Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

MARQUETTE CLAIMS TO BE A NONPARTISAN EDUCATIONAL ENTITY FOR TAX PURPOSES, RIGHT? 

 

Marquette University threatened to rescind student’s admission over pro-Trump TikTok video.

 

Pfefferle’s post has been watched nearly 600,000 times and has since caught the attention of the Marquette community, some of whom began harassing Pfefferle. Others threatened her life.

 

“I hope you get shot,” one commenter told Pfefferle. “I’d pray for you but you’re not worth it,” another user added.

 

“I was extremely disappointed by the incendiary comments,” Pfefferle told The College Fix in an interview. “The response from my peers has been repulsive.”

 

Pfefferle explained that following the TikTok, she was contacted by Brian Troyer, dean of undergraduate admissions at Marquette, who she said told her her acceptance to the school was far from certain.

 

“[He] had the heart to tell me I wasn’t a student,” Pfefferle said. “This means that my classification is still in limbo and is currently being decided by the administration. I have been accepted, I paid for my housing, I have my roommates, I even have a complete class schedule. If that doesn’t make me a student, what does?”

 

Some Marquette administrators also asked Pfefferle a series of questions meant to judge her morals, she said.

 

 

 

Marquette University President Michael Lovell needs to be questioned as to whether he thinks this behavior toward a student is appropriate.

 
 
 
 
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
2 hours ago, B-Man said:

 

Something about that kid's account of things is oddly self-serving. I found it interesting that he didn't give the author the entire 'statement of probable cause'. Something smells fishy.

 

Also, what kind of legal advice is he getting when he explicitly admits, in the article, to violating the eavesdropping law, but is heading to trial anyhow?

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Koko78 said:

 

Something about that kid's account of things is oddly self-serving. I found it interesting that he didn't give the author the entire 'statement of probable cause'. Something smells fishy.

 

Also, what kind of legal advice is he getting when he explicitly admits, in the article, to violating the eavesdropping law, but is heading to trial anyhow?

I was chalking it up just to poor writing by a "journalist" and the usual half correct info, but it could certainly be this student was trying to provoke a reaction due to other reasons.

Posted
8 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

I was chalking it up just to poor writing by a "journalist" and the usual half correct info, but it could certainly be this student was trying to provoke a reaction due to other reasons.

 

If anything, they're going for jury nullification, which is an illegal defense (at least in NY).

Posted
1 hour ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

I was chalking it up just to poor writing by a "journalist" and the usual half correct info, but it could certainly be this student was trying to provoke a reaction due to other reasons.

 

Trying to get his 15 minutes of fame.

Posted
15 hours ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

:wacko:
 

 

 

 


(second tweet)

 

 

I wonder if there's any legal ramifications for an individual or an organization threatening you with some kind of punishment for how you vote.

Posted
16 hours ago, Joe Miner said:

 

I wonder if there's any legal ramifications for an individual or an organization threatening you with some kind of punishment for how you vote.


Not even how you vote. For who you like?  How you think?  There is so much wrong with this story. 

Posted (edited)
 
English police protected a celebrity from a twelve year olds tweet by arresting
him? Uhhhh
 
 

 

 

A stand for common sense NEEDS to happen.

 

 

 

 

Edited by B-Man
×
×
  • Create New...