SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

   PoliticsPolitics for Pros- moderated


Previous 10 Next 10 
From: LindyBill5/18/2019 10:46:06 AM
   of 763257
 

wsj.com Students Were Advised to Claim to Be Minorities in College-Admissions Scandal
Melissa Korn and Jennifer Levitz







BOSTON—The man behind the scheme to help wealthy students get into elite colleges by cheating on tests and faking athletic credentials also advised some families to falsely claim students were racial minorities, exploiting the push to diversify campuses, according to two people familiar with the situation.

A son of Marjorie Klapper, a parent scheduled to plead guilty Friday for participating in the scheme, was incorrectly listed on his Common Application as being black and Hispanic, the people said. William “Rick” Singer, the college counselor who has agreed to plead guilty in the case and is awaiting sentencing, also arranged for a proctor to cheat on the ACT admissions test for the teen, according to a Federal Bureau of Investigation affidavit filed in the case.

Ms. Klapper, who lives in Menlo Park, Calif., was one of many parents charged whose child was misrepresented as a minority, according to one of the people, who is familiar with the investigation.

Mr. Singer frequently gave families the option of misrepresenting race and would say that not doing so could put their child at a “competitive disadvantage,” said one of the people, who is familiar with his business.



Share Your Thoughts What factors should colleges consider in admissions? Join the conversation below.



Lawyers for Ms. Klapper didn’t respond to requests for comment, and efforts to reach Ms. Klapper were unsuccessful. The lawyer for Mr. Singer declined to comment.

In looking to present a teen as a minority, Mr. Singer was tapping into a hot-button aspect of college admissions that has led to numerous lawsuits: decisions that take into account, or even give preference to, students of certain races or ethnicities. Schools that pursue race-conscious admissions policies say they do so to provide a richer learning environment for all students and are following Supreme Court precedent that allows such an approach. Harvard University faces a civil lawsuit accusing it of discrimination, with plaintiffs claiming the school holds Asian-American applicants to a higher standard than applicants of other races. Harvard denies the accusation, saying it uses a holistic approach and a complex set of factors to hand out acceptances.

Applicants can check boxes noting their race or ethnicity in a section on the Common Application, which is accepted by hundreds of schools across the country. Doing so is optional.

On some applications that Mr. Singer’s operation handled, applicants may have claimed to be underrepresented minorities based on a tenuous connection, such as a distant relative of Native American ancestry, said one of the people familiar with his business. In one case, the person said, a teenager was presented as Native American when “there was absolutely nothing Native American about this kid.”

Mr. Singer’s employees often submitted the final application on behalf of clients, according to two people familiar with Mr. Singer’s counseling operation. One of these people said the Klapper family knew the boxes indicating black and Hispanic were checked.

Lying on a college application isn’t necessarily a crime, but can prompt disciplinary actions by schools. The parents charged in the college-admissions cheating scheme face charges related to bribery or test-cheating aspects of Mr. Singer’s operation.

Colleges count on honesty, and it would be difficult to catch applicants who misrepresent their race, said Stefanie Niles, president of the National Association for College Admission Counseling. “You could have a student who looks white but who is multiracial,” she said.

Ms. Niles added that it is unlikely applicants would check a box mistakenly. She said the Common Application prompts students who have selected a racial category to then check additional boxes confirming their selection.

Prosecutors alluded to applicants exploiting presumed preferences in March, when Mr. Singer pleaded guilty to four crimes. Assistant U.S. Attorney Eric Rosen listed Mr. Singer’s schemes, including “lying about students’ ethnicities and other biographical information in an attempt to take advantage of perceived benefits from affirmative action and other programs.”

Mr. Singer responded at that hearing that “everything that Mr. Rosen stated is exactly true.”

Public court filings for the case, which has ensnared 33 parents, don’t include specific references to dishonest racial claims and the details haven’t been previously reported.

Ms. Klapper has said she would plead guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit mail fraud and honest services mail fraud. Prosecutors said she paid Mr. Singer $15,000 in exchange for having a proctor in Mr. Singer’s employ take the ACT for her son in October 2017. The son received a score of 30 out of a possible 36.

Prosecutors have said they plan to recommend a sentence at the low end of the 4- to 10-month range, a $20,000 fine and 12 months supervised release.









How Easy Is It to Fake Athletic Photos?

As part of the largest college-admissions scam ever prosecuted, some parents allegedly paid others to create fake photos of their children as top athletes. WSJ finds out just how easy it is to manipulate photos by asking an expert to combine pictures of Tom Brady and Bradley Cooper. Photos illustration: David Starr



Write to Melissa Korn at melissa.korn@wsj.com and Jennifer Levitz at jennifer.levitz@wsj.com






Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


From: LindyBill5/18/2019 10:49:30 AM
4 Recommendations   of 763257
 

wsj.com Australia’s Conservatives Win Surprise Election Victory
Rob Taylor and Rachel Pannett




SYDNEY—Australia’s conservative government eked out a surprise victory in Saturday’s national elections after voters in resource-rich districts turned against center-left opponents who had put climate change at the heart of their campaign.

Behind in polls for more than two years, Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s Liberal-National coalition appealed to voters in battleground states such as Queensland, struggling at the end of a long mining boom, with a campaign focused on the economy and jobs.

With 71% of votes counted, the conservatives were hopeful of gaining a narrow majority in Parliament’s 151-seat House of Representatives, or possibly governing in minority with the support of conservative-leaning independents. Political experts predicted the government would likely win around 77 seats.


“I have always believed in miracles,” Mr. Morrison, a devout Christian, said in a speech to jubilant supporters gathered at a Sydney hotel after midnight local time. “Our government will come together after this night and we will get back to work.” His center-left Labor opponent, Bill Shorten, conceded defeat a short time earlier, stepping down as party leader. “Labor’s next victory will belong to the next leader,” he said.





Australian opposition Labor leader Bill Shorten prepares to cast his vote in Melbourne. Photo: lukas coch/Shutterstock



The election comes at a pivotal time for Australia, as global trade rivalries and a slowing economy threaten to end the country’s record growth run. Australia has the world’s longest ongoing growth streak—27 years and counting—powered largely by Chinese demand for resources like iron ore and coal. But the economy nearly stalled in the second half of 2018 as China’s growth slowed and Australian consumers—worried by falling home values, record debt and stagnant wage growth—reined in spending. Annualized growth dipped to about 1% from 4% in the first half.

Mining, a top export sector, helped Australia sidestep the 2007-09 recession a decade ago. Mr. Morrison campaigned in support of major coal mine projects located near the Great Barrier Reef, boosting the conservatives’ fortunes in those areas and offsetting losses in more progressive-leaning cities along the east coast.

Climate change, a thorny problem that has ripped apart governments, re-emerged as an election issue following a summer of wildfires, drought, floods and extreme temperatures: Voter support for policies aimed at addressing climate change was at the highest level since 2007. But, as in the U.S., divisions grew more stark as the issue gathered steam.

Labor campaigned on a pledge to reduce emissions by 45% from 2005 levels by 2030, after Australia under the conservatives became the first developed nation to abolish a price on carbon in 2014. The party also promised a push on renewable energy and electric vehicles.

While the message appealed to many city voters, voters in resource-rich regions worried Labor’s climate plan would drive up living costs and put coal miners out of work. Mr. Morrison’s government approved a controversial coal mine in northeastern Queensland planned by Indian conglomerate Adani Corp just days before declaring elections.

Underscoring the city-versus-rural divide, one of the highest-profile casualties of the election was Tony Abbott, a former conservative prime minister and climate skeptic who in 2014 championed the dumping of carbon taxes. He was defeated in the Sydney beachside district he has held for 25 years against an independent candidate who made his resistance to climate change policies her key appeal.

“When climate change is a moral issue, we Liberals do it tough. When climate change is an economic issue, we do well,” Mr. Abbott said Saturday as he conceded defeat.

Few had seen a conservative victory coming. Exit polls as voting stations closed had pointed to a conservative defeat. The conservatives struggled during their first two terms in office with internal rifts over climate and energy policies, and social issues such as same-sex marriage. That led them to switch leaders twice in six years, fueling perceptions of political dysfunction in Parliament after a decade of leadership coups on both sides.

Mr. Morrison, however, ran a disciplined and aggressive campaign, urging voters to look beyond internal divisions and back his economic record. Among his campaign pledges were tax cuts to stoke growth and a program to help young home buyers into what is still one of the world’s most expensive housing markets.

Mr. Shorten offered voters a more radical interventionist approach to tackle growing wealth divides, promising to end tax breaks for investors and global corporations, while spending more on public health and education.

Write to Rob Taylor at rob.taylor@wsj.com and Rachel Pannett at rachel.pannett@wsj.com







Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


From: LindyBill5/18/2019 11:00:57 AM
3 Recommendations   of 763257
 

thegatewaypundit.com MUST READ: Mueller's Reprehensible Ultimatum to General Flynn: Your Son or Your Country? Make Your Decision!
by Jim Hoft



General Flynn was given an ultimatum by the corrupt Mueller team – choose either your son or your country! This grotesque abuse of power and the legal system by the Mueller gang should never have happened and should not go unpunished! General Flynn worked for the Obama Administration but at some point was fired by Obama for apparently disagreeing with his policies and actions and speaking out against his failed policies in Iraq and Syria. Soon after, then candidate Trump ran for office and General Flynn supported the future President and introduced the candidate at rallies and then was offered a position on the Trump team.

Obama was upset with Flynn for supporting Trump and it appears that he had some sort of vendetta with Flynn for his comments on the growing threat of ISIS. It’s also suspected that after Flynn parted ways with President Obama he was set up at a dinner with Russians where he was seated next to Russian President Putin in December 2015.

The American spy in England used often by the Deep State, Stefan Halper, seated Flynn next to Putin and then it is suspected used this information as an informant for the Obama administration to obtain a FISA warrant to spy on General Flynn.

Additional information on the framing of General Flynn was reported from a woman who said she was used as a Russian against the General –








Svetlana Lokhova, the Russian historian at the center of Michael Flynn investigation for ‘alleged contacts with Russians’, told Fox News in an exclusive interview with Catherine Herridge, that she is not a Russian spy and that she thought “there’s a high chance that is was coordinated, and believe it needs to be properly investigated.”

In 2017, American various media outlets framed her as a Russian operative and linked her to Michael Flynn. The allegations involved her contact with Flynn three years prior at a 2014 dinner at the University of Cambridge, England, when Flynn was Defense Intelligence Agency director.








General Flynn’s actions had nothing to do with collusion with Russia. He was set up and spied on!

In October 2016, shortly before the election, based on a bogus and fake dossier financed by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the DNC, Obama’s gang of corrupt Intel Heads filed for and eventually obtained a warrant to spy on fellow Americans. The warrants were fraudulent due to their source and made up content.

Obama spied on the Trump team as well as President Trump’s leadership team, including General Michael Flynn for some time. (When and for how long is still unknown. Many suspect this is why Flynn was targeted by the Mueller gang – because Flynn was spied on illegally by the Obama Deep State for some time before the 2016 election most likely based on the phony reports that Flynn was working with Russians. By indicting General Flynn the Deep State could say – see he was a Russian sympathizer and therefore their illegal spying was justified.)

General Flynn was participating in Trump rallies throughout the US and he also became an advisor for the campaign. At this same time the Obama administration was in full force beginning their efforts to frame candidate Trump as a compatriot with Russia to steal the election. One way they did this was to set up Flynn with the Russians.

After Trump eventually won the election, the Deep State that represented and supported Obama was in a panic. They feared that if Flynn looked into efforts to spy on the Trump campaign, they would be found guilty of their many illegal actions in spying on the incoming President, the opposition party and many others.

When President-elect Trump met with President Obama for the first time, Obama even recommended that the future President not select Flynn to be on the Trump administration team. It’s suspected that Obama didn’t want Flynn on Trump’s team because Obama feared Flynn would uncover the illegal spying that the Obama team carried out during the 2016 campaign and before.

So the same FBI investigator who led the Hillary Clinton email investigation –
– The same individual who led the Hillary interview and neglected to take notes, put her under oath or record the meeting
– The same individual who assisted in drafting the memo months before the Hillary was interviewed that was presented by corrupt FBI Director Comey to explain why the FBI was not pressing charges against Hillary
– The same individual who lead the Russia – Trump investigation
– The same individual who neglected to do anything when presented with information that China was hacking Hillary’s emails real-time
– The same individual who personally reviewed over 300,000 Hillary emails found on perp Anthony Weiner’s computer a week before the 2016 election
– The same individual that said all of Weiner’s emails were reviewed in less than a week and no criminally related information was found
– This individual, Peter Strzok, went to the White House a couple days after President Trump’s inauguration and entrapped General Flynn, President Trump’s National Security Advisor, in discussions related to Russia.

Corrupt Strzok asked Flynn questions related to a call Flynn made to a Russian official before the inauguration – totally legal. The rumor is that the FBI Agent with Strzok, Joe Pientka, said Flynn never lied. Strzok and Pientka asked Flynn questions, did not tell him he was under investigation, did not read him his rights, did not allow him to have an attorney and then lied about what was said. The location of the FBI’s original Form 302 recording this discussion is unknown.

After this meeting a few days later, then acting AG Sally Yates, an Obama holdover, went over to the White House and stated that General Flynn had lied to the FBI. Eventually General Flynn resigned from his position at the White House on February 13, 2017.

A few months passed and then the corrupt Mueller investigation started. Mueller’s first target was General Flynn. Mueller had nothing on Flynn so he and his goons went after Flynn’s son, Michael Flynn, Jr. Micheal Jr had a brand new baby and was grilled by the Mueller team. Eventually, they used the General’s family against him. It’s believed that the General could plea guilty to a bogus charge of lying to the FBI or he could watch Mueller’s goons put his son in prison for some bogus crime.

“Make a decision, either your country or your son?” Mueller’s goons put the General in the worst position possible. He chose his son. The goons then placed the General under a gag order while the media persecuted him for months for a false crime, unrelated to Russia collusion. They paraded him as a criminal. The judge overseeing the case who took Flynn’s plea was a friend of corrupt cop Strzok and was also a FISA Court judge. He was recused from the sentencing but to this day we don’t know why. They never told Flynn that he was being spied on for months before the election.

The Mueller team and the Deep State and the Democrats didn’t stop with the General, they went after others including the President’s eldest son, Don Jr.

There are so many questions yet unanswered. One question is why did Obama’s Deep State not tell the President that General Flynn was under investigation during his campaign? Who made this decision? This would have been the proper thing to do. Were they afraid that illegitimate spying by the Obama team would be uncovered?

General Flynn is a patriot. He never should have been put in this situation. He was illegally set up and lied to. He was forced to choose between his family or his country. General Flynn chose his family. What would you have done? Please donate to the Michael T. Flynn Legal Defense Fund. This ordeal has cost him and his family millions.








Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: Alan Smithee who wrote (684075)5/18/2019 11:19:06 AM
From: Neeka
1 Recommendation   of 763257
 
Interesting!

Before becoming a judge, Miller was a partner at Perkins Coie from 2012 to 2019 in the firm's Seattle office.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: LindyBill who wrote (684089)5/18/2019 12:22:17 PM
From: D. Long
8 Recommendations   of 763257
 
“If we knew that the tariffs were going to be permanent, we would make sweeping changes to the supply chain,” he said.

This is where China is really shooting itself in the foot. Instead of reaching a compromise deal to equalize trade and intellectual property protections, their intransigence is guaranteeing that the supply chain relocates to southeast Asia, Latin America, or back to America. The China Miracle bubble is going to deflate rather fast if industry sees tarriffs continuing.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: LindyBill who wrote (684092)5/18/2019 1:05:15 PM
From: ig
3 Recommendations   of 763257
 
Facebook Includes Candace Owens On ‘Hate Agents‘ List


Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: LindyBill who wrote (684110)5/18/2019 3:08:22 PM
From: garrettjax
4 Recommendations   of 763257
 
Bottom clip --

Dagen McDowell -- pure rising fury from about 7:30 on... She's the star of the whole segment. Juan Williams has no response but to crawl back into his hole.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: D. Long who wrote (684117)5/18/2019 3:29:06 PM
From: LindyBill
   of 763257
 
The soybean farmers get it in the shorts. If the Chinese have any doubts about what to tariff, I am sure their Dem friends are helping them out. The hatred is that bad.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read


To: ig who wrote (684118)5/18/2019 3:53:58 PM
From: LindyBill
5 Recommendations   of 763257
 
I am glad they ramped up the censorship early. This will get Barr on the case. Utility or Publisher? They are turning off half the country with their censorship. It will get worse as we approach the election.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)


To: garrettjax who wrote (684119)5/18/2019 3:55:26 PM
From: LindyBill
   of 763257
 
Yes, I watched that. Very unusual on "the five." They normally play it nice. She will have a lecture from the producer over it. Juan is in a bind. It will get worse for him as more gets out. Indictments will cause an uproar for him.

Share RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read
Previous 10 Next 10