University Bribery Scandal (1 Viewer)

Steve R.

Retired
Local time
Today, 08:37
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,617
Recently a group of people were exposed for bribing athletic coaches to get their children into universities. Universities race to quell outrage over bribery and cheating scandal in admissions

There is tremendous irony in this. The university admission process has become increasingly opaque and subjective over the years. The end result, there really are no clearly defined standards, only capricious and whimsical "decisions" on how one is admitted to a university. One could say, increasingly corrupt, for which this reprehensible bribery scandal becomes a prime example of abuse.

Claims made in discussing the ability of those with money who where able to bribe officials so that their children could get into college are that it "short-circuited" the admission process and allowed "non-qualified" students to be admitted. True, but as pointed out above, the admissions process has become increasingly subjective and open to question. Of course, that does not excuse bribery.

So far, it seems, that university administrators have not had the finger-of-blame pointed at them. They should know what their underlings are doing.

A side concern. Universities are supposed to be for education, they are not supposed to serve as training grounds for professional teams. An unfortunate reality is that athletes, who will eventually receive $$$$, will still receive athletic scholarships. At a minimum, professional teams that recruit athletes from universities should be required to re-reimburse the universities. Additionally, these professional teams should toss in some extra $$$ to help pay for the tuition of the other students.
 

theseus

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 08:37
Joined
Aug 6, 2018
Messages
32
So far, it seems, that university administrators have not had the finger-of-blame pointed at them. They should know what their underlings are doing.
.


I have worked at every level of education, middle school (jr-high, if you are older) to college. Admins rarely know what the underlings are doing. College admins are mainly figure heads for fundraising and interfacing with the board.

The coaches that sold their scholarship slots for cash, that's a problem. I would be asking why they didn't win championships with such "qualified" students. I'd also be asking why the AD didn't know about these students and the fact they never competed.

I would also think that there is the potential to be sued by individuals who missed a scholarship due to it being given to someone who was never meant to be part of the team.
 

The_Doc_Man

Immoderate Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 07:37
Joined
Feb 28, 2001
Messages
26,996
Just another example of "dumbing down" schools that SHOULD be doing something to - dare I say it? - actually EDUCATE young people.
 

The_Doc_Man

Immoderate Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 07:37
Joined
Feb 28, 2001
Messages
26,996
An interesting turn of events has cropped up. Lori Laughlin and her husband have now claimed that the FBI's witness who was part of this whole scheme may have been coached in a way to bias or prejudice the case. If this can be corroborated (and at the moment it superficially looks like it can be), some of the cases will be thrown out and the FBI might get sued for witness tampering.
 

Steve R.

Retired
Local time
Today, 08:37
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,617
An interesting turn of events has cropped up. Lori Laughlin and her husband have now claimed that the FBI's witness who was part of this whole scheme may have been coached in a way to bias or prejudice the case. If this can be corroborated (and at the moment it superficially looks like it can be), some of the cases will be thrown out and the FBI might get sued for witness tampering.
This gets into what is "good" and "bad" concerning our judicial system. It is the job of the prosecution to prove the person committed a crime. The job of the defense is to obfuscate the prosecutions contentions.

At times, the prosecution and/or defense will go to ridiculous irrational extremes that are unethical and/or which fail the "smell test". It seems that over the past several years there have been a number of judicial cases were abusive repulsive tactics, principally by prosecutors, have been used. Whether the frequency and intensity is increasing or not, I don't know.

It terms of the case you have cited. I have no knowledge concerning whether the prosecution and/or defense have done anything unethical. It will be very interesting to watch and see how it evolves.
 

AccessBlaster

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 05:37
Joined
May 22, 2010
Messages
5,823
When they have to manufacture evidence to get a conviction, somebody needs to lose their jobs and be prosecuted.

i.e. recent FISA rulings.
 

Pat Hartman

Super Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 08:37
Joined
Feb 19, 2002
Messages
42,970
The DOJ and FBI are simply not capable of taking care of this. I had high hopes for Barr but he isn't going to come through and the head of the FBI should have been fired long ago for his attempts at cover up. You'd think they'd learn from the example of the Catholic church that covering up for people who commit crimes does more harm to the institution than holding the criminals accountable and cleaning house.

When the government came to the rescue to make college more "affordable" and started loaning money to anyone for any program regardless of its applicability in the work place, the colleges were very happy to take the students and the money and they used it to build lazy rivers and spas. Education?? What's that? Now some of the candidates for president are offering to forgive student loans. Who does that reward, the people who worked two jobs and saved their money so they could minimize their borrowing or the people who have the latest iphones and designer sneakers and are never going to be able to monetize their education?
 

Steve R.

Retired
Local time
Today, 08:37
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,617
When the government came to the rescue to make college more "affordable" and started loaning money to anyone for any program regardless of its applicability in the work place, the colleges were very happy to take the students and the money and they used it to build lazy rivers and spas.
Student are now simply "revenue units".

One of my daughters went to UNC at Greensboro. We noticed, when visiting her, massive construction projects on campus and even expansion into surrounding areas. While we never formerly looked into why these construction efforts were necessary, these expansion projects had the "look and feel" of a wasteful unnecessary vanity construction projects.
 

ColinEssex

Old registered user
Local time
Today, 12:37
Joined
Feb 22, 2002
Messages
9,110
I'm confused again.
What power do athletics coach's have to get prospective students into university? Surely students don't go to university just to do games and run around, then end up with a degree?
Don't students go to university to learn useful things like doctor, lawyer, science etc?
Ok, running around is good, like jogging etc and the exceptional few have a limited life at top level. But hey, come on, you don't need a few years in university to tell you how to put one foot in front the other quickly. Surely it's a cop out of getting a proper job.
Col
 

AccessBlaster

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 05:37
Joined
May 22, 2010
Messages
5,823
Do a search on prominent people who went to Ivy League colleges. These people did not go on to be doctors, scientist or lawyers. They are power brokers who's family's arranged for them to attend, so they can keep their hands on the levers of power. They will get their below average child into Yale in exchange for a new wing named after the college chancellor or dean.
 

The_Doc_Man

Immoderate Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 07:37
Joined
Feb 28, 2001
Messages
26,996
these expansion projects had the "look and feel" of a wasteful unnecessary vanity construction projects.

Steve R., you have misinterpreted what you saw. Vanity isn't any part of it. Rather, it's an old law of profit-making. Classrooms have fixed numbers of chairs and only so many hours per day of usefulness. So they start building more classrooms based on the concept of "If your business can't make it on quality, make it up with quantity." More classrooms and research buildings mean more students paying through the nose for whatever is passing for a college education these days.

On-line universities are taking the other approach, mass-media education. Same concept as above but less infrastructure requirements.
 

ColinEssex

Old registered user
Local time
Today, 12:37
Joined
Feb 22, 2002
Messages
9,110
Do a search on prominent people who went to Ivy League colleges. These people did not go on to be doctors, scientist or lawyers. They are power brokers who's family's arranged for them to attend, so they can keep their hands on the levers of power. They will get their below average child into Yale in exchange for a new wing named after the college chancellor or dean.
I get it. These power brokers are the ones who supply funding for their favourite candidate for presidency, or at the very least bribe their senator to get favours.
So, is it true that Americans worship three things - money, money and money? It certainly looks that way.

BTW, there was a group in the 60's called 'The Ivy League', they had 2 or 3 top 10 hits if I recall.
Col
 

ColinEssex

Old registered user
Local time
Today, 12:37
Joined
Feb 22, 2002
Messages
9,110
Ha ha, yes, Yanks worshipping the gun was a given, that's always first.

Col
 

Pat Hartman

Super Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 08:37
Joined
Feb 19, 2002
Messages
42,970
Professors are also something of a problem. Once you have tenure, you can delegate your mundane lectures to your graduate students and do almost no teaching yourself. Professors with tenure cannot be fired so we have too many like the black professor who made the news this week by "teaching" his students that being white is racist in and of itself. White skin is an affront to any dark skinned person who looks at you. Oh, I forgot. People who are not classified as white can say anything they want and it isn't considered to be racist. Ipso facto I must be racist for even being critical.
 

The_Doc_Man

Immoderate Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 07:37
Joined
Feb 28, 2001
Messages
26,996
Pat, sad but true. Racism should be a two-edged sword but it is not, and until we sharpen the other edge, the race card will continue to be played by folks with less than honorable intentions.
 

The_Doc_Man

Immoderate Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 07:37
Joined
Feb 28, 2001
Messages
26,996
It looks like Lori Laughlin has gotten a judge at least concerned if not outright perturbed over the government misconduct situation with her "college entrance bribery" case.

I want to clarify that parents trying to find ways to get their kids into elite colleges is laudable until you do things that might be considered unethical "end runs" around the normal entrance barriers. Barriers such as the kid being dumber than a box of rusty garden tools. So Lori isn't pure and pristine here. She's at least a little dirty.

BUT if you are going to use the might and majesty of the government to even temporarily revoke someone's right of liberty and the pursuit of happiness, then the Due Process clause says you had better dot every "i" and cross every "t" to be sure that you DID NOT violate the rights of the accused. Otherwise, what you have done is clearly beyond the law... dare I say "Unconstitutional"?
 

AccessBlaster

Registered User.
Local time
Today, 05:37
Joined
May 22, 2010
Messages
5,823
Also you can't throw her in jail, why? Wait for it.......COVID-19 you guessed it... ding ding ding.

Everyone gets a shinny new get out of jail free card.

1587566681923.png

PS: Notice you can sell them, lol.
 
Last edited:

Pat Hartman

Super Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 08:37
Joined
Feb 19, 2002
Messages
42,970
Although we CAN throw Roger Stone in jail. Why, he's a Trump supporter. Doesn't matter that the FBI and DOJ trampled on his rights big time. Or that the jury pool was polluted.
 

Steve R.

Retired
Local time
Today, 08:37
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,617
A Roger Stone followup. Being placed here, simply because his name was posted here. Couldn't locate a more relevant "hook".

Roger Stone erupts after CNN wins journalism award for coverage of predawn arrest: 'total bulls--t'

It's unbelievable that CNN would receive such an award for their coverage of his arrest. It was an obvious publicity stunt by the Mueller team. It also raises concerns that CNN was fed this proposed arrest by someone so that it could be used as a photo-op by CNN. That is not legitimate "investigative" reporting.

This is simply another small item of "proof" that some of the media are promoting a political agenda.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom