have only read the New Yorker article in the OP of this thread. So zero preconceptions coming in, I had never even hear of any of this (do not follow this kind of news at all).

One thing that strikes me, regardless of whether you believe Mackenzie or her mom, is that it is weird for Penn to withhold an earned degree. Withholding the masters degree is odd to me because regardless of whether Mackenzie lied on her application, it's obvious she completed her coursework and earned the necessary grades to complete her masters. Same with her undergrad degree. They stripped her of her summa status based on this issue, but she obviously earned it. She did the work and did it well enough to earn the required grades.

This is disturbing to me because it's a view of academic credentials as nothing more than a rubber stamp, like Mackenzie is only a Penn grad, or only a qualified social worker, if Penn says so, regardless of the work put into earning those degrees. I underwent that if she did like, Penn would have an interest in sanctioning her. But the allegations are not that she cheated on any of her coursework, or that she didn't earn her grades. And no one is alleging that she lied about her high school grades or other qualifications. The ONLY allegations I that she lied or exaggerated about her first-gen or low income status. But those aren't qualifications for admission to Penn or the masters program. Those are identities that Penn and others have decided are desirable for reasons totally external to this situation.

Even if she did lie (and based exclusively on the New Yorker article, it seems to me that she, at worst, failed to provide context that might have altered the school's perception of her as first gen or high needs), she did the work. Trying to take that away from her, or anyone, seems antithetical to a belief in a meritocracy. What is more important to people, that she have suffered sufficiently to have earned a place at an institution literally filled with people who have never really suffered at all (interesting that the wealthy kids at Penn don't have to prove they've earned admission, or their degree, via suffering)? Or that she actually did her coursework, learned what she needed to learn, performed well enough to get the right grades, and completed her degree?

What the heck is college for, exactly?

[Anonymous]

^ should read "I understand that if she did lie..."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The New Yorker article notes that Mackenzie made some mistakes and I think there is even room to believe her mom over her, although I don’t, but even if you did Penn comes off horribly for the way they treated her (not that I expect it to affect Penn’s admissions— if you want to go to be management consultant something like this isn’t going to discourage you).

I disagree. Penn should have expelled her and tried to claw back the over $300,000 in aid the rich brat looted.

Also interesting we have so many profiles of this rich white girl but zero mention of her SAT score. And her transcript had at least some Bs on it; she was NOT even valedictorian or salutatorian at her tiny high school! Clearly SAT is never mentioned because it was mediocre and it would expose she is a midwit only at an Ivy, for free no less, because of all these falsehoods. She was an unimpressive dime a dozen rich white girl from St Louis who ought to have ended up at Missouri or maybe a Wake Forest tier private school if her rich doctor mom would have paid for it. I believe she cooked up this crap to get into an elite college.

She wasn’t rich, though. Regardless of whether you think she was lying the fact is she was an uneducated teenager with zero family support. Being rich isn’t like having freckles or something-you can (and she did) stop being rich-in her case she did that as a junior in high school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The New Yorker article notes that Mackenzie made some mistakes and I think there is even room to believe her mom over her, although I don’t, but even if you did Penn comes off horribly for the way they treated her (not that I expect it to affect Penn’s admissions— if you want to go to be management consultant something like this isn’t going to discourage you).

I disagree. Penn should have expelled her and tried to claw back the over $300,000 in aid the rich brat looted.

Also interesting we have so many profiles of this rich white girl but zero mention of her SAT score. And her transcript had at least some Bs on it; she was NOT even valedictorian or salutatorian at her tiny high school! Clearly SAT is never mentioned because it was mediocre and it would expose she is a midwit only at an Ivy, for free no less, because of all these falsehoods. She was an unimpressive dime a dozen rich white girl from St Louis who ought to have ended up at Missouri or maybe a Wake Forest tier private school if her rich doctor mom would have paid for it. I believe she cooked up this crap to get into an elite college.

Expelled her???

This is absurd. She had already graduated. This didn’t become an issue until the 2nd semester of her year as a graduate student. And by that time Penn stated that she had already completed all of the requirements fir her master’s degree.

Nonetheless what would have been the grounds for expulsion? I don’t see any.

Regardless of her skin color, she was no longer a rich girl either at the time she applied to Penn nor at any point while she was a student at Penn.

[Anonymous]

You really have to suspend all reality to believe anything this woman tells you and overlook the serial manipulative diversions, guilt-tripping and gas lighting. Her lies and excuses are just so laughable. The only reason she gets away with it is because she's a cute well-groomed rich girl. Perfect teeth, polished, and knows how to work all the angles.

She 'speaks the language' of a rich white girl, thus rich white professors and rich white writers are captivated by her. It is white privilege in action. Imagine hearing a Black male was accused of this sort of six-figure financial aid fraud and was randomly living with female professors and randomly on the receiving end of tens of thousands of dollars from the professors. You can't imagine it because it would never happen and actual poor kids don't know how to work all of these angles, only ruthless striver rich kids do. I wouldn't be surprised if her Rhodes scholar mentor older pal at Penn is also a pathological lying fraud. Birds of a feather.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
2.) Why did the writer omit this smoking gun from her reporting? Do her editors know of this smoking gun? Why was a woman who claims to have zero relationship or support from mum and dad submitting this internally to Penn financial aid:

Additionally, I partially support my younger sister, who will be starting college soon. I will then have the additional strain of working to put her through school and ensure her basic living expenses are met. Because she also has special needs, additional resources such as medication, testing, learning aids, and more create further expenses throughout this process.” She wrote the same in her 2018-2019 PFAS form. Ms. Shaw told OSC that Mackenzie has not provided, and that there was no reason to believe it would become necessary to provide, “basic living expenses” or medical costs for Cat (who does have learning challenges). Asked about this, Mackenzie told OSC (and it was separately confirmed) that Mackenzie set up a 529 account for her sister to use towards higher education. OSC understands that the account has approximately $6,000 in it at this point. According to Mackenzie, the seed money for this account may have come from her biological father, although she does not quite remember.

McKenzie ignored this in the older threads. For obvious reasons. Penn caught her red-handed and there's no way to weasel out of this. No doubt the New Yorker hack read this in Penn's records and chose to ignore it too, because she wrote this with an agenda to make the big bad rich university look evil.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well that’s a pack of lies. I predict a libel action against the New Yorker and its staff writer on this much the way UVA rd overdid against Rolling Stone when it ran its false case about rape at a frat house.

I see you’re with the camp that claims she attacked herself, smashed her own face, broke her own bones, and that her stepfather legit mistook her for her mother when he molested her.

She’s a master manipulator. The article is part of the plaintiff lawyers’ appeal to the public and to taint the jury. Or to force an early settlement. Most good lawyers don’t litigate in the press.

How could you possibly know any of this? You can’t. Completely fabricated statement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The New Yorker article notes that Mackenzie made some mistakes and I think there is even room to believe her mom over her, although I don’t, but even if you did Penn comes off horribly for the way they treated her (not that I expect it to affect Penn’s admissions— if you want to go to be management consultant something like this isn’t going to discourage you).

I disagree. Penn should have expelled her and tried to claw back the over $300,000 in aid the rich brat looted.

Also interesting we have so many profiles of this rich white girl but zero mention of her SAT score. And her transcript had at least some Bs on it; she was NOT even valedictorian or salutatorian at her tiny high school! Clearly SAT is never mentioned because it was mediocre and it would expose she is a midwit only at an Ivy, for free no less, because of all these falsehoods. She was an unimpressive dime a dozen rich white girl from St Louis who ought to have ended up at Missouri or maybe a Wake Forest tier private school if her rich doctor mom would have paid for it. I believe she cooked up this crap to get into an elite college.

Expelled her???

This is absurd. She had already graduated. This didn’t become an issue until the 2nd semester of her year as a graduate student. And by that time Penn stated that she had already completed all of the requirements fir her master’s degree.

Nonetheless what would have been the grounds for expulsion? I don’t see any.

Regardless of her skin color, she was no longer a rich girl either at the time she applied to Penn nor at any point while she was a student at Penn.

Yes, expel her and claw back all degrees. It's happened in recent memory at Harvard, Georgetown and Stanford. If you were admitted under any false pretenses i.e. fraud the institution has cause to make the duration of your time there null and void. Penn's offer to her is a slap on the wrist. She should also be pursued by the feds for financial aid fraud as Pell Grants were used to offset her over $300k in freebies at Penn.